Abstract
In this paper, we describe a project-based mathematical lab implemented in our Applied Mathematics in Biology course. The Leaky Bucket Lab allows students to parameterize and test Torricelli’s law and develop and compare their own alternative models to describe the dynamics of water draining from perforated containers. In the context of this lab students build facility in a variety of applied biomathematical tools and gain confidence in applying these tools in data-driven environments. We survey analytic approaches developed by students to illustrate the creativity this encourages as well as prepare other instructors to scaffold the student learning experience. Pedagogical results based on classroom videography support the notion that the Biology-Applied Math Instructional Model, the teaching framework encompassing the lab, is effective in encouraging and maintaining high-level cognition among students. Research-based pedagogical approaches that support the lab are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Barak, M., & Dori, Y. (2004). Enhancing undergraduate students chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Sci. Educ., 89(1), 117139.
Batchelor, G. K. (1985). An introduction to fluid mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BIO 2010 (2003). Transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists. Washington: National Academies Press. Board on Life Sciences, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies.
Bressoud, D. M. (2001). What’s been happening to undergraduate mathematics? J. Chem. Educ., 78(5), 578–581.
Chazan, D., & Ball, D. (1999). Beyond being told not to tell. For Learn. Math., 19(2), 2.
Chin, C., & Chia, L.-G. (2005). Problem-based learning: using Ill-structured problems in biology project work. Sci. Educ., 90(1), 44–67.
DebBurman, S. K. (2002). Learning how scientists work: experiential research projects to promote cell biology learning and scientific process skills. Cell Biol. Educ., 1, 154–172.
Gall, M. D. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Rev. Educ. Res., 40(5), 707–721.
Haefner, J. W., & Bowen, M. D. (2002). Physical-based model of fish movement in fish extraction facilities. Ecol. Model., 152, 227–245.
Helle, L., Tynjälä, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning in post-secondary education—theory, practice and rubber sling shots. High. Educ., 51, 287–314.
Hilborn, R., & Mangel, M. (1997). The ecological detective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ. Psychol. Rev., 16, 235–266.
Keener, J. P., & Sneyd, J. (1998). Mathematical physiology. New York: Springer.
Keyes, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Sci. Educ., 83(2), 18–30.
Kohler, B. R., Swank, R. J., Haefner, J. W., & Powell, J. A. (2009). Leading students to investigate diffusion as a model of brine shrimp movement. Bull. Math. Biol., 72(1), 230257. doi:10.1007/s11538-009-9444-4.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lemasson, B. H., Haefner, J. W., & Bowen, M. D. (2008). The effect of avoidance behavior on predicting fish passage rates through water diversion structures. Ecol. Model., 219, 178–188.
Logan, J. D. (2006). Applied mathematics (3rd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
NCTM (1991). Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Platt, J. R. (1964). Strong inference. Science, 146, 3642.
Powell, J., Cangelosi, J., & Harris, A. M. (1998). Games to teach mathematical modelling. SIAM Rev., 40, 87–95.
Powell, J. A., & Engelhardt, K. A. (2000). Optimal trajectories for the short-distance foraging flights of swans. J. Theor. Biol., 204, 415–430.
Rigley, M. (2009). An intermediate-complexity biological modeling framework for nutrient cycling in lakes based on physical structure. Masters Thesis, Utah State University.
Schwartz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46(6), 632654.
Smith, H. L., & Waltman, P. (1995). The theory of the chemostat. London: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: classroom-based practices. J. Eng. Educ., 94(1), 87–102. Special Issue on the State of the Art and, Practice of Engineering Education Research.
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: a meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res., 69(1), 21–51.
Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2009). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: a casebook for professional development (2nd ed., p. 16). New York: Teachers College Press.
Tynjälä, P. (1998). Writing as a tool for constructive learning: students learning experiences during an experiment. High. Educ., 36, 209–230.
Usiskin, Z. (1991). Building mathematics curricula with applications and modeling. In M. Niss, W. Blum, & I. D. Huntley (Eds.), Mathematical modeling and applications (pp. 30–45). Chichester: Horwood. 1991.
Wurtsbaugh, W. A., Baker, M. A., Gross, H. P., & Brown, P. D. (2005). Lakes as nutrient “sources” for watersheds: a landscape analysis of the temporal flux of nitrogen through sub-alpine lakes and streams. Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol., 29(2), 645–649.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank a variety of funding agencies for their support, including a grant from NSF DEB (JP), PCMI (BK) and FIPSE (JH and JP). A number of 2010 students, who must remain nameless, allowed themselves to be videotaped and just let the pedagogical research infrastructure fade into the background while they got on with the more interesting business of practicing mathematical biology. For their help, excitement and energy, and those of their peers stretching back 15 years, we are extremely grateful.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Powell, J.A., Kohler, B.R., Haefner, J.W. et al. Carrying BioMath Education in a Leaky Bucket. Bull Math Biol 74, 2232–2264 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-012-9741-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-012-9741-1