Download - Bioengineering Summer Camps 2014 Annual Report

2 0 1 4 A n n u A l R e p o R t

university of pittsburgh | swanson school of engineering | Department of bioengineering

InspIrIng tomoRRow's engineeRs

b i o e n g i n e e r i n g s u m m e r c a m p s

b i o e n g i n e e r i n g s u m m e r c a m p s | 2 0 1 4 a n n u a l r e p o r t 3

Mission stateMent

since 2007, the university of pittsburgh Department of Bioengineering has been addressing deficiencies in youth stem education by offering the Bioengineering summer Camps. it is now the signature outreach program of the department and one of the most successful K-12 outreach initiatives of the university. the goal of our program is to engage young minds in the wonders of science and bioengineering and the potential to benefit the human condition, while also showing them that stem can be a fun and exciting field of

learning and future careers. we seek to engage diverse groups of students, particularly those from backgrounds which are underrepresented in stem fields such as minorities and women. Developed through an interdisciplinary partnership between the Department of Bioengineering and the university of pittsburgh medical Center (upmC), our curriculum utilizes regenerative aspects of the natural world and current research topics in bioengineering to explore how state-of-the-art research can be translated to human medicine and treatment. our

near-peer mentorship strategy integrates excellent undergraduate bioengineering students from pitt’s swanson school of engineering as “content creators” and “camp counselors.” each year we aim to provide middle and high school students who possess burgeoning interests in science an exceptional opportunity to learn about bioengineering and regenerative medicine through hands-on experiences with new technologies, experimental strategies, and ethical considerations in the diverse fields of bioengineering and regenerative medicine.

Campers harvesting silk from a spider for analysis of its potential as a bioscaffold.

SwanSon School of EnginEEring | DEpartmEnt of BioEnginEEring4

suMMary

this was another exciting year for the university of pittsburgh Bioengineering summer Camp. it started in the winter and spring when our call for support to our local industry and foundation friends/partners was answered in a big way! with government funding becoming more difficult to obtain, we are very proud that this marked our first year supported by private funding. this achievement validates that youth stem education is important to western pennsylvania and we are indeed playing a vital role in providing a positive and inspiring experience that allows area teens to engage in state-of-the-art, hands-on science. the independent external evaluation included with this report demonstrates that we are continuing to meet our learning objectives and, more importantly, that our campers and their parents have been extremely pleased with what we have offered.

Beginning at the end of may through mid-July, five bioengineering undergraduates worked with our faculty and two master educators from the pittsburgh region to develop an all-new set of innovative and exciting learning modules. these included pig knee and heart defect repairs with commercially available bioscaffolds

(donated from ACell, inc.), robot and human interfaces, smart prosthetics controlled by brain signals, differentiating stem cells seeded on 3D printed scaffolds, and silk scaffold collection from spiders and subsequent analysis of its properties. these unique activities were combined with some of our standard activities (building bones, design of aortic aneurysm repairs, scaffold degradation analysis, DnA extraction, angiogenesis assays, bioethics case studies, etc.) and presentations from some of our world-renowned faculty to create a weeklong experience that is packed with activities from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily.

this year, we offered three five-day summer camps from July 14 through August 1 focused on bioengineering, tissue engineering, and regenerative medicine; one for middle school and two for high school students. with 75 participants from area middle and high-schools, this brings our total to over 450 campers educated over the last eight years!

looking forward to 2015, we have one very specific goal in mind – inCReAse DiVeRsitY. Despite our efforts to make the camps free for students from the pittsburgh public schools and mcKeesport school District,

participation by African Americans and other minority students is still very limited. we feel this is due to two main factors: 1) Communication, and 2) Accessibility. thus, this winter and spring we will be expanding our recruitment efforts to these districts through additional outreach visits and marketing strategies. in addition, through a partnership with the Citizen science lab (Csl), which opened in 2014 with support from a variety of nonprofit partners, we hope to offer a more central City location that is served by multiple public transportation routes. we hope we can continue to count on your support in pursuing our 2015 diversity goals.

in the following pages, we would like to provide you with a flavor for the camp by highlighting selected feedback (page 5), our key personnel and undergraduate counselors (pages 6 and 7), with pictures of the camps in action featured throughout. Finally, we have included the report provided by our external evaluator, Dr. Kalyani Raghavan (page 8).

thank you for making 2014 another outstanding year of stem education in pittsburgh!


“It was a great experience... this camp brought the classes full circle.”

“The camp definitely exceeded my expectations. I loved all the hands-on work we did...”

2014 selected Feedback

Campers

The camp definitely exceeded my expectations. I loved all the hands on work we did but at the same time learning about new topics in detail. It really opened my eyes to the different areas of biomedical engineering.

I gained the ability to use different instruments and knowledge in how to do certain experiments (e.g., Gel electrophoresis).

I am pretty much satisfied that this is what I want to study in college. It is fascinating! I thought this was a fantastic camp.

I gained experience with the different tools. I had never used a micropipette before. Also we learned the basics of culturing stem cells.

I am so glad I was exposed to (stem cells) because I think it is an area I could definitely pursue and excel in.

I think the summer camp was really great and I liked everything about it. I want to try and come back next summer.

It was great. This is what I want to do when I grow up (biomedical engineering).

It was a great experience. I have taken biology, chemistry and anatomy and this camp brought the classes full circle.

Parents

You guys rock. I also loved the communication from your entire team, before my child attended. All of my questions were answered. You exceeded my expectations. We are blessed to live so close to Pitt (University of Pittsburgh).

What a great experience! This camp stimulated thought- provoking conversations at our dinner table all week long. Loved seeing my child so inspired by the scientific trends at work today.

Our daughter enjoyed the camp immensely. She thought the counselors were hands-on and created a fun atmosphere for learning. She is going to be a high school sophomore in the fall and she wants to begin to narrow her field of study. This camp allowed her to do so. Thanks for providing such an amazing opportunity.

Very impressive week! My child’s feet hit the floor in the mornings, anxious to get to Pitt. Well organized. Coordinators were very responsive to e-mails and questions.

Great experience for middle school girls. Much more hands-on opportunity than they get at school.

My son was excited to get up and come into the camp each day. This says a lot especially in the middle of the summer!


2014 Undergraduate Camp Counselors

Laura Power is a sophomore at edinboro university of pennsylvania, who is totally excited about her second year as a counselor in this program. Although unsure of what she wants to study as an undergraduate she

is leaning toward biology and attending graduate school for public health. Her long-term goal is to start a nonprofit that encourages and facilitates involvement in the sciences for the physically disabled. in her spare time she enjoys reading, swimming, and writing fiction.

Karen Hranek was born and raised in King of prussia, pA (home to the second-largest mall in America). she is a junior studying bioengineering at the university of pittsburgh, and she has yet to decide between

a minor in mechanical engineering or neuroscience. she plans to spend the upcoming fall semester abroad at the national university of singapore and is extremely excited to do a lot of traveling while there. in her free time she is a beater on pitt’s Quidditch club team, a sister of the engineering sorority phi sigma Rho, and an enthusiastic intramural soccer participant. she also loves setting up blanket caves from which she watches too much netflix, eats too much chocolate, and is woefully addicted to Candy Crush.

Tom Kappil is a junior at the university of pittsburgh, majoring in bioengineering with a concentration in biome-chanics, and a minor in mechanical engineering. in the fall, he plans to co-op at a bioengineering

company. originally from levittown, pennsylvania, tom has really come to love western pA and all that pittsburgh offers. After graduation, he plans on joining industry, and working in prosthetics development or tissue repair. in his spare time, tom enjoys reading, listening to really good live music, and volunteering. tom was very excited to be part of such an interesting summer camp and could not wait to teach his students about bioengineering.

Sanjeev Shroff, PhD Distinguished professor and Chairman Department of Bioengineering

Steven Abramowitch, PhD Assistant professor Department of BioengineeringCamp Director

2014 key Personnel

B i o E n g i n E E r i n g S u m m E r c a m p S | 2 0 1 4 a n n u a l r E p o r t 7

Joanie Guyer is a senior bioengineering student at the university of pittsburgh. originally from west Chester, pennsylvania, Joanie has always enjoyed spending time with her extended family on the western

side of the state. with her concentration in biome-chanics, Joanie has been involved in ergonomic and gait research at pitt’s Human movement and Balance laboratory. outside of the classroom, Joanie is the Director of Communications for engineering student Council as well as the president of her sorority, Delta phi epsilon. she was very excited to share her passion for engineering with all of the students at the Bioengineering summer Camp this year!

Aaron Dees is a Junior at the university of pittsburgh, majoring in bioengineering while minoring in chemistry and mechanical engineering. He plans on attending medical school in the future. Aaron enjoys a

variety of hobbies outside of engineering including basketball, soccer, music, and hiking.

Stephanie Schlebusch is a senior in the bioengineering program at the university of pittsburgh. Her concentration is neural engineering and she will also be getting a minor in neuroscience. she is very interested in global health, and plans on

getting a global studies certificate. After gradua-tion, she plans on pursuing a career in industry or an international project, such as the peace Corp or an english-teaching program. in her spare time, she enjoys studying slovak,

practicing ballet, shopping, crafting, hanging out with friends, volunteering, and participating in her sorority Delta phi epsilon events. stephanie was excited to be teaching a module at pitt’s Bioengineering summer Camp that focused on neurons and how they send signals, and enjoyed meeting and working with all of the students!

Juel Smith Associate professor Community College of Allegheny CountyCamp mentoring and education specialist

Mark Krotec Biology teacher Central Catholic High schoolCamp master educator

Alicia Kemp undergraduate Administrator Department of BioengineeringCamp Coordinator


evaluation

to determine the overall quality of the camp experience, as well as to assess change in participant understanding and learning related to tissue engineering and Regenerative medicine concepts, the following evaluation instruments were utilized:

• pre/post surveys;

• pre/post content assessments;

• post-camp survey of the counselors; and

• parent survey at the end of the camp.

this report consists of four main components – middle school camp, high school camp, camp counselors, and parent comments.

2014 bioengineering summer camps

evaluation report

september 30, 2014

Dr. Kalyani Raghavan Evaluation Consultant 524 Allenby Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15218


Middle school Camp

Demographics

Campers comprised of 11 female and 13 male students made up of 15 Caucasians, 6 Asians, and 3 other.

twenty-one of the participants attended public schools, one attended private school, one student attended a school district in new York and one student from istanbul. participants had completed grades 5 through 7 with a majority comprising seventh graders, going into eighth grade, as Figure 3 shows.

Participant Distribution by Gender

■ Male

■ Female

Participant Distribution by Race/Ethnicity

■ Caucasian

■ Asian

■ Other

Distribution of Participants by Completed Grade Levels

■ Grade 5

■ Grade 6

■ Grade 7

48%

24%

20%

63% 25%

13%

54% 46%

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3


Pre/Post General Survey Results

pre- and post- surveys were administered to the campers on the first and last day of the camp respectively. one student who started late did not complete the pre-survey and his survey responses when not appropriate were deleted. twelve of the twenty-four campers found out about the camp from parents or relatives. the remaining found out through the school or friends. two of the students had attended the camp in a prior year.

Figure 4 displays the top reasons campers cited for attending the summer camp.

several participants expressed an interest in and curiosity about bioengineering and hoped to enhance their knowledge of science and engineering through their participation in the camp. Although such an overwhelming majority said that they were interested in science and engineering, they were not very clear or specific about what they expected to experience in the camp. From the responses in the post questionnaire, the workshop appears to have solidified their interest in science with a majority of students (75%) saying that the camp motivated them to a moderate extent to take more science-related courses and 25% said it increased their motivation a whole lot as Figure 5 shows.

participants, in general, had a good aptitude for science as Figure 6 illustrates.

Frequencies of Top Reasons Participants Chose to Attend the Summer Camp

Ratings of Participants’ Science Aptitude on a Scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree)

Plan to Take More Science Classes in the Future

■ Very Little

■ Moderate Amount

■ A Whole Lot

75%

25%

0%

Cells & Diseases

Knowledge

Teamwork

Bioengineering

Interest in TE

Biology/Science Knowledge

Fun Experiments

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5

i enjoy science 0 0 3 10 10

science is useful in everyday life 0 0 2 8 13

science challenges me to use my mind 0 0 3 8 12

i am good at science 0 2 4 9 8

i usually understand what we are doing in science 0 1 2 6 14

i will take advanced science courses 1 1 5 8 8

i will probably major in science in college 2 2 7 6 6

Fig. 5

Fig. 4

Fig. 6


Frequencies of Engagement in Indicated Activities in School Science

Number of Participants Rating their Goals for the Summer Camp

Number of Participants Rating the Extent to which Program Goals were Accomplished

to get an idea of the school science environment, students were asked to rate on a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (Very often) the type of science activities that they did in science classes. As suggested by their responses, most students participated in classroom discussions with the teacher, engaged in hands-on activities, and worked in cooperative learning groups. However, the classes appear to have been more traditional with answering textbook/worksheet questions, frequent reading from text, and reviewing homework assignments. A relatively small number had worked on science projects and a very select few had participated in a science fair. Figure 7 displays their responses.

in the pre-survey, participants were asked to rate their expectations of the camp experience on a scale of 1 (not important) to 5 (Very important) regarding the goals for the summer camp. this was followed up in the post-survey, asking them to rate on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (Very well) the extent to which these goals were met. Figures 8 and 9 display the responses.

1 2 3 4 5

participate in discussions with the teacher 0 1 5 8 9

work in cooperative learning groups 0 1 3 15 4

Read from a science textbook in class 1 2 7 5 8

Read other (non-textbook) science-related 0 4 6 6 7

Answer textbook/worksheet questions 1 3 4 8 7

Review homework/worksheet assignments 2 2 5 5 9

share ideas or solve problems in small groups 1 0 5 12 5

engage in hands-on science activities 0 2 8 9 4

participate in science fair 6 10 2 2 3

work on a science project 0 6 9 5 3

Expectations 1 2 3 4 5

gain more hands-on laboratory experience 0 3 6 7 9

gain more knowledge in biology 0 4 2 9 10

gain experience in collaborative group work 1 1 10 9 4

meet and interact with peers from other schools 0 4 11 7 3

Extent Goals Accomplished 1 2 3 4 5





Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9


the camp goals, as Figure 10 shows, exceeded expectations. this is consistent with participants’ response to another post-survey question regarding their satisfaction with aspects of the workshop on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (Very much), as displayed in Figure 11.

All attendees stated they enjoyed participating in the summer camp and being able to do many of the activities. A limited number, however, felt that it was a bit too long and too serious for a summer camp. when asked to specify the activities they most enjoyed, the most frequently mentioned activities were the pig heart dissection and suturing. About half the participants mentioned the DnA capsule activity where they had to insert the string into the capsule as the most difficult.

Figure 12 illustrates participant responses when asked about their feelings about time spent on the camp overall, hands-on activities, listening to presentations, and interacting with peers, on a scale of 1 (too little) to 5 (too long). note that a rating of 3 indicates the time allocated was just right.

Number of Participants Rating their Satisfaction with the Different Aspects of the Camp

Number of Participants Considering the Time Allotted for Indicated Activities

Extent of Satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5

program logistics 0 0 0 10 14

scheduled activities 0 0 1 10 13

goals of the camp 0 0 5 10 9

Collaborating with instructors and mentors 0 0 0 10 14

interaction with peers 0 0 4 9 11

Time Allotted 1 2 3 4 5

summer camp overall 0 1 13 8 2

Hands-on activities 1 3 14 7 0

listening to presentations 0 1 12 9 2

interacting with peers 1 2 14 5 2

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0Gain more hands-on laboratory experience

Gain more knowledge in

biology

Gain experience in collaborative

group work

Meet and interact with peers from

other schools

Pre and Post Expectation and Achievement of Camp Objectives

■ Pre

■ Post

Fig. 10

Fig. 11

Fig. 12


overall, campers enjoyed participating in the summer camp saying it was educational as well as fun as revealed in the following sample comments:

• i learned a lot about the body and cells within it and a little bit about what it is like working in a lab.

• i learned a lot about bioethics and their purpose. Also i learned about the way stem cells work and what te really is.

• i think i gained a lot more experience with cells because we grew them and i think i gained [the] most experience with pipetting as well.

• i learned mostly about stem cells and how they work and how careful one should be when conducting experiments.

•more accurate teachings and explanations of anatomy.

• i think the summer camp was really great and i liked everything about it. i want to try and come back next summer.

• it was great. this is what i want to do when i grow up (biomedical engineering).

• i really liked this summer camp because it was fun and it wasn’t what i expected it to be like.

• i really liked it. the hands-on learning was a lot of fun.

the only criticism in some of the student comments was the length of the camp days, which they believed was too long. A majority of students (75%) said that they would recommend the camp to their friends.

Some happy middle school campers.


Pre/Post Content Knowledge Evaluation Results

participants were administered a pre- and post-camp test in multiple-choice format to gauge what they learned during the course of the week. At the beginning of the camp, participants demonstrated basic understanding of the process of human development, were able to identify DnA as the internal set of instructions within a cell, and knew that stem cells are most commonly used in trying to grow new tissues. in contrast, post-assessment data reveals that participants experienced a substantive change in understanding and learning related to a) how tissues or cells communicate, (b) major components needed to fabricate a tissue, (c) where stem cells can be found, (d) the fate of an implanted scaffold, (e) what tissues are made up of, (f) what cells are most commonly used when trying to grow a new tissue, and (g) repair processes used by the body to heal a wound. participants continued to have difficulty identifying cell division, differentiation, organization, and cell death as the key processes underlying human development (Q1). As displayed in Figure 13,

participants displayed a positive trend in understanding and learning across most concepts. in particular, their scores improved by 15% or more on five of the ten questions, improved slightly on four and maintained their score on one. Although the test was ambitious for a week-long program for middle schoolers, the results are very encouraging with mean scores increasing from 53% to 71%. the change is statistically significant (p < 0.001) with an effect size 1.09 (that is, they scored a little over one standard deviation higher in the post test).

in summary, the middle school summer camp provided an enjoyable learning experience. the only criticism expressed by a few is understandable but unavoidable. middle school students are not used to spending eight-hour stretches focused on one topic. the major goal of the camp to provide students a taste of scientific research and kindle their interest in the field of bioengineering was successfully met.

Comparison of Pre-Post Mean Scores Across Questions

(n = 21 – tests of three students were eliminated because one did

not do the pre-test and two did not complete the second half of the test.)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Overall

■ Pre

■ Post

Fig. 13


High school Camp

Demographics

the two high school camps’ data were merged for this report. there were six students from the second camp that did not complete either both pre-and post-surveys or the pre- or post-survey. the report is based on the remaining 45 students comprising 25 females and 20 male students. this group was made up of 26 Caucasians, 14 Asians, 2 Hispanics, 1 African American and 2 other. Forty-two of the participants attended a public school and the remaining three attended private schools. participants had completed grades 8 through 11 with a majority comprising ninth graders, going into tenth grade. Figures 14, 15, and 16 display the demographic information about the high school campers.

Participant Distribution by Gender

■ Male

■ Female

Participant Distribution by Race/Ethnicity

■ Caucasian

■ Asian

■ Hispanic

■ African American

■ Other

Distribution of Participants by Completed Grade Levels

■ Grade 8

■ Grade 9

■ Grade 10

■ Grade 11

20% 38%

16%

31% 58%

4%4%

44% 56%

27%

2%

Fig. 14

Fig. 15

Fig. 16


Pre/Post General Survey Results

most campers heard about the camp from school, online, parents, relatives, or friends. Five participants attended prior year’s summer camp. several participants hoped to enhance their knowledge of science and biology. they expressed a keen interest in bioengineering and curiosity about tissue engineering. they expected the camp experience to help them decide on a future college major and/or career. Figure 18 displays the top reasons campers cited for attending the camp.

A majority stated they were interested in science and engineering and they were interested in learning about bioengineering and biotechnology, but they were not specific about what they expected to experience in the camp. However, from the responses in the post questionnaire, the camp solidified their interest in science with a majority of students saying the camp motivated them a whole lot to a moderate amount to take advanced science courses as Figure 19 shows.

Ways Campers Learned about the Summer Camps

Frequencies of Top Reasons Participants Chose to Attend the Summer Camp

Plan to Take Advanced or More Science Classes in the Future

■ Very Little

■ Moderate Amount

■ A Whole Lot

67%

29%

4%

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0Online Parent Friend School Relative Repeat

98 8

5

3

12

Help in future/career

New biology/science knowledge

Lab experience

Work with new people

Interest in tissue/human body

Interest in bioengineering

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Fig. 19


participants, in general, had a good aptitude for science as Figure 20 illustrates.

to get an idea of their school science environment, students were asked to rate on a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (Very often) the type of science activities that they did in science classes. As displayed in Figure 21, most students were engaged in hands-on activities, worked in cooperative learning groups, and participated in classroom discussions. However, the classes appear to have been more traditional with frequent reading from text, answering textbook/worksheet questions and very few of the participants had regularly participated in a science fair.

Ratings of Participants’ Science Aptitude on a Scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5

i enjoy science 0 0 0 9 36

science is useful in everyday life 0 0 1 9 35

science challenges me to use my mind 0 0 0 12 33

i am good at science 0 0 1 25 19

i usually understand what we are doing in science 0 0 0 15 30

i will take advanced science courses 0 0 0 2 43

i will probably major in science in college 0 0 4 7 34

Frequencies of Engagement in Indicated Activities in School Science

1 2 3 4 5

participate in discussions with the teacher 0 1 3 25 16

work in cooperative learning groups 0 0 8 22 15

Read from a science textbook in class 5 9 11 10 10

Read other (non-textbook) science-related 0 5 14 13 13

Answer textbook/worksheet questions 1 5 9 13 17

Review homework/worksheet assignments 0 1 11 13 20

share ideas or solve problems in small groups 0 3 8 16 18

engage in hands-on science activities 0 1 5 28 11

participate in science fair 18 13 7 4 3

work on a science project 2 8 16 13 6

Fig. 20

Fig. 21


in the pre-survey, participants were asked to rate their expectations on a scale of 1 (not important) to 5 (Very important) regarding the goals for the summer camp. this was followed up in the post-survey, asking them to rate on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (Very well) the extent to which these goals were met. Figures 22 and 23 display the responses.

the camp goals, as Figure 24 shows, exceeded expectations on all counts. this is consistent with participants’ response to another post-survey question regarding their satisfaction with aspects of the workshop on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (Very much), as displayed in Figure 25 on the following page.

Number of Participants Rating their Goals for the Summer Camp

Expectations 1 2 3 4 5





Number of Participants Rating the Extent to which Program Goals were Accomplished

Extent Goals Accomplished 1 2 3 4 5





5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0Gain more hands-on laboratory experience

Gain more knowledge in

biology

Gain experience in collaborative

group work

Meet and interact with peers from

other schools

Pre and Post Expectation and Achievement of Camp Objectives

■ Pre

■ Post

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

Fig. 24


All attendees stated they enjoyed participating in the summer camp and being able to do many of the activities. Asked to specify the activities they most enjoyed, the most frequently mentioned activities were the coronary bypass on the pig heart and chicken leg dissection followed by the spider challenge. the most frustrating experience, similar to the middle school campers, was trying to fit the string in the DnA capsule. Figure 26 illustrates participant responses regarding their feelings on time spent at the camp overall, hands-on activities, listening to presentations, and interacting with peers, on a scale of 1 (too little) to 5 (too long). note that a rating of 3 indicates the time allocated was just right.

Number of Participants Considering the Time Allotted for Indicated Activities

Time Allotted 1 2 3 4 5

summer camp overall 1 3 27 11 3

Hands-on activities 0 5 33 6 1

listening to presentations 2 5 29 7 2

interacting with peers 0 5 35 5 0

Number of Participants Rating their Satisfaction with the Different Aspects of the Camp

Extent of Satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5

program logistics 0 1 2 13 29

scheduled activities 0 0 3 18 24

goals of the camp 0 0 1 14 30

Collaborating with instructors and mentors 0 0 3 12 30

interaction with peers 0 0 4 14 27

Fig. 25

Fig. 26

Dr. Abramowitch demonstrating how a pig knee’s function changes following a ligament tear.


overall, campers enjoyed participating in the summer camp saying it was educational as well as fun as revealed in the following sample comments:

•experience i can use when determining my future career (lab research); knowledge that i didn’t know before which will also help me while deciding on a career path.

• i definitely gained a lot more knowledge in the bioengineering field. that will definitely help me during my Ap bio class. i am pretty much satisfied that this is what i want to study in college. it is fascinating! i thought this was a fantastic camp.

•An important insight to the careers of te, Be etc.; scientific techniques and processes during activities such as micropipetting.

• i gained experience with the different tools. i had never used a micropipette before. Also we learned the basics of culturing stem cells.

•my knowledge about stem cells. i am so glad i was exposed to them because i think it is an area i could definitely pursue and excel in. thinking from an overall “forest” viewpoint, i used to think biology was just memorizing terms.

• i gained more knowledge about biology in general that i didn’t learn during the school year. i learned to collaborate in groups better.

• i learned a lot. i also got more experience with different lab equipment. Also i learned to collaborate with strangers and make friends.

•the hands-on experience was so much fun and made me love science even more. i loved dissecting the heart and the knee. tom’s hand was awesome as well because i’d never done anything with a circuit board.

• i gained the ability to use different instruments and knowledge in how to do certain experiments (e.g., gel electrophoresis); i also gained more knowledge about what te is and what it is also about.

•the camp definitely exceeded my expectations. i loved all the hands-on work we did but at the same time learning about new topics in detail. it really opened my eyes to the different areas of biomedical engineering.

• it was a good opportunity to be more involved in science hands-on outside the classroom, something i really enjoy. it has made me more interested in research than i already am.

• it was really great but i think we needed a little more time to work on the projects. the days were exhausting from the eight hours but well worth it.

• it was a great experience. i have taken biology, chemistry and anatomy and this camp has brought the classes full circle.

• it was a great experience overall, the counselors, campers, and materials were really fun, engaging, and informative.

some students felt that the set-up did not allow them a chance to interact with everyone beyond their table-mates. A majority of students (93%) said that they would recommend the camp to their friends.

Sometimes even tape can be fun!


Pre/Post Content Knowledge Evaluation Results

participants were administered a pre- and post-camp test in free response format to gauge what they learned during the course of the week. At the beginning of the camp, participants had very little understanding of the processes involved in human development, tissue engineering process, how cells communicate, and extra-cellular matrix. However, post-assessment data revealed that participants improved to a moderate level of understanding and learning related to (a) repair processes used by the body to heal a wound, (b) the tissue engineering process, (c) the fate of an implanted scaffold, (d) where stem cells come from, and (e) cell differentiation. the question about the processes involved in human development was as problematic in the post-test as it was in the pre-test. As displayed in Figure 27, participants displayed a positive trend in understanding and learning across most concepts. in particular, their scores improved by 15% or more on nine of the eleven questions. Although the test was ambitious for a week-long program, the results are very encouraging with mean scores increasing from 23% to 53%. the change is statistically significant (p < 0.0001) with an effect

size 1.5 (that is, they scored a little over one and a half standard deviation higher in the post test). it is worth noting that scores increased in the post test for all but three students (all three had no change from pre to post).

in summary, the high school summer camp provided an enjoyable learning experience. in the words of one camper, “i thought it was really fun with a variety of activities. every day we switched what we did. the people are really awesome too.” participants suggested time for interaction with everyone, and not just the people at their table would enhance the camp experience.

All camps included an interactive two-hour question-and-answer session about college preparation and application process and a final group presentation of ethical issues involved in their make-believe biotech company. some parents attended the latter session. students argued on both sides of the ethical dilemmas pertaining to the company and were quite convincing in the reasons they provided as to why they had a preference for one or the other option.

Comparison of Pre-Post Mean Scores Across Questions

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Overall

■ Pre

■ Post

Fig. 27

SwanSon School of EnginEEring | DEpartmEnt of BioEnginEEring22Counselors’ Background Experience on a Scale of 1 (None) to 5 (A Great Deal)

1 2 3 4 5

Hands-on research laboratory experience 1 1 2 3 0

experience tutoring/mentoring students 0 2 1 3 1

interest in the life sciences with significant coursework 0 0 0 3 4

interest in the physical science with significant coursework 0 0 1 2 4

interest in engineering with significant coursework 1 0 0 1 5

interest in education/instruction 0 1 4 1 1

experience working on an independent research project 2 1 0 3 1

Camp Counselors

in addition to mentors for the counselors, a recent bioengineering graduate from the university of pittsburgh and a third year phD student, there were seven counselors who worked closely with the campers. these seven counselors included five bioengineering undergraduates, a bioengineering undergraduate from edinboro university and one high school senior. they attended “a mock week” training, familiarizing them with the various modules addressed at the camp. All of them completed the survey administered on the last day of the camps. As Figures 28 and 29 display, there were 3 male and 4 female counselors comprising 5 Caucasians, 1 Asian, and 1 African American.

Five counselors said they mentored or tutored before. Communication about the counselor training schedule as well as the training were rated as fairly good.

Figure 30 indicates the background experience of the counselors. the responses indicate more than half of them had worked on independent science projects and had a moderate level of hands-on research lab experience. they were interested in life sciences, physical sciences and engineering having completed significant coursework, and a moderate level of experience tutoring/mentoring. Half expressed some level of interest in education/instruction. Figure 30 displays their responses regarding background experience.

Distribution of Counselors by Race/Ethnicity

■ Caucasian

■ Asian

■ African American

5 1

1

Distribution of Counselors by Gender

■ Male

■ Female

3 4

Fig. 28

Fig. 29

Fig. 30

23

Asked to respond to questions regarding the impact of their participation as counselors, a majority indicated their participation in the camp as a counselor/mentor reflected their interests as Figure 31 shows (sA – strongly agree, A – Agree, nC – non-committal, D – Disagree, sD – strongly disagree).

many indicated that participation in the camp increased their understanding of tissue engineering. some were motivated to pursue advanced science and/or engineering course of study. Half of the counselors indicated that this experience kindled an interest in taking education courses. most were interested in participating again as camp counselor or in some other tissue engineering/ regenerative medicine related informal educational experience.

several of the activities for the camps were designed by undergraduate bioengineering students providing them with an opportunity to create activities suitable for middle and high school students.

Frequency of Counselors’ Responses on the Impact of the Summer Camp

Impact SA A NC D SD

participation reflects interest 3 2 1 1 0

increased te knowledge 1 4 1 0 1

motivated to take advanced science/engineering courses 1 1 4 1 0

interest in taking education courses 1 3 3 0 0

participate in other such informal offerings 2 2 3 0 0

Fig. 31

B i o E n g i n E E r i n g S u m m E r c a m p S | 2 0 1 4 a n n u a l r E p o r t


overall the camp provided a creative learning opportunity for the counselors working with middle and high school students as the following comments illustrate:

• i liked sharing new ideas and techniques with the kids who otherwise would not have been exposed to these types of opportunities. it made me happy when i explained something well and they grasped a new topic. i liked interacting with the kids that liked me and would respect what i told them to do. it was also rewarding to see them improve at skills that they initially knew nothing about like pipetting or loading gels.

• i enjoyed having the opportunity to teach kids science and hopefully instill a love of science in them.

• i loved working with the children and learning how to simplify some aspects of science to fit their understanding of the material. i liked working with my team of interns and relearning so much bioengineering technique.

•working with kids. i learned how to put together teaching material, lessons and got some teaching experience.

• i like making the kids think about what science is and making sure they understand it. i like watching them think through the questions as well as learning about myself. i enjoyed impressing myself and the company of people.

• i learned a lot of basic lab techniques like splitting cells, pipetting, serial dilutions, etc. i also learned about relating to kids about science, which is much

more difficult than i originally thought. i learned how to do basic lab skills like pCR, gel electrophoresis pouring and pipetting.

• (learned) more teaching skills. more interactions and teaching roles with kids. How to conduct an independent experience. more business experience.

• i learned how to multitask to the extreme. listening to kids and other interns and the administration all at once. Refreshed my knowledge of cell culturing and other bio techniques. learned how to communicate difficult concepts in an easy way.

• i learned not to expect people to show appreciation automatically. i learned how to handle people who can cause trouble and communicate effectively as well as my need to improve my own self-confidence. i learned also about the nature of stem cells culture and growing bacteria. i learned a considerable deal about te.

• i learned that teaching is exhausting even when your students are well-behaved!

Asked for suggestions to improve the program, counselors uniformly brought up three main issues:

• improving the design of the training week. in particular, they would have liked to practice all of the activities rather than just talk about them;

•time allotted during the training camp to learn about some principles of teaching/mentoring. in particular, they wanted to be prepared when faced with children with learning disabilities or other such issues; and

•A need for better communication about coordinating the various activities.


parent surveys

the last afternoon of each camp was designed to be parents’ day with student presentations of their arguments for and against ethical issues at their make-believe companies. several parents attended the camp. they were asked to complete a survey that asked for their feedback based on what their sons or daughters told them about the camp. only six parents - four parents of middle school campers and two parents of high school campers- responded. to get additional feedback, parents were e-mailed a survey-monkey. thirty–five parents responded made up of 13 middle school campers’ parents and 22 high school campers’ parents with an overall total of 17 middle schoolers’ parents and 24 high schoolers’ parents (~60 % response rate). All of them said that the camps met their expectations and would recommend the camp to others. parents indicated their children were satisfied (25%) or highly satisfied (75%) with the camp experience. A vast majority (97%) also said their children were happy with the camp counselors and instructors. with the exception of three, all the others said they would send their children to camp again. the three who said no indicated they would consider sending their children again if the camp content was not the same. most parents (97%) also mentioned the camp stimulated science-related discussions at home. Asked what the children talked about most, the responses paralleled students’ own opinion – dissections and spider activity. the final question asked parents to offer comments and suggestions. the following are some of the comments:

• it is hard to find challenging and fun camps like this for middle school and high school. we are looking forward to next summer.

•this was an amazing opportunity – thank you. He went with a friend and they are already talking about what they hope to do at the high school camp next year.

•You guys rock. i also loved the communication from your entire team, before my child attended. All of my questions were answered. You exceeded my expectations. we are blessed to live so close to pitt (university of pittsburgh).

• i would definitely look into this next year if it would have different learning plans vs this time, otherwise there would be no point. i enjoyed the last day ceremony, kids did a great job. Keep my e-mail on file for new and upcoming events. we will definitely encourage and recommend others to do the camp.

•what a great experience! this camp stimulated thought-provoking conversations at our dinner table all week long. loved seeing my child so inspired by the scientific trends at work today.

•great experience for middle school girls. much more hands-on opportunity than they get at school.

•my daughter enjoyed the camp immensely. she thought the counselors were hands-on and created a fun atmosphere for learning. she is going to be a high school sophomore this fall and she wants to begin to narrow her field of study. this camp allowed her to do so. thanks for providing such an amazing opportunity.

•my son was excited to get up and come into the camp each day. this says a lot especially in the middle of the summer!

•Very impressive week! my child’s feet hit the floor in the mornings, anxious to get to pitt. well organized. Coordinators were very responsive to e-mails and questions.

one parent suggested providing guidelines about group work because some of the children were just learning to do group projects.

overall the responses from parents were extremely positive. the only complaint was from the parents of the two out-of-town students who had to spend extra money for accommodations.


conclusion

in summary, the summer camp had a positive impact and provided an enjoyable learning experience not only for the campers but also for the counselors. participants gained insight into a growing field which stimulated their interest in the fields of science and engineering. By the end of the camp, they displayed an increased understanding of the basic concepts involved in tissue engineering. the counselors also benefited from this exposure, expanding their own knowledge of the field and learning to manage and coach the middle and high schoolers. many of the activities for the camp were designed by bioengineering undergraduates and this provided them with a very valuable experience. in the spirit of continuous improvement, in response to feedback from last year, a mock-up of the camp was conducted during training that appears to have been beneficial for the counselors. the learning accomplished by the middle and high school students during the camps are consistent with prior years’ camps.

the following are some recommendations for program improvement based on a synthesis of the evaluation, observations, and suggestions from campers and counselors:

•Allocate time at the end of the day or beginning of next day for review of the day’s activities, particularly because too much information is presented in a short amount of time;

• include exposition of teaching techniques/mentoring during the counselor training so the counselors are better prepared with different levels of students.

•provide each counselor with a complete procedure book with clearly defined goals for each module;

•Allot time for counselors to try the hands-on activity during training. perhaps as suggested by one of the counselors, each intern can learn one of the scheduled modules and teach the other counselors in a table setting similar to the camp. this would ensure that everyone is on the same page during the camps; and

•schedule opportunities for interaction among all the campers.

Local cardiologist, Dr. Tom Power, assisting campers with the repair of a pig heart using bioscaffolds.


We’d like to take this opportunity to thank our 2014 Bioengineering Summer Camp sponsors:

ACell Inc.

Advanced Controls, Inc

ALung Technologies

Cardiac Assist

Clinical & Translational Science InstituteUniversity of Pittsburgh

Department of BioengineeringUniversity of Pittsburgh/Swanson School of Engineering

Ension

Intermec/Seattle Foundation

Lanxess

Office of the ProvostUniversity of Pittsburgh

Omnyx

Philips Respironics

Timesys

University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering Benedum Hall, 3700 o’Hara street, pittsburgh, pA 15261

engineering.pitt.edu

the information printed in this document was accurate to the best of our knowledge at the time of printing and is subject to change at any time at the university’s sole discretion.

the university of pittsburgh is an affirmative action, equal opportunity institution. 2/2015

10%

post-

consumer waste content

For information on becoming a bioengineering summer camp sponsor, please contact

Andrew Falk, Executive Director of Corporate and Foundation Relations,

at 412-624-6085 or [email protected].

Download - Bioengineering Summer Camps 2014 Annual Report

Top Related