Learning about Prairie Restoration Ecology in Large

Prairie Restoration Ecology 101

Learning about Prairie Restoration Ecology in Large Introductory Biology Courses BRUNO BORSARI, Department of Biology, Winona State University, Winona, MN 55987 KEN GRAETZ, E-Learning Center, Winona State University, Winona, MN 55987 JOAN BERNARD, Bloomington Public Schools Educational Services Center, Bloomington, MN 55431 Abstract: The increasing interest in prairie restoration presents opportunities to develop new didactic methodologies that impart knowledge in basic ecology. For the present study, students in large introductory biology courses for non-majors were exposed in alternating semesters to prairie restoration ecology principles by either using a prairie case or a typical lecture format. A classroom response system (CPSRF) was used in both situations to engage students in the learning process and to assess their learning. The authors measured students’ learning by presenting a set of questions on the day of the case or lecture (pre-test) and again at the onset of the following class (post-test). Test results revealed that students in the case condition improved significantly from pre-test to post-test, whereas test scores declined for students in the lecture condition. These results suggest that the case-based method of instruction, combined with clicker technology, enhances students’ learning in prairie ecology when used instead of lecturing. Proceedings of the North American Prairie Conference 21:199-204 Keywords: case-study, clicker technology, learning, prairie restoration.

Introduction

The tallgrass prairie that had dominated the North American landscape was superseded by an expansion of cultivated fields and farms in an insignificant amount of time after European settlement, compared to the thousands of years of evolution it took to shape the attributes of this vast and unique ecosystem (Borsari et al., 2006a). There is a great need to impart knowledge to students regarding prairie restoration, as Borsari (2003) indicated, by assessing their knowledge about coastal prairies. Introductory courses in biology may not offer this opportunity to students as the typical module on ecology and the environment is normally taught at the end of the semester due to the topics placement in textbooks. This may not leave sufficient time for learners to understand and reflect upon basic ecological principles while pondering about the interconnectedness of the living world

with its physical habitat. In addition to this, students’ aversion and apathy towards science learning in introductory courses constitutes another challenge to professors who are committed to excellence in education and dedicated to students’ learning. This condition is aggravated also by a chronic naturedeficit disorder, which affects a majority of people (Louv 2005). Thus, the necessity of an enhancement of life science education, which reinforces learning in ecology, restoration and an appreciation for the natural attributes of the environment in which people live. Place-based education may inspire teachers and their students to learn more about the landscape features of specific bioregions (Orr, 1992), and within this context the study of prairies could fulfill a significant curricular need. To this end, prairie habitats may become valuable assets for this type of instruction in the upper Midwest region of the U.S.

Proceedings of the 21st North American Prairie Conference (2010)

199

Prairie and Education and beyond. A compelling need for developing and employing more engaging teaching methods aimed at attracting and retaining students in biology and life science curricula is emerging among institutions of higher education. To this end, Herreid (2006) suggested an innovative pedagogical approach to overcome student’s boredom, recitation of factual information and teacher-centered instruction when imparting knowledge in biology to large classes. In his opinion, the adoption of case-studies that employs the use of a response system (clickers) engage students more effectively to understand, learn and apply what is being taught. In an attempt to embrace this pedagogy, the authors proposed a clicker case (Borsari 2010) to large sections of a non-majors introductory biology course for several semesters, which challenged students with concepts and issues Case Introduction Jim and his family had purchased their first home on the outskirts of a midwestern town. The house was surrounded by approximately one acre of land. A young biology professor, Jim had studied native prairies and their plant communities, so he began to reconstruct a prairie. There weren’t any prairie plants present on his property. He transplanted seedlings and sowed seed right after moving in to the new home. His garden design included a system of mowed trails around a series of four-foot wide wildflower patches. Local Weed Ordinance “…..noxious weeds taller than 8 inches shall be mowed or the city will take care of the unwanted plants at the owner’s expense” pointed out the ordinance in place, although it did not define what constitutes a noxious weed. Jim’s Neighbors Jim’s neighbors were talking about his yard. “It’s an untidy mess! Everyone knows what a nice yard looks like, and it ain’t that!” one grumbled. “Don’t you think mice, ticks, and snakes are hiding in there? It’s probably not

of prairie restoration and ecology. The purpose of this study was to evaluate students’ learning when they were taught the prairie topic through the case study, in alternation with a typical lecture, through several semesters, by the same instructor.

Materials and Methods

Two-hundred and ninety-one undergraduate Introductory Biology students participated in the study as research subjects in fulfillment of a class requirement. Students from three consecutive academic terms, spring 2007, fall 2007, and spring 2008, were involved. All participants were either undeclared or non-science majors enrolled in their first or second semester of studies at Winona State University. All students purchased the eInstruction Classroom Response System polling device or

safe.” another wondered. “Whatever else, the fact remains: they are weeds. He can call them butterflyweed or milkweed ... they still are WEEDS! And they are taller than the 8” rule!” The City Building Inspector “Your yard is an eyesore in the neighborhood and it is hurting property value because of all those weeds!” the city building inspector sniffed at the end of his visit. “Your neighbors have complained and are asking the city to take action against your neglected home landscape. Your plants are weeds, and if they were flowers they should be contained within flower beds and not sprawling all over the place.” Jim’s Response Jim continued his restoration project. He fired an angry letter back to the Building Inspector. There weren’t any weeds in his yard! He was cherishing rare prairie plants! “Weeds” is just an ambiguous term to define plants growing out of place! He wrote: I am working on a restoration landscape project at home that minimizes the use of resources and enhances the biodiversity in the neighborhood. I have been planting more than fifty species of native grass

and wildflowers and also posted four signs to inform the neighbors about the work. My one-acre backyard is almost treeless and thus perfect for prairie wildflowers (especially for species in the Asteraceae family) as they require direct exposure to sunlight for several hours every day in order to thrive. I have been studying the environmental benefits of this landscape design for years and now I would like to apply this knowledge in my own garden. There is no danger of attracting mosquitoes or other animals like snakes or mice as the area is too small to support vertebrate species and too dry for mosquitoes to reproduce. The idea of maintaining a lawn around a house is not sustainable. A lawn demands the use of chemicals, a lot of water for irrigation and energy to mow all that grass on a regular basis and it is wasteful to have all that biomass hauled away by the waste management crew. Sterile lawn landscapes are what really hurt environmental quality in the community and I want to demonstrate a more efficient system of beautifying the neighborhood. I think my effort should be celebrated instead of being prosecuted!

Figure. 1. The case. From Borsari (2010). 200


Prairie Restoration Ecology 101 “clicker” from the university bookstore. This small, handheld device allowed them to respond to multiple-choice, true/false, and yes/no questions posed by the instructor by pressing a corresponding button. Responses were transmitted to a receiver connected to the instructor’s laptop and class results were displayed on a public screen. The instructor gave students a fixed amount of time to respond and could control when to reveal the results to students (Duncan 2005). Case vs. Lecture Cases are stories with a meaning purposefully conceived to educate students. They have been employed for a long time by teachers on the assumption that story telling captivates and holds on to the audience’s attention (Herreid, 1997). “Prairie Garden of Troubles” is the case Borsari (2010) wrote 1: What environmental factor do you think is most helpful to the reproductive success of prairie plant species that belong to the sunflower family (Asteraceae)? a. Water b. Light c. Soil d. Temperature e. An environment free from other Asteraceae Correct answer: B. This question assesses student understanding of the relevance of abiotic factors in prairie habitats. It may be difficult to make a selection as every factor could be important. However, there is a clear hint about this topic in the case and thus, I would like to learn whether students have read the case with attention. 2: How do you think prairie plants keep under control the growth of weeds and exotic species? What is their best strategy to succeed? a. their massive root system occupies all soil niches b. their effective photosynthetic activities are superior to non-prairie plants c. their speed in germinating seed outcompetes non-prairie plants d. b and c e. none of the statements above are correct

in order to engage students in active learning about prairie restoration ecology. This is a true story and experience that he uses to introduce himself to his classes, at the beginning of the semester (Fig. 1). This case was designed to be resolved in a typical fifty minute class period. Five pre-test questions were posed to the audience prior to the presentation of the case, which were answered using their clickers (Fig. 2). Then the case was presented through the slides of a power point presentation, which included more clicker questions to further retain students’ interest in the story and to allow small group discussions before selecting an answer. As the case unraveled, students worked in groups to develop open ended questions to be discussed in class. Clickers were used again to select three to five

Correct answer: A. The case emphasizes the difference between perennial and annual plants. Therefore, the rationale for this question consisted in asking students to reflect upon the growth of root systems of prairie species. Note that this is not always successful in disturbed sites, and it is often in disturbed sites where alien species often gain a hold that can spread. This could be a viable concern for the first years of Jim’s restoration effort. 3: The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) lays its eggs on different species of milkweed (Asclepias spp.) which inhabit prairies. The plant offers a site to the insect where its offspring will find easy food (the plant itself), whereas the insect while visiting the several plants will pollinate its flowers and help milkweeds to reproduce. This is an example of: a. parasitism b. mutualism c. competition d. commensalism e. synergism Correct answer: B. I thought this question was important to recall students learning about the importance of mutualism in prairies. 4: Extracts of the prairie plant pale coneflower (Echinacea pallida) have provided medicine

to enhance the capability of the immune system to resist infection. The discovery of these drugs is a strong argument for: a. genetic engineering b. overexploitation c. preserving biodiversity d. supporting pharmaceutical industries e. developing a better technology in support of quality of life for humans Correct answer: C. This question was designed to stress the need to conserve biodiversity. 5: All of these ecological services BUT ONE can be performed by insects on a well restored habitat: a. pollination b. sexual dimorphism c. predation d. parasitism e. reproduction Correct Answer: B. The rationale for this question is to make students reflect upon the importance of insects (in terms of ecological services) in natural ecosystems. An ecological service is a favorable performance of one species at the advantage of another one, or more. Think about the effect of insect beneficial species in controlling populations of noxious species in agroecosystems so that the use of agrichemical products may be reduced or even avoided.

Figure. 2. Pretest, posttest clicker questions. Modified after Borsari (2010). Proceedings of the 21st North American Prairie Conference (2010)

201

Prairie and Education “On the day scheduled for the trial the prosecutor decided to drop the charges against Jim as the scientific documentation he provided indicated very precisely the safety of this form of landscape design, in addition to its environmental benefits.

The judge dismissed Jim and invited him to join the ‘ad hoc’ committee to be chaired by the city attorney, so that the weed ordinance in the community could be revisited”.

Figure 3. Case Epilogue. From Borsari (2010). main questions that were answered through group and class discussion. A few minutes before the end of class, the case was resolved (Fig. 3 epilogue) and the instructor’s identity role in the case was revealed (Borsari 2010). At the onset of the following class period the same five clicker questions were posed again (post-test). These responses were compared to the answers of the pre-test questions. No discussion or explanation about these questions took place in the class. This teaching method was alternately used by the same instructor with a lecture about the topic over the course of three consecutive semesters. More specifically, the case was taught in spring 2007 and again in spring 2008, whereas the lecture was presented during the fall semester 2007. The latter was presented within the similar timeframe of a 50minute class used for the case. Lecture and casebased teaching aimed at fulfilling similar educational objectives and these consisted in:

perennials are not. However, native, perennial species are emphasized in this case as their cycle of growth and decay is fundamental to maintain soil structural integrity and fertility. • Hearing about the role of a prairie patch in connecting other native remnants and the benefits of this approach for facilitating gene flow. A full achievement for these four objectives is a very ambitious task for a 50-minute class meeting. To this end, the instructor should lead the learning towards concepts about this topic he/she feels most knowledgeable and comfortable to consider (Borsari 2010). In addition to this, the lesson plan for both lecture and case aimed at resolving two important misconceptions about prairies, which are common among students and the general public: • There is no need to preserve prairie biodiversity as humanity responds to any challenge with immediate, effective solutions driven by powerful technologies. • A prairie habitat is only a ‘patch of weeds’. This last misconception is a very important point which deserves (at the instructor’s discretion) further elaboration and discussion. Generally, students will produce and select a question about what constitutes a weed and thus, we strongly encourage the instructor to emphasize this topic and clarify

• Learning the basic ecological characteristics of a prairie ecosystem, including prairie ecological services (soil humus formation, water conservation, pollination, biodiversity, fire use and management). • Developing an appreciation for prairie habitat reconstruction and its acceptability as a form of ecological and more sustainable landscape design for urban areas. • Learning a few selected species of grasses and forbs (native perennials versus exotic annuals). Many annuals are native, and many 202

Figure 4. Pretest and posttest data for case-based and lecture-based classes.


Prairie Restoration Ecology 101 and elaborate about this important concept (Borsari 2010). However, this opportunity was not offered to students when they were lectured about the prairie topic.

Results And Discussion

One-hundred and eleven students were taught prairie restoration through a lecture presentation, whereas one hundred and eighty were taught prairie restoration through case-study. The two styles of instruction were alternated by the same professor over the course of three consecutive semesters. The means (standard deviations) for the pre-test and posttest scores for participants in the lecture condition were 3.78 (1.38) and 2.42 (2.45), respectively (Fig. 4). A Wilcoxon signed-ranks test indicated that the scores of a significant number of participants in the case condition improved (p < .001), with 104 of the 180 students in this condition scoring higher on the post-test versus the pre-test. A Wilcoxon signedranks test indicated that the scores of a significant number of students in the lecture condition declined (p < .001), with 64 of the 111 students in this condition scoring lower on the post-test versus the pre-test. Analyzing the data from the case condition for the Spring 2007 and Fall 2007 terms separately, a Wilcoxon signed-ranks test indicated that the improvement in the case condition was significant for students in the spring term (p < .001) but not in the fall term. The pre-test and post-test means (standard deviations) for the spring term were 2.90 (1.35) and 5.10 (1.05), respectively. The means for the fall term were 3.48 (1.10) and 3.69 (1.11), respectively. The interpretation of these results must be qualified by the fact that participants were not assigned randomly to conditions and there could have been several differences between groups. Specifically, it is unclear why students in the lecture condition outperformed those in the case condition on the pre-test. Using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test, this difference was significant (p = .009). It is also unclear why performance in the lecture condition declined. It is possible that the lecture format is counterproductive in this particular situation with this specific content. Additional research is needed to answer this question.

Conclusion

The current study explored whether the use of a case-based method for presenting prairie restoration and ecology concepts to Introductory Biology students would result in improved learning outcomes compared to a traditional lecture-based format, even when both classrooms teachings were enhanced by clicker technology. Results indicated superior performance for students who participated in the case-based presentation. The combination of a case-based method with tools that allow all students to participate and engage in constructing knowledge shows great promise. This technology is developing rapidly and soon the use of clickers may even be superseded by more sophisticated means of communication. It served well the purpose of engaging large groups of students in learning about prairie habitats. Finally, future studies exploring the integration of clicker technology with alternative pedagogies might include control conditions where clickers are not used. In the current study, it cannot be determined whether it was the case method alone or in combination with a classroom polling tool that produced improved learning outcomes. Even in light of these methodological limitations, the results are compelling and indicate fertile ground for further exploration. However, we remain cognizant of the limitations technology possesses to impart knowledge in ecology and restoration as the real experience should be gained in the outdoors. Nonetheless, if technology serves as the vehicle to inspire students to learn more about prairie restoration while enhancing their desire to get involved with real, hands-on projects, we feel that there is a viable niche for technology to be used as a tool to enhance learning and to motivate students a step further.

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Grant No.:DUE-0618570. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. Additionally, the authors would like to thank Drs. Clyde F. Herreid


203

Prairie and Education (University of Buffalo), Mary Lundeberg (Michigan State University) and Eric Ribbens (Western Illinois University) for their guidance and critical evaluation of the case.

Literature Cited Allison, S. K. 2002. When is a restoration successful? Results from a 45-Year-Old Tallgrass Prairie Restoration. Ecological Restoration, 20(1):1017. Borsari, B. 2003. The Coastal Prairie Habitat as a Model to promote Sustainability in the Agricultural Curriculum:17-23. In: 18th North American Prairie Conference Proceedings. Fore’ S. (Ed.). Promoting Prairie; 2002, June 23-27; Kirksville, MO. Kirksville: Truman State University Press. 249 pp. _______, Johnson, D., Taylor W., Kefeli, V. and Doherty, S. 2006a. Conservation Efforts and Natural History of a Prairie Habitat at Jennings Environmental Education Center, Pennsylvania. Proceedings of the 19th North American Prairie Conference:149-157. In: D. Egan and J. A. Harrington, eds. Proceedings of the 19th North American Prairie Conference. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison. 300 pp ________, Nosek, J., Bernard, J., Graetz, K. 2006b. Clickers Use to Enhance Students’ Academic Achievement in a non-majors Biology Course at Winona State University. Annual Conference on Case-Study Teaching in Science. University at Buffalo State University of New York. Buffalo, NY. Oct. 6-7. (Abstract). ________. 2010. Prairie Garden of Troubles: A Case-study. The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science Case Collection (In press). Caldwell, J. E. 2007. Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips. CBE-Life Science Education, 6:9-20. Duncan, D. 2005. Clickers in the Classroom: How to Enhance Science Teaching Using Classroom Response Systems. Addison Wesley and 204

Benjamin Cummings. New York, NY. Herreid, C. F. 1997. What is a Case? Bringing to Science Education the Established Tool of Law and Medicine. Journal of College Science Teaching, Herreid, C. F. 2006. “Clicker” Cases: Introducing Case Study Teaching into Large Classrooms. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(2): Jackson, L. L. 1999. Establishing Tallgrass Prairie on a Grazed Permanent Pasture in the Upper Midwest. Restoration Ecology, 7(2):127-138. Louv, R. 2005. Last Child in the Woods. Saving our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Algonquin Books, Chapel Hill, NC. Orr, W. D. 1992. Ecological Literacy. Education and Transition to a Postmodern World. State University of New York Press, New York, NY. Preszler, R. W., Dawe, A., C. B. Shuster and M. Shuster. 2007. Assessment of the Effects of Student Response Systems on Student Learning and Attitudes over a Broad Range of Biology Courses. CBE-Life Science Education, 6:2941. Van Bruggen, T. 1992. Wildflowers, Grasses and other Plants of the Northern Plains and Black Hills. 4th Ed. Fenske Printing Inc., Rapid City, SD. 112 pp. Vickery, P. D. and Dunwiddie, P. W. (Eds.). 1997. Grasslands of Northeastern North America. Ecology and Conservation of Native and Agricultural Landscapes. Massachusetts Audubon Society. Lincoln, MA. 297 pp. Vidrine, M. F., Allen, C. M., Borsari, B., Allain, L and Johnson, S., R. 2001. The Cajun Prairie Restoration Project:151-154. In: Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference. Seeds for the Future; Roots of the Past. N. P. Bernstein and L. J. Ostrander (eds.). North Iowa Area Community College, Mason City, Iowa. 241 pp.
