| Literature DB >> 35085230 |
Thomas Sauter1, Tamara Bintener1, Ali Kishk1, Luana Presta1, Tessy Prohaska1, Daniel Guignard1, Ni Zeng1, Claudia Cipriani1, Sundas Arshad1, Thomas Pfau1, Patricia Martins Conde1, Maria Pires Pacheco1.
Abstract
Project-based learning (PBL) is a dynamic student-centred teaching method that encourages students to solve real-life problems while fostering engagement and critical thinking. Here, we report on a PBL course on metabolic network modelling that has been running for several years within the Master in Integrated Systems Biology (MISB) at the University of Luxembourg. This 2-week full-time block course comprises an introduction into the core concepts and methods of constraint-based modelling (CBM), applied to toy models and large-scale networks alongside the preparation of individual student projects in week 1 and, in week 2, the presentation and execution of these projects. We describe in detail the schedule and content of the course, exemplary student projects, and reflect on outcomes and lessons learned. PBL requires the full engagement of students and teachers and gives a rewarding teaching experience. The presented course can serve as a role model and inspiration for other similar courses.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35085230 PMCID: PMC8794106 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009711
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Fig 1Toy metabolic model analysed during Monday.
Metabolites are represented as boxes, and reactions are depicted as arrows. The toy network contains 3 metabolites (A, B, and C) and 5 reactions (v1 to v5).
Fig 2Chloroplast carbon metabolism model analysed on Tuesday.
Medium-sized model where metabolites are represented as text and reactions as arrows. The model was adapted from [10].
Course assignments criteria and evaluation.
| Assessment tasks | Type of assessment | Grading scheme | Weight for final grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| Task 1 | Take-home assignment | 20 points (0 to 20) | 50 |
| Objectives | Report on practical tasks of week 1 | ||
| Assessment rules | Correctness and discussion of obtained results | ||
| Assessment criteria | Correctness and discussion are equally weighted | ||
| Task 2 | Presentation | 20 points (0 to 20) | 10 |
| Objectives | Present/pitch own project idea | ||
| Assessment rules | Oral presentations at the beginning of project | ||
| Assessment criteria | Quality and style of presentation | ||
| Task 3 | Presentation | 20 points (0 to 20) | 40 |
| Objectives | Present and discuss own project results | ||
| Assessment rules | Oral presentations at the end of project | ||
| Assessment criteria | Quality and style of presentation; Significance of obtained results | ||
| Task 4 | Attendance | Pass/fail | |
| Objectives | Minimal attendance required for this course | ||
| Assessment rules | Minimal attendance required for this course | ||
| Assessment criteria | 80% | ||
Fig 3Student’s course evaluation scores for the academic year 2018 to 2019.
The Advanced Systems Biology II course (number 7, in yellow) has been the most appreciated by the student’s population. MISB, Master in Integrated Systems Biology.
Evaluation form and results of Advanced Systems Biology II course, edition 2018 to 2019.
| ISB705: Advanced Systems Biology II Evaluation Form 2018 to 2019 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +++ | ++ | + | - | -- | --- | |
| I spent enough time studying to attain the level of deep learning | 6 | 7 | 1 | |||
| In this study module, the students were encouraged to think critically | 8 | 6 | ||||
| There was an encouraging and motivating atmosphere in the study module | 9 | 5 | ||||
| I was active during the study module | 11 | 3 | ||||
| I was motivated to learn | 7 | 6 | 1 | |||
| I learned new things during the study module | 9 | 5 | ||||
| I understand why the things to be learned in the study module were important | 7 | 6 | 1 | |||
| I was able to make connections between new learning and prior learning | 6 | 6 | 2 | |||
| My understanding of the subject matter increased during this study module | 9 | 5 | ||||
| I received enough guidance during the study module | 10 | 4 | ||||
| The teacher was in my opinion motivated to teach | 11 | 3 | ||||
| In my opinion, there was enough interaction during this study module | 11 | 3 | ||||
| In this study module, methods that activated my thinking were used | 6 | 7 | 1 | |||
| The teaching methods used enhanced my learning | 2 | 11 | 1 | |||
| I found the learning material for this study module quite easily | 5 | 5 | 3 | 1 | ||
| In my opinion, the learning materials were up to date | 7 | 7 | ||||
| The study module assessment was fair in my opinion | 5 | 8 | 1 | |||
| I knew what the assessment criteria were during the study module | 9 | 4 | 1 | |||
| The learning arrangements in this study module worked well | 7 | 7 | ||||
| The teacher was competent | 11 | 3 | ||||
| The teacher was able to concentrate on the most relevant matters | 9 | 5 | ||||
| The study module was too demanding for me | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 1 | |
| The study module progressed logically and coherently in my opinion | 7 | 5 | 2 | |||
| The practical/internship training helped me to understand the meaning of prior theoretical learning | 7 | 5 | ||||
| I planned my time when studying this study module | 4 | 8 | 1 | 1 | ||
| I spent enough time studying in this study module (1 credit = 25 hours of work) | 7 | 6 | 1 | |||
| In my opinion, the study module load corresponded with the credits given | 6 | 7 | 1 | |||
| I was able to manage time during the study module | 3 | 6 | 4 | 1 | ||
Fig 4(A) Overall student’s grades per evaluation method: The highest scores are obtained by the students in the final project, meaning that the PBL approach has a good impact on their performances. (B) Comparison of students’ grades per course edition: The graph shows a year-by-year improvement in students’ performances, which, in our opinion, also stands for the quality of the teaching improvement, including the course’s methods and contents. PBL, project-based learning.
Schedule of the 2-week course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 09:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 10:00 | CBM | Introducing COBRA methods with simple CBM models | Large-scale modelling and omics data integration | Large-scale modelling and omics data integration with rFASTCORMICS | |
| 11:00 | |||||
| 12:00 | |||||
| 12:30 | |||||
| 13:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 14:00 | Introducing COBRA methods with simple CBM models | Introducing COBRA methods with simple CBM models | Large-scale modelling and omics data integration with rFASTCORMICS | Large-scale modelling and omics data integration with rFASTCORMICS | |
| 15:00 | |||||
| 16:00 |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 09:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 10:00 | |||||
| 11:00 | |||||
| 12:00 | |||||
| 12:30 | |||||
| 13:00 |
|
|
|
| |
| 14:00 | |||||
| 15:00 | |||||
| 16:00 | |||||
Lectures, guided practical, and PBL times are depicted in blue, pink, and green, respectively. There are 3 assignments (in yellow) contributing to the final grading: a report on the guided practical of week 1, due on Monday after the course ending; a project pitch; and a final project presentation, both evaluated jointly by the students and the teachers. Allocated time for the presentations per student (7 to 15 minutes) is adapted according to the overall number of students. Independent study time is planned to allow the students to prepare for the assignments.
CBM, constraint-based modelling; PBL, project-based learning.
Overview of selected student projects in the PBL of week 2 of the 2020 and 2021 course editions.
| Project | Aim | Organism(s) | Models (draft/context) | Databases and tools | Outcome(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1: Engineering a synthetic pathway for maleate in | Building a model that includes all the necessary reactions for the maleate production and checking which other reactions of the model could be optimised to get a higher maleate production | Creation of an | |||
| P2: Impact of different diets on anxiety and depression in regards to serotonin levels | Evaluating the growth of 3 |
| Reduced growth rate of | ||
| P3: Genome-scale metabolic modelling of human CD4+ T cells | Building models for naive CD4+ T cells, Th1, and Th2 cells and performing a comparative essentiality analysis |
| Recon3D | GSE22886 [ | Identified essential metabolic pathways for naive CD4+ T cells, Th1, and Th2 cells |
| P4: Exploratory study using a human alveolar macrophage or respective mouse model combined with the Zika virus | Performing single reaction deletion, after the reconstruction of the host virus model, to predict putative antiviral strategies that could be tested experimentally | Human macrophage | DrugBank | Confirmation of the validity of the human virus model and reconstruction of other models using different hosts | |
| P5: Metabolic differences in high and low STAT3 expressing breast cancer | Comparison of metabolic reactions, genes, and metabolites in high and low STAT3 expression using expression data from breast cancer patients and a breast cancer cell line model | GSE62944 [ | Phenylalanine and vitamin B6 metabolisms identified as unique in the low STAT3 expression model |
Project title, aims, organisms of interest, used models, and data, as well as project outcomes, are briefly summarised. More detailed descriptions of the projects are given in S1 Appendix. These descriptions have been written by the individual student as part of the learning process.
PBL, project-based learning.