Date Submitted: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:34:17 GMT

Viewing: CDS 3460W allencar : Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diagnostic Applications I - Writing Intensive

Last approved: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:08:56 GMT

Last edit: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:08:34 GMT

Changes proposed by: allencar

Proposal Type

Writing Intensive

Contact Information

ciscojo
Jonathan
Cisco
CiscoJo@missouri.edu
573/884-6221
Campus Writing Program
Are you submitting this proposal on behalf of an instructor?

Instructor for whom you are submitting proposal:
allencar
Carla
Allen
allencar@health.missouri.edu
573/884-9680
SHP/Clinical & Diagnostic Sci
Subject Area’s Department Chair/Director:
ciscojo
Jonathan
Cisco
CiscoJo@missouri.edu
573/884-6221
Campus Writing Program

Term for Proposal

 
Spring 2017

Course Catalog Information

HP
Clinical and Diagnostic Sciences (CDS)
Clinical and Diagnostic Sciences
3460W
3
 
30
Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diagnostic Applications I - Writing Intensive
Interdisciplinary small group, case-based study of common cardiovascular, pulmonary and other diseases. Pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment from the perspective of allied health professionals. Emphasis on critical thinking, teamwork skills.
 
Lecture/Standard
A-F (allow student to choose S/U option)
Acceptance into Radiologic Sciences, Radiography Program.
 
 
 
RA_SCI 3460 - Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diagnostic Applications I

Instructor Information

allencar
Carla
Allen
allencar@health.missouri.edu
573/884-9680
SHP/Clinical & Diagnostic Sci
(numbers only)
NTT Associate Professor
619 Lewis Hall
 
 

The Campus Writing Program conducts a two-day faculty workshop to assist with the design and implementation of your writing intensive course. Once your course proposal has been approved by the Campus Writing Program, you will receive information on time, date and location of the workshop.
Indicate below if additional instructors are planned, but specific individuals have not yet been chosen. Check all that apply

Briefly describe the qualifications of the known graduate instructors, or planned qualifications if graduate instructors are still to be selected, bearing in mind that graduate students teaching honors courses should be advanced students with a record of excellent teaching.
 

Honors Course Information

 
 
Answer the questions below as they would apply to one section. For all other sections, provide similar information in the Additional Sections Information box below.
 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

Writing Intensive Course Information

Problem-based study of cardiopulmonary anatomy and physiology using current imaging methods. Emphasis given to assessment of the acutely distressed cardiac or pulmonary subject, emergency pulmonary support and vascular access techniques This course is designed to bridge understanding from basic diagnostic techniques to the role of diagnosis in the overall care and well-being of the patient. Disease processes addressed include commonly encountered issues including acute coronary syndromes, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, stroke, diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Students will work through the inquiry process using writing in a journal/private blog, on a team wiki and in peer reviews on the discussion board.

Each of the following assignments is repeated for each of the four cases.

Inquiry Journal Entry 1 - Exploration of Case Ideas Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on what might be going on with the patient and the aspects of the case that they find most interesting. Approximately 400 words What did you learn from reading the case? Write about something that surprised you or was new to you. Write something that you already knew about. Tell how you know. List some ideas that seem interesting to you. List ideas that you want to know more about.

Entry 2; Identification of Topic Personal journaling in a private blog to narrow the topics for investigation. Approximately 400 word Of the ideas and questions from your team Exploration Wiki, what seems most interesting to you? Why do you think it is interesting? Of those ideas, what would you enjoy sharing or telling others about? What sources do you think would be most useful? Why are they useful sources? How can you provide variety and multiple perspectives to the work?

Entry 3; information Gathering Personal journaling in a private blog to organize ideas and information gleaned from peer reviewed resources. Approximately 400 words Review the citations from the Explore page on your team wiki. Which do you think will be useful for your Inquiry Question? What makes it useful? What information is most important? What should be quoted? What ideas, connections, and interpretations does it raise? Look at the citations for each sources. Do they look useful for adding depth to your understanding? If so, add them to the list. Repeat.

Entry 4: Evaluation Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on the inquiry process. Approximately 400 words What aspects of your handout do you like the best? What areas need to be strengthened? How do you plan to address those areas? What aspects of other people's handouts did you appreciate most? Are there ways to incorporate a similar idea or approach in your handout?

Entry 5; Reflection Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on the inquiry process. Approximately 400 words What have you learned about the inquiry process? What did you do well that you would repeat in the next inquiry? What will you do differently next time? What were your favorite things that you learned about the content (disease process)?


Team Wiki

Page 1; Exploration of Case Ideas and Information Sources Collaborative inquiry and meaning making to share ideas and resources that help the team gain an overall understanding of the case. Approximately 600 words per student. Explain a minimum of 4 of the ideas you found most interesting and provide peer-reviewed resources that are related to each idea.

Page 2; Focus Organization of team ideas and distribution of areas of investigation. Approximately 300 words per student. Create a chart of the ideas that were most interesting to each of you. Look for similarities and differences. Group similar ideas together. Write a question that represents the ideas in each group. Continue until you have a cluster of ideas and an associated question for each team member. Try to make lone ideas fit into one of the groups. When you finish, identify the topics and questions each team member will address.

Discussion Board/Peer Evaluation Peer evaluation of handouts as responses to postings on the discussion board. Approximately 600 words (100 words/post) For all members of your team and 1 person from each of the other teams, respond to the post with the following information: What I liked about the handout was: I think they could have: What caught my attention was: I was interested because: I might have been more interested if:
The changes to implement sub-assignments focusing on the development of effective search terms was very well receive this past year. Overall course evaluations were 4.28/5.0. The assignments of four 4-page papers all revised will remain unchanged. Additional writing in discussion boards, wikis and an inquiry journal support the idea of writing to learn.
Online
Self paced?
No
14
15
Should this course be considered for funding?

Large Enrollment Courses:
 
 
 

Writing Intensive Assignments

Pages
Case Studies x4
Students will work in teams of 5-7 to analyze a patient scenario (case study). Each student will determine a different aspect of the scenario that they believe to be important in impacting the patient's outcomes. Emphasis is placed on each student identifying and refining all aspects of his or her individual topic; identifying, evaluating and synthesizing information sources; and writing a paper on those issues to share with their team. The entire team then works to make meaning of each member's shared information. Teams also evaluate their peer's document, and each student revises his or her document. Instructor evaluates revision. This process allows for reflection on both content and the inquiry process. These assignments involve 4 pages each for 4 case studies, plus revision of each assignment.
Length of assignment:
16
.
16
.
32

Total pages for all assignments:
First drafts:
16.00
Revisions:
16.00
32.00
 

Writing Intensive Teaching

Instructor provided feedback
Other
Peer review
While the instructor will model appropriate feedback on the first couple of assignments, feedback will primarily be in the form of peer review performed using guiding questions.
Students will work through the inquiry process using writing in a journal/private blog, on a team wiki and in peer reviews on the discussion board. Each of the following assignments is repeated for each of the four cases.

Inquiry Journal Entry 1 - Exploration of Case Ideas Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on what might be going on with the patient and the aspects of the case that they find most interesting. Approximately 400 words What did you learn from reading the case? Write about something that surprised you or was new to you. Write something that you already knew about. Tell how you know. List some ideas that seem interesting to you. List ideas that you want to know more about.

Entry 2; Identification of Topic Personal journaling in a private blog to narrow the topics for investigation. Approximately 400 word Of the ideas and questions from your team Exploration Wiki, what seems most interesting to you? Why do you think it is interesting? Of those ideas, what would you enjoy sharing or telling others about? What sources do you think would be most useful? Why are they useful sources? How can you provide variety and multiple perspectives to the work?

Entry 3; information Gathering Personal journaling in a private blog to organize ideas and information gleaned from peer reviewed resources. Approximately 400 words Review the citations from the Explore page on your team wiki. Which do you think will be useful for your Inquiry Question? What makes it useful? What information is most important? What should be quoted? What ideas, connections, and interpretations does it raise? Look at the citations for each sources. Do they look useful for adding depth to your understanding? If so, add them to the list. Repeat.

Entry 4: Evaluation Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on the inquiry process. Approximately 400 words What aspects of your handout do you like the best? What areas need to be strengthened? How do you plan to address those areas? What aspects of other people's handouts did you appreciate most? Are there ways to incorporate a similar idea or approach in your handout?

Entry 5; Reflection Personal journaling in a private blog to reflect on the inquiry process. Approximately 400 words What have you learned about the inquiry process? What did you do well that you would repeat in the next inquiry? What will you do differently next time? What were your favorite things that you learned about the content (disease process)?


Team Wiki Page 1; Exploration of Case Ideas and Information Sources Collaborative inquiry and meaning making to share ideas and resources that help the team gain an overall understanding of the case. Approximately 600 words per student. Explain a minimum of 4 of the ideas you found most interesting and provide peer-reviewed resources that are related to each idea.
Page 2; Focus Organization of team ideas and distribution of areas of investigation. Approximately 300 words per student. Create a chart of the ideas that were most interesting to each of you. Look for similarities and differences. Group similar ideas together. Write a question that represents the ideas in each group. Continue until you have a cluster of ideas and an associated question for each team member. Try to make lone ideas fit into one of the groups. When you finish, identify the topics and questions each team member will address.

Discussion Board/Peer Evaluation Peer evaluation of handouts as responses to postings on the discussion board. Approximately 600 words (100 words/post) For all members of your team and 1 person from each of the other teams, respond to the post with the following information: What I liked about the handout was: I think they could have: What caught my attention was: I was interested because: I might have been more interested if:
While topics for the handouts will vary, students will routinely analyze risk factors, compare and evaluate diagnosis and treatment options, and debate differential diagnoses for symptoms presented in the cases. Students are expected to explain the how's and why's of all learning issues they address.
All of the units throughout the semester are heavily writing focused.
90
%
 
0
 

Course Syllabus

Upload Course Syllabus

Administrative Information

Natural and Applied Sciences
 
9.26.16 Requested information on individual/group writing.

Acknowledgement

I have read and reviewed the updated proposal

Additional Comments

 
Patricia Luckenotte (luckenottep) (Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:08:34 GMT): I have added CDS 3460W, 01 to the Spring 2017 semester and cancelled CDS 3640, 01 for Spring 2017
Key: 79