Presentations and Publications

Slides for MW-ERA Presentations

Kallio pipnic Carnegie Poster FINAL

ARIS Global Summit 2016

Presenting our research on a teacher-led implementation:Screen Shot 2016-08-16 at 1.08.05 PM.png

*Click on the image to link to the slideshow

Carnegie Foundation Summit on Improvement Science in Education, March 22-24, 2016


Julie Carnegie Poster



Research and development in education has traditionally followed a linear or technical model, but there is increasing attention on research-practice partnerships (RPPs) as an alternative organizational model to solve problems of practice (Coburn & Stein, 2010). However, large gaps exist in our understanding of how the design of an RPP relates to its actions and goals (Coburn & Penuel, 2016). Networked approaches to educational change represent a type of RPP that reorganizes research around problems of practice, seeking to align local learning for effective, scalable solutions (Bryk, Gomez, & Grunow, 2011). The cross-case analysis presented here compares three networks: (1) Community Colleges Pathways and its Networked Improvement Community, (2) Inquiry Hub and the Research + Practice Collaboratory and (3) Wilson1 School District and the Institute for Personalized Learning. While all three networks use similar strategies (centrality of local practices, collaborative design, network architectures for scale), they diverge in theory of action (Argyris & Schon, 1974) and end goal. This organizational shift has policy, theory, and practice implications for how scalable change is effected in educational systems.


Games+Learning+Society 11: Wednesday, July 8, 2015

*For this presentation, I only presented a short 10 minute bit about my part in teaching the Anatomy Browser Curriculum, linked below*

Craig G Anderson, John Binzak, Lauren Wielgus, Jennifer Dalsen, Mark Stenerson, Sheri Ebert, Julie Kallio Robison, David Azari, Laura Bloker, Pasqueline Scaico, Robert Bohanen, Kurt Squire, Constance Steinkuehler

Pairing games with education has been attempted many times with the hopes that the engaging nature of games will fuel student learning. However, these attempts often fall short of their goals by either losing student interest as soon as the game is forced into the classroom or because the game does not adequately promote learning of the desired material. Maintaining student interest while keeping learning goals on track has proven to be non-trivial. In an attempt to achieve these goals, we at GLS created an informal learning event called Game-A-Palooza in which students participated in 3 curricula designed around 5 educational games. Each game was created as a stand-alone learning tool and the curricula were designed to supplement the materials embedded in them. From these games and curricula, we obtained multiple data streams spanning quantitative click-stream data of each player’s game behaviors to talk audio data during each session to physical artifacts created by the players during sessions. Through this symposium, we will detail the design of each curriculum, the data streams that were collected, plans for analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data, challenges of creating the event, and future directions.

Anatomy Browser Presentation Slides

Anatomy Curriculum Resources



ISTE: Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Poster PDF



NCCE: Friday, March 1, 2013

Friday 9:45-10:45am



Article from undergraduate research (under maiden name “Kallio”)

“A Combination of Hand-held Models and Computer Imaging Program Helps Students Answer Oral Questions about Molecular Structure and Function: A controlled investigation of student learning.”

Authors: Harris, M; Peck, R; Colton, S; Morris, J; Neto, E; Kallio, J.

CBE – Life Sciences Education, 2009, 8:29-43

Link to the Article


We conducted a controlled investigation to examine whether a combination of computer imagery and tactile tools helps introductory cell biology laboratory undergraduate students better learn about protein structure/function relationships as compared with computer imagery alone. In all five laboratory sections, students used the molecular imaging program, Protein Explorer (PE). In the three experimental sections, three-dimensional physical models were made available to the students, in addition to PE. Student learning was assessed via oral and written research summaries and videotaped interviews. Differences between the experimental and control group students were not found in our typical course assessments such as research papers, but rather were revealed during one-on-one interviews with students at the end of the semester. A subset of students in the experimental group produced superior answers to some higher-order interview questions as compared with students in the control group. During the interview, students in both groups preferred to use either the hand-held models alone or in combination with the PE imaging program. Students typically did not use any tools when answering knowledge (lower-level thinking) questions, but when challenged with higher-level thinking questions, students in both the control and experimental groups elected to use the models.


2 thoughts on “Presentations and Publications

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s