Gender Identity and Student Perceptions of Peer Research Aptitude in CUREs and Traditional Laboratory Courses in the Biological Sciences.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Cbe-Life Sciences Education Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1187/cbe.22-03-0054
David Esparza, Aimeé A Hernández-Gaytan, Jeffrey T Olimpo
{"title":"Gender Identity and Student Perceptions of Peer Research Aptitude in CUREs and Traditional Laboratory Courses in the Biological Sciences.","authors":"David Esparza, Aimeé A Hernández-Gaytan, Jeffrey T Olimpo","doi":"10.1187/cbe.22-03-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While several studies have investigated gender inequities in the social learning environment of biology lecture courses, that same phenomenon remains largely unexplored in biology laboratory contexts. We conducted a mixed methods study to understand the influence of gender on student perceptions of their peers' research aptitude in introductory biology CUREs and traditional laboratory courses. Specifically, students (<i>N</i> = 125) were asked to complete a name generator survey at three time points across the semester. This survey asked students to list the names of peers whom they viewed as \"most proficient\" in the course investigations and to justify their choice via an open-ended response prompt. Using social network analysis, exponential random graph modeling (ERGM), and thematic analysis, we demonstrate that student gender identity did not influence nomination behaviors in CURE or traditional laboratory courses. However, the ERGMs reveal the presence of a popularity effect in CUREs and demonstrate that mutual nominations were more prevalent in traditional laboratory courses. Our qualitative data further provide insights into the reasons students nominated peers as proficient in CURE and traditional courses.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"22 4","pages":"ar53"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10756035/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-03-0054","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While several studies have investigated gender inequities in the social learning environment of biology lecture courses, that same phenomenon remains largely unexplored in biology laboratory contexts. We conducted a mixed methods study to understand the influence of gender on student perceptions of their peers' research aptitude in introductory biology CUREs and traditional laboratory courses. Specifically, students (N = 125) were asked to complete a name generator survey at three time points across the semester. This survey asked students to list the names of peers whom they viewed as "most proficient" in the course investigations and to justify their choice via an open-ended response prompt. Using social network analysis, exponential random graph modeling (ERGM), and thematic analysis, we demonstrate that student gender identity did not influence nomination behaviors in CURE or traditional laboratory courses. However, the ERGMs reveal the presence of a popularity effect in CUREs and demonstrate that mutual nominations were more prevalent in traditional laboratory courses. Our qualitative data further provide insights into the reasons students nominated peers as proficient in CURE and traditional courses.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性别认同与学生对生物科学治疗与传统实验课程中同侪研究能力的认知。
虽然有几项研究调查了生物学课堂的社会学习环境中的性别不平等,但在生物学实验室环境中,同样的现象在很大程度上仍未被探索。我们进行了一项混合方法研究,以了解性别对学生在生物学入门课程和传统实验课程中对同龄人研究能力的看法的影响。具体来说,学生(N = 125)被要求在整个学期的三个时间点完成一个名字生成器调查。这项调查要求学生列出他们认为在课程调查中“最精通”的同学的名字,并通过一个开放式的回答提示来证明他们的选择是正确的。通过社会网络分析、指数随机图模型(ERGM)和专题分析,我们发现学生性别认同对CURE或传统实验课程的提名行为没有影响。然而,ergm揭示了在CUREs中存在流行效应,并表明相互提名在传统的实验课程中更为普遍。我们的定性数据进一步揭示了学生提名同龄人精通CURE和传统课程的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
期刊最新文献
Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research. Examining How Student Identities Interact with an Immersive Field Ecology Course and its Implications for Graduate School Education. Factors Influencing the Use of Evidence-based Instructional Practices by Community College Biology Instructors. Bee The CURE: Increasing Student Science Self-Efficacy, Science Identity, and Predictors of Scientific Civic Engagement in a Community College CURE. Is Support in the Anxiety of the Beholder? How Anxiety Interacts with Perceptions of Instructor Support in Introductory Biology Classes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1