Cbe-Life Sciences Education最新文献

The discrimination that Muslim students face on United States (U.S.) university campuses may be heightened in academic biology environments due to perceived stigma against religion in biology. Furthermore, as undergraduate biology courses transition to active learning, interactions among students often increase, so peer interactions may present additional challenges for biology students with concealable Muslim identities as they consider whether they should reveal their identities. In this study, we explored the experiences of 12 students with concealable Muslim identities during peer interactions in their undergraduate biology courses. We found that students felt their Muslim identity was salient during these peer interactions. However, students generally described the culture of biology as unwelcoming to any mention of religion. They anticipated stigma related to their Muslim identity, which contributed to them typically concealing their identity even though most had not actually experienced stigma related to their Muslim identity during peer interactions in biology. Students wished that their peers knew more about Islam and discussed how their own experiences as Muslims may differ based on their racial/ethnic identities. Our findings add to the growing literature on the experiences of Muslim students in academic biology in the U.S.

To address global environmental and health problems, scientists must work across disciplinary boundaries. The Science of Team Science is a field of study that examines the processes by which effective scientific teams operate across disciplines. We incorporated strategies from team science into undergraduate courses to help students develop an appreciation of other disciplines and to learn how to create productive science research teams. We then explored student team interactions and interdisciplinary thinking in three course-based undergraduate research experiences (CURE) in three different disciplines that were linked by complementary research questions in the same system. Through writing prompts scored with the Interdisciplinary Science Rubric, students demonstrated an intermediate level of understanding of the importance of interdisciplinary teams. Social network analysis revealed evidence of students learning from and building trust with students in the other CUREs. This study highlights the benefits of integrating concepts across disciplines in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education to better prepare undergraduates for modern STEM careers.

Undergraduate research experiences (URE) and course-based UREs (CURE) vary in terms of what students do, and it is unclear whether CUREs can substitute as research experiences for UREs. We used ecological momentary assessment (EMA), or in-the-moment data collection, to identify and compare research tasks of CURE and URE students at nine universities. We texted surveys to two cohorts, receiving 3537 responses from 538 students in Cohort 1 and 10,862 responses from 711 students in Cohort 2. Qualitative analysis revealed that students' tasks fit 11 themes (planning, managing research, experimenting, working with data, iterating, learning, reading, writing, presenting, finalizing work, interacting with others), which mapped onto four topics (experimentation, data collection, data analysis, communication) derived using natural language processing and machine learning. CURE and URE students completed similar tasks in similar proportions and described engaging in their tasks actively and constructively, but not interactively. Our results suggest CUREs may substitute for UREs for engaging students in research tasks in university contexts and that both CURE and URE students may benefit from greater interactive engagement. Our study also demonstrates the feasibility of EMA for studying research experiences and the utility of topic modeling for analyzing large text datasets.

Few LGBTQ+ biology instructors reveal their identities to undergraduates, often without considering the potential student benefits. Although instructors who have revealed their LGBTQ+ identity perceive positive impacts for students and a pilot study demonstrated this positive impact, we know of no multi-institution studies exploring how instructor LGBTQ+ disclosure affects students. We recruited a nationwide sample of nine LGBTQ+ biology instructors to disclose their identities and assessed the impact of disclosure on students via surveys (n = 2045). Few student participants in our study reported that instructor LGBTQ+ disclosure negatively impacted their course experience, and most students agreed that instructor LGBTQ+ disclosure is appropriate. Counter to our expectations, state LGBTQ+ acceptance did not have a significant effect on participants' responses to the instructor's LGBTQ+ disclosure. Additionally, students in our study with marginalized identities-including LGBTQ+, women or nonbinary, persons excluded due to ethnicity or race, or having anxiety or depression-benefited disproportionately compared with their peers. Although this multi-institution work is promising in that it corroborates previous findings of benefits to students following instructor LGBTQ+ disclosure and provides evidence that contradicts assumed regional differences in US students' responses to instructor LGBTQ+ disclosure, we encourage caution in generalizing the results to the students of all LGBTQ+ instructors.

In professional development (PD), who the learners are becomes a central feature that influences not only their learning, but also that of those around them. Participant identities, expectations, and teaching philosophies all influence the success of PD. In 2019, Zagallo and colleagues developed a set of personas to characterize how instructors show up in these settings. We are expanding on this prior study to include instructors from diverse institution types participating in a different PD context. To validate the existing personas and generate potential new personas, we followed Zagallo's stepwise procedure that included the collection of multiple types of data (interview transcripts, PD observations, meeting observations) over a 2-y period, qualitative analysis and triangulation of data, creation of skeletons that could be further developed into personas, description and refinement of skeletons into personas, and validation of the personas. Themes from the original study were also captured in this study: knowledge of students, teaching values, approaches to innovations, and perceived barriers. Four personas from the original paper were refined, and two new personas (Riley the Rookie and Ash the Advocate) were identified; both arose from institutional contexts not present in the prior research.

Perceived conflict between religion and evolution drives evolution rejection among religious undergraduate biology students. Though most biology undergraduates at secular institutions are religious, the majority of biology graduate students and faculty are nonreligious. Thus, nonreligious instructor perceptions of religion and its relationship with evolution may impact how they teach evolution, and ultimately their students' evolution acceptance. We interviewed 35 nonreligious biology graduate teaching assistants (TAs) across the United States to investigate their perceptions of the relationship between religion and evolution and to discuss that relationship in class. We found that most TAs did not perceive inherent conflict between religion and evolution. However, TAs had mixed opinions about whether helping students accept evolution was part of their job and how discussing religion and evolution in class might impact students. While some thought these discussions could promote inclusion and improve student evolution education outcomes, others worried these discussions could exclude students. Many TAs also expressed negative ideas about religion that could affect their willingness and ability to discuss religion and evolution effectively. It may therefore be important for biology graduate teaching assistants to intentionally emphasize compatibility between religion and evolution, rather than discuss their personal views, to improve student evolution education outcomes.

Science doctoral students can experience negative interactions with faculty mentors and internalize these experiences, potentially leading to self-blame and undermining their research self-efficacy. Helping students perceive these interactions adaptively may protect their research self-efficacy and maintain functional mentoring relationships. We conducted a preregistered, longitudinal field experiment of a novel perspective-getting intervention combined with attribution retraining to help students avoid self-blame and preserve research self-efficacy. Science doctoral students (n = 155) were randomly assigned to read about mentor perspectives on negative interactions (i.e., Perspective-getting Condition) or about mentoring with no mentor perspective (i.e., control condition). Contrary to our hypotheses, we found no main effects of the intervention on students' self-blame or research self-efficacy. However, for students with lower preintervention mentorship relationship satisfaction, the intervention preserved research self-efficacy six months later. This study provides evidence that perspective-getting may be protective for students who are most in need of relationship intervention.

Despite efforts to improve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and student outcomes, STEM fields continue to lack equity, inclusion, and diversity. The disproportionate attrition of minoritized students, including first-generation and racially minoritized students, is a pressing issue in higher education. Students often cite competition as a reason for leaving STEM fields, and competitive environments may have disproportionate negative effects on minoritized students. Investigating what makes STEM environments competitive and how competition affects students' sense of belonging is crucial for understanding minoritized student attrition from STEM fields. Therefore, we sought to understand first-generation and racially minoritized students' conceptions of competition and its effects. To do this, we conducted semistructured interviews with 25 racially minoritized and first-generation students in an introductory biology class with a noncompetitive grading structure. A recurring theme emerged: when students labeled a class as "competitive," they were referring to inequities-inequities in prior preparation, resources, time, understanding, and ultimately, success. The competition stemming from perceived inequities contributed to a low sense of belonging in class and in STEM generally. Because competition in STEM is a systemic issue, these findings position instructors as agents for change. Therefore, we conclude with recommendations to help instructors transform a competitive, inequitable environment into a noncompetitive, inclusive environment.

Women in science, technology, engineering and mathermatics (STEM) point to a competitive, predominantly white, male-dominant STEM culture where women confront a "chilly climate" and microaggressions. This includes biology, where there is gender parity, but underrepresented minority (URM) disparities prevail. We draw on qualitative data-focus groups, in-depth interviews, and journal entries-to compare the experiences of Latina, self-identified Black, and Asian American women in a biology undergraduate program at a prestigious Minority Serving Institution. We find that all women identify a competitive culture in biology, but differed in how they interpreted and navigated the major. Class-diverse Asian American women and white presenting, middle-class Latinas interpreted STEM culture through a meritocratic, colorblind lens, reflecting their seamless academic and social integration. In contrast, first-generation college-going, working-class Latinas and Black women, who were middle class in this study, interpreted the biology classroom culture through a class and racial lens. Working-class Latinas, in particular, experienced academic culture shock and, like Black women, had racialized interactions, reported being rebuffed when interacting and attempting to collaborate with predominantly Asian peers. URM women, including at MSIs, experience a competitive, non-collaborative culture in biology, with working-class Latinas culturally sidelined and, like Black women, racialized negatively in the major.

The purpose of the Current Insights feature is to highlight recent research and scholarship from outside the LSE community. In this installment, I review recent research investigating young children's capabilities for scientific reasoning and practices. These articles are part of a growing movement challenging interpretations of children as developmentally limited. Instead, they argue that with rich curricula and responsive teaching, children can achieve much more than previously assumed. For LSE readers, these articles raise the question: How does understanding young children's capabilities expand our assumptions and aspirations for postsecondary science learning?