Cbe-Life Sciences Education最新文献

Many students who enroll in a public U.S. 4-y college will not graduate. The odds of completing a college degree are even lower for students who have been marginalized in higher education, especially in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) fields. Can undergraduate research increase a student's likelihood of graduating college and close educational equity gaps in college completion? To answer this question, we use data from six public U.S. universities (N = 120,308 students) and use Propensity Score Matching to generate a comparison group for analyses. We conducted logistic regressions on graduation rates and equity gaps in 4 and 6 y using the matched comparison group and undergraduate researchers in STEM (n = 2727). When being compared with like-peers and controlling for background characteristics and prior academic performance, students who participated in undergraduate research were twice as likely to graduate in 4 y and over 10 times as likely to graduate in 6 y. We also found that equity gaps in 4-y graduation rates for students of color, low-income, and first-generation students were cut in half for undergraduate researchers. At 6 y, these gaps were completely closed for undergraduate researchers. As we seek ways to close education gaps and increase graduation rates, undergraduate research can be a meaningful practice to improve student success.

Graphs are ubiquitous tools in science that allow one to explore data patterns, design studies, communicate findings, and make claims. This essay is a companion to the online, evidence-based interactive guide intended to help inform instructors' decision-making in how to teach graph reading, interpretation, construction, and evaluation within the discipline of biology. We provide a framework with a focus on six instructional practices that instructors can utilize when designing graphing activities: use data to engage students, teach graphing grounded in the discipline, practice explicit instruction, use real world "messy" data, utilize collaborative work, and emphasize reflection. Each component of this guide is supported by summaries of and links to articles that can inform graphing practices. The guide also contains an instructor checklist that summarizes key points with actionable steps that can guide instructors as they work towards refining and incorporating graphing into their classroom practice and emerging questions in which further empirical studies are warranted.

STEM undergraduates navigate lengthy sequences of prerequisite courses covering volumes of science content. Given that these courses may contribute to attrition and equity gaps in STEM, research is needed to test the assumption that prerequisite content benefits students in their future studies and careers. We investigated the relevance of prerequisite course content for students' careers through semistructured interviews with practicing nurses regarding their undergraduate anatomy and physiology (A&P) courses. Nurses reported that A&P content does not align with the skills and knowledge needed in the nursing profession. Interviewees averaged 39% on a brief A&P assessment, suggesting A&P prerequisites failed to impart a high degree of long-term A&P knowledge among nurses. Further, practicing nurses perceived overcommitment to A&P content coverage as an exclusionary practice that eliminates capable individuals from the prenursing pathway. These findings challenge assumptions surrounding the justification for prerequisite course content and raise questions of whether content expectations actively exclude individuals from STEM or healthcare careers. We aspire for this study to stimulate conversation and research about the goals of prerequisite content, who is best positioned to articulate prerequisite content objectives, and the influence of content coverage on equity and justice in undergraduate STEM education.

The purpose of the Current Insights feature is to highlight recent research and scholarship from outside the LSE community. In this installment, I review a series of recently published articles which examine ethical dilemmas concerning the use of artificial intelligence (AI), more specifically machine learning, in science education. The articles in this set are intended to stimulate discussions about whether and how AI can and should be used in education research.

Discipline-based education research (DBER) has experienced dramatic growth over recent years, but with growth comes concerns about whether DBER efforts accurately represent the education landscape. By many measures, DBER does not feature a representative range of institutional contexts or a diverse array of voices. Numerous professional development efforts have sought to broaden DBER participation. However, few studies investigate factors that increase engagement by individuals from underrepresented contexts. Drawing on theory related to belonging, self-efficacy, and social learning communities, we investigated persistence in an affinity group aimed at engaging community college faculty (CCF) in biology education research (BER). CCF and CC contexts are dramatically underrepresented in BER in comparison to their central positioning in higher education. We conducted a 4-y study of CCF participants' sense of belonging, self-efficacy, and network connectivity. Our results suggest a relationship between social connectivity, belonging, and persistence in the community, indicating an increase of either of these factors may increase persistence. Self-efficacy increased alongside belonging within the affinity group, which correlated with belonging in BER broadly. These results might inform efforts to engage underrepresented groups of DBER scholars and suggest that such efforts go beyond provision of resources and skills, to focus on building social connections.

Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) are attractive solutions for scaling undergraduate research experiences at primarily undergraduate teaching institutions, where resources for faculty research activities can be limited. The Sustainable Interdisciplinary Research to Inspire Undergraduate Success (SIRIUS) project is a unique program that integrates CUREs, coordinated around a local real-world problem, throughout a biology department's curricula. The CUREs are scaffolded to provide all biology majors with multiple opportunities to engage in scientific investigations as they advance through introductory, intermediate, and advanced courses. In this mixed methods, cross-sectional study, we explore students' perceptions of the authenticity of their experiences as they progress through the SIRIUS CUREs. Triangulated data collected from two instruments indicated that students in advanced courses recognized more involvement in research activities and perceived greater authenticity in the science they were performing compared with introductory and intermediate students. Intermediate and advanced students perceived more opportunities for independence; however, experiences with failure and the influence these experiences had on the perceptions of authenticity was primarily observed with advanced students. This study contributes to the growing literature on CUREs with a focus on students from a primarily undergraduate institution with multiple minority-serving designations.

Effective communication about science is a core skill undergraduates should learn, but little research has explored how students communicate about culturally controversial science topics. In this study, we explored how Black undergraduate science students took on the role of science communicators in their communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We interviewed 23 Black students about their experiences learning about COVID-19 vaccines and communicating about COVID-19 vaccines to their communities. We found that students' racial/ethnic and science backgrounds made them feel a responsibility to be effective communicators about COVID-19 vaccines as potential trusted messengers within their communities. However, students were using limited strategies when communicating and were unsure how to communicate about COVID-19 topics effectively to those who were vaccine-hesitant or doubted the severity of the pandemic. Finally, students described ways that their biology instructors could have helped them be more confident when communicating about COVID-19 vaccines with their communities. Findings suggest that biology instructors could teach science communication principles in addition to content knowledge about culturally controversial science topics in their undergraduate classes to build on students' developing science communication skills.

Graduate students often face choices about which resources to use to help them succeed in their programs. These choices likely differ among students, in part, due to different perceptions of resource value. However, little is known about why particular resources might be considered highly valuable to students, thus driving choice. Utilizing expectancy-value theory for help sources as our theoretical framework, this qualitative study explored life science (LS) graduate students' top three resource choices, their explanations about why they made those choices, and whether students' perceptions of value differed among resources and across demographic groups. We addressed two research questions: 1) What resources do LS graduate students consider to be the most important? 2) What drives LS graduate students' perceptions of resource value? Many participants indicated that 'advisor' and 'academic stipend' were most important. Student perceptions of value were driven by their perceptions of which needs resources fulfilled, such as basic needs, academic help, or support. Participants' top resource choices and underlying values of those resources did not differ among demographic groups. We propose a model for understanding graduate student resource choice that may inform future work on student outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to present an argument for why there is a need to re-envision the underlying culture of undergraduate biology education to ensure the success, retention, and matriculation of Black students. The basis of this argument is the continued noted challenges with retaining Black students in the biological sciences coupled with existing research that implicates science contexts (i.e., the cultural norms, values, and beliefs manifesting through policies and practices) as being the primary source of the challenges experienced by Black students that lead to their attrition. In presenting this argument, we introduce the Re-Envisioning Culture Network, a multigenerational, interdisciplinary network comprised of higher education administrators, faculty, staff, Black undergraduate students majoring in biology, Black cultural artists, community leaders, and STEM professionals to work together to curate and generate resources and tools that will facilitate change. In introducing the REC Network and disseminating its mission and ongoing endeavors, we generate a clarion call for educators, researchers, STEM professionals, students, and the broader community to join us in this endeavor in fostering transformative change.

Evolution is foundational to understanding biology, yet learners at all stages have incomplete and incorrect ideas that persist beyond graduation. Contextual features of prompts (e.g., taxon of organism, acquisition vs. loss of traits, etc.) have been shown to influence both the learning process and the ideas students express in explanations of evolutionary processes. In this study, we compare students' explanations of natural selection for humans versus a nonhuman animal (cheetah) at different times during biology instruction. We found "taxon" to be a significant predictor of the content of students' explanations. Responses to "cheetah" prompts contained a larger number and diversity of key concepts (e.g., variation, heritability, differential reproduction) and fewer naïve ideas (e.g., need, adapt) when compared with responses to an isomorphic prompt containing "human" as the organism. Overall, instruction increased the prevalence of key concepts, reduced naïve ideas, and caused a modest reduction in differences due to taxon. Our findings suggest that the students are reasoning differently about evolutionary processes in humans as compared with nonhuman animals, and that targeted instruction may both increase students' facility with key concepts while reducing their susceptibility to contextual influences.