Abstract Young researchers are often excluded from the scholarly processes of peer‐review and publication, which are cornerstones of scholarly work. TheJournal of Emerging Investigatorsis an open access journal dedicated to publishing the research of middle and high school students. We surveyed student authors before and after they participated in the peer‐review and publication process of their scientific articles. Following peer‐review and publication, students report gains in their confidence and self‐efficacy in science, and increased feelings of identity and belonging in science. Our findings demonstrate that even the youngest scholars are capable of participating in the publication process, and our data suggest that participation in the process has positive outcomes. 
                        more » 
                        « less   
                    
                            
                            Preprint articles as a tool for teaching data analysis and scientific communication
                        
                    
    
            The skill of analyzing and interpreting research data is central to the scientific process, yet it is one of the hardest skills for students to master. While instructors can coach students through the analysis of data that they have either generated themselves or obtained from published articles, the burgeoning availability of preprint articles provides a new potential pedagogical tool. We developed a new method in which students use a cognitive apprenticeship model to uncover how experts analyzed a paper and compare the professional’s cognitive approach to their own. Specifically, students first critique research data themselves and then identify changes between the preprint and final versions of the paper that were likely the results of peer review. From this activity, students reported diverse insights into the processes of data presentation, peer review, and scientific publishing. Analysis of preprint articles is therefore a valuable new tool to strengthen students’ information literacy and understanding of the process of science. 
        more » 
        « less   
        
    
                            - Award ID(s):
- 1827204
- PAR ID:
- 10366285
- Editor(s):
- Aslam, Muhammad Shahzad
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- PLOS ONE
- Volume:
- 16
- Issue:
- 12
- ISSN:
- 1932-6203
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- e0261622
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
- 
            
- 
            East, Martin; Slomp, David (Ed.)Studies examining peer review demonstrate that students can learn from giving feedback to and receiving feedback from their peers, especially when they utilize information gained from the review process to revise. However, much of the research on peer review is situated within the literature regarding how students learn to write. With an increasing use of writing-to-learn in STEM classrooms, it is important to study how students engage in peer review for these types of writing assignments. This study sought to better understand how peer review and revision can support student learning for writing-to-learn specifically, using the lenses of cognitive perspectives of writing and engagement with written corrective feedback. Using a case study approach, we provide a detailed analysis of six students’ written artifacts in response to a writing-to-learn assignment that incorporated peer review and revision implemented in an organic chemistry course. Students demonstrated a range in the types of revisions they made and the extent to which the peer review process informed their revisions. Additionally, students exhibited surface, midlevel, and active engagement with the peer review and revision process. Considering the different engagement levels can inform how we frame peer review to students when using it as an instructional practice.more » « less
- 
            In the last two decades, research experiences for pre-college students have gone from the exception of a typical experience of a high school student, to the norm. Often, these research experiences include distinct disciplinary literacy outputs that mimic those of professionals. And while much attention has been paid to supporting students in scientific writing, other disciplinary literacy practices, such as peer-review and publication, are often part of the hidden-curriculum of science research, thus excluding students from fully understanding ways in which scientific knowledge is constructed, refined, and disseminated (Authors, 2022). As more students participate in research experiences and the dissemination of their work, it is important to understand how mentors support the development of disciplinary literacies, including those that are deemed “professional”. To this end, we used a mixed-methods study of interviews and surveys to examine the experience and conceptions of the mentors who guided precollege students through the writing and publication of their scientific research projects. Using the construct of cognitive apprenticeship to evaluate our findings, we find that although mentors highly value peer-review and publication within science, they are not intentional about bringing these practices to the forefront of the research process for their student. Additionally, mentors report a range of involvement level in guiding students through the publication process. Our findings suggest that more work is needed to help reveal professional disciplinary literacy practices to students. mentors could benefit from resources to help them more intentionally involve students in such disciplinary literacy practices.more » « less
- 
            In a typical science class, communication exercises may include a variety of outputs including lab reports, posters, reflective writing, or research proposals. However, a growing number of students are engaging in more complex and professional communication endeavors, including scientific publication. The chance to write a research paper and experience the peer-review and publication processes may provide students the opportunity to integrate several practices from the Next Generation Science Standards, as well as share their research in a more public setting. Although we have some limited understanding in terms of the outcomes that students experience when engaging in peer-review and publication of their science research papers, we have no information or data regarding why students want to participate in these processes. As such, the purpose of this study is to investigate the motivations of pre-college students to pursue peer-review and publication of their scientific research papers. Using the theory of science identity to analyze the data, I found that students view publication as a mechanism to grow their scientific skills and be recognized as a scientist. The findings suggest that providing students the opportunity to share their research in more public settings could be a factor in developing their science identity.more » « less
- 
            Citizen science programs offer opportunities for K-12 students to engage in authentic science inquiry. However, these programs often fall short of including learners as agents in the entire process, and thus contrast with the growing open science movement within scientific communities. Notably, study ideation and peer review, which are central to the making of science, are typically reserved for professional scientists. This study describes the implementation of an open science curriculum that engages high school students in a full cycle of scientific inquiry. We explored the focus and quality of students’ study designs and peer reviews, and their perceptions of open science based on their participation in the program. Specifically, we implemented a human brain and behavior citizen science unit in 6 classrooms across 3 high schools. After learning about open science and citizen science, students (N = 104) participated in scientist-initiated research studies, and then collaboratively proposed their own studies to investigate personally interesting questions about human behavior and the brain. Students then peer reviewed proposals of students from other schools. Based on a qualitative and quantitative analysis of students’ artifacts created in-unit and on a pre and posttest, we describe their interests, abilities, and self-reported experiences with study design and peer review. Our findings suggest that participation in open science in a human brain and behavior research context can engage students with critical aspects of experiment design, as well as with issues that are unique to human subjects research, such as research ethics. Meanwhile, the quality of students’ study designs and reviews changed in notable, but mixed, ways: While students improved in justifying the importance of research studies, they did not improve in their abilities to align methods to their research questions. In terms of peer review, students generally reported that their peers' feedback was helpful, but our analysis showed that student reviewers struggled to articulate concrete recommendations for improvement. In light of these findings, we discuss the need for curricula that support the development of research and review abilities by building on students’ interests, while also guiding students in transferring these abilities across a range of research foci.more » « less
 An official website of the United States government
An official website of the United States government 
				
			 
					 
					
 
                                    