skip to main content


This content will become publicly available on August 22, 2024

Title: Using an Observation Protocol To Evaluate Student Argumentation Skills in Introductory Biology Laboratories
ABSTRACT Argumentation is vital in the development of scientific knowledge, and students who can argue from evidence and support their claims develop a deeper understanding of science. In this study, the Argument-Driven Inquiry instruction model was implemented in a two-semester sequence of introductory biology laboratories. Student’s scientific argumentation sessions were video recorded and analyzed using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom observation protocol. This protocol separates argumentation into three subcategories: cognitive (how the group develops understanding), epistemic (how consistent the group’s process is with the culture of science), and social (how the group members interact with each other). We asked whether students are equally skilled in all subcategories of argumentation and how students’ argumentation skills differ based on lab exercise and course. Students scored significantly higher on the social than the cognitive and epistemic subcategories of argumentation. Total argumentation scores were significantly different between the two focal investigations in Biology Laboratory I but not between the two focal investigations in Biology Laboratory II. Therefore, student argumentation skills were not consistent across content; the design of the lab exercises and their implementation impacted the level of argumentation that occurred. These results will ultimately aid in the development and expansion of Argument-Driven Inquiry instructional models, with the goal of further enhancing students’ scientific argumentation skills and understanding of science.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1725655
NSF-PAR ID:
10465532
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Editor(s):
Shaffer, Justin
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
Volume:
24
Issue:
2
ISSN:
1935-7877
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Augmented reality (AR) has the potential to fundamentally transform science education by making learning of abstract science ideas tangible and engaging. However, little is known about how students interacted with AR technologies and how these interactions may affect learning performance in science laboratories. This study examined high school students’ navigation patterns and science learning with a mobile AR technology, developed by the research team, in laboratory settings. The AR technology allows students to conduct hands-on laboratory experiments and interactively explore various science phenomena covering biology, chemistry, and physics concepts. In this study, seventy ninth-grade students carried out science laboratory experiments in pairs to learn thermodynamics. Our cluster analysis identified two groups of students, which differed significantly in navigation length and breadth. The two groups demonstrated unique navigation patterns that revealed students’ various ways of observing, describing, exploring, and evaluating science phenomena. These navigation patterns were associated with learning performance as measured by scores on lab reports. The results suggested the need for providing access to multiple representations and different types of interactions with these representations to support effective science learning as well as designing representations and connections between representations to cultivate scientific reasoning skills and nuanced understanding of scientific processes. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    This paper examines the use of quantitative research agendas on systems modeling to study anticipatory cognition and cultural competency. This combination results in an integrative science approach to explore the intersectionality of metacognition, academic self-efficacy, stereotype threat, scholarly reasoning and identity among minority black diaspora graduate students. Extant literature focuses on social support models, but the novelty of the approach in this paper examines metacognition in action within a culturally-aware context. Data were collected as semi-structured narrative inquiry to capture metacognition during learning using narrative identity construction as a tool. There was a total of five students in the study including three females and two male participants in their first year of the graduate studies. However, the analysis focused on three of the participants who provided data consistently for eleven months -- two males and one female. The participants provided data including responses to Likert scale questions, and weekly video narratives in response to three sets of questions each week in an n-of-1 big data approach. This approach has the empirical benefit of allowing more inclusive and personalized analyses to draw conclusions. By observing the requirements of an approved IRB protocol, the analysis based on the transcripts of the video recordings, and the examination of change within each individual over time was confidential and conducted with de-identified data. Video recordings are coded and analyzed using HyperRESEARCH TM version 3.7.5. The result calibrates students’ comprehension, integration, and application of impactful, data-driven research skills. The metacognitive development portion examines the influence and dynamics of anticipatory cognition, stereotype threat, identity, and academic self-efficacy as the students’ progress through the process of quantitative skills mastery. This paper reports on the highlights of the distilled data on: (i) anticipatory cognition -- construct to describe use of prospective memory to simulate future associations and expected outcomes; (ii) academic self-efficacy -- captures the perceived level of confidence in the participants to engage successfully in specific cognitive acts associated with academic mastery; (iii) stereotype threat -- captures the anxiety associated with the salience of status as a member of a group that is stereotyped as underperforming in a specific area; (iv) identity or categorization of the self as a scholar and engineer. Other themes emerging include perseverance or determination, isolation, extant knowledge, future anticipation, and problem solution focus. 
    more » « less
  3. Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) are an increasingly utilized model for exposing students to research. The lack of robust assessments is a major hurdle to wider adoption of CUREs. The Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a drastic shift of in-person courses to the online format. Using the Participant Perception Indicator (PPI) survey, we measured students’ self-reported changes in learning from such a biochemistry course at a large university in south Florida based on the Biochemistry Authentic Scientific Inquiry Lab (BASIL) model. By doing this, we were able to better understand the student-benefits of CUREs and how these benefits are affected by changes in learning modalities between two relevant semesters, i.e., winter and summer of 2020. Anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) help partially fill the gap left by the loss of physical interaction in experimental procedures. Our analysis indicated that students learned more through bioinformatic experiments compared to their wet-lab counterparts. Using pre- and post- surveys, students reported that their experience and confidence gains lagged behind their knowledge gain of technique-based skills. Students are not as confident in their understanding of techniques when unable to perform those in the physical laboratory. Thus, despite extensive pursuit of the purpose and protocols of the experiments and techniques, neither their experience nor their confidence was on par with their knowledge. This study is one of the first examples demonstrating a quantitative student-learning assessment of a CURE in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The novel assessment strategies targeted to identify gaps in learning mastery could facilitate the adoption of CUREs, fostering opportunities for all undergraduate students to vital laboratory research experiences in STEM. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract: 100 words Jurors are increasingly exposed to scientific information in the courtroom. To determine whether providing jurors with gist information would assist in their ability to make well-informed decisions, the present experiment utilized a Fuzzy Trace Theory-inspired intervention and tested it against traditional legal safeguards (i.e., judge instructions) by varying the scientific quality of the evidence. The results indicate that jurors who viewed high quality evidence rated the scientific evidence significantly higher than those who viewed low quality evidence, but were unable to moderate the credibility of the expert witness and apply damages appropriately resulting in poor calibration. Summary: <1000 words Jurors and juries are increasingly exposed to scientific information in the courtroom and it remains unclear when they will base their decisions on a reasonable understanding of the relevant scientific information. Without such knowledge, the ability of jurors and juries to make well-informed decisions may be at risk, increasing chances of unjust outcomes (e.g., false convictions in criminal cases). Therefore, there is a critical need to understand conditions that affect jurors’ and juries’ sensitivity to the qualities of scientific information and to identify safeguards that can assist with scientific calibration in the courtroom. The current project addresses these issues with an ecologically valid experimental paradigm, making it possible to assess causal effects of evidence quality and safeguards as well as the role of a host of individual difference variables that may affect perceptions of testimony by scientific experts as well as liability in a civil case. Our main goal was to develop a simple, theoretically grounded tool to enable triers of fact (individual jurors) with a range of scientific reasoning abilities to appropriately weigh scientific evidence in court. We did so by testing a Fuzzy Trace Theory-inspired intervention in court, and testing it against traditional legal safeguards. Appropriate use of scientific evidence reflects good calibration – which we define as being influenced more by strong scientific information than by weak scientific information. Inappropriate use reflects poor calibration – defined as relative insensitivity to the strength of scientific information. Fuzzy Trace Theory (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995) predicts that techniques for improving calibration can come from presentation of easy-to-interpret, bottom-line “gist” of the information. Our central hypothesis was that laypeople’s appropriate use of scientific information would be moderated both by external situational conditions (e.g., quality of the scientific information itself, a decision aid designed to convey clearly the “gist” of the information) and individual differences among people (e.g., scientific reasoning skills, cognitive reflection tendencies, numeracy, need for cognition, attitudes toward and trust in science). Identifying factors that promote jurors’ appropriate understanding of and reliance on scientific information will contribute to general theories of reasoning based on scientific evidence, while also providing an evidence-based framework for improving the courts’ use of scientific information. All hypotheses were preregistered on the Open Science Framework. Method Participants completed six questionnaires (counterbalanced): Need for Cognition Scale (NCS; 18 items), Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT; 7 items), Abbreviated Numeracy Scale (ABS; 6 items), Scientific Reasoning Scale (SRS; 11 items), Trust in Science (TIS; 29 items), and Attitudes towards Science (ATS; 7 items). Participants then viewed a video depicting a civil trial in which the defendant sought damages from the plaintiff for injuries caused by a fall. The defendant (bar patron) alleged that the plaintiff (bartender) pushed him, causing him to fall and hit his head on the hard floor. Participants were informed at the outset that the defendant was liable; therefore, their task was to determine if the plaintiff should be compensated. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 experimental conditions: 2 (quality of scientific evidence: high vs. low) x 3 (safeguard to improve calibration: gist information, no-gist information [control], jury instructions). An expert witness (neuroscientist) hired by the court testified regarding the scientific strength of fMRI data (high [90 to 10 signal-to-noise ratio] vs. low [50 to 50 signal-to-noise ratio]) and gist or no-gist information both verbally (i.e., fairly high/about average) and visually (i.e., a graph). After viewing the video, participants were asked if they would like to award damages. If they indicated yes, they were asked to enter a dollar amount. Participants then completed the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Modified Short Form (PANAS-MSF; 16 items), expert Witness Credibility Scale (WCS; 20 items), Witness Credibility and Influence on damages for each witness, manipulation check questions, Understanding Scientific Testimony (UST; 10 items), and 3 additional measures were collected, but are beyond the scope of the current investigation. Finally, participants completed demographic questions, including questions about their scientific background and experience. The study was completed via Qualtrics, with participation from students (online vs. in-lab), MTurkers, and non-student community members. After removing those who failed attention check questions, 469 participants remained (243 men, 224 women, 2 did not specify gender) from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds (70.2% White, non-Hispanic). Results and Discussion There were three primary outcomes: quality of the scientific evidence, expert credibility (WCS), and damages. During initial analyses, each dependent variable was submitted to a separate 3 Gist Safeguard (safeguard, no safeguard, judge instructions) x 2 Scientific Quality (high, low) Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Consistent with hypotheses, there was a significant main effect of scientific quality on strength of evidence, F(1, 463)=5.099, p=.024; participants who viewed the high quality evidence rated the scientific evidence significantly higher (M= 7.44) than those who viewed the low quality evidence (M=7.06). There were no significant main effects or interactions for witness credibility, indicating that the expert that provided scientific testimony was seen as equally credible regardless of scientific quality or gist safeguard. Finally, for damages, consistent with hypotheses, there was a marginally significant interaction between Gist Safeguard and Scientific Quality, F(2, 273)=2.916, p=.056. However, post hoc t-tests revealed significantly higher damages were awarded for low (M=11.50) versus high (M=10.51) scientific quality evidence F(1, 273)=3.955, p=.048 in the no gist with judge instructions safeguard condition, which was contrary to hypotheses. The data suggest that the judge instructions alone are reversing the pattern, though nonsignificant, those who received the no gist without judge instructions safeguard awarded higher damages in the high (M=11.34) versus low (M=10.84) scientific quality evidence conditions F(1, 273)=1.059, p=.30. Together, these provide promising initial results indicating that participants were able to effectively differentiate between high and low scientific quality of evidence, though inappropriately utilized the scientific evidence through their inability to discern expert credibility and apply damages, resulting in poor calibration. These results will provide the basis for more sophisticated analyses including higher order interactions with individual differences (e.g., need for cognition) as well as tests of mediation using path analyses. [References omitted but available by request] Learning Objective: Participants will be able to determine whether providing jurors with gist information would assist in their ability to award damages in a civil trial. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    ABSTRACT The global COVID-19 pandemic left universities with few options but to turn to remote learning. With much effort, STEM courses made this change in modality; however, many laboratory skills, such as measurement and handling equipment, are more difficult to teach in an online learning environment. A cohort of instructors who are part of the NSF RCN-UBE funded Sustainable, Transformative Engagement across a Multi-Institution/Multidisciplinary STEM (STEM 2 ) Network (a working group of faculty from two community colleges and three 4-year universities) analyzed introductory biology and chemistry courses to identify essential laboratory skills that students will need in advanced courses. Seven essential laboratory proficiencies were derived from reviewing disciplinary guiding documents such as AAAS’s Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education, the American Society for Microbiology’s Recommended Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Microbiology Education , and the American Chemical Society’s Guidelines for Chemistry : data analysis, scientific writing, proper handling and disposal of laboratory materials, discipline-specific techniques, measurement, lab safety and personal protective equipment, and interpersonal and collaborative skills. Our analysis has determined that some of these skills are difficult to develop in a remote online setting but could be recovered with appropriate interventions. Skill recovery procedures suggested are a skills “boot camp,” department and college coordinated club events, and a triage course. The authors recommend that one of these three recovery mechanisms be offered to bridge this skill gap and better prepare STEM students for upper-level science courses and the real world. 
    more » « less