Search for: All records

This article builds on the work of Scott et al. (Scott EE, Cerchiara J, McFarland JL, Wenderoth MP, Doherty JH. J Res Sci Teach 1: 37, 2023) and Shiroda et al. (Shiroda M, Fleming MP, Haudek KC. Front Educ 8: 989836, 2023) to quantitatively examine student language in written explanations of mass balance across six contexts using constructed response assessments. These results present an evaluation of student mass balance language and provide researchers and practitioners with tools to assist students in constructing scientific mass balance reasoning explanations. 

This paper details the development of the first reasoning framework to describe how students’ reasoning about biological bulk flow pressure gradients develop toward scientific, mechanistic reasoning. 

These findings are the first empirical evidence to support the claim that using Physiology Core Concept reasoning supports transfer of knowledge across different physiological systems. 

Evidence-based teaching practices are associated with improved student academic performance. However, these practices encompass a wide range of activities and determining which type, intensity or duration of activity is effective at improving student exam performance has been elusive. To address this shortcoming, we used a previously validated classroom observation tool, Practical Observation Rubric to Assess Active Learning (PORTAAL) to measure the presence, intensity, and duration of evidence-based teaching practices in a retrospective study of upper and lower division biology courses. We determined the cognitive challenge of exams by categorizing all exam questions obtained from the courses using Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Domains. We used structural equation modeling to correlate the PORTAAL practices with exam performance while controlling for cognitive challenge of exams, students’ GPA at start of the term, and students’ demographic factors. Small group activities, randomly calling on students or groups to answer questions, explaining alternative answers, and total time students were thinking, working with others or answering questions had positive correlations with exam performance. On exams at higher Bloom’s levels, students explaining the reasoning underlying their answers, students working alone, and receiving positive feedback from the instructor also correlated with increased exam performance. Our study is the first to demonstrate a correlation between the intensity or duration of evidence-based PORTAAL practices and student exam performance while controlling for Bloom’s level of exams, as well as looking more specifically at which practices correlate with performance on exams at low and high Bloom’s levels. This level of detail will provide valuable insights for faculty as they prioritize changes to their teaching. As we found that multiple PORTAAL practices had a positive association with exam performance, it may be encouraging for instructors to realize that there are many ways to benefit students’ learning by incorporating these evidence-based teaching practices. 

Recent calls in biology education research (BER) have recommended that researchers leverage learning theories and methodologies from other disciplines to investigate the mechanisms by which students to develop sophisticated ideas. We suggest design-based research from the learning sciences is a compelling methodology for achieving this aim. Design-based research investigates the “learning ecologies” that move student thinking toward mastery. These “learning ecologies” are grounded in theories of learning, produce measurable changes in student learning, generate design principles that guide the development of instructional tools, and are enacted using extended, iterative teaching experiments. In this essay, we introduce readers to the key elements of design-based research, using our own research into student learning in undergraduate physiology as an example of design-based research in BER. Then, we discuss how design-based research can extend work already done in BER and foster interdisciplinary collaborations among cognitive and learning scientists, biology education researchers, and instructors. We also explore some of the challenges associated with this methodological approach. 

As the world becomes more urbanized, people place less value on knowing the biodiversity that surrounds them. Engagement with trees is hindered by an additional barrier, plant blindness, the tendency of people to ignore plants entirely. To help educators make tree diversity learning meaningful to students, this research aims to understand whether observing trees improves student dispositions towards knowing and observing trees, whether positive dispositions improve student learning about trees, and the reasons why urban middle school students care or do not care to know tree names.

To improve student engagement with local plant diversity, we developed a curriculum for New York City (NYC) students (Grades 6–8, ages 11–14) to help them scientifically observe the trees they pass daily.

This study reports results from preassessments/postassessments that explore students' dispositions towards knowing and observing trees and how these dispositions relate to learning. Participants included 150 intervention and 100 comparison students. In addition, 19 students were interviewed at three different time points.

Findings indicate that a tree observation and identification curriculum positively influenced students' dispositions towards knowing and observing trees, but 6 months after implementation, student interest had returned near to where it had begun. In addition, socioeconomic status had little impact on students' dispositions, and no relationship was found between dispositions and learning. Findings also show that as a baseline, about 25% of students care about knowing a tree's name. We grouped the reasons students provided into 17 categories, 10 for caring and 7 for not caring. The most frequently stated categories for caring were liking to know, knowing a name helps me know more, and knowing a tree's name helps me know my surroundings. The most stated categories for not caring were that knowing a tree's name is unimportant for my day‐to‐day life and all trees look the same.

Student reasons for caring and not caring are a compelling guide to the difficult task of making trees meaningful for students, an important step for empowering students to learn more about the trees that surround them.

 

In recent years, there has been a strong push to transform STEM education at K‐12 and collegiate levels to help students learn to think like scientists. One aspect of this transformation involves redesigning instruction and curricula around fundamental scientific ideas that serve as conceptual scaffolds students can use to build cohesive knowledge structures. In this study, we investigated how students use mass balance reasoning as a conceptual scaffold to gain a deeper understanding of how matter moves through biological systems. Our aim was to lay the groundwork for a mass balance learning progression in physiology. We drew on a general models framework from biology and a covariational reasoning framework from math education to interpret students' mass balance ideas. We used a constant comparative method to identify students' reasoning patterns from 73 interviews conducted with undergraduate biology students. We helped validate the reasoning patterns identified with >8000 written responses collected from students at multiple institutions. From our analyses, we identified two related progress variables that describe key elements of students' performances: the first describes how students identify and use matter flows in biology phenomena; the second characterizes how students use net rate‐of‐change to predict how matter accumulates in, or disperses from, a compartment. We also present a case study of how we used our emerging mass balance learning progression to inform instructional practices to support students' mass balance reasoning. Our progress variables describe one way students engage in three dimensional learning by showing how student performances associated with the practice of mathematical thinking reveal their understanding of the core concept of matter flows as governed by the crosscutting concept of matter conservation. Though our work is situated in physiology, it extends previous work in climate change education and is applicable to other scientific fields, such as physics, engineering, and geochemistry.

 

Abstract We systematically compared two coding approaches to generate training datasets for machine learning (ML): (i) a holistic approach based on learning progression levels and (ii) a dichotomous, analytic approach of multiple concepts in student reasoning, deconstructed from holistic rubrics. We evaluated four constructed response assessment items for undergraduate physiology, each targeting five levels of a developing flux learning progression in an ion context. Human-coded datasets were used to train two ML models: (i) an 8-classification algorithm ensemble implemented in the Constructed Response Classifier (CRC), and (ii) a single classification algorithm implemented in LightSide Researcher’s Workbench. Human coding agreement on approximately 700 student responses per item was high for both approaches with Cohen’s kappas ranging from 0.75 to 0.87 on holistic scoring and from 0.78 to 0.89 on analytic composite scoring. ML model performance varied across items and rubric type. For two items, training sets from both coding approaches produced similarly accurate ML models, with differences in Cohen’s kappa between machine and human scores of 0.002 and 0.041. For the other items, ML models trained with analytic coded responses and used for a composite score, achieved better performance as compared to using holistic scores for training, with increases in Cohen’s kappa of 0.043 and 0.117. These items used a more complex scenario involving movement of two ions. It may be that analytic coding is beneficial to unpacking this additional complexity. 

Vision and Change challenged biology instructors to develop evidence-based instructional approaches that were grounded in the core concepts and competencies of biology. This call for reform provides an opportunity for new educational tools to be incorporated into biology education. In this essay, we advocate for learning progressions as one such educational tool. First, we address what learning progressions are and how they leverage research from the cognitive and learning sciences to inform instructional practices. Next, we use a published learning progression about carbon cycling to illustrate how learning progressions describe the maturation of student thinking about a key topic. Then, we discuss how learning progressions can inform undergraduate biology instruction, citing three particular learning progressions that could guide instruction about a number of key topics taught in introductory biology courses. Finally, we describe some challenges associated with learning progressions in undergraduate biology and some recommendations for how to address these challenges.