Discipline-specific education research continues to be published to inform teaching and learning efforts in biology education. Biology instructors can find teaching materials that emphasize active learning, research on how people learn, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CURES), and inclusivity efforts in biology classrooms.
The 2011 publication of the report Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action was a clear demonstration of how the field of biology education recognized a need to change its teaching and learning practices. This proposed call was profound in that it had the endorsement of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, several funding agencies including the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and other organizations. A major initiative arising out of the Vision and Change report was the formation of the Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education (PULSE) network, endorsed by several funding agencies. The mission of PULSE is to transform biology education at the undergraduate level. PULSE has regional networks and workshops, and produces resources to help departments self-assess their teaching and learning efforts and transform their classrooms according to the policies espoused by Vision and Change.
Journals
Articles and Papers
This reports summarizes the major findings since the publication of the original Vision and Change report. The original report has been distributed, viewed and cited frequently within the biology education community. Efforts have focused largely upon transforming how undergraduate introductory biology courses are taught. Faculty report not having sufficient planning time, a need for more teaching professional development and a necessity to cover material as the greatest barriers to change. Further, faculty are implementing change with and without funding from external grant agencies.
Abstract: “To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under traditional lecturing versus active learning. The effect sizes indicate that on average, student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes—although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.”
Abstract: “The Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Network (CUREnet) was initiated in 2012 with funding from the National Science Foundation program for Research Coordination Networks in Undergraduate Biology Education. CUREnet aims to address topics, problems, and opportunities inherent to integrating research experiences into undergraduate courses. During CUREnet meetings and discussions, it became apparent that there is need for a clear definition of what constitutes a CURE and systematic exploration of what makes CUREs meaningful in terms of student learning. Thus, we assembled a small working group of people with expertise in CURE instruction and assessment to: 1) draft an operational definition of a CURE, with the aim of defining what makes a laboratory course or project a “research experience”; 2) summarize research on CUREs, as well as findings from studies of undergraduate research internships that would be useful for thinking about how students are influenced by participating in CUREs; and 3) identify areas of greatest need with respect to CURE assessment, and directions for future research on and evaluation of CUREs. This report summarizes the outcomes and recommendations of this meeting.”
Excerpt from article (p. 322): “Below are 21 simple teaching strategies that biology instructors can use to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity. To provide a framework for how these teaching strategies might be most useful to instructors, I have organized them into five sections, representing overarching goals instructors may have for their classrooms, including:
- Giving students opportunities to think and talk about biology
- Encouraging, demanding, and actively managing the participation of all students
- Building an inclusive and fair classroom community for all students
- Monitoring behavior to cultivate divergent biological thinking
- Teaching all of the students in your biology classroom”
Tanner, K.D. (2012). Promoting Student Metacognition. CBE Life Sci Edu 11, 113-120.
This article describes the importance of metacognition - encouraging students think about their thinking - in biology classrooms. Several strategies are provided that instructors can use in the classroom to improve student learning. Of note include: pre-assessments, identification of confusing areas, retrospective post-assessments and reflective journals. A number of prompts are also provided that instructors can use in their classroom to promote metacognition.
The report encourages the biology education community to take action and change the way biology is taught at the undergraduate level. Four major recommendations from the report are:
- Instead of focusing on covering content, integrate core competencies across departmental curricula,
- Apply research on how people learn, and implement student-centered learning practices in the biology classroom,
- Garner support from all across the campus and a commitment to change,
- Work within all levels of the biology community to integrate change.
Abstract: “We developed the Blooming Biology Tool (BBT), an assessment tool based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, to assist science faculty in better aligning their assessments with their teaching activities and to help students enhance their study skills and metacognition. The work presented here shows how assessment tools, such as the BBT, can be used to guide and enhance teaching and student learning in a discipline-specific manner in postsecondary education. The BBT was first designed and extensively tested for a study in which we ranked almost 600 science questions from college life science exams and standardized tests. The BBT was then implemented in three different collegiate settings. Implementation of the BBT helped us to adjust our teaching to better enhance our students’ current mastery of the material, design questions at higher cognitive skills levels, and assist students in studying for college-level exams and in writing study questions at higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. From this work we also created a suite of complementary tools that can assist biology faculty in creating classroom materials and exams at the appropriate level of Bloom’s Taxonomy and students to successfully develop and answer questions that require higher-order cognitive skills.”
Abstract: “The present study examined the reliability of student evaluations of summer undergraduate research experiences using the SURE (Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences) and a follow-up survey disseminated 9 mo later. The survey further examines the hypothesis that undergraduate research enhances the educational experience of science undergraduates, attracts and retains talented students to careers in science, and acts as a pathway for minority students into science careers. Undergraduates participated in an online survey on the benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Participants indicated gains on 20 potential benefits and reported on career plans. Most of the participants began or continued to plan for postgraduate education in the sciences. A small group of students who discontinued their plans for postgraduate science education reported significantly lower gains than continuing students. Women and men reported similar levels of benefits and similar patterns of career plans. Undergraduate researchers from underrepresented groups reported higher learning gains than comparison students. The results replicated previously reported data from this survey. The follow-up survey indicated that students reported gains in independence, intrinsic motivation to learn, and active participation in courses taken after the summer undergraduate research experience.”
Abstract: “We tested five course designs that varied in the structure of daily and weekly active-learning exercises in an attempt to lower the traditionally high failure rate in a gateway course for biology majors. Students were given daily multiple-choice questions and answered with electronic response devices (clickers) or cards. Card responses were ungraded; clicker responses were graded for right/wrong answers or participation. Weekly practice exams were done as an individual or as part of a study group. Compared with previous versions of the same course taught by the same instructor, students in the new course designs performed better: There were significantly lower failure rates, higher total exam points, and higher scores on an identical midterm. Attendance was higher in the clicker versus cards section; attendance and course grade were positively correlated. Students did better on clicker questions if they were graded for right/wrong answers versus participation, although this improvement did not translate into increased scores on exams. In this course, achievement increases when students get regular practice via prescribed (graded) active-learning exercises.”
