Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22949428›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2012

Student learning outcomes and attitudes when biotechnology lab partners are of different academic levels.

Heather B Miller, D Scott Witherow, Susan Carson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Heather B MillerBiotechnology Program and Department of Plant Biology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.
D Scott Witherow
Susan Carson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The North Carolina State University Biotechnology Program offers laboratory-intensive courses to both undergraduate and graduate students. In "Manipulation and Expression of Recombinant DNA," students are separated into undergraduate and graduate sections for the laboratory, but not the lecture, component. Evidence has shown that students prefer pairing with someone of the same academic level. However, retention of main ideas in peer learning environments has been shown to be greater when partners have dissimilar abilities. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that there will be enhanced student learning when lab partners are of different academic levels. We found that learning outcomes were met by both levels of student, regardless of pairing. Average undergraduate grades on every assessment method increased when undergraduates were paired with graduate students. Many of the average graduate student grades also increased modestly when graduate students were paired with undergraduates. Attitudes toward working with partners dramatically shifted toward favoring working with students of different academic levels. This work suggests that offering dual-level courses in which different-level partnerships are created does not inhibit learning by students of different academic levels. This format is useful for institutions that wish to offer "boutique" courses in which student enrollment may be low, but specialized equipment and faculty expertise are needed.

Indexed as

LearningAdolescentAdultBiotechnologyCurriculumDNA, RecombinantEducational MeasurementFacultyHumansLaboratoriesNorth CarolinaPeer GroupStudentsUniversitiesYoung AdultDNA, Recombinant

Identifiers

PMID22949428
PMCPMC3433304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.