Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23858355›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2013

Using primary literature to teach science literacy to introductory biology students.

Johanna Krontiris-Litowitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Assessment ofJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Using the Humanities to Teach Neuroscience to Non-majors.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2015
    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

1 author.

Johanna Krontiris-LitowitzDepartment of Biological Sciences, Youngstown State University, Youngstown, OH 44555.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Undergraduate students struggle to read the scientific literature and educators have suggested that this may reflect deficiencies in their science literacy skills. In this two-year study we develop and test a strategy for using the scientific literature to teach science literacy skills to novice life science majors. The first year of the project served as a preliminary investigation in which we evaluated student science literacy skills, created a set of science literacy learning objectives aligned with Bloom's taxonomy, and developed a set of homework assignments that used peer-reviewed articles to teach science literacy. In the second year of the project the effectiveness of the assignments and the learning objectives were evaluated. Summative student learning was evaluated in the second year on a final exam. The mean score was 83.5% (±20.3%) and there were significant learning gains (p < 0.05) in seven of nine of science literacy skills. Project data indicated that even though students achieved course-targeted lower-order science literacy objectives, many were deficient in higher-order literacy skills. Results of this project suggest that building scientific literacy is a continuing process which begins in first-year science courses with a set of fundamental skills that can serve the progressive development of literacy skills throughout the undergraduate curriculum.

Identifiers

PMID23858355
PMCPMC3706167

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.