ArticleJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience2014
"Thinking like a Neuroscientist": Using Scaffolded Grant Proposals to Foster Scientific Thinking in a Freshman Neuroscience Course.
Article in Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Service Learning into a Neuropsychopharmacology Course.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Using Blogs as Practice Writing About Original Neuroscience Papers Enhances Students' Confidence in Their Critical Analysis of Research.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2018Article
- Teaching as THE Oldest Profession.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Learning and practicing scientific inquiry is an essential component of a STEM education, but it is often difficult to teach to novices or those outside of a laboratory setting. To promote scientific thinking in a freshmen introductory neuroscience course without a lab component, we developed a series of learning activities and assignments designed to foster scientific thinking through the use of scientific grant proposals. Students wrote three short grant proposals on topics ranging from molecular to cognitive neuroscience during a 10-week class (one quarter). We made this challenging and advanced task feasible for novice learners through extensive instructional scaffolding, opportunity for practice, and frequent peer and instructor feedback. Student and instructor reports indicate that the assignments were highly intellectually engaging and that they promoted critical thinking, a deeper understanding of neuroscience material, and effective written communication skills. Here we outline the mechanics of the assignment, student and instructor impressions of learning outcomes, and the advantages and disadvantages of implementing this approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25565917PMC4281046W2346771672What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.