ArticleCBE life sciences education2016
A Primer for Developing Measures of Science Content Knowledge for Small-Scale Research and Instructional Use.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- An adapted process to develop customized assessments to measure the impact of biology lessons.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Adolescents' knowledge of and confidence in vaccines improves with board game play.Discover education · 2025Article
- A scoping review of undergraduate anatomy and physiology education: approaches to evaluating student outcomes in the United States.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- A framework for leveraging network course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) faculty to develop, validate, and administer an assessment instrument.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation of Integrated Diabetes Curricula for Teaching Gene by Environment Concepts to High School Health and Biology Students.Journal of STEM outreach · 2024Article
- Comparing study features is easy but identifying next steps is hard: Evaluating critical thinking through the Biology Lab Inventory of Critical Thinking in Ecology.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Connecting the Dots from Professional Development to Student Learning.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Development of the Biological Variation In Experimental Design And Analysis (BioVEDA) assessment.PloS one · 2020Article
- The Community Faces Model: Community, University and Health Department Partners Thriving Together for Effective Health Education.Collaborations (Coral Gables, Fla.) · 2019Article
- EcoEvo-MAPS: An Ecology and Evolution Assessment for Introductory through Advanced Undergraduates.CBE life sciences education · 2018Article
- Design and Assessment of Online, Interactive Tutorials That Teach Science Process Skills.CBE life sciences education · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The credibility of conclusions made about the effectiveness of educational interventions depends greatly on the quality of the assessments used to measure learning gains. This essay, intended for faculty involved in small-scale projects, courses, or educational research, provides a step-by-step guide to the process of developing, scoring, and validating high-quality content knowledge assessments. We illustrate our discussion with examples from our assessments of high school students' understanding of concepts in cell biology and epigenetics. Throughout, we emphasize the iterative nature of the development process, the importance of creating instruments aligned to the learning goals of an intervention or curricula, and the importance of collaborating with other content and measurement specialists along the way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.