Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28495932›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2017

Effectiveness and Adoption of a Drawing-to-Learn Study Tool for Recall and Problem Solving: Minute Sketches with Folded Lists.

Paul D Heideman, K Adryan Flores, Lu M Sevier, Kelsey E Trouton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Paul D HeidemanDepartment of Biology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187 pdheid@wm.edu.
K Adryan FloresDepartment of Biology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187.
Lu M SevierDepartment of Biology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187.
Kelsey E TroutonDepartment of Biology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187.

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drawing by learners can be an effective way to develop memory and generate visual models for higher-order skills in biology, but students are often reluctant to adopt drawing as a study method. We designed a nonclassroom intervention that instructed introductory biology college students in a drawing method, minute sketches in folded lists (MSFL), and allowed them to self-assess their recall and problem solving, first in a simple recall task involving non-European alphabets and later using unfamiliar biology content. In two preliminary ex situ experiments, students had greater recall on the simple learning task, non-European alphabets with associated phonetic sounds, using MSFL in comparison with a preferred method, visual review (VR). In the intervention, students studying using MSFL and VR had ∼50-80% greater recall of content studied with MSFL and, in a subset of trials, better performance on problem-solving tasks on biology content. Eight months after beginning the intervention, participants had shifted self-reported use of drawing from 2% to 20% of study time. For a small subset of participants, MSFL had become a preferred study method, and 70% of participants reported continued use of MSFL. This brief, low-cost intervention resulted in enduring changes in study behavior.

Indexed as

LearningBiologyHumansMemoryProblem-Based LearningStudents

Identifiers

PMID28495932
PMCPMC5459246

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.