ArticleCBE life sciences education2017
Effectiveness and Adoption of a Drawing-to-Learn Study Tool for Recall and Problem Solving: Minute Sketches with Folded Lists.
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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drawing-based instruction enhances practical performance and academic flow in cardiovascular and respiratory anatomy education: a quasi-experimental study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Reclaiming the writing process using AI: a scaffolded writing assignment that promotes critical thinking, reflection, and accountability.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Students' Perception of Newly Experimented "Rangoli Art" in Anatomy Education: A Pilot Study.Medical science educator · 2023Article
- Successful Problem Solving in Genetics Varies Based on Question Content.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- A Cocurricular Program That Encourages Specific Study Skills and Habits Improves Academic Performance and Retention of First-Year Undergraduates in Introductory Biology.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
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.
Funding
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
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.