Trial reportPloS one2018
Comparing student, instructor, and expert perceptions of learner-centeredness in post-secondary biology classrooms.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early-career faculty practice learner-centered teaching up to 9 years after postdoctoral professional development.Science advances · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Learner-centered classrooms encourage critical thinking and communication among students and between students and their instructor, and engage students as active learners rather than passive participants. However, students, faculty, and experts often have distinct definitions of learner-centeredness, and the paucity of research comparing perspectives of these different groups must be resolved. In the current study, our central research question was how do student, faculty, and expert observer perceptions of learner-centeredness within biology classrooms compare to one another? We sampled 1114 students from fifteen sections of a general biology course for non-majors, and complete responses from 490 students were analyzed. Five valid and reliable tools (two faculty; two student; and one expert observer) evaluated the learner-centeredness of each participating section. Perceptions of learner-centered instructors often aligned with those of expert observers, while student perceptions tended not to align with either group. Interestingly, students perceived learner-centered instructors as less learner-centered if they taught at non-traditional times and/or in large-enrollment sections, despite their focus on student learning. Perceptions of learner-centeredness in the biology classroom are complex and may be best captured with more than one instrument. Our findings encourage instructors to be cognizant that the approaches they employ in the classroom may not be interpreted as learner-centered, in the same manner, by students and external observers, particularly when additional course factors such as enrollment and scheduling may encourage negative perceptions of learner-centered practices.
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.