Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30618507›Full record

ArticleJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience2018

"Understanding Checkpoints" Followed by Self-Evaluation to Assess Students' Scientific Literacy and Mastery of Content and Techniques.

Jennifer E Schaefer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Jennifer E SchaeferBiology Department, College of St. Benedict/St. John's University, Collegeville, MN 56321.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An Understanding Checkpoint (UC) presents students with previously-unseen figures from published scientific studies accompanied by questions about the study methods, results, and implications. The UCs incorporate content, concepts, and techniques previously discussed in class, although the figures and study from which they are taken are new to students. They are in-class, open-note, time-limited assessments that simultaneously assess course learning goals related to: neurobiology principles and content; process of scientific investigation, including neurobiological research tools and data interpretation; and reading and analyzing primary research literature. After students submit their work, they are provided the full publication and are asked to grade their own work, providing rationale for their evaluation. The self-evaluative portion of the assignment incentivizes students to identify and remediate ongoing weaknesses. It also provides spaced retrieval practice to enhance learning. The final grade for the UC incorporates the student's original answers and the accuracy of the self-assessment rationale. Student and instructor feedback indicates that the self - evaluative requirement develops a deeper understanding of the course material and enhances metacognitive effort, in addition to providing an opportunity to improve the UC grade. This strategy was originally presented as a teaching demonstration at the 2017 Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience Workshop.

Indexed as

formative assessmentneuroscience educationSTEM educationsummative assessmentundergraduate

Identifiers

PMID30618507
PMCPMC6312137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.