ArticleCBE life sciences education2020
Development of the BioCalculus Assessment (BCA).
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We describe the development and initial validity assessment of the 20-item BioCalculus Assessment (BCA), with the objective of comparing undergraduate life science students' understanding of calculus concepts in different courses with alternative emphases (with and without focus on biological applications). The development process of the BCA included obtaining input from a large network of scientists and educators as well as students in calculus and biocalculus courses to accumulate evidential support of the instrument's content validity and response processes of test takers. We used the Rasch model to examine the internal structure of scores from students who have experienced calculus instruction in the two methods. The analysis involved three populations (Calculus 1, Calculus 2, and Biocalculus) for which the Calc 1 and Calc 2 students were not exposed to calculus concepts in a life science setting, while the Biocalculus students were presented concepts explicitly with a life science emphasis. Overall, our findings indicate that the BCA has reasonable validity properties, providing a diagnostic tool to assess the relative learning success and calculus comprehension of undergraduate biology majors from alternative methods of instruction that do or do not emphasize life science examples.
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.