ArticleCBE life sciences education2020
Diving into the Details: Constructing a Framework of Random Call Components.
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. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Community College Biology Student Perceptions of Being Called on in Class.CBE life sciences education · 2023Article
- A Digital Single-Session Intervention (Project Engage) to Address Fear of Negative Evaluation Among College Students: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mental health · 2023Article
- What I Wish My Instructor Knew: How Active Learning Influences the Classroom Experiences and Self-Advocacy of STEM Majors with ADHD and Specific Learning Disabilities.CBE life sciences education · 2023Article
- Co-teaching in Undergraduate STEM Education: A Lever for Pedagogical Change toward Evidence-Based Teaching?CBE life sciences education · 2023Review
- Brief Training and Intensive Mentoring Guide Postdoctoral Scholars to Student-Centered Instruction.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Reconsidering the Share of a Think-Pair-Share: Emerging Limitations, Alternatives, and Opportunities for Research.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Instructor Strategies to Alleviate Stress and Anxiety among College and University STEM Students.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Evidence-based teaching practices correlate with increased exam performance in biology.PloS one · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Random call is a randomized approach to select a student or group of students to share their thinking with the whole class. There are potential costs and benefits of random call in undergraduate courses, yet we lack insight about how this strategy is actually implemented and why instructors choose to use it. We interviewed 12 college biology instructors who use random call in courses with 50 or more students. Qualitative content analysis revealed why these instructors chose to use random call, the specific ways they implemented random call, and the reasoning behind their implementation. Instructors used random call to increase the diversity of voices heard in the classroom and to hold students accountable for working. Random call users showed concern about student anxiety and took specific steps to mitigate it. We break random call down into a series of components, identify the components that our participants considered most critical, and describe the reasoning underlying random call components. This work lays a foundation for future investigations of how specific random call components influence student outcomes, in what contexts, and for which students.
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.