ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2020
A Modified CREATE Intervention Improves Student Cognitive and Affective Outcomes in an Upper-Division Genetics Course.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- CREATE'ing improvements in first-year students' science efficacy via an online introductory course experience.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- Synthesizing Research Narratives to Reveal the Big Picture: a CREATE(S) Intervention Modified for Journal Club Improves Undergraduate Science Literacy.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Discussion of Annotated Research Articles Results in Increases in Scientific Literacy within a Cell Biology Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Annotations Serve as an On Ramp for Introductory Biology Students Learning to Read Primary Scientific Literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- From Novice To Expert: An Assessment To Measure Strategies Students Implement While Learning To Read Primary Scientific Literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2022Article
- Sharing Notes Is Encouraged: Annotating and Cocreating with Hypothes.is and Google Docs.Journal of microbiology & biology 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many national reports have called for undergraduate biology education to incorporate research and analytical thinking into the curriculum. In response, interventions have been developed and tested. CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate the hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) is an instructional strategy designed to engage students in learning core concepts and competencies through careful reading of primary literature in a scaffolded fashion. CREATE has been successfully implemented by many instructors across diverse institutional contexts and has been shown to help students develop in the affective, cognitive, and epistemological domains, consistent with broader meta-analyses demonstrating the effectiveness of active learning. Nonetheless, some studies on CREATE have reported discrepant results, raising important questions on effectiveness in relation to the fidelity and integrity of implementation. Here, we describe an upper-division genetics course that incorporates a modified version of CREATE. Similar to the original CREATE instructional strategy, our intervention's design was based on existing learning principles. Using existing concept inventories and validated survey instruments, we found that our modified CREATE intervention promotes higher affective and cognitive gains in students in contrast to three comparison groups. We also found that students tended to underpredict their learning and performance in the modified CREATE intervention, while students in some comparison groups had the opposite trend. Together, our results contribute to the expanding literature on how and why different implementations of the same active-learning strategy contribute to student outcomes.
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.