ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2020
A Single, Narrowly Focused CREATE Primary Literature Module Evokes Gains in Genetics Students' Self-Efficacy and Understanding of the Research Process.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Student-led discussions of landmark discovery articles: a foothold in teaching primary virology literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- Fostering student authorship skills in synthetic biology.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Reading Primary Scientific Literature: Approaches for Teaching Students in the Undergraduate STEM Classroom.CBE life sciences education · 2023Review
- 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
- Teach different: The CREATE pedagogy for ecology and evolution.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure to primary literature using CREATE tools has been shown to have a positive impact on students' self-efficacy and beliefs when incorporated into semester-long courses taught by extensively trained faculty. However, it is unknown whether similar benefits can occur with a brief exposure to CREATE in an otherwise traditionally taught course. We hypothesized that students who experienced a short-term CREATE module taught by faculty with minimal training in this pedagogy would make gains in scientific literacy and self-efficacy while also experiencing epistemological maturation. To test this hypothesis, we compared sections of students who experienced the CREATE module with sections of the same course taught without CREATE. Our hypothesis was partially supported by the data in that students in CREATE sections made significant gains in self-efficacy but did not gain transferable data analysis skills. Students in those sections also self-reported significantly enhanced understanding of the research process. Thus, this study suggests that analysis of primary literature using CREATE, even in short modules, can significantly and positively affect students' self-efficacy and their views of science.
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.