Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34914796›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

An introductory biology research-rich laboratory course shows improvements in students' research skills, confidence, and attitudes.

Iglika V Pavlova, David L Remington, Meg Horton, Elizabeth Tomlin, Mark D Hens, David Chen, John Willse, Malcolm D Schug

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Diving into research without wading through content: A skills-based cell biology course emphasizing the unknown.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
    Article
  6. Student Perceptions of Cognitive, Psychomotor and Affective Learning in the Undergraduate Laboratory.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
    Article
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

8 authors.

Iglika V PavlovaDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3540-0672
David L RemingtonDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7618-8407
Meg HortonDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.
Elizabeth TomlinDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.
Mark D HensDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.
David ChenDepartment of Educational Research Methodology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.
John WillseDepartment of Educational Research Methodology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.
Malcolm D SchugDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As part of a wider reform to scaffold quantitative and research skills throughout the biology major, we introduced course-based undergraduate research experiences (CURE) in sections of a large-enrollment introductory biology laboratory course in a mid-level, public, minority-serving institution. This initiative was undertaken as part of the in the National Science Foundation / Council for Undergraduate Research Transformations Project. Student teams performed two or three experiments, depending on semester. They designed, implemented, analyzed, revised and iterated, wrote scientific paper-style reports, and gave oral presentations. We tested the impact of CURE on student proficiency in experimental design and statistical reasoning, and student research confidence and attitudes over two semesters. We found that students in the CURE sections met the reformed learning objectives for experimental design and statistical reasoning. CURE students also showed higher levels of experimental design proficiency, research self-efficacy, and more expert-like scientific mindsets compared to students in a matched cohort with the traditional design. While students in both groups described labs as a positive experience in end-of-semester reflections, the CURE group showed a high level of engagement with the research process. Students in CURE sections identified components of the research process that were difficult, while also reporting enjoying and valuing research. This study demonstrates improved learning, confidence, and attitudes toward research in a challenging CURE laboratory course where students had significant autonomy combined with appropriate support at a diverse public university.

Indexed as

Academic SuccessAdolescentAttitudeBiologyCurriculumEducationEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansLaboratoriesLaboratory PersonnelLearningMaleResearchScienceStudents

Identifiers

PMID34914796
PMCPMC8675740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.