ArticlePloS one2022
Real-time text message surveys reveal student perceptions of personnel resources throughout a course-based research experience.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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
Course-based research experiences (CREs) are designed to engage students in authentic scientific experiences that are embedded into a standard curriculum. CREs provide valuable research experiences to large numbers of undergraduate biology students, however, CRE implementation can require many personnel. Because limited personnel may be a barrier to widespread CRE implementation, our goal was to discover which personnel students valued throughout a CRE and the ways they were valuable. We investigated students' perceptions of personnel resources throughout a semester-long CRE using two survey approaches. Using a text message survey administered multiple times per week, real-time data was collected about which personnel resource students perceived to be the most helpful. Using a web-based survey administered five times throughout the semester, retrospective data was collected about how often students used each personnel resource and how helpful students perceived each personnel resource to be. Graduate teaching assistants (TAs) were consistently selected as the most helpful personnel resource by the majority of respondents throughout the semester, with most respondents describing graduate TAs providing project-specific feedback. Although less frequently, undergraduate TAs were also consistently selected as the most helpful personnel resource. Respondents described undergraduate TAs providing project-specific feedback, general feedback, and project-specific resources. Data from the retrospective, web-based survey largely mirrored the real-time, text message survey data. Throughout the semester, most respondents reported using graduate TAs "Often" or "Always" and that graduate TAs were "Very" or "Extremely" helpful. Throughout most of the semester, most respondents also reported using undergraduate TAs "Often" or "Always" and that undergraduate TAs were "Very" or "Extremely" helpful. The results of this descriptive study underscore the importance of graduate and undergraduate TAs in the development and implementation of CREs, emphasizing the need for departments and course coordinators to be intentional in planning TA training that prepares TAs to fulfill their critical role in CRE implementation.
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.