Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36692203›Full record

ReviewJournal of animal science2023

A review of the application of active learning pedagogies in undergraduate animal science curricula.

Elizabeth C Ragland, Scott Radcliffe, Elizabeth L Karcher

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of animal science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Elizabeth C RaglandDepartment of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Scott RadcliffeDepartment of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Elizabeth L KarcherDepartment of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1432-2727

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With most of the student attrition occurring early in undergraduate educational programs (Braunstein et al., 1997) it is necessary to interest and motivate students early on. The demographics of animal science students have shifted to students with minimal background in food producing animals. This presents a unique challenge as the current student population represents a diverse array of backgrounds and prior experiences. As a result, students enroll in undergraduate animal science programs with various expectations for their undergraduate degree and a focus primarily on careers in veterinary medicine. To engage all students, interest and motivation need to be generated. This review will use motivational frameworks as outlined by the self-determination theory, expectancy value theory, and interest, to explain the impact of the proposed solutions. Active learning classroom strategies are linked to increased knowledge compared with traditional, passive classrooms (Wells et al., 2019). Active learning shifts from a traditional teaching model to a student-centered model, which transitions instructors to facilitators of learning. This review summarizes current proposed pedagogies that have been researched in animal science classrooms such as experiential learning, flipped classrooms, hands-on animal experience, undergraduate research experiences, mentorship opportunities, capstone experiences, service-learning experiences, team-based learning, and cooperative learning. The limitations of these proposed pedagogies and the future research needed are also discussed.

Indexed as

Problem-Based LearningStudentsAnimalsCurriculumHumansactive learninganimal scienceexperiential learninginterestmotivation

Identifiers

PMID36692203
PMCPMC9872220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.