ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2023
A Multistep Science Literacy Training Framework in an Introductory Biology Classroom: Teaching How to Find, Evaluate, Comprehend, and Cite Scientific Evidence.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applying the mentor mindset to undergraduate and graduate student teaching assistant professional development in a laboratory course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2025Article
- Demographic isolation and attitudes toward group work in student-selected lab groups.PloS one · 2024Article
- Developing Science Literacy in Students and Society: Theory, Research, and Practice.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of Scientific Literacy and Communication E-Modules in a Molecular Biology Course: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Today's undergraduates are tomorrow's decision makers. Many of these decisions in biological sciences can influence whether the vaccines for the next pandemic will be effective, whether the mitigation efforts will have any impact on climate change, or whether we can produce enough food for the rapidly increasing human population while fighting the next pest outbreak. These informed decisions will need to be made by scientifically literate humans, including health professionals, politicians, and media personalities, who are currently undergraduates in our courses. Students in introductory biology classes can build a strong science literacy foundation by learning how to find, evaluate, read, discuss, and cite scientific evidence. An interconnected, multistep framework that uses library guides, active learning methods, group discussions, and collaborative learning is being used for nearly a decade in Investigative Biology and has been shown to significantly improve students' perceived science literacy and science communication skills. In this article, we share basic guidelines about how to implement this framework in one long laboratory session or in consecutive lectures. The flow of the proposed exercises has been tested and adjusted based on students' feedback and the authors' experiences, and a wide variety of resources are being shared to help the successful implementation of this framework in courses that would like to train the next generation of science-literate biologists.
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.