ArticleCBE life sciences education2023
Postsecondary biology students' ways of participating in the critique and discussion of primary scientific literature.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What's in a Prompt? Assignment Prompt Cues Influence Data Analysis, Critique, and Inclusion of Follow-up Experiments.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Science advances through the interplay of idea construction and idea critique. Our goal was to describe varied forms of productive disciplinary engagement that emerged during primary literature discussions. Such descriptions are necessary for biology educators and researchers to design for and recognize diverse repertoires of participation in the critique and discussion of primary scientific literature. We identified three cases (a lower-division ecology course, an upper-division organismal course, and a journal club embedded in a summer research program) that were each designed with weekly primary literature discussions. We analyzed 12 discussions (four from each case) to describe what postsecondary students attend to when they critique and what forms of participation emerged from students reading and discussing primary scientific literature. Students participated in critique in all three cases and patterns in the substance and framing of critiques reflected the level of the context (lower- or upper-division). Students also shaped how they participated in ways that were relevant to the science classroom communities in each case. Our findings suggest that structuring primary literature discussions in ways that both elevate and connect students' agency and personal relevance is important for fostering varied forms of productive disciplinary engagement within a science classroom community.
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.