Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38306616›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2024

Developing Student Expertise in Evolution: Cognitive Construals Complement Key Concepts in Student Representations.

Kamali Sripathi, Aidan Hoskinson

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
24.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kamali SripathiUC Davis Genome Center, University of California, Davis, CA 95616.
Aidan HoskinsonDepartment of Biology and Microbiology, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007.
South Dakota State University · USUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic variation is historically challenging for undergraduate students to master, potentially due to its grounding in both evolution and genetics. Traditionally, student expertise in genetic variation has been evaluated using Key Concepts. However, Cognitive Construals may add to a more nuanced picture of students' developing expertise. Here, we analyze the occurrence of Key Concepts and Cognitive Construals among three types of student representations: interviews, drawn models, and constructed responses (CRs). Our mixed-methods analysis indicates that differential survival and differential reproduction occur more often in interviews than in CRs. In our interviews, presence of Cognitive Construals indicate varying levels of understanding of genetic variation, but we were not able to detect Cognitive Construals in students' models or CRs. Finally, our analyses of both Key Concepts and Cognitive Construals in student representations indicate that Cognitive Construals can co-occur with any number of Key Concepts, and that the presence of Construal-based language alone does not seem to correlate to the expert nature of a response. Taken together, our results highlight the need for instructors to avoid treating Construal-based language as implicit disconnects in student understanding, and to use multiple methods to gain a holistic picture of student expertise.

Indexed as

CognitionStudentsHumans

Identifiers

PMID38306616
PMCPMC10956600
OpenAlexW4391465796

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.