Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38728229›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2024

How Do Students Critically Evaluate Outdated Language That Relates to Gender in Biology?

Ryan D P Dunk, Sarah J Malmquist, Kristina K Prescott, Sharday N Ewell, Jeremiah A Henning, Cissy J Ballen

Abstract 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Ryan D P DunkDepartment of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
Sarah J MalmquistDepartment of Biology Teaching and Learning, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Kristina K PrescottDepartment of Biology Teaching and Learning, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Sharday N EwellDepartment of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
Jeremiah A HenningDepartment of Biology, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL 36688.
Cissy J BallenDepartment of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cisheteronormative ideologies are infused into every aspect of society, including undergraduate science. We set out to identify the extent to which students can identify cisheteronormative language in biology textbooks by posing several hypothetical textbook questions and asking students to modify them to make the language more accurate (defined as "correct; precise; using language that applies to all people"). First, we confirmed that textbooks commonly use language that conflates or confuses sex and gender. We used this information to design two sample questions that used similar language. We examined what parts of the questions students modified, and the changes they recommended. When asked to modify sample textbook questions, we found the most common terms or words that students identified as inaccurate were related to infant gender identity. The most common modifications that students made were changing gender terms to sex terms. Students' decisions in this exercise differed little across three large biology courses or by exam performance. As the science community strives to promote inclusive classrooms and embrace the complexity of human gender identities, we provide foundational information about students' ability to notice and correct inaccurate language related to sex and gender in biology.

Indexed as

BiologyGender IdentityLanguageStudentsEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID38728229
PMCPMC11235110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.