Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38885292›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2024

Student Perspectives of Success and Failure in Biology Lecture: Multifaceted Definitions and Misalignments.

Bailey M Von der Mehden, Kurisma Waller, Elisabeth E Schussler

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 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.

Bailey M Von der MehdenDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
Kurisma WallerDepartment of Microbiology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
Elisabeth E SchusslerDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Investigating definitions of success and failure among introductory biology students is essential for understanding what underlies their self-efficacy; a student who gets a B on an exam may lose self-efficacy if they define failure as anything less than an A. Yet, whether students have the same definitions for success as they have for failure in these classes is unknown, nor how those definitions relate to course performance. To better understand student definitions for success and failure and their implications, this mixed-methods study collected survey data from students in two introductory biology courses about their definitions of success and failure and their self-reported grades. Coding of open-ended responses revealed four broad themes related to both success and failure: Performance, Content, Preparation, and Attitude. Although there were common themes in how students defined success and failure overall, individual students often (65%) described success or failure in relation to different standards. We also found some definitions of success and failure were predicted by grades. These results highlight the complexity of building self-efficacy in introductory biology and suggest the need for greater awareness and acknowledgment of the different standards students use to judge their success and failure.

Indexed as

BiologyEducational MeasurementStudentsAttitudeFemaleHumansMaleSelf EfficacySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID38885292
PMCPMC11440737

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.