Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39150270›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2024

Exam reform: an opportunity for the redistribution of academic power.

Gregory J Crowther, Benjamin L Wiggins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Gregory J CrowtherEverett Community College, Everett, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0530-9130
Benjamin L WigginsShoreline Community College, Shoreline, Washington, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Students in STEM know well the stress, challenge, and effort that accompany college exams. As a widely recognizable feature of the STEM classroom experience, high-stakes assessments serve as crucial cultural gateways in shaping both preparation and motivation for careers. In this essay, we identify and discuss issues of power around STEM exams to further the understanding of exam practices that can unjustly hold students back. Through theory and practical examples, we consider the numerous ways in which power manifests both on and off the pages of the exams themselves, as well as ways in which power is consolidated away from students through logistical norms and tradeoffs. Centering the "rules of the culture of power" as delineated by Dr. Lisa Delpit, we reflect on exam practices that prioritize faculty voice and faculty convenience above student learning and student identity. We share some of what we have learned from our students as part of a call to improve STEM education by relinquishing some of our exam-related power over students, redistributing it to students so that they have more power to shape their own education.

Indexed as

equitable assessmenthigh-stakes testing“the silenced dialogue”

Identifiers

PMID39150270
PMCPMC11636372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.