Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39280704›Full record

ArticleJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience2024

Teaching the Nature of Science Improves Scientific Literacy Among Students Not Majoring in STEM.

David W Donley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Proceedings of the 2023 Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience Workshop at Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA, July 27-30, 2023.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2024
    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

1 author.

David W DonleyBiology Department, Harding University, Searcy, AR 72143.

Funding

Understanding Hesitant AdoptersP20GM103429 · NIGMS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI Lawrence E Cornett, JERRY WARE · 2012 to 2026
$60.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103429
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, science courses focus on knowledge and practices within specific disciplines. There has long been a call, however, to increase the focus on the nature and process of science as a way to improve scientific literacy and increase the transfer of knowledge. Despite this, there are few systematic studies that seek to understand the impact of this approach. Revising a STEM course in a liberal arts curriculum to primarily focus on the nature and process of science rather than on the content of a specific discipline increased student scores on the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills and improved perceptions of STEM. In the revised course, students self-reported higher levels of confidence in their ability to learn scientific information and their ability to contribute to scientific progress compared to traditional methods. These data and other literature suggest that the traditional knowledge-focused approach to science education is insufficient to facilitate scientific literacy and address equity gaps in STEM. Proposed is a model where scientific literacy and feelings of inclusion in STEM are the product of direct engagement in the process of science and careful evaluation of the nature of science. Long-term, a holistic approach that includes an authentic discussion of the enterprise of sciences is needed to prepare students to engage in future problems that are best solved by cross-disciplinary collaboration.

Indexed as

InterdisciplinaryNature-of-scienceScientific Literacy

Identifiers

PMID39280704
PMCPMC11396173

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.