Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39813308›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2025

Investigating Student Noticing of Quantitative Reasoning in Introductory Biology Labs.

Jeremy L Hsu, Sara Gartland, Joelle Prate, Charles Hohensee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2025. 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. 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

4 authors.

Jeremy L HsuSchmid College of Science and Technology, Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866.
Sara GartlandCollege of Education and Human Development, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716.
Joelle PrateSchmid College of Science and Technology, Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866.
Charles HohenseeCollege of Education and Human Development, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative reasoning (QR) is a key skill for undergraduate biology education. Despite this, many students struggle with QR. Here, we use the theoretical framework of student noticing to investigate why some students struggle with QR in introductory biology labs. Under this framework, what students notice when given new information and data influences how they process this information and connect it with other events to form new conceptions. Students must mentally isolate given features, create mental records of those features, and identify features or objects that they connect to existing knowledge. Identifying these features or objects is thus critical since they form the foundation upon which learning takes place. We conducted observations of groups in introductory biology labs involving QR, which informed follow-up interviews to examine what students notice, the level/relevance of their noticing, and factors that shape student noticing. We find that some students are noticing more perceptual features, often focusing on less relevant trends and features, with others noticing deeper, more relevant patterns that facilitate conceptual sensemaking. In addition, we find multiple factors, including students' expectations and their attitude toward QR and biology, that shape student noticing. We conclude with implications for instructors and the biology education research community.

Indexed as

BiologyLaboratoriesStudentsThinkingHumansLearningUniversities

Identifiers

PMID39813308
PMCPMC11974523

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.