Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39992096›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2025

Student perceptions of alternative grading strategies in the biology classroom.

Jacob J Adler, Lauren E Stoczynski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2025. 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.

Jacob J AdlerDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8439-5067
Lauren E StoczynskiDepartment of Biology and Environmental Sciences, Le Moyne College, Syracuse, New York, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a need to provide more case studies of alternative grading strategies in the biology education literature and report on student perceptions of these strategies. Student participants were instructed using alternative grading strategies and then completed course metacognitive self-reflections. Qualitative content analysis was performed on open responses. Students perceived opportunities for helpful instructor feedback, having a learning-focused environment, improved understanding, clarity of focus, reduced stress, improvement, enjoyment, practice, encouragement, and increased self-confidence. They also sometimes compared the logistics of their alternatively graded course to other courses or past experiences. Based upon previous literature and students mentioning opportunities for growth/improvement, a follow-up survey was performed examining the student's growth mindset beliefs regarding biology and general intelligence using a verified survey. Qualitative content analysis was performed on open responses within this growth mindset survey. Students frequently reported growth mindset statements and discussed having to put in effort or utilize various learning factors that help frame their biology and general intelligence. Further, students reported that their alternatively graded course strengthened their growth mindset beliefs and improved their understanding of course content. This work adds to the growing base of case studies of alternative grading strategies in biology classrooms and some qualitative results on the perceived effects that these strategies are having on students.

Indexed as

grading for growthgrowth mindsetmastery gradingone-on-one meetingsoral interviewsspecifications gradingstandards-based gradingungrading

Identifiers

PMID39992096
PMCPMC12020799

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.