Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40470943›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2025

What's troubling you? Examining how biology teaching assistants talk about teaching concerns.

Hillary A Barron, Lorelei E Patrick, Julie C Brown, Sehoya Cotner

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. 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.

Hillary A BarronDepartment of Biology, School of Sustainability and Life Sciences, Bemidji State University, Bemidji, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9499-9422
Lorelei E PatrickDepartment of Biological Sciences, Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas, USA.
Julie C BrownCollege of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Sehoya CotnerUniversity of Bergen, STEM Education Research Center, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-3324-9430

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Undergraduate students in science classes are more engaged and demonstrate increased performance when instructional methods include authentic science practices and active learning strategies. Non-majors students (i.e., those enrolled in science classes to fulfill a degree requirement) typically receive instruction that is more lecture-based and prescribed, however, which contributes to disinterest, diminished self-expectations, and lower performance. Teaching assistants (TAs) often interact with undergraduate students more closely in science classes than faculty and thus could potentially have far-reaching impacts on these students. Therefore, understanding how TAs think about their science teaching and the concerns they have about their methods can lead to designing more effective TA professional development (PD). In this qualitative study, we explored TA written reflections and employed first- and second-cycle analysis techniques to identify themes reflecting TAs' perceptions of their science teaching and concerns for improvement. We found that TAs' concerns about their teaching centered on three themes:

Indexed as

biology teaching assistantsprofessional developmentqualitative analysisteaching concerns

Identifiers

PMID40470943
PMCPMC12369319

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.