Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41259309›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2025

Biological Principles Successfully Guide Students' Generative Mechanistic Reasoning.

Jennifer H Doherty, Kylie A Todd, Mary Pat Wenderoth, Aeryn L VanDerSlik, Elijah J Cole

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. 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

5 authors.

Jennifer H DohertyDepartment of Physiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Kylie A ToddDepartment of Physiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Mary Pat WenderothDepartment of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195.
Aeryn L VanDerSlikDepartment of Physiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Elijah J ColeDepartment of Physiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do undergraduates use biological principles to guide their reasoning when solving novel problems? Is it an effective strategy? To address these questions, we analyzed real-time discussions from small groups of students in an Introductory Organismal Biology course. We created a reasoning framework to characterize how students activated and linked their knowledge when constructing mechanistic explanations. We found that the principle of flux (flow rate ∝ gradient/resistance) served as a schema, a set of interconnected knowledge elements, that guided students' reasoning by focusing their attention on key components and their interactions. Students who used flux to guide their reasoning were more successful in constructing domain-plausible mechanistic explanations than students who did not use flux to guide their reasoning. However, students who used flux incorrectly, such as applying the wrong gradient for a given scenario, were less likely to generate domain-plausible answers. Our findings emphasize the importance of teaching disciplinary core principles, or core concepts, as schemas. Prioritizing core principles that function as predictive scientific models, providing explanatory power across contexts, can support students' generative reasoning. Still, students require foundational content knowledge, such as understanding gradients and resistances specific to each context, to effectively apply these principles.

Indexed as

BiologyProblem SolvingStudentsThinkingHumans

Identifiers

PMID41259309
PMCPMC12667368

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.