ArticleJournal of science teacher education2026
Teacher Research Experiences: A Review of the Literature from 2018 to 2024.
Article in Journal of science teacher education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Engaging K-12 science teachers in authentic research experiences has been a promising approach to enhance science teaching and learning. Teacher research experiences aim to bridge the gap between science practices and classroom instruction through immersing teachers in research labs. Building on the previous literature reviews of teacher research experiences, we seek to assess what has changed since previous calls to action in this research area. We report on 39 empirical studies published between 2018 and 2024 that include these types of programs. We have found that while there have been improvements since previous publications, there have also been areas of continued stagnation. We have seen a shift in content areas from natural science to engineering and other STEM fields. The focus areas of many programs include the translation of skills and content gained from these programs into curriculum design, pedagogical knowledge, and classroom instruction. Given the timeframe of the research studies we reviewed, we noted studies where Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) impacted the TRE program structure causing the research components to take place online rather than in-person. One major growth area has been the focus of research on underrepresented minority and rural populations. However, despite previous calls to action, there remains a substantial lack of data-driven research about the impacts of these programs on student outcomes. These findings reveal both promising developments and persistent gaps that require further research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.