A Framework for Evidentiary Reasoning in Biology: Insights from Laboratory Courses Focused on Evolutionary Tree-thinking.

Science educators report that students struggle with understanding, using, and evaluating the evidence underpinning scientific knowledge. However, there are not many studies focused on helping instructors address those difficulties. Here, we report on a laboratory instructor's scaffolding of students' evidentiary reasoning with and about evidence for evolutionary trees with guidance from the Conceptual Analysis of Disciplinary Evidence (CADE) framework, which links biological knowledge with epistemic considerations. To consider both domain-general and discipline-specific aspects of evidence, CADE was implemented to inform scaffolds in two ways: (1) generic evidence scaffolds (GES) reminded students of general epistemic considerations; (2) disciplinary evidence scaffolds (DES) explicitly reminded students of the disciplinary knowledge of relevance for considering biological evidence. An instructor's lab discussions were compared before and after they had a workshop with CADE. CADE helped the lab instructor facilitate students' evidentiary reasoning about evolutionary trees. In comparison to baseline, both GES and DES discussions covered more aspects and relationships among types of evidence for evolutionary tree-thinking and the instructor prompted more kinds of general epistemic considerations and biological knowledge. DES discussions emphasized the importance of disciplinary knowledge for research design. The CADE framework guided planning and implementation of intentional scaffolding aimed at guiding evidentiary reasoning. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11191-023-00435-6.

Using expert data to inform the use of research methods and representations to enhance biochemistry instruction and textbook design.

Biochemistry textbooks often provide a disconnected, highly mathematical, and decontextualized treatment of thermodynamic and kinetic principles, which renders topics like protein folding difficult to teach. This is concerning given that graduates entering careers, like the pharmaceutical industry, must be able to apply such knowledge and related research methods to solve biochemistry research problems. Thus, it is essential that instructors have strategies to incorporate research methods and representations to help students understand the source of such scientific knowledge. Therefore, the goal of our work is to examine expert practice and use the findings to identify instructional strategies to incorporate more cutting-edge research and authentic ways of knowing into science classrooms and textbooks. Toward this goal, we examined how four scientists explain protein folding and dynamics research, focusing on the interaction of spoken language and representations, including gesture. Our analysis indicates that experts employ multiple representations and research methods to communicate how evidence can be used to understand phenomena. In contrast, textbooks explain what is known but seldom use representations to explain how it is known. Based on our findings, we suggest implications for instruction, including the design of textbooks, as well as potential instructional strategies to incorporate discussion of experimental methods and interpretation of representations during classroom activities. © 2019 International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 47(5):513-531, 2019.

Anticipated learning outcomes for a biochemistry course-based undergraduate research experience aimed at predicting protein function from structure: Implications for assessment design.

Several course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been published in the literature. However, only limited attempts have been made to rigorously identify the discovery-type research abilities that students actually develop during such experiences. Instead, there has been a greater focus on technical or procedural-type knowledge or general CURE skills that are too comprehensive to effectively assess. Before the extent of discovery-type learning outcomes can be established in students (termed verified learning outcomes or VLOs), it is important to rigorously identify the anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) and to then develop student assessments that target each ALO to reveal the nature of such student learning. In this article we present a matrix of 43 ALOs, or course-based undergraduate research abilities (CURAs), that instructors anticipate students will develop during a recently-developed biochemistry CURE focusing on the prediction of protein function from structure. The CURAs were identified using the process for identifying course-based undergraduate research abilities (PICURA) and classified into seven distinct themes that enabled the characterization of the CURE and a comparison to other published inventories of research competencies and CURE aspects. These themes and the CURE protocols aligning to the CURAs were used to form the ALO matrix that was, in turn, used to inform the design of an assessment that revealed evidence that a student had developed some of the targeted CURAs. Future research will focus on further assessment development that targets other identified CURAs. This approach has potential applications to other CUREs both in biochemistry and other science disciplines. © 2018 International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 46(5):478-492, 2018.

How to Identify the Research Abilities That Instructors Anticipate Students Will Develop in a Biochemistry Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE).

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been described in a range of educational contexts. Although various anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) have been proposed, processes for identifying them may not be rigorous or well documented, which can lead to inappropriate assessment and speculation about what students actually learn from CUREs. In this essay, we offer a user-friendly and rigorous approach based on evidence and an easy process to identify ALOs, namely, a five-step Process for Identifying Course-Based Undergraduate Research Abilities (PICURA), consisting of a content analysis, an open-ended survey, an interview, an alignment check, and a two-tiered Likert survey. The development of PICURA was guided by four criteria: 1) the process is iterative, 2) the overall process gives more insight than individual data sources, 3) the steps of the process allow for consensus across the data sources, and 4) the process allows for prioritization of the identified abilities. To address these criteria, we collected data from 10 participants in a multi-institutional biochemistry CURE. In this essay, we use two selected research abilities to illustrate how PICURA was used to identify and prioritize such abilities. PICURA could be applied to other CUREs in other contexts.

Exploring the MACH Model's Potential as a Metacognitive Tool to Help Undergraduate Students Monitor Their Explanations of Biological Mechanisms.

When undergraduate biology students learn to explain biological mechanisms, they face many challenges and may overestimate their understanding of living systems. Previously, we developed the MACH model of four components used by expert biologists to explain mechanisms: Methods, Analogies, Context, and How. This study explores the implementation of the model in an undergraduate biology classroom as an educational tool to address some of the known challenges. To find out how well students' written explanations represent components of the MACH model before and after they were taught about it and why students think the MACH model was useful, we conducted an exploratory multiple case study with four interview participants. We characterize how two students explained biological mechanisms before and after a teaching intervention that used the MACH components. Inductive analysis of written explanations and interviews showed that MACH acted as an effective metacognitive tool for all four students by helping them to monitor their understanding, communicate explanations, and identify explanatory gaps. Further research, though, is needed to more fully substantiate the general usefulness of MACH for promoting students' metacognition about their understanding of biological mechanisms.

Development of the Neuron Assessment for Measuring Biology Students' Use of Experimental Design Concepts and Representations.

Researchers, instructors, and funding bodies in biology education are unanimous about the importance of developing students' competence in experimental design. Despite this, only limited measures are available for assessing such competence development, especially in the areas of molecular and cellular biology. Also, existing assessments do not measure how well students use standard symbolism to visualize biological experiments. We propose an assessment-design process that 1) provides background knowledge and questions for developers of new "experimentation assessments," 2) elicits practices of representing experiments with conventional symbol systems, 3) determines how well the assessment reveals expert knowledge, and 4) determines how well the instrument exposes student knowledge and difficulties. To illustrate this process, we developed the Neuron Assessment and coded responses from a scientist and four undergraduate students using the Rubric for Experimental Design and the Concept-Reasoning Mode of representation (CRM) model. Some students demonstrated sound knowledge of concepts and representations. Other students demonstrated difficulty with depicting treatment and control group data or variability in experimental outcomes. Our process, which incorporates an authentic research situation that discriminates levels of visualization and experimentation abilities, shows potential for informing assessment design in other disciplines.

An instructional design process based on expert knowledge for teaching students how mechanisms are explained.

In biology and physiology courses, students face many difficulties when learning to explain mechanisms, a topic that is demanding due to the immense complexity and abstract nature of molecular and cellular mechanisms. To overcome these difficulties, we asked the following question: how does an instructor transform their understanding of biological mechanisms and other difficult-to-learn topics so that students can comprehend them? To address this question, we first reviewed a model of the components used by biologists to explain molecular and cellular mechanisms: the MACH model, with the components of methods (M), analogies (A), context (C), and how (H). Next, instructional materials were developed and the teaching activities were piloted with a physical MACH model. Students who used the MACH model to guide their explanations of mechanisms exhibited both improvements and some new difficulties. Third, a series of design-based research cycles was applied to bring the activities with an improved physical MACH model into biology and biochemistry courses. Finally, a useful rubric was developed to address prevalent student difficulties. Here, we present, for physiology and biology instructors, the knowledge and resources for explaining molecular and cellular mechanisms in undergraduate courses with an instructional design process aimed at realizing pedagogical content knowledge for teaching. Our four-stage process could be adapted to advance instruction with a range of models in the life sciences.

A model of how different biology experts explain molecular and cellular mechanisms.

Constructing explanations is an essential skill for all science learners. The goal of this project was to model the key components of expert explanation of molecular and cellular mechanisms. As such, we asked: What is an appropriate model of the components of explanation used by biology experts to explain molecular and cellular mechanisms? Do explanations made by experts from different biology subdisciplines at a university support the validity of this model? Guided by the modeling framework of R. S. Justi and J. K. Gilbert, the validity of an initial model was tested by asking seven biologists to explain a molecular mechanism of their choice. Data were collected from interviews, artifacts, and drawings, and then subjected to thematic analysis. We found that biologists explained the specific activities and organization of entities of the mechanism. In addition, they contextualized explanations according to their biological and social significance; integrated explanations with methods, instruments, and measurements; and used analogies and narrated stories. The derived methods, analogies, context, and how themes informed the development of our final MACH model of mechanistic explanations. Future research will test the potential of the MACH model as a guiding framework for instruction to enhance the quality of student explanations.

Widespread distribution and unexpected variation among science faculty with education specialties (SFES) across the United States.

College and university science departments are increasingly taking an active role in improving science education. Perhaps as a result, a new type of specialized science faculty position within science departments is emerging--referred to here as science faculty with education specialties (SFES)--where individual scientists focus their professional efforts on strengthening undergraduate science education, improving kindergarten-through-12th grade science education, and conducting discipline-based education research. Numerous assertions, assumptions, and questions about SFES exist, yet no national studies have been published. Here, we present findings from a large-scale study of US SFES, who are widespread and increasing in numbers. Contrary to many assumptions, SFES were indeed found across the nation, across science disciplines, and, most notably, across primarily undergraduate, master of science-granting, and PhD-granting institutions. Data also reveal unexpected variations among SFES by institution type. Among respondents, SFES at master of science-granting institutions were almost twice as likely to have formal training in science education compared with other SFES. In addition, SFES at PhD-granting institutions were much more likely to have obtained science education funding. Surprisingly, formal training in science education provided no advantage in obtaining science education funding. Our findings show that the SFES phenomenon is likely more complex and diverse than anticipated, with differences being more evident across institution types than across science disciplines. These findings raise questions about the origins of differences among SFES and are useful to science departments interested in hiring SFES, scientific trainees preparing for SFES careers, and agencies awarding science education funding.

Investigation of science faculty with education specialties within the largest university system in the United States.

Efforts to improve science education include university science departments hiring Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES), scientists who take on specialized roles in science education within their discipline. Although these positions have existed for decades and may be growing more common, few reports have investigated the SFES approach to improving science education. We present comprehensive data on the SFES in the California State University (CSU) system, the largest university system in the United States. We found that CSU SFES were engaged in three key arenas including K-12 science education, undergraduate science education, and discipline-based science education research. As such, CSU SFES appeared to be well-positioned to have an impact on science education from within science departments. However, there appeared to be a lack of clarity and agreement about the purpose of these SFES positions. In addition, formal training in science education among CSU SFES was limited. Although over 75% of CSU SFES were fulfilled by their teaching, scholarship, and service, our results revealed that almost 40% of CSU SFES were seriously considering leaving their positions. Our data suggest that science departments would likely benefit from explicit discussions about the role of SFES and strategies for supporting their professional activities.

Calibrated peer review for computer-assisted learning of biological research competencies.

Recently, both science and technology faculty have been recognizing biological research competencies that are valued but rarely assessed. Some of these valued learning outcomes include scientific methods and thinking, critical assessment of primary papers, quantitative reasoning, communication, and putting biological research into a historical and broader social context. This article presents examples of Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) assignments that illustrate a computer-assisted method to help students achieve biological research competencies. A new release of CPR is appropriate for engaging students online in reading and writing about investigations. A participant perception inventory was designed for use as a repeated measure to discriminate among beginning, middle, and ending student perceptions. Examples are provided to demonstrate how to assess student perceptions of what they gain from instruction related to science research competencies. Results suggest that students in a large enrollment class consider CPR to be useful for helping them learn about quantitative and categorical research variables; the use of the experimental method to test ideas; the use of controls; analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data; and how to critically read primary papers.

Demand for interdisciplinary laboratories for physiology research by undergraduate students in biosciences and biomedical engineering.

Physiology as a discipline is uniquely positioned to engage undergraduate students in interdisciplinary research in response to the 2006-2011 National Science Foundation Strategic Plan call for innovative transformational research, which emphasizes multidisciplinary projects. To prepare undergraduates for careers that cross disciplinary boundaries, students need to practice interdisciplinary communication in academic programs that connect students in diverse disciplines. This report surveys policy documents relevant to this emphasis on interdisciplinary training and suggests a changing role for physiology courses in bioscience and engineering programs. A role for a physiology course is increasingly recommended for engineering programs, but the study of physiology from an engineering perspective might differ from the study of physiology as a basic science. Indeed, physiology laboratory courses provide an arena where biomedical engineering and bioscience students can apply knowledge from both fields while cooperating in multidisciplinary teams under specified technical constraints. Because different problem-solving approaches are used by students of engineering and bioscience, instructional innovations are needed to break down stereotypes between the disciplines and create an educational environment where interdisciplinary teamwork is used to bridge differences.

Blood circulation laboratory investigations with video are less investigative than instructional blood circulation laboratories with live organisms.

Live organisms versus digital video of the organisms were used to challenge students' naive ideas and misconceptions about blood, the heart, and circulatory patterns. Three faculty members taught 259 grade 10 biology students in a California high school with students from diverse ethnolinguistic groups who were divided into 5 classes using microscopes (128 students) and 5 classes using digital video (131 students) to compare blood transport among invertebrates, fish, and humans. The "What Is Happening in this Class?" (WIHIC) questionnaire was used for assessment of microscope and video groups to detect students' perception of their learning environment following these teaching interventions. The use of microscopes had a clear effect on the perception of the investigative aspects of the learning environment that was not detected with the video treatment. Findings suggest that video should not replace investigations with live organisms.

Prevalence of blood circulation misconceptions among prospective elementary teachers.

Research shows that misconceptions about human blood circulation and gas exchange persist across grade levels. The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to investigate the prevalence and persistence of blood circulation misconceptions among prospective elementary teachers and 2) to evaluate the effectiveness of learning activities for discovering what students know and can explain about blood circulation and lung function. The context was an undergraduate introduction to biology course taught by two professors across three semesters at a state university. Independent reviewers identified five categories of erroneous ideas about blood circulation. Many categories still presented problems to students at the end of the course: 70% of prospective elementary teachers did not understand the dual blood circulation pathway, 33% were confused about blood vessels, 55% had wrong ideas about gas exchange, 19% had trouble with gas transport and utilization, and 20% did not understand lung function. Results show that an interview about a drawing as a final exam was significantly better at revealing different errors and a higher frequency of erroneous ideas compared with an essay exam. There is an urgent need for instructional tools to help undergraduate students realize the discrepancies between their own ideas about blood circulation and those of the scientific community.

Sharing science: characteristics of effective scientist-teacher interactions.

Despite national guidelines to reform K-12 science education, our students are not learning science any better. Conducted under the auspices of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a symposium examined several programs where professional scientists interact with classroom teachers to improve science education. Symposium participants described their projects and discussed the factors that contribute or detract from each project's success. The events of this symposium are critically analyzed. Four themes emerged as issues that affect the successful implementation and continuation of science education reform projects: scientific literacy as a primary goal, personal characteristics and commitment of project partners, curricular change built on social and developmental goals, and the incentive/reward structures in universities and school systems. This review of the emergent themes places the opinions of the symposium participants into the larger context of a growing science education research literature to inform others about synergy between professional scientists and classroom teachers. Our aim is to help others learn about the characteristics of effective partnerships to improve science education.