1887

Towards a Mastery Understanding of Critical Reading in Biology: The Use of Highlighting by Students to Assess Their Value Judgment of the Importance of Primary Literature

    Authors: Mark Gallo1,*, Vince Rinaldo2
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Biology, Niagara University, NY 14109; 2: Department of Middle Childhood and Adolescent Education, Niagara University, NY 14109
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Published 03 December 2012
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biology, Niagara University, NY 14109. Phone: 716-286-8247. Fax: 716-286-8254. E-mail: [email protected].
    • Copyright © 2012 American Society for Microbiology
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2012 vol. 13 no. 2 142-149. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    442.62 Kb
  • HTML
    65.52 Kb
  • XML

    Abstract:

    An analysis of critical reading styles of freshmen and senior biology students was compared to that of biology faculty members through the use of highlighting a primary research article. Sentence-by-sentence comparisons were made within each group and the data were analyzed; the composite picture from each group was then compared to the other groups. There appears to be a close agreement of what is deemed important content as judged by faculty but less agreement by seniors and even less agreement by freshmen regarding the value of each line of the text. The results imply that experts in a field appear able to discriminate what is important and valuable in the primary literature and that the novice appears to develop some degree of scientific literacy during his or her undergraduate career.

Key Concept Ranking

Horizontal Gene Transfer
0.51093566
0.51093566

References & Citations

1. Baram-Tsabari A, Yarden A 2005 Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy J. Res. Sci. Teach 42 4 403 428 10.1002/tea.20063 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20063
2. Bogucka R, Wood E 2009 How to read scientific research articles: a hands-on classroom exercise Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship [Online.] http://www.istl.org/09-fall/article4.html.
3. Davis TA 2011 The biology major capstone experience: measurements of accountability Bioscene 37 1 26 28
4. Falk H, Yarden A 2011 Stepping into the unknown: Three models for the teaching and learning of the opening sections of scientific articles J. Biol. Educ 45 2 77 82 10.1080/00219266.2010.546012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.546012
5. Hoskins SG, LoPatto D, Stevens LM 2011 The C.R.E.A.T.E approach to primary literature shifts undergraduates’ self-assessed ability to read and analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemological beliefs CBE Life Sci Educ 10 368 378 10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027 22135371 3228655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027
6. Hyland K 2010 Constructing proximity: relating to readers in popular and professional science Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 116 127 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003
7. Krathwohl DR 2002 A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview Theory Pract 41 4 212 218 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
8. Liu SY, Lin C-S, Tsai C-C 2010 College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making Science Education 95 3 497 519 10.1002/sce.20422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422
9. McMillan VE 2012 Writing papers in the biological sciences 5th ed Bedford/St. Martin’s Boston
10. Muench SB 2000 Choosing primary literature in biology to achieve specific educational goals J. Coll. Sci. Teach 29 4 255 260
11. National Research Council 2003 Bio 2010: transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists National Academies Press Washington, D.C. [Online.] http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309085357
12. National Research Council 1996 National Science Education Standards National Academies Press Washington, DC [Online.] http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4962
13. Obringer JW, Kent JS 1998 The senior biology seminar – a capstone course J. Coll. Sci. Teach 27 4 263 266
14. Parkinson J, Adendorff R 2004 The use of popular science articles in teaching scientific literacy English for Specific Purposes 23 379 396 10.1016/j.esp.2003.11.005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.11.005
15. Pechenik JA 2001 A short guide to writing about biology 4th ed Addison-Wesley N.Y.
16. Siegel S, Castellan NJ 1988 Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences 2nd ed McGraw-Hill New York
17. Sorek R, Zhu Y, Creevey CJ, Francino MP, Bork P, Rubin EM 2007 Genome-wide experimental determination of barriers to horizontal gene transfer Science 318 1449 1452 10.1126/science.1147112 17947550 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1147112
18. Stevens R, Johnson DF, Soller A 2005 Probabilities and predictions: modeling the development of scientific problem-solving skills CBE Life Sci. Educ 4 1 42 57 10.1187/cbe.04-03-0036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.04-03-0036
19. Wenk L, Tronsky L 2011 First-year students benefit from reading primary research articles J. Coll. Sci. Teach 40 4 60 67
20. Yarden A, Brill G, Falk H 2001 Primary literature as a basis for a high-school biology curriculum J. Biol. Educ 35 4 190 195 10.1080/00219266.2001.9655776 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2001.9655776

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493
2012-12-03
2019-03-19

Abstract:

An analysis of critical reading styles of freshmen and senior biology students was compared to that of biology faculty members through the use of highlighting a primary research article. Sentence-by-sentence comparisons were made within each group and the data were analyzed; the composite picture from each group was then compared to the other groups. There appears to be a close agreement of what is deemed important content as judged by faculty but less agreement by seniors and even less agreement by freshmen regarding the value of each line of the text. The results imply that experts in a field appear able to discriminate what is important and valuable in the primary literature and that the novice appears to develop some degree of scientific literacy during his or her undergraduate career.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/13/2/jmbe-13-2-142.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

Comparative responses by group.

Note: P3.1 refers to paragraph three, sentence one; P5.1 refers to paragraph five, sentence one in Sorek et al. ( 18 ). The same nomenclature is used for the rest of the data points.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2012 vol. 13 no. 2 142-149. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

Comparative nonresponses by group, paragraphs 4–8.

Note: P4.1 refers to paragraph four, sentence one; P4.3 refers to paragraph four sentence three in Sorek et al. ( 18 ). The same nomenclature is used for the rest of the data points.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2012 vol. 13 no. 2 142-149. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 3

Click to view

FIGURE 3

Comparative nonresponses by group, paragraphs 9–20.

Note: P9.1 refers to paragraph nine, sentence one; P10.1 refers to paragraph ten sentence one in Sorek et al. ( 18 ). The same nomenclature is used for the rest of the data points.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2012 vol. 13 no. 2 142-149. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v13i2.493
Download as Powerpoint

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error