1887

Investigating Undergraduates’ Perceptions of Science in Courses Taught Using the CREATE Strategy

    Authors: Sally G. Hoskins1,*, Alan J. Gottesman1
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Biology Department, City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY 10031
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Received 07 August 2017 Accepted 18 November 2017 Published 16 February 2018
    • ©2018 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology
    • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

    • Supplemental materials available at http://asmscience.org/jmbe
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Biology Department, City College of the City University of New York 160 Convent Ave, New York NY 10031. Phone: 212-650-8213. Fax: 212-650-8585. E-mail: [email protected].
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. February 2018 vol. 19 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1440
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • HTML
    72.63 Kb
  • PDF
    395.39 Kb
  • XML
    97.92 Kb

    Abstract:

    Many science educators agree that 21 century students need to develop mature scientific thinking skills. Unsurprisingly, students’ and experts’ perceptions about the nature of scientific knowledge differ. Moreover, students’ naïve and entrenched epistemologies can preclude their development toward “thinking like scientists.” Novel teaching approaches that guide students toward more mature perceptions may be needed to support their development of scientific thinking skills. To address such issues, physics educators developed the Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey (CLASS), subsequently adapted for chemistry and biology. These surveys are “designed to compare novice and expert perceptions about the content and structure of a specific discipline; the source of knowledge about that discipline, including connection of the discipline to the real world; and problem-solving approaches” (Semsar , CBE Life Sci. Educ. 10:268–278; p 269). We used CLASS-Bio to track students’ perceptions of science in separate first-year and upper-level CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, Think of the next Experiment) electives, hypothesizing that perceptions would become significantly more expert-like across a semester. Both first-year and upper-level cohorts made significant expert-like shifts. Students also made significant critical thinking gains in CREATE courses. Our findings of more mature, expert-like perceptions of science post-course contrast with those of previous studies, where students’ thinking became significantly less expert-like across a term of introductory instruction and changed little in upper-level biology electives. Augmenting traditional biology curricula with CREATE courses could be an economical way to help undergraduates develop more mature views of science.

References & Citations

1. Semsar K, Knight JK, Birol G, Smith MK2011The Colorado learning attitudes about science survey (CLASS) for use in biologyCBE Life Sci Educ1026827810.1187/cbe.10-10-0133218858233164566 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-10-0133
2. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, Wenderoth MP2014Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematicsPNAS1118410841510.1073/pnas.1319030111248217564060654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
3. Jensen JL, Lawson A2011Effects of collaborative group composition and inquiry instruction on reasoning shifts and achievement in undergraduate biologyCBE Life Sci Educ10647310.1187/cbe.10-07-0089213641013046889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-07-0089
4. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST)2012Engage to excel: producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematicsExecutive Office of the PresidentWashington, DC
5. Kuhn D1993Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinkingSci Educ7731933710.1002/sce.3730770306 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770306
6. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM, Nehm RH2007Selective use of the primary literature transforms the classroom into a virtual laboratoryGenetics1761381138910.1534/genetics.107.071183174834261931557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183
7. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM2009Learning our L.I.M.I.T.S.: less is more in teaching scienceAdv Physiol Educ33172010.1152/advan.90184.200819261755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.90184.2008
8. Hoskins SG, Krufka A2015The CREATE strategy benefits students and is a natural fit for facultyMicrobe10108112
9. Hoskins SG, Lopatto D, Stevens LM2011The 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 beliefsCBE Life Sci Educ1036837810.1187/cbe.11-03-0027221353713228655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027
10. Gottesman AJ, Hoskins SG2013CREATE cornerstone: introduction to scientific thinking, a new course for STEM-interested freshmen demystifies scientific thinking through analysis of scientific literatureCBE Life Sci Educ12597210.1187/cbe.12-11-0201234632293587857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201
11. Ding L, Mollohan KN2015How college-level introductory instruction can impact student epistemological beliefsJ Coll Sci Teach44192710.2505/4/jcst15_044_04_19 http://dx.doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst15_044_04_19
12. Mollohan KN2015PhD thesisEpistemologies and scientific reasoning skills among undergraduate science studentsOhio State UniversityColumbus, OH
13. Hansen MJ, Birol G2014Longitudinal study of student attitudes in a Biology programCBE Life Sci Educ1333133710.1187/cbe.13-06-01244041509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0124
14. Stein B, Haynes A, Redding M2012Critical thinking assessment test, version 5Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning, Tennessee Technological UniversityCookeville, TN
16. Cohen J1988Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences2nd edLawrence Erlbaum AssociatesHillsdale, NJ
17. Hake RR1998Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics coursesAm J Phys66647410.1119/1.18809 http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
18. Stevens LM, Hoskins SG2014The CREATE strategy for intensive analysis of primary literature can be used effectively by newly trained faculty to produce multiple shifts in diverse studentsCBE Life Sci Educ1322424210.1187/cbe.13-12-02394041501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0239
19. Kenyon KL, Onorato ME, Gottesman AJ, Hoque J, Hoskins SG2016Testing CREATE at community colleges: an examination of faculty perceptions and diverse student shiftsCBE Life Sci Educ151910.1187/cbe.15-07-0146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-07-0146
20. Hoskins SG, Gottesman AG, Kenyon KLCREATE 2YR/4YR faculty workshops: a focus on practice, reflection and novel curricular design leads to diverse gains for faculty at 2YR and 4YR InstitutionsJ Microbiol Biol Educ183111
21. Jensen JL, Kummer TA, Godoy PDImprovements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning2014CBE Life Sci Educ141ar510.1187/cbe.14-08-0129 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129
22. Adams WK, Perkins KK, Podolefsky NS, Dubson M, Finkelstein ND, Wieman CE2006New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: the Colorado learning attitudes about science surveyPhys Rev ST Phys Educ Res201010110.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010101
23. Adams WK, Wieman CE2011Development and validation of instruments to measure learning of expert-like thinkingInt J Sci Educ331289131210.1080/09500693.2010.512369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.512369
24. Barbera J, Adams WK, Wieman CE, Perkins KK2008Modifying and validating the Colorado learning attitudes about science survey for use in chemistryJ Chem Educ851435143910.1021/ed085p1435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed085p1435
25. Nomme KG, Birol G2014Course redesign: an evidence-based approachCan J Sch Teach Learn512810.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2014.1.2 http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2014.1.2
26. Otero VK, Gray KE2008Attitudinal shifts across multiple universities using the physics and everyday thinking curriculumPhys Rev ST Phys Educ Res402010410.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.020104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.020104
27. Brewe E, Kramer L, O’Brien G2009Modeling instruction: positive shifts in introductory physics measured with CLASSPhys Rev ST Phys Educ Res501310210.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.013102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.013102
28. DeHaan RL2009Teaching creativity and inventive problem solving in scienceCBE Life Sci Educ317218110.1187/cbe.08-12-0081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-12-0081
29. Tanner K2012Promoting student metacognitionCBE Life Sci Educ1111912010.1187/cbe.12-03-0033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033
30. Waldrop MM2015The science of teaching scienceNature52327227410.1038/523272a26178948 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/523272a
31. Schwinn D2016Educate to transform: the art of developing curious mindsTrans Am Clin Climatol Assoc127259271
32. Shavelson RJ, Towne L2012Scientific research in educationThe National Academies PressWashington, DC
33. Trujillo CM, Anderson T, Pelaez N2015A model of how different biology experts explain molecular and cellular mechanismsCBE Life Sci Educ14ar2010.1187/cbe.14-12-0229259993134477736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-12-0229
34. Bransford J, Brown AL, Cocking RR2000Chapter 2 In How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school, expanded editionThe National Academies PressWashington, DC
35. Sawtelle V, Brewe E, Kramer L2009Validation study of the Colorado learning attitudes about science survey at a Hispanic-serving institutionPhys Rev ST Phys Educ Res502310110.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.023101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.023101

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1440
2018-02-16
2018-10-18

Abstract:

Many science educators agree that 21 century students need to develop mature scientific thinking skills. Unsurprisingly, students’ and experts’ perceptions about the nature of scientific knowledge differ. Moreover, students’ naïve and entrenched epistemologies can preclude their development toward “thinking like scientists.” Novel teaching approaches that guide students toward more mature perceptions may be needed to support their development of scientific thinking skills. To address such issues, physics educators developed the Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey (CLASS), subsequently adapted for chemistry and biology. These surveys are “designed to compare novice and expert perceptions about the content and structure of a specific discipline; the source of knowledge about that discipline, including connection of the discipline to the real world; and problem-solving approaches” (Semsar , CBE Life Sci. Educ. 10:268–278; p 269). We used CLASS-Bio to track students’ perceptions of science in separate first-year and upper-level CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, Think of the next Experiment) electives, hypothesizing that perceptions would become significantly more expert-like across a semester. Both first-year and upper-level cohorts made significant expert-like shifts. Students also made significant critical thinking gains in CREATE courses. Our findings of more mature, expert-like perceptions of science post-course contrast with those of previous studies, where students’ thinking became significantly less expert-like across a term of introductory instruction and changed little in upper-level biology electives. Augmenting traditional biology curricula with CREATE courses could be an economical way to help undergraduates develop more mature views of science.

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

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/19/1/jmbe-19-6.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1440&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1A

Click to view

FIGURE 1A

First-year CREATE students’ CLASS-Bio outcomes across one semester. CLASS-Bio outcomes in three iterations of the first-year Introduction to Scientific Thinking elective. First-year CREATE students made significant shifts on CLASS-Bio. Students took the CLASS-Bio survey in course weeks 1 and 14. Scoring as described in ( 1 ); percentages are the percentage of student responses that matched experts’ responses. CLASS-Bio tracks an Overall score and seven category scores. First-year CREATE students made significant shifts in the direction of expert-like thinking both Overall and in 5 of 7 CLASS-Bio categories. Significance, ** = < 0.01; * = < 0.05; matched-pair 2-tailed test. Error bars, ± SEM. = 21 matched-pairs; see Table S1a, Appendix 2 , for values and effect sizes for matched-pairs as well as for entire first-year cohort (all-participants)

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. February 2018 vol. 19 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1440
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 1B

Click to view

FIGURE 1B

Upper-level CREATE students’ CLASS-Bio outcomes across one semester. Upper-level CREATE students made significant shifts on CLASS-Bio. CLASS-Bio outcomes in four iterations of the upper-level “Analysis of Scientific Literature using CREATE” elective. Students took the survey in course weeks 1 and 14. Scoring as described in ( 1 ); percentages are the percentage of student responses that matched experts’ responses. CLASS-Bio tracks an Overall score and seven category scores. Upper-level CREATE students made significant shifts in the direction of expert-like thinking both Overall and in 4 of 7 CLASS-Bio categories. Significance: *** = < 0.001; ** = < 0.01; matched-pair 2-tailed test. Error bars, ± SEM. = 56 matched-pairs; See Table S1b, Appendix 2 for values and effect sizes for matched-pairs as well as for entire upper-level cohort (all-participants).

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. February 2018 vol. 19 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1440
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