Learning from the primary literature: selected approaches
16
In testing the null hypothesis, both Monte Carlo simulations and empirical field-based observations were used to assess the feasibility of the heteroproximity paradigm. As seen in the inset of Fig. 8H, the model captures most essential features of the data aside from an idiopathic discontinuity at high temperatures. After applying Bonferroni’s correction for multiple comparisons, three treatment conditions proved statistically distinct from the baseline (p<0.05). One may surmise that McDowell’s concern about 1. C.R.E.A.T.E. • Hoskins et al., 2007/2011 2. Figure Facts • Round & Campbell, 2013 3. Science in the Classroom • scienceintheclassro om.org Learning from the primary literature: selected approaches
-
Upload
greg-crowther -
Category
Education
-
view
79 -
download
0
description
An overview of strategies for making research articles accessible to science students. Presented to the Biology Education Research Group (BERG) in October 2013.
Transcript of Learning from the primary literature: selected approaches
In testing the null hypothesis, both Monte Carlo simulations and empirical field-based observations were used to assess the feasibility of the heteroproximity paradigm. As seen in the inset of Fig. 8H, the model captures most essential features of the data aside from an idiopathic discontinuity at high temperatures. After applying Bonferroni’s correction for multiple comparisons, three treatment conditions proved statistically distinct from the baseline (p<0.05). One may surmise that McDowell’s concern about inappropriate seeding of model parameters (Yoder et al., 2005) is not relevant here and, furthermore, that previous speculations that replication is resource-limited (Parkwood et al., 2007) are largely correct. Nevertheless this study is spec-
1. C.R.E.A.T.E.• Hoskins et al., 2007/2011
2. Figure Facts• Round & Campbell, 2013
3. Science in the Classroom• scienceintheclassroom.org
Learning from the primary literature: selected approaches
B.C. (Before C.R.E.A.T.E.)
1st author (Year), Journal times cited formal evidence of learning gains?
Epstein (1972), Nature 22 No
Janick-Buckner (1997), J Coll Sci Teach 58 No
Herman (1999), J Coll Sci Teach 23 No
Levine (2001), J Coll Sci Teach 46 No
Smith (2001), J Coll Sci Teach 23 No
Brill (2003), Cell Biol Educ 33 Sort of
Kozeracki (2006), CBE Life Sci Ed 28 No
Hoskins (2007), Genetics 33 Yes(but no control group)
Introducing C.R.E.A.T.E.• Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret
data, Think of the next Experiment• 1 line of research (4 articles) from 1 lab
• Other interesting aspects:– abridgement of articles (no titles, abstracts, discussion sections)– concept mapping & cartooning– analysis templates for figures/tables
Hoskins et al., 2011
Hoskins et al., 2007
C.R.E.A.T.E. improves critical thinking
Hoskins et al., 2007
Figure Facts (Round & Campbell 2013)
• Motivation– “Students often approach a research article as they would a textbook,
focusing on the narrative of the paper as fact, with figures subordinate to the text.”
• Limits of other approaches– Journal club: “unstructured reading experience” – Study questions: “time-consuming for the instructor” (?!)– C.R.E.A.T.E.: much instructor prep, requires sequence of related papers
• Figure Facts approach– “The Figure Facts template encourages students to adopt a data-
centric approach, rather than a text-based approach, to understand research articles. Specifically, Figure Facts requires students to focus on the experimental data presented in each figure and identify specific conclusions that may be drawn from those results.”
The Figure Facts template
Round & Campbell, 2013
Figure Facts: findings
• Increased time spent examining/annotating figures (Fig. 2)• Improvement in data interpretation (Fig. 3)• Positive opinion of template (Fig. 4)
Figure 3.Students interpreted novel data sets more accurately at weeks 9 and 15. ***, p < 0.001 by paired t test; n = 16.
Round & Campbell, 2013
October 2013 Discussion at BERG(Biology Education Research Group)• Imagine that you are about to teach a …
1. 10th-grade biology course (~20 students)
2. small undergrad nonmajors course (~20 students)
3. large intro course (~200 students)
4. literature seminar for senior majors (~10 students)
5. grad student seminar (~20 students)
• Discuss and report:
A. What (if anything) will you retain from C.R.E.A.T.E.? Why?
B. What (if anything) will you retain from Figure Facts?
Why?
C. What (if anything) will you do that is different?
BERG, 10-25-13
BERG, 10-25-13
BERG, 10-25-13
BERG, 10-25-13
BERG, 10-25-13
Science in the Classroom• “A collection of annotated scientific papers and accompanying
teaching materials designed to help students understand the structure and workings of professional scientific research”
What my ENGL 299 students did with SitC (Spring 2014)
1. Learned SitC format using an already-annotated article
2. Read 1 of 2 non-annotated Science articles (class divided in half)- Created annotations for Glossary and References And Notes- Created tabs for figures- Wrote mini-grant proposal (potential follow-up study)
3. Switched to the other article- Evaluated classmates’ previous annotations- Created new annotations for Authors’ Experiments- Wrote journal-style peer review of paper
