scholarly journals Primary literature across the undergraduate curriculum: teaching science process skills and content

2011 ◽  
Vol 92 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily S. J. Rauschert ◽  
Joseph Dauer ◽  
Jennifer L. Momsen ◽  
Ariana Sutton-Grier
2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 524-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Coil ◽  
Mary Pat Wenderoth ◽  
Matthew Cunningham ◽  
Clarissa Dirks

Most scientific endeavors require science process skills such as data interpretation, problem solving, experimental design, scientific writing, oral communication, collaborative work, and critical analysis of primary literature. These are the fundamental skills upon which the conceptual framework of scientific expertise is built. Unfortunately, most college science departments lack a formalized curriculum for teaching undergraduates science process skills. However, evidence strongly suggests that explicitly teaching undergraduates skills early in their education may enhance their understanding of science content. Our research reveals that faculty overwhelming support teaching undergraduates science process skills but typically do not spend enough time teaching skills due to the perceived need to cover content. To encourage faculty to address this issue, we provide our pedagogical philosophies, methods, and materials for teaching science process skills to freshman pursuing life science majors. We build upon previous work, showing student learning gains in both reading primary literature and scientific writing, and share student perspectives about a course where teaching the process of science, not content, was the focus. We recommend a wider implementation of courses that teach undergraduates science process skills early in their studies with the goals of improving student success and retention in the sciences and enhancing general science literacy.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 194
Author(s):  
Ni Nyoman Sri Vutu Verawati ◽  
Saiful Prayogi ◽  
Muhammad Asy’ari

This article describes scientific learning that focuses on the implementation of learning on scientific principles to build students' thinking skills in accordance with the 2013 curriculum. The essence of science education becomes the main foundation of the importance of teaching science process skills in learning. Scientific skills that are important to train learners in conducting scientific activities. These skills include, 1) observing; 2) interpret; 3) predict; 4) using tools and materials; 5) apply the concept; 6) planning research; 7) communicate.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell Kramer ◽  
Dalay Olson ◽  
J.D. Walker

AbstractExplicit emphasis on teaching science process skills leads to both gains in the skills themselves and, strikingly, deeper understanding of content. Here, we created and tested a series of online, interactive tutorials with the goal of helping undergraduate students develop science process skills. We designed the tutorials in accordance with evidence-based multimedia design principles and student feedback from usability testing. We then tested the efficacy of the tutorials in an introductory undergraduate biology class. Based on a multivariate ordinary least squares regression model, students that received the tutorials are predicted to score 0.824 points higher on a 15 point science process skill assessment than their peers that received traditional textbook instruction on the same topic. This moderate but significant impact indicates that well designed online tutorials can be more effective than traditional ways of teaching science process skills to undergraduate students. We also found trends that suggest the tutorials are especially effective for non-native English speaking students. However, due to a limited sample size, we were unable to confirm that these trends occurred due to more than just variation in the sampled student group.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander James Carroll

Students entering graduate degree programs in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields or professional degree programs in the health sciences are expected to have adequate academic preparation in science process skills like the ability to read primary literature effectively. This column scrutinizes this assumption by examining how science is taught to undergraduates, finding that undergraduate STEM curricula rarely prepare students with the mastery of science process skills needed to succeed in graduate school. The column discusses some possible causes of this skill gap and suggests that academic and medical librarians are well-equipped to help students develop primary literature literacy skills. The column closes with a list of practical active reading strategies that librarians can share and model for students. The Version of Record of this manuscript has been published and is available in Medical Reference Services Quarterly, August 10, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/02763869.2020.1778336.


1996 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter N. Brotherton ◽  
Peter F. W. Preece

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. ar19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell Kramer ◽  
Dalay Olson ◽  
J. D. Walker

Explicit emphasis on teaching science process skills leads to both gains in the skills themselves and, strikingly, deeper understanding of content. Here, we created and tested a series of online, interactive tutorials with the goal of helping undergraduate students develop science process skills. We designed the tutorials in accordance with evidence-based multimedia design principles and student feedback from usability testing. We then tested the efficacy of the tutorials in an introductory undergraduate biology class. On the basis of a multivariate ordinary least-squares regression model, students who received the tutorials are predicted to score 0.82 points higher on a 15-point science process skill assessment than their peers who received traditional textbook instruction on the same topic. This moderate but significant impact indicates that well-designed online tutorials can be more effective than traditional ways of teaching science process skills to undergraduate students. We also found trends that suggest the tutorials are especially effective for nonnative English-speaking students. However, due to a limited sample size, we were unable to confirm that these trends occurred due to more than just variation in the student group sampled.


2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. ar34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Abdullah ◽  
Julian Parris ◽  
Richard Lie ◽  
Amy Guzdar ◽  
Ella Tour

The ability to think analytically and creatively is crucial for success in the modern workforce, particularly for graduate students, who often aim to become physicians or researchers. Analysis of the primary literature provides an excellent opportunity to practice these skills. We describe a course that includes a structured analysis of four research papers from diverse fields of biology and group exercises in proposing experiments that would follow up on these papers. To facilitate a critical approach to primary literature, we included a paper with questionable data interpretation and two papers investigating the same biological question yet reaching opposite conclusions. We report a significant increase in students’ self-efficacy in analyzing data from research papers, evaluating authors’ conclusions, and designing experiments. Using our science-process skills test, we observe a statistically significant increase in students’ ability to propose an experiment that matches the goal of investigation. We also detect gains in interpretation of controls and quantitative analysis of data. No statistically significant changes were observed in questions that tested the skills of interpretation, inference, and evaluation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document