Intuitive biological thought: Developmental changes and effects of biology education in late adolescence.

A large body of cognitive research has shown that people intuitively and effortlessly reason about the biological world in complex and systematic ways. We addressed two questions about the nature of intuitive biological reasoning: How does intuitive biological thinking change during adolescence and early adulthood? How does increasing biology education influence intuitive biological thinking? To do so, we developed a battery of measures to systematically test three components of intuitive biological thought: anthropocentric thinking, teleological thinking and essentialist thinking, and tested 8th graders and university students (both biology majors, and non-biology majors). Results reveal clear evidence of persistent intuitive reasoning among all populations studied, consistent but surprisingly small differences between 8th graders and college students on measures of intuitive biological thought, and consistent but again surprisingly small influence of increasing biology education on intuitive biological reasoning. Results speak to the persistence of intuitive reasoning, the importance of taking intuitive knowledge into account in science classrooms, and the necessity of interdisciplinary research to advance biology education. Further studies are necessary to investigate how cultural context and continued acquisition of expertise impact intuitive biology thinking.

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.

Differentiation, adaptation, and perseverance: Maturing conceptualizations of education-focused science faculty in the United States.

Science education reform has been underway for almost a century with the general aim to engage students and train scientists needed to find solutions to global challenges, and also ensure a general public well disposed towards science. In an effort to aid science reform, more recently, colleges and universities have been augmenting their academic workforce by embedding education-focused science faculty into science departments. However, little research has investigated how this approach, and the identity of these faculty, may be changing over time. Here we investigate how conceptualizations of professional identities of these faculty across the United States have changed over the last two decades. We found three professional identities amongst these faculty: Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES), Discipline-Based Education Researchers (DBER), and faculty who identify as both SFES and DBER. Evidence indicates this is a maturing field within higher-education science departments, with more direct hiring and training pathways, but with potentially diminishing agency. Finally, data reveal resilience and perseverance despite negative biases from peers and college administrators, especially at PhD-granting institutions.

Content Coverage as a Persistent Exclusionary Practice: Investigating Perspectives of Health Professionals on the Influence of Undergraduate Coursework.

STEM undergraduates navigate lengthy sequences of prerequisite courses covering volumes of science content. Given that these courses may contribute to attrition and equity gaps in STEM, research is needed to test the assumption that prerequisite content benefits students in their future studies and careers. We investigated the relevance of prerequisite course content for students' careers through semistructured interviews with practicing nurses regarding their undergraduate anatomy and physiology (A&P) courses. Nurses reported that A&P content does not align with the skills and knowledge needed in the nursing profession. Interviewees averaged 39% on a brief A&P assessment, suggesting A&P prerequisites failed to impart a high degree of long-term A&P knowledge among nurses. Further, practicing nurses perceived overcommitment to A&P content coverage as an exclusionary practice that eliminates capable individuals from the prenursing pathway. These findings challenge assumptions surrounding the justification for prerequisite course content and raise questions of whether content expectations actively exclude individuals from STEM or healthcare careers. We aspire for this study to stimulate conversation and research about the goals of prerequisite content, who is best positioned to articulate prerequisite content objectives, and the influence of content coverage on equity and justice in undergraduate STEM education.

Scientist Spotlights in Secondary Schools: Student Shifts in Multiple Measures Related to Science Identity after Receiving Written Assignments.

Based on theoretical frameworks of scientist stereotypes, possible selves, and science identity, written assignments were developed to teach science content through biographies and research of counter-stereotypical scientists-Scientist Spotlights (www.scientistspotlights.org). Previous studies on Scientist Spotlight assignments showed significant shifts in how college-level biology students relate to and describe scientists and in their performance in biology courses. However, the outcomes of Scientist Spotlight assignments in secondary schools were yet to be explored. In collaboration with 18 science teachers from 12 schools, this study assessed the impacts of Scientist Spotlight assignments for secondary school students. We used published assessment tools: Relatability prompt; Stereotypes prompt; and Performance/Competence, Interest, and Recognition (PCIR) instrument. Statistical analyses compared students' responses before and after receiving at least three Scientist Spotlight assignments. We observed significant shifts in students' relatability to and descriptions of scientists as well as other science identity measures. Importantly, disaggregating classes by implementation strategies revealed that students' relatability shifts were significant for teachers reporting in-class discussions and not significant for teachers reporting no discussions. Our findings raise questions about contextual and pedagogical influences shaping student outcomes with Scientist Spotlight assignments, like how noncontent Instructor Talk might foster student shifts in aspects of science identity.

Investigating high school students' conceptualizations of the biological basis of learning.

Students go to school to learn. How much, however, do students understand about the biological basis of this everyday process? Blackwell et al. (1) demonstrated a correlation between education about learning and academic achievement. Yet there are few studies investigating high school students' conceptions of learning. In this mixed-methods research study, written assessments were administered to 339 high school students in an urban school district after they completed their required biology education, and videotaped interviews were conducted with 15 students. The results indicated that the majority of students know little about the biological basis of learning, even with prompting, and they recall having learned little about it in school. Students appear to believe that people control their own ability to learn, and some have developed personal hypotheses to describe the learning process. On written assessments, 75% of participants demonstrated a nonbiological framework for learning, and, during interviews, 67% of participants revealed misconceptions about the biological basis of learning. Sample quotes of these interviews are included in this report, and the implications of these findings are discussed.

Effects of Reading Interventions on Student Understanding of and Misconceptions about Antibiotic Resistance.

Students possess informal, intuitive ways of reasoning about the world, including biological phenomena. Although useful in some cases, intuitive reasoning can also lead to the development of scientifically inaccurate ideas that conflict with central concepts taught in formal biology education settings, including evolution. Using antibiotic resistance as an example of evolution, we developed a set of reading interventions and an assessment tool to examine the extent to which differences in instructional language affect undergraduate student misconceptions and intuitive reasoning. We find that readings that confront intuitive misconceptions can be more effective in reducing those misconceptions than factual explanations of antibiotic resistance that fail to confront misconceptions. Overall, our findings build upon investigations of intuitive reasoning in biology, examine possible instructional interventions, and raise questions about effective implementation of reading interventions in addressing persistent misconceptions about biology.

Investigating Instructor Talk among Graduate Teaching Assistants in Undergraduate Biology Laboratory Classrooms.

Instructor Talk-noncontent and nonlogistical language that is focused on shaping the classroom learning environment-is a recently defined variable that may play an important role in how undergraduates experience courses. Previous research characterized Instructor Talk used by faculty teaching in biology lecture classrooms. However, graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) and laboratory classrooms represent critical factors in undergraduate education, and Instructor Talk in this context has yet to be explored. Here, we present findings analyzing Instructor Talk used by GTAs teaching in undergraduate biology laboratory classrooms. We characterized the Instructor Talk used by 22 GTA instructors across 24 undergraduate biology laboratory courses in the context of a single, urban, Hispanic-serving and Asian American and Pacific Islander-serving Institution. We found that Instructor Talk was present in every course studied, GTAs with pedagogical training and prior teaching experience used more Instructor Talk than those without, and GTAs teaching laboratory courses used more Instructor Talk than previous observations of faculty teaching lecture courses. Given the widespread use of Instructor Talk and its varying use across contexts, we predict that Instructor Talk may be a critical variable in teaching, specifically in promoting equity and inclusion, which merits continued study in undergraduate science education.

Reconsidering the Share of a Think-Pair-Share: Emerging Limitations, Alternatives, and Opportunities for Research.

The think-pair-share is a common teaching tool, but how critical is the "share" step in helping students achieve learning goals? This feature examines assumptions that instructors may make about the share, explores unanticipated impacts of the share, and provides alternatives to having students share their thoughts in front of the class.

Investigating Student Perceptions of Instructor Talk: Alignment with Researchers' Categorizations and Analysis of Remembered Language.

Instructor Talk-the noncontent language used by an instructor during class time-is likely to influence learning environments in science classrooms from the student perspective. Despite Instructor Talk being found in every science course thus far, investigations into student perceptions and memories of it are limited. We investigated to what extent undergraduate biology students 1) were aligned with researchers in their perceptions of Instructor Talk as Positively Phrased or Negatively Phrased and 2) remembered Instructor Talk. To test these ideas, we engaged 90 biology students in a multipart assessment. First, students were given randomly selected Instructor Talk quotes, half Positively Phrased and half Negatively Phrased, and were asked to evaluate each quote as promoting a positive or negative learning environment. Overall, students evaluated the Instructor Talk quotes similarly to researchers' categorizations (p < 0.0001). Second, students were asked to provide examples of remembered instructor language from their biology courses that they felt promoted a positive or negative learning environment. Most students shared multiple memories, and ∼75% of these memories could be coded with the Instructor Talk frameworks. Given that students perceive and remember Instructor Talk as impacting the learning environment, Instructor Talk may be an explanatory variable for differential student outcomes across studies of active learning.

Student-Authored Scientist Spotlights: Investigating the Impacts of Engaging Undergraduates as Developers of Inclusive Curriculum through a Service-Learning Course.

Scientist Spotlights-curricular materials that employ the personal and professional stories of scientists from diverse backgrounds-have previously been shown to positively influence undergraduate students' relatability to and perceptions of scientists. We hypothesized that engaging students in authoring Scientist Spotlights might produce curricular materials of similar impact, as well as provide a mechanism for student involvement as partners in science education reform. To test this idea and investigate the impact of student-authored Scientist Spotlights, we developed a service-learning course in which teams of biology students partnered with an instructor to develop and implement Scientist Spotlights in a biology course. Results revealed that exposure to three or four student-authored Scientist Spotlights significantly shifted peers' perceptions of scientists in all partner courses. Interestingly, student-authored Scientist Spotlights shifted peers' relatability to scientists similarly among both white students and students of color. Further, student authors themselves showed increases in their relatability to scientists. Finally, a department-wide survey demonstrated significant differences in students' perceptions of scientist representation between courses with and without student-authored Spotlights. Results suggest that engaging students as authors of inclusive curricular materials and partners in reform is a promising approach to promoting inclusion and addressing representation in science.

Attention Matters: How Orchestrating Attention May Relate to Classroom Learning.

Attention is thought to be the gateway between information and learning, yet there is much we do not understand about how students pay attention in the classroom. Leveraging ideas from cognitive neuroscience and psychology, we explore a framework for understanding attention in the classroom, organized along two key dimensions: internal/external attention and on-topic/off-topic attention. This framework helps us to build new theories for why active-learning strategies are effective teaching tools and how synchronized brain activity across students in a classroom may support learning. These ideas suggest new ways of thinking about how attention functions in the classroom and how different approaches to the same active-learning strategy may vary in how effectively they direct students' attention. We hypothesize that some teaching approaches are more effective than others because they leverage natural fluctuations in students' attention. We conclude by discussing implications for teaching and opportunities for future research.

Disciplinary Bias, Money Matters, and Persistence: Deans' Perspectives on Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES).

The phenomenon of embedding Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) in science departments is well documented. However, the perspectives of academic leaders have not been systematically studied. To investigate these perspectives, we conducted an interview study of college of science deans in the California State University system, which offers a defined higher education context in which to sample across a range of institution types and cultures. While deans were aware of and positive about SFES as potential change agents, most deans also evidenced casual bias against science education efforts and experts. Deans mentioned that education reform efforts by SFES were primarily driven by external policy and funding mandates, causing concern that support for such positions and scholarly work could evaporate if external pressures recede. The majority of deans stated that the SFES phenomenon had persisted over the last decade and continued to grow. Findings reported here document tacit assumptions that science education efforts may not count as science and reveal a lack of cultural integration of science education efforts into the sciences in higher education. Such findings should give biology educators, reformers, and researchers pause, as well as fresh incentive to engage more fully and regularly with administrators about their work.

Resources for Teaching and Assessing the Vision and Change Biology Core Concepts.

The Vision and Change report called for the biology community to mobilize around teaching the core concepts of biology. This essay describes a collection of resources developed by several different groups that can be used to respond to the report's call to transform undergraduate education at both the individual course and departmental levels. First, we present two frameworks that help articulate the Vision and Change core concepts, the BioCore Guide and the Conceptual Elements (CE) Framework, which can be used in mapping the core concepts onto existing curricula and designing new curricula that teach the biology core concepts. Second, we describe how the BioCore Guide and the CE Framework can be used alongside the Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education curricular rubric as a way for departments to self-assess their teaching of the core concepts. Finally, we highlight three sets of instruments that can be used to directly assess student learning of the core concepts: the Biology Card Sorting Task, the Biology Core Concept Instruments, and the Biology-Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science instruments. Approaches to using these resources independently and synergistically are discussed.

Evolving roles of scientists as change agents in science education over a decade: SFES roles beyond discipline-based education research.

To what extent have positions for science education specialists as change agents within science departments persisted and evolved over the past decade? We addressed this question by studying a population of Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) first described in 2008. SFES are university science faculty who engage in undergraduate science education, K-12 science education, and/or research in science education. Compared to a decade ago, SFES are now more prevalent and more likely to be formally trained in science education. Many identify as discipline-based education researchers (DBER) but assert that their SFES and DBER roles are nonequivalent. SFES have garnered university administrator support through varied science education activities, and these insights into the evolving role of scientists in science education have implications for many stakeholders.

Cognitive Construal-Consistent Instructor Language in the Undergraduate Biology Classroom.

Researchers have identified patterns of intuitive thinking that are commonly used to understand and reason about the biological world. These cognitive construals (anthropic, teleological, and essentialist thinking), while useful in everyday life, have also been associated with misconceptions about biological science. Although construal-based thinking is pervasive among students, we know little about the prevalence of construal-consistent language in the university science classroom. In the current research, we characterized the degree to which construal-consistent language is present in biology students' learning environments. To do so, we coded transcripts of instructor's speech in 90 undergraduate biology classes for the presence of construal-consistent language. Classes were drawn from two universities with very different student demographic profiles and represented 18 different courses aimed at nonmajors and lower- and upper-division biology majors. Results revealed construal-consistent language in all 90 sampled classes. Anthropic language was more frequent than teleological or essentialist language, and frequency of construal-consistent language was surprisingly consistent across instructor and course level. Moreover, results were surprisingly consistent across the two universities. These findings suggest that construal-consistent language is pervasive in the undergraduate classroom and highlight the need to understand how such language may facilitate and/or interfere with students learning biological science.

Investigating Undergraduate Students' Use of Intuitive Reasoning and Evolutionary Knowledge in Explanations of Antibiotic Resistance.

Natural selection is a central concept throughout biology; however, it is a process frequently misunderstood. Bacterial resistance to antibiotic medications provides a contextual example of the relevance of evolutionary theory and is also commonly misunderstood. While research has shed light on student misconceptions of natural selection, minimal study has focused on misconceptions of antibiotic resistance. Additionally, research has focused on the degree to which misconceptions may be based in the complexity of biological information or in pedagogical choices, rather than in deep-seated cognitive patterns. Cognitive psychology research has established that humans develop early intuitive assumptions to make sense of the world. In this study, we used a written assessment tool to investigate undergraduate students' misconceptions of antibiotic resistance, use of intuitive reasoning, and application of evolutionary knowledge to antibiotic resistance. We found a majority of students produced and agreed with misconceptions, and intuitive reasoning was present in nearly all students' written explanations. Acceptance of a misconception was significantly associated with production of a hypothesized form of intuitive thinking (all p ≤ 0.05). Intuitive reasoning may represent a subtle but innately appealing linguistic shorthand, and instructor awareness of intuitive reasoning's relation to student misunderstandings has potential for addressing persistent misconceptions.

Investigating Novice and Expert Conceptions of Genetically Modified Organisms.

The aspiration of biology education is to give students tools to apply knowledge learned in the classroom to everyday life. Genetic modification is a real-world biological concept that relies on an in-depth understanding of the molecular behavior of DNA and proteins. This study investigated undergraduate biology students' conceptions of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) when probed with real-world, molecular and cellular, and essentialist cues, and how those conceptions compared across biology expertise. We developed a novel written assessment tool and administered it to 120 non-biology majors, 154 entering biology majors, 120 advanced biology majors (ABM), and nine biology faculty. Results indicated that undergraduate biology majors rarely included molecular and cellular rationales in their initial explanations of GMOs. Despite ABM demonstrating that they have much of the biology knowledge necessary to understand genetic modification, they did not appear to apply this knowledge to explaining GMOs. Further, this study showed that all undergraduate student populations exhibited evidence of essentialist thinking while explaining GMOs, regardless of their level of biology training. Finally, our results suggest an association between scientifically accurate ideas and the application of molecular and cellular rationales, as well as an association between misconceptions and essentialist rationales.

Using the Biology Card Sorting Task to Measure Changes in Conceptual Expertise during Postsecondary Biology Education.

While there have been concerted efforts to reform undergraduate biology toward teaching students to organize their conceptual knowledge like experts, there are few tools that attempt to measure this. We previously developed the Biology Card Sorting Task (BCST), designed to probe how individuals organize their conceptual biological knowledge. Previous results showed the BCST could differentiate between different populations, namely non-biology majors (NBM) and biology faculty (BF). In this study, we administered the BCST to three additional populations, using a cross-sectional design: entering biology majors (EBM), advanced biology majors (ABM), and biology graduate students (BGS). Intriguingly, ABM did not initially sort like experts any more frequently than EBM. However, once the deep-feature framework was revealed, ABM were able to sort like experts more readily than did EBM. These results are consistent with the conclusion that biology education enables advanced biology students to use an expert-like conceptual framework. However, these results are also consistent with a process of "selection," wherein students who persist in the major may have already had an expert-like conceptual framework to begin with. These results demonstrate the utility of the BCST in measuring differences between groups of students over the course of their undergraduate education.