How students think about experimental design: Novel conceptions revealed by in-class activities

BioScience

Volumn 64, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 125-137

  Brownell, Sara E ^a   Wenderoth, Mary Pat ^a   Theobald, Roddy ^a   Okoroafor, Nnadozie ^a   Koval, Mikhail ^a   Freeman, Scott ^a   Walcher Chevillet, Cristina L ^b   Crowe, Alison J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUND   (United States)

Author keywords

active learning; education; experimental design; large lecture; learning progression

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898989533     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: 15253244     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/biosci/bit016     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alonzo AC, Gotwals AW, eds. 2012. Learning Progressions in Science: Current Challenges and Future Directions. Springer.
2. Andrews TM, Leonard MJ, Colgrove CA, Kalinowski ST. 2011. Active learning not associated with student learning in a random sample of college biology courses. CBE Life Sciences Education 10: 394-405.
3. Beichner RJ, Saul JM, Abbot DS, Morse JJ, Deardorff DL, Allain RJ, Bonham SW, Dancy MH, Risley DS. 2007. The student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (SCALE-UP) project. Pages 2-39 in Redish EF, Cooney PJ, eds. Research-Based Reform of University Physics. American Association of Physics Teachers.
4. Bloom BS, Krathwohl DR. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Longman, Green, and Company.
5. Boudreaux A, Shaffer PS, Heron PRL, McDermott LC. 2008. Student understanding of control of variables: Deciding whether or not a variable influences the behavior of a system. American Journal of Physics 76: 163.
6. Brewer CA, Smith D, eds. 2011. Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action. American Association for the Advancement of Science.
7. Chen Z, Klahr D. 1999. All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development 70: 1098-1120.
8. Clement J, Brown DE, Zietsman A. 1989. Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding "anchoring conceptions" for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education 11: 554-565.
9. Coil D, Wenderoth MP, Cunningham M, Dirks C. 2010. Teaching the process of science: Faculty perceptions and an effective methodology. CBE Life Sciences Education 9: 524-535.
10. Coley JD, Tanner KD. 2012. Common origins of diverse misconceptions: Cognitive principles and the development of biology thinking. CBE Life Sciences Education 11: 209-215.
11. Colon-Berlingeri M, Burrowes PA. 2011. Teaching biology through statistics: Application of statistical methods in genetics and zoology courses. CBE Life Sciences Education 10: 259-267.
12. Crowe A, Dirks C, Wenderoth MP. 2008. Biology in bloom: Implementing Bloom's taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. CBE Life Sciences Education 7: 368-381.
13. D'Costa AR, Schlueter MA. 2013. Scaffolded instruction improves student understanding of the scientific method and experimental design. American Biology Teacher 75: 18-28.
14. Dirks C, Cunningham M. 2006. Enhancing diversity in science: Is teaching science process skills the answer? CBE Life Sciences Education 5: 218-226.
15. Duncan RG, Rivet AE. 2013. Science learning progressions. Science 339: 396-397.
16. Eddy SE, Crowe AJ, Wenderoth MP, Freeman S. 2013 How should we teach tree-thinking? An experimental test of two hypotheses Evolution: Education and Outreach 6 (art. 13). doi:10.1186/1936-6434-6-13
17. Edens KM, Potter E. 2003. Using descriptive drawings as a conceptual change strategy in elementary science. School Science and Mathematics 103: 135-144.
18. Freeman S, Haak D, Wenderoth MP. 2011. Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education 10: 175-186.
19. Giere RN. 2004. How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science 71: 742-752.
20. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Transaction.
21. Gormally C, Brickman P, Lutz M. 2012. Developing a test of scientific literacy skills (TOSLS): Measuring undergraduates? evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE Life Sciences Education 11: 364-377.
22. Hake RR. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 66: 64.
23. Hiebert SM. 2007. Teaching simple experimental design to undergraduates: Do your students understand the basics? Advances in Physiology Education 31: 82-92.
24. Hoefnagels MH. 2002. Using superstitions and sayings to teach experimental design. Tested Studies for Laboratory Teaching 24: 325-327.
25. Kanari Z, Millar R. 2004. Reasoning from data: How students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41: 748-769.
26. Kloser MJ, Brownell SE, Shavelson RJ, Fukami T. 2013. Effects of a research-based ecology lab course: A study of nonvolunteer achievement, self-confidence, and perception of lab course purpose. Journal of College Science Teaching 42: 90-99.
27. Lin X, Lehman JD. 1999. Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based biology environment: Effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36: 837-858.
28. Mak SY, Yip DY, Chung CM. 1999. Alternative conceptions in biology-related topics of integrated science teachers and implications for teacher education. Journal of Science Education and Technology 8: 161-170.
29. Nelson CE. 2008. Teaching evolution (and all of biology) more effectively: Strategies for engagement, critical reasoning, and confronting misconceptions. Integrative and Comparative Biology 48: 213-225.
30. Poehnl S, Bogner FX. 2013. Cognitive load and alternative conceptions in learning genetics: Effects from provoking confusion. Journal of Educational Research 106: 183-196.
31. Pollack AE. 2010. Exploring the complexities of experimental design: Using an on-line reaction time program as a teaching tool for diverse student populations. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education 9: A47-A50.
32. Ryan AG, Aikenhead GS. 1992. Students' preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education 76: 559-580.
33. Shadmi Y. 1981. Teaching "control of variables" to primary school teachers. Physics Education 16: 93.
34. Shi J, Power JM, Klymkowsky MW. 2011. Revealing student thinking about experimental design and the roles of control experiments. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 5 (art. 93).
35. Sirum K, Humburg J. 2011. The Experimental Design Ability Test (EDAT). Bioscene: Journal of College Biology Teaching 37: 8-16.
36. Songer NB, Kelcey B, Gotwals AW. 2009. How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46: 610-631.
37. Strike KA, Posner GJ. 1992. A revisionist theory of conceptual change. Pages 147-176 in Duschl RA, Hamilton RJ, eds. Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press.
38. White TK, Whitaker P, Gonya T, Hein R, Kroening D, Lee K, Lee L, Lukowiak A, Hayes E. 2009. The use of interrupted case studies to enhance critical thinking skills in biology. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education 10: 25-31.
39. Yates TB, Marek EA. 2013. Is Oklahoma really OK? A regional study of the prevalence of biological evolution-related misconceptions held by introductory biology teachers. Evolution: Education and Outreach 6 (art. 6).
40. Zuckerman JT. 1994. Accurate and inaccurate conceptions about osmosis that accompanied meaningful problem solving. School Science and Mathematics 94: 226-234.