Literature DB >> 23653776

Does the transition to an active-learning environment for the introductory course reduce students' overall knowledge of the various disciplines in biology?

Maryanne C Simurda1.   

Abstract

As biology education is being redesigned toward an interdisciplinary focus and as pedagogical trends move toward active-learning strategies and investigative experiences, a restructuring of the course content for the Introductory Biology course is necessary. The introductory course in biology has typically been a survey of all the biosciences. If the total number of topics covered is reduced, is the students' overall knowledge of biology also reduced? Our introductory course has been substantially modified away from surveying the biological sciences and toward providing a deep understanding of a particular biological topic, as well as focusing on developing students' analytical and communication skills. Because of this shift to a topic-driven approach for the introductory course, we were interested in assessing our graduating students' overall knowledge of the various biological disciplines. Using the Major Field Test - Biology (Educational Testing Service (ETS), Princeton, NJ), we compared the test performance of graduating students who had a traditional lecture-based introductory course to those who had a topic-driven active-learning introductory course. Our results suggest that eliminating the traditional survey of biology and, instead, focusing on quantitative and writing skills at the introductory level do not affect our graduating students' overall breadth of knowledge of the various biosciences.

Year:  2012        PMID: 23653776      PMCID: PMC3577302          DOI: 10.1128/jmbe.v13i1.340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ        ISSN: 1935-7877


  11 in total

1.  Assessing student learning.

Authors:  Marshall D Sundberg
Journal:  Cell Biol Educ       Date:  2002

2.  Introductory biology courses: a framework to support active learning in large enrollment introductory science courses.

Authors:  Ann C Smith; Richard Stewart; Patricia Shields; Jennifer Hayes-Klosteridis; Paulette Robinson; Robert Yuan
Journal:  Cell Biol Educ       Date:  2005

3.  Talking to learn: why biology students should be talking in classrooms and how to make it happen.

Authors:  Kimberly D Tanner
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology.

Authors:  Peter Armbruster; Maya Patel; Erika Johnson; Martha Weiss
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology.

Authors:  David C Haak; Janneke HilleRisLambers; Emile Pitre; Scott Freeman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Redesigning introductory biology: a proposal.

Authors:  Eileen Gregory; Craig Lending; Amanda N Orenstein; Jane P Ellis
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2011-05-19

7.  Order matters: using the 5E model to align teaching with how people learn.

Authors:  Kimberly D Tanner
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Learner-centered inquiry in undergraduate biology: positive relationships with long-term student achievement.

Authors:  Terry L Derting; Diane Ebert-May
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.325

9.  Online interactive teaching modules enhance quantitative proficiency of introductory biology students.

Authors:  Katerina V Thompson; Kären C Nelson; Gili Marbach-Ad; Michael Keller; William F Fagan
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology.

Authors:  Scott Freeman; David Haak; Mary Pat Wenderoth
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.325

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.