Today's doctoral programs continue to prepare students for a traditional academic career path despite the inadequate supply of research-focused faculty positions. We advocate for a broader doctoral curriculum that prepares trainees for a wide range of science-related career paths. In support of this argument, we describe data from our survey of doctoral students in the basic biomedical sciences at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Midway through graduate training, UCSF students are already considering a broad range of career options, with one-third intending to pursue a non–research career path. To better support this branching career pipeline, we recommend that national standards for training and mentoring include emphasis on career planning and professional skills development to ensure the success of PhD-level scientists as they contribute to a broadly defined global scientific enterprise.

We describe how a team approach that we developed as a mentoring strategy can be used to recruit, advance, and guide students to be more interested in the interdisciplinary field of mathematical biology, and lead to success in undergraduate research in this field. Students are introduced to research in their first semester via lab rotations. Their participation in the research of four faculty members—two from biology and two from mathematics—gives them a first-hand overview of research in quantitative biology and also some initial experience in research itself. However, one of the primary goals of the lab rotation experience is that of developing teams of students and faculty that combine mathematics and statistics with biology and the life sciences, teams that subsequently mentor undergraduate research in genuine interdisciplinary environments. Thus, the team concept serves not only as a means of establishing interdisciplinary research, but also as a means of incorporating new students into existing research efforts that will then track those students into meaningful research of their own. We report how the team concept is used to support undergraduate research in mathematical biology and what types of team-building strategies have worked for us.

Incorporation of mathematics into biology curricula is critical to underscore for undergraduate students the relevance of mathematics to most fields of biology and the usefulness of developing quantitative process skills demanded in modern biology. At our institution, we have made significant changes to better integrate mathematics into the undergraduate biology curriculum. The curricular revision included changes in the suggested course sequence, addition of statistics and precalculus as prerequisites to core science courses, and incorporating interdisciplinary (math–biology) learning activities in genetics and zoology courses. In this article, we describe the activities developed for these two courses and the assessment tools used to measure the learning that took place with respect to biology and statistics. We distinguished the effectiveness of these learning opportunities in helping students improve their understanding of the math and statistical concepts addressed and, more importantly, their ability to apply them to solve a biological problem. We also identified areas that need emphasis in both biology and mathematics courses. In light of our observations, we recommend best practices that biology and mathematics academic departments can implement to train undergraduates for the demands of modern biology.

This paper describes a newly adapted instrument for measuring novice-to-expert-like perceptions about biology: the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Biology (CLASS-Bio). Consisting of 31 Likert-scale statements, CLASS-Bio probes a range of perceptions that vary between experts and novices, including enjoyment of the discipline, propensity to make connections to the real world, recognition of conceptual connections underlying knowledge, and problem-solving strategies. CLASS-Bio has been tested for response validity with both undergraduate students and experts (biology PhDs), allowing student responses to be directly compared with a consensus expert response. Use of CLASS-Bio to date suggests that introductory biology courses have the same challenges as introductory physics and chemistry courses: namely, students shift toward more novice-like perceptions following instruction. However, students in upper-division biology courses do not show the same novice-like shifts. CLASS-Bio can also be paired with other assessments to: 1) examine how student perceptions impact learning and conceptual understanding of biology, and 2) assess and evaluate how pedagogical techniques help students develop both expertise in problem solving and an expert-like appreciation of the nature of biology.

Our study, focused on classroom-based research at the introductory level and using the Phage Genomics course as the model, shows evidence that first-year students doing research learn the process of science as well as how scientists practice science. A preliminary but notable outcome of our work, which is based on a small sample, is the change in student interest in considering different career choices such as graduate education and science in general. This is particularly notable, as previous research has described research internships as clarifying or confirming rather than changing undergraduates’ decisions to pursue graduate education. We hypothesize that our results differ from previous studies of the impact of engaging in research because the students in our study are still in the early stages of their undergraduate careers. Our work builds upon the classroom-based research movement and should be viewed as encouraging to the Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education movement advocated by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Science Foundation, and other undergraduate education stakeholders.

Today, more minority students are entering undergraduate programs than ever before, but they earn only 6% of all science or engineering PhDs awarded in the United States. Many studies suggest that hands-on research activities enhance students’ interest in pursuing a research career. In this paper, we present a model for the implementation of laboratory research in the undergraduate teaching laboratory using a culturally relevant approach to engage students. Laboratory modules were implemented in upper-division genetics and cell biology courses using cassava as the central theme. Students were asked to bring cassava samples from their respective towns, which allowed them to compare their field-collected samples against known lineages from agricultural stations at the end of the implementation. Assessment of content and learning perceptions revealed that our novel approach allowed students to learn while engaged in characterizing Puerto Rican cassava. In two semesters, based on the percentage of students who answered correctly in the premodule assessment for content knowledge, there was an overall improvement of 66% and 55% at the end in the genetics course and 24% and 15% in the cell biology course. Our proposed pedagogical model enhances students’ professional competitiveness by providing students with valuable research skills as they work on a problem to which they can relate.

Digital technologies can improve student interest and knowledge in science. However, researching the vast number of websites devoted to science education and integrating them into undergraduate curricula is time-consuming. We developed an Adobe ColdFusion– and Adobe Flash–based system for simplifying the construction, use, and delivery of electronic educational materials in science. The Online Multimedia Teaching Tool (OMTT) in Neuroscience was constructed from a ColdFusion-based online interface, which reduced the need for programming skills and the time for curriculum development. The OMTT in Neuroscience was used by faculty to enhance their lectures in existing curricula. Students had unlimited online access to encourage user-centered exploration. We found the OMTT was rapidly adapted by multiple professors, and its use by undergraduate students was consistent with the interpretation that the OMTT improved performance on exams and increased interest in the field of neuroscience.

Comic books employ a complex interplay of text and images that gives them the potential to effectively convey concepts and motivate student engagement. This makes comics an appealing option for educators trying to improve science literacy about pressing societal issues involving science and technology. Here, we report results from the first systematic assessment of how a science comic book can affect student learning and attitudes about biology. We used pre- and postinstruction instruments to measure students’ attitudes about biology, attitudes about comics, and content knowledge about evolution before and after using the science comic book Optical Allusions in their classes. On the preinstruction instrument, nonmajors reported the lowest scores on the content test and attitude surveys relative to the other groups. However, on the postinstruction instrument, nonmajors’ content scores and attitudes showed a statistically significant improvement after using the comic book, particularly among those with lower content knowledge at the start of the semester. The improvement in attitudes about biology was correlated to attitudes about comics, suggesting that the comic may have played a role in engaging and shaping student attitudes in a positive way.

Science education in the United States will increasingly be driven by testing and accountability requirements, such as those mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act, which rely heavily on learning outcomes, or “standards,” that are currently developed on a state-by-state basis. Those standards, in turn, drive curriculum and instruction. Given the importance of standards to teaching and learning, we investigated the quality of life sciences/biology standards with respect to genetics for all 50 states and the District of Columbia, using core concepts developed by the American Society of Human Genetics as normative benchmarks. Our results indicate that the states’ genetics standards, in general, are poor, with more than 85% of the states receiving overall scores of Inadequate. In particular, the standards in virtually every state have failed to keep pace with changes in the discipline as it has become genomic in scope, omitting concepts related to genetic complexity, the importance of environment to phenotypic variation, differential gene expression, and the differences between inherited and somatic genetic disease. Clearer, more comprehensive genetics standards are likely to benefit genetics instruction and learning, help prepare future genetics researchers, and contribute to the genetic literacy of the U.S. citizenry.