As part of its mission, the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) works to increase diversity in the scientific workforce, in part through the work of its Minorities Affairs Committee. It is for this reason that the ASCB was happy to welcome the special September 2016 issue of CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE) focused on broadening participation. As a response to this special issue, we update our ASCB community and LSE readership on the society’s efforts to broaden participation of underrepresented minorities in the biological sciences.

Nearly half of all undergraduates are enrolled at community colleges (CCs), including the majority of U.S. students who represent groups underserved in the sciences. Yet only a small minority of studies published in discipline-based education research journals address CC biology students, faculty, courses, or authors. This marked underrepresentation of CC biology education research (BER) limits the availability of evidence that could be used to increase CC student success in biology programs. To address this issue, a diverse group of stakeholders convened at the Building Capacity for Biology Education Research at Community Colleges meeting to discuss how to increase the prevalence of CC BER and foster participation of CC faculty as BER collaborators and authors. The group identified characteristics of CCs that make them excellent environments for studying biology teaching and learning, including student diversity and institutional cultures that prioritize teaching, learning, and assessment. The group also identified constraints likely to impede BER at CCs: limited time, resources, support, and incentives, as well as misalignment between doing research and CC faculty identities as teachers. The meeting culminated with proposing strategies for faculty, administrators, journal editors, scientific societies, and funding agencies to better support CC BER.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) for non–science majors (nonmajors) are potentially distinct from CUREs for developing scientists in their goals, learning objectives, and assessment strategies. While national calls to improve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education have led to an increase in research revealing the positive effects of CUREs for science majors, less work has specifically examined whether nonmajors are impacted in the same way. To address this gap in our understanding, a working group focused on nonmajors CUREs was convened to discuss the following questions: 1) What are our laboratory-learning goals for nonmajors? 2) What are our research priorities to determine best practices for nonmajors CUREs? 3) How can we collaborate to define and disseminate best practices for nonmajors in CUREs? We defined three broad student outcomes of prime importance to the nonmajors CURE: improvement of scientific literacy skills, proscience attitudes, and evidence-based decision making. We evaluated the state of knowledge of best practices for nonmajors, and identified research priorities for the future. The report that follows is a summary of the conclusions and future directions from our discussion.

We provide a tutorial on differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, an analytic method useful for identifying potentially biased items in assessments. After explaining a number of methodological approaches, we test for gender bias in two scenarios that demonstrate why DIF analysis is crucial for developing assessments, particularly because simply comparing two groups’ total scores can lead to incorrect conclusions about test fairness. First, a significant difference between groups on total scores can exist even when items are not biased, as we illustrate with data collected during the validation of the Homeostasis Concept Inventory. Second, item bias can exist even when the two groups have exactly the same distribution of total scores, as we illustrate with a simulated data set. We also present a brief overview of how DIF analysis has been used in the biology education literature to illustrate the way DIF items need to be reevaluated by content experts to determine whether they should be revised or removed from the assessment. Finally, we conclude by arguing that DIF analysis should be used routinely to evaluate items in developing conceptual assessments. These steps will ensure more equitable—and therefore more valid—scores from conceptual assessments.

Many of Africa’s challenges have scientific solutions, but there are fewer individuals engaged in scientific activity per capita on this continent than on any other. Only a handful of African scientists use their skills to capacity or are leaders in their disciplines. Underrepresentation of Africans in scientific practice, discourse, and decision making reduces the richness of intellectual contributions toward hard problems worldwide. This essay outlines challenges faced by teacher-scholars from sub-Saharan Africa as we build scientific expertise. Access to tertiary-level science is difficult and uneven across Africa, and the quality of training available varies from top-range to inadequate. Access to science higher education needs to increase, particularly for female students, first-generation literates, and rural populations. We make suggestions for collaborative initiatives involving stakeholders outside Africa and/or outside academia that could extend educational opportunities available to African students and increase the chance that Africa-based expertise is globally available.

Assessments represent an important component of undergraduate courses because they affect how students interact with course content and gauge student achievement of course objectives. To make decisions on assessment design, instructors must understand the affordances and limitations of available question formats. Here, we use a crossover experimental design to identify differences in how multiple-true-false (MTF) and free-response (FR) exam questions reveal student thinking regarding specific conceptions. We report that correct response rates correlate across the two formats but that a higher percentage of students provide correct responses for MTF questions. We find that MTF questions reveal a high prevalence of students with mixed (correct and incorrect) conceptions, while FR questions reveal a high prevalence of students with partial (correct and unclear) conceptions. These results suggest that MTF question prompts can direct students to address specific conceptions but obscure nuances in student thinking and may overestimate the frequency of particular conceptions. Conversely, FR questions provide a more authentic portrait of student thinking but may face limitations in their ability to diagnose specific, particularly incorrect, conceptions. We further discuss an intrinsic tension between question structure and diagnostic capacity and how instructors might use multiple formats or hybrid formats to overcome these obstacles.

Calculus is one of the primary avenues for initial quantitative training of students in all science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields, but life science students have been found to underperform in the traditional calculus setting. As a result, and because of perceived lack of its contribution to the understanding of biology, calculus is being actively cut from biology program requirements at many institutions. Here, we present an alternative: a model for learning mathematics that sees the partner disciplines as crucial to student success. We equip faculty with information to engage in dialogue within and between disciplinary departments involved in quantitative education. This includes presenting a process for interdisciplinary development and implementation of biology-oriented Calculus I courses at two institutions with different constituents, goals, and curricular constraints. When life science students enrolled in these redesigned calculus courses are compared with life science students enrolled in traditional calculus courses, students in the redesigned calculus courses learn calculus concepts and skills as well as their traditional course peers; however, the students in the redesigned courses experience more authentic life science applications and are more likely to stay and succeed in the course than their peers who are enrolled in traditional courses. Therefore, these redesigned calculus courses hold promise in helping life science undergraduate students attain Vision and Change recommended competencies.

Students of all ages face severe conceptual difficulties regarding key aspects of evolution—the central, unifying, and overarching theme in biology. Aspects strongly related to abstract “threshold” concepts like randomness and probability appear to pose particular difficulties. A further problem is the lack of an appropriate instrument for assessing students’ conceptual knowledge of randomness and probability in the context of evolution. To address this problem, we have developed two instruments, Randomness and Probability Test in the Context of Evolution (RaProEvo) and Randomness and Probability Test in the Context of Mathematics (RaProMath), that include both multiple-choice and free-response items. The instruments were administered to 140 university students in Germany, then the Rasch partial-credit model was applied to assess them. The results indicate that the instruments generate reliable and valid inferences about students’ conceptual knowledge of randomness and probability in the two contexts (which are separable competencies). Furthermore, RaProEvo detected significant differences in knowledge of randomness and probability, as well as evolutionary theory, between biology majors and preservice biology teachers.

The primary measure used to determine relative effectiveness of in-class activities has been student performance on pre/posttests. However, in today’s active-learning classrooms, learning is a social activity, requiring students to interact and learn from their peers. To develop effective active-learning exercises that engage students, it is important to gain a more holistic view of the student experience in an active-learning classroom. We have taken a mixed-methods approach to iteratively develop and validate a 16-item survey to measure multiple facets of the student experience during active-learning exercises. The instrument, which we call Assessing Student Perspective of Engagement in Class Tool (ASPECT), was administered to a large introductory biology class, and student responses were subjected to exploratory factor analysis. The 16 items loaded onto three factors that cumulatively explained 52% of the variation in student response: 1) value of activity, 2) personal effort, and 3) instructor contribution. ASPECT provides a rapid, easily administered means to measure student perception of engagement in an active-learning classroom. Gaining a better understanding of students’ level of engagement will help inform instructor best practices and provide an additional measure for comprehensively assessing the impact of different active-learning strategies.

The Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: Call to Action report has inspired and supported a nationwide movement to restructure undergraduate biology curricula to address overarching disciplinary concepts and competencies. The report outlines the concepts and competencies generally but does not provide a detailed framework to guide the development of the learning outcomes, instructional materials, and assessment instruments needed to create a reformed biology curriculum. In this essay, we present a detailed Vision and Change core concept framework that articulates key components that transcend subdisciplines and scales for each overarching biological concept, the Conceptual Elements (CE) Framework. The CE Framework was developed using a grassroots approach of iterative revision and incorporates feedback from more than 60 biologists and undergraduate biology educators from across the United States. The final validation step resulted in strong national consensus, with greater than 92% of responders agreeing that each core concept list was ready for use by the biological sciences community, as determined by scientific accuracy and completeness. In addition, we describe in detail how educators and departments can use the CE Framework to guide and document reformation of individual courses as well as entire curricula.

We present the Homeostasis Concept Inventory (HCI), a 20-item multiple-choice instrument that assesses how well undergraduates understand this critical physiological concept. We used an iterative process to develop a set of questions based on elements in the Homeostasis Concept Framework. This process involved faculty experts and undergraduate students from associate’s colleges, primarily undergraduate institutions, regional and research-intensive universities, and professional schools. Statistical results provided strong evidence for the validity and reliability of the HCI. We found that graduate students performed better than undergraduates, biology majors performed better than nonmajors, and students performed better after receiving instruction about homeostasis. We used differential item analysis to assess whether students from different genders, races/ethnicities, and English language status performed differently on individual items of the HCI. We found no evidence of differential item functioning, suggesting that the items do not incorporate cultural or gender biases that would impact students’ performance on the test. Instructors can use the HCI to guide their teaching and student learning of homeostasis, a core concept of physiology.

The Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education final report challenged institutions to reform their biology courses to focus on process skills and student active learning, among other recommendations. A large southeastern university implemented curricular changes to its majors’ introductory biology sequence in alignment with these recommendations. Discussion sections focused on developing student process skills were added to both lectures and a lab, and one semester of lab was removed. This curriculum was implemented using active-learning techniques paired with student collaboration. This study determined whether these changes resulted in a higher gain of student scientific literacy by conducting pre/posttesting of scientific literacy for two cohorts: students experiencing the unreformed curriculum and students experiencing the reformed curriculum. Retention of student scientific literacy for each cohort was also assessed 4 months later. At the end of the academic year, scientific literacy gains were significantly higher for students in the reformed curriculum (p = 0.005), with those students having double the scientific literacy gains of the cohort in the unreformed curriculum. Retention of scientific literacy did not differ between the cohorts.

In response to calls for reform in undergraduate biology education, we conducted research examining how varying active-learning strategies impacted students’ conceptual understanding, attitudes, and motivation in two sections of a large-lecture introductory cell and molecular biology course. Using a quasi-experimental design, we collected quantitative data to compare participants’ conceptual understanding, attitudes, and motivation in the biological sciences across two contexts that employed different active-learning strategies and that were facilitated by unique instructors. Students participated in either graphic organizer/worksheet activities or clicker-based case studies. After controlling for demographic and presemester affective differences, we found that students in both active-learning environments displayed similar and significant learning gains. In terms of attitudinal and motivational data, significant differences were observed for two attitudinal measures. Specifically, those students who had participated in graphic organizer/worksheet activities demonstrated more expert-like attitudes related to their enjoyment of biology and ability to make real-world connections. However, all motivational and most attitudinal data were not significantly different between the students in the two learning environments. These data reinforce the notion that active learning is associated with conceptual change and suggests that more research is needed to examine the differential effects of varying active-learning strategies on students’ attitudes and motivation in the domain.

The purpose of this study was to examine the educational impact of an intervention, the inquiry-focused textbook Integrating Concepts in Biology (ICB), when used in a yearlong introductory biology course sequence. Student learning was evaluated using three published instruments: 1) The Biology Concept Inventory probed depth of student mastery of fundamental concepts in organismal and cellular topics when confronting misconceptions as distractors. ICB students had higher gains in all six topic categories (+43% vs. peers overall, p < 0.01). 2) The Biology Card Sorting Task assessed whether students organized biological ideas more superficially, as novices do, or based on deeper concepts, like experts. The frequency with which ICB students connected deep-concept pairs, or triplets, was similar to peers; but deep understanding of structure/function was much higher (for pairs: 77% vs. 25%, p < 0.01). 3) A content-focused Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) posttest compared ICB student content knowledge with that of peers from 15 prior years. Historically, MCAT performance for each semester ranged from 53% to 64%; the ICB cohort scored 62%, in the top quintile. Longitudinal tracking in five upper-level science courses the following year found ICB students outperformed peers in physiology (85% vs. 80%, p < 0.01).

Calls for undergraduate biology reform share similar goals: to produce people who can organize, use, connect, and communicate about biological knowledge. Achieving these goals requires students to gain disciplinary expertise. Experts organize, access, and apply disciplinary knowledge differently than novices, and expertise is measurable. By asking introductory biology students to sort biological problems, we investigated whether they changed how they organized and linked biological ideas over one semester of introductory biology. We administered the Biology Card Sorting Task to 751 students enrolled in their first or second introductory biology course focusing on either cellular–molecular or organismal–population topics, under structured or unstructured sorting conditions. Students used a combination of superficial, deep, and yet-uncharacterized ways of organizing and connecting biological knowledge. In some cases, this translated to more expert-like ways of organizing knowledge over a single semester, best predicted by whether students were enrolled in their first or second semester of biology and by the sorting condition completed. In addition to illuminating differences between novices and experts, our results show that card sorting is a robust way of detecting changes in novices’ biological expertise—even in heterogeneous populations of novice biology students over the time span of a single semester.

Drawing by learners can be an effective way to develop memory and generate visual models for higher-order skills in biology, but students are often reluctant to adopt drawing as a study method. We designed a nonclassroom intervention that instructed introductory biology college students in a drawing method, minute sketches in folded lists (MSFL), and allowed them to self-assess their recall and problem solving, first in a simple recall task involving non-European alphabets and later using unfamiliar biology content. In two preliminary ex situ experiments, students had greater recall on the simple learning task, non-European alphabets with associated phonetic sounds, using MSFL in comparison with a preferred method, visual review (VR). In the intervention, students studying using MSFL and VR had ∼50–80% greater recall of content studied with MSFL and, in a subset of trials, better performance on problem-solving tasks on biology content. Eight months after beginning the intervention, participants had shifted self-reported use of drawing from 2% to 20% of study time. For a small subset of participants, MSFL had become a preferred study method, and 70% of participants reported continued use of MSFL. This brief, low-cost intervention resulted in enduring changes in study behavior.

In college introductory science courses, students are challenged with mastering large amounts of disciplinary content while developing as autonomous and effective learners. Self-regulated learning (SRL) is the process of setting learning goals, monitoring progress toward them, and applying appropriate study strategies. SRL characterizes successful, “expert” learners, and develops with time and practice. In a large, undergraduate introductory biology course, we investigated: 1) what SRL strategies students reported using the most when studying for exams, 2) which strategies were associated with higher achievement and with grade improvement on exams, and 3) what study approaches students proposed to use for future exams. Higher-achieving students, and students whose exam grades improved in the first half of the semester, reported using specific cognitive and metacognitive strategies significantly more frequently than their lower-achieving peers. Lower-achieving students more frequently reported that they did not implement their planned strategies or, if they did, still did not improve their outcomes. These results suggest that many students entering introductory biology have limited knowledge of SRL strategies and/or limited ability to implement them, which can impact their achievement. Course-specific interventions that promote SRL development should be considered as integral pedagogical tools, aimed at fostering development of students’ lifelong learning skills.

Students with awareness and control of their own thinking can learn more and perform better than students who are not metacognitive. Metacognitive regulation is how you control your thinking in order to learn. It includes the skill of evaluation, which is the ability to appraise your approaches to learning and then modify future plans based on those appraisals. We asked when, why, and how upper-division biology students evaluated their approaches to learning. We used self-evaluation assignments to identify students with potentially high metacognition and conducted semistructured interviews to collect rich qualitative data from them. Through content analysis, we found that students evaluated their approaches to learning when their courses presented novel challenges. Most students evaluated in response to an unsatisfactory grade. While evaluating study strategies, many students considered performance and learning simultaneously. We gained insights on the barriers students face when they try to change their approaches to learning based on their evaluations. A few students continued to use ineffective study strategies even though they were aware of the ineffectiveness of those strategies. A desire to avoid feeling uncomfortable was the primary reason they avoided strategies that they knew were more effective. We examined the behavioral change literature to help interpret these findings.

Retrieval practice has been shown to produce significant enhancements in student learning of course information, but the extent to which students make use of retrieval to learn information on their own is unclear. In the current study, students in a large introductory biology course were provided with optional online review questions that could be accessed as Test questions (requiring students to answer the questions before receiving feedback) or as Read questions (providing students with the question and correct answer up-front). Students more often chose to access the questions as Test compared with Read, and students who used the Test questions scored significantly higher on subsequent exams compared with students who used Read questions or did not access the questions at all. Following an in-class presentation of superior exam performance following use of the Test questions, student use of Test questions increased significantly for the remainder of the term. These results suggest that practice questions can be an effective tool for enhancing student achievement in biology and that informing students about performance-based outcomes coincides with increased use of retrieval practice.

Large class learning is a reality that is not exclusive to the first-year experience at midsized, comprehensive universities; upper-year courses have similarly high enrollment, with many class sizes greater than 200 students. Research into the efficacy and deficiencies of large undergraduate classes has been ongoing for more than 100 years, with most research associating large classes with weak student engagement, decreased depth of learning, and ineffective interactions. This study used a multidimensional research approach to survey student and instructor perceptions of large biology classes and to characterize the courses offered by a department according to resources and course structure using a categorical principal components analysis. Both student and instructor survey results indicated that a large class begins around 240 students. Large classes were identified as impersonal and classified using extrinsic qualifiers; however, students did identify techniques that made the classes feel smaller. In addition to the qualitative survey, we also attempted to quantify courses by collecting data from course outlines and analyzed the data using categorical principal component analysis. The analysis maps institutional change in resource allocation and teaching structure from 2010 through 2014 and validates the use of categorical principal components analysis in educational research. We examine what perceptions and factors are involved in a large class that is perceived to feel small. Our analysis suggests that it is not the addition of resources or difference in the lecturing method, but it is the instructor that determines whether a large class can feel small.

The persistence of undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines is a national issue based on STEM workforce projections. We implemented a weeklong pre–college engagement STEM Academy (SA) program aimed at addressing several areas related to STEM retention. We validated an instrument that was developed based on existing, validated measures and examined several psychosocial constructs related to STEM (science identity, self-efficacy, sense of belonging to the university and to STEM, career expectancies, and intention to leave STEM majors) before and after the program. We also compared students in the SA program with a matched comparison group of first-year students. Results show that SA students significantly increased in science identity and sense of belonging to STEM and to the university, all predictive of increased STEM retention and a primary aim of the program. Relative to the matched comparison group, SA students began their first semester with higher STEM self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and science identity, positive career expectancies, and lower intention to leave STEM. The SA cohort showed 98% first-year retention and 92% STEM major retention. The SA program serves as a model of a scalable, first-level, cocurricular engagement experience to enhance psychosocial factors that impact undergraduate persistence in STEM.

This study examines how two kinds of authentic research experiences related to smoking behavior—genotyping human DNA (wet lab) and using a database to test hypotheses about factors that affect smoking behavior (dry lab)—influence students’ perceptions and understanding of scientific research and related science concepts. The study used pre and post surveys and a focus group protocol to compare students who conducted the research experiences in one of two sequences: genotyping before database and database before genotyping. Students rated the genotyping experiment to be more like real science than the database experiment, in spite of the fact that they associated more scientific tasks with the database experience than genotyping. Independent of the order of completing the labs, students showed gains in their understanding of science concepts after completion of the two experiences. There was little change in students’ attitudes toward science pre to post, as measured by the Scientific Attitude Inventory II. However, on the basis of their responses during focus groups, students developed more sophisticated views about the practices and nature of science after they had completed both research experiences, independent of the order in which they experienced them.

Participating in undergraduate research with mentorship from faculty may be particularly important for ensuring the persistence of women and minority students in science. Yet many life science undergraduates at research universities are mentored by graduate or postdoctoral researchers (i.e., postgraduates). We surveyed a national sample of undergraduate life science researchers about the mentoring structure of their research experiences and the outcomes they realized from participating in research. We observed two common mentoring structures: an open triad with undergraduate–postgraduate and postgraduate–faculty ties but no undergraduate–faculty tie, and a closed triad with ties among all three members. We found that men and underrepresented minority (URM) students are significantly more likely to report a direct tie to their faculty mentors (closed triad) than women, white, and Asian students. We also determined that mentoring structure was associated with differences in student outcomes. Women’s mentoring structures were associated with their lower scientific identity, lower intentions to pursue a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) PhD, and lower scholarly productivity. URM students’ mentoring structures were associated with higher scientific identity, greater intentions to pursue a STEM PhD, and higher scholarly productivity. Asian students reported lower scientific identity and intentions to pursue a STEM PhD, which were unrelated to their mentoring structures.

Do summer laboratory research apprenticeships during high school have an impact on entry into MD/PhD programs? Apart from the nearly decade-long span of time between high school and matriculation into an MD/PhD program, young people have many life-shaping experiences that presumably impact their education and career trajectories. This quantitative study (n = 236,432) examines the connection between early laboratory research apprenticeship experiences at the high school level and matriculation into one of the more rigorous educational programs for scientific research training. The span of time covered by this analysis reaches across more than a decade, examining the potential importance of research experiences during the precollege years in the educational trajectory of young people. Intertwined with this question on research experiences is a second major concern regarding diversity in the life sciences research corps. Diversity in this wide-ranging discipline refers specifically to the underrepresentation of Blacks/African Americans, Hispanics/Latino/as, and American Indians/Alaska Natives among the ranks of research scientists. Thus, this study includes analyses that specifically focus on research apprenticeships of Blacks/African Americans and Hispanics/Latino/as and their entrance into MD/PhD programs.

With the development of new sequencing and bioinformatics technologies, concepts relating to personal genomics play an increasingly important role in our society. To promote interest and understanding of sequencing and bioinformatics in the high school classroom, we developed and implemented a laboratory-based teaching module called “The Genetics of Race.” This module uses the topic of race to engage students with sequencing and genetics. In the experimental portion of this module, students isolate their own mitochondrial DNA using standard biotechnology techniques and collect next-generation sequencing data to determine which of their classmates are most and least genetically similar to themselves. We evaluated the efficacy of this module by administering a pretest/posttest evaluation to measure student knowledge related to sequencing and bioinformatics, and we also conducted a survey at the conclusion of the module to assess student attitudes. Upon completion of our Genetics of Race module, students demonstrated significant learning gains, with lower-performing students obtaining the highest gains, and developed more positive attitudes toward scientific research.

Explicit racial bias has decreased in the United States, but racial stereotypes still exist and conspire in multiple ways to perpetuate the underparticipation of Blacks in science careers. Capitalizing on the potential effectiveness of role-playing video games to promote the type of active learning required to increase awareness of and reduce subtle racial bias, we developed the video game Fair Play, in which players take on the role of Jamal, a Black male graduate student in science, who experiences discrimination in his PhD program. We describe a mixed-methods evaluation of the experience of scientific workforce trainers who played Fair Play at the National Institutes of Health Division of Training Workforce Development and Diversity program directors’ meeting in 2013 (n = 47; 76% female, n = 34; 53% nonwhite, n = 26). The evaluation findings suggest that Fair Play can promote perspective taking and increase bias literacy, which are steps toward reducing racial bias and affording Blacks equal opportunities to excel in science.