The development of scientific visual literacy has been identified as critical to the training of tomorrow’s scientists and citizens alike. Within the context of the molecular life sciences in particular, visual representations frequently incorporate various components, such as discipline-specific graphical and diagrammatic features, varied levels of abstraction, and spatial arrangements of visual elements to convey information. Visual literacy is achieved when an individual understands the various ways in which a discipline uses these components to represent a particular way of knowing. Owing to the complex nature of visual representations, the activities through which visual literacy is developed have high cognitive load. Cognitive load can be reduced by first helping students to become fluent with the discrete components of visual representations before asking them to simultaneously integrate these components to extract the intended meaning of a representation. We present a taxonomy for characterizing one component of visual representations—the level of abstraction—as a first step in understanding the opportunities afforded students to develop fluency. Further, we demonstrate how our taxonomy can be used to analyze course assessments and spur discussions regarding the extent to which the development of visual literacy skills is supported by instruction within an undergraduate biochemistry curriculum.

The discipline-based education research (DBER) community has been invested in the research and development of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) for decades. Unfortunately, investigations of the impact of EBIPs on student outcomes typically do not characterize instructors’ adherence to an EBIP, often assuming that implementation was as intended by developers. The validity of such findings is compromised, since positive or negative outcomes can be incorrectly attributed to an EBIP when other factors impacting implementation are often present. This methodological flaw can be overcome by developing measures to determine the fidelity of implementation (FOI) of an intervention, a construct extensively studied in other fields, such as healthcare. Unfortunately, few frameworks to measure FOI in educational settings exist, which likely contributes to a lack of FOI constructs in most impact studies of EBIPs in DBER. In this Essay, we leverage the FOI literature presented in other fields to propose an appropriate framework for FOI within the context of DBER. We describe how this framework enhances the validity of EBIP impact studies and provide methodological guidelines for how it should be integrated in such studies. Finally, we demonstrate the application of our framework to peer instruction, a commonly researched EBIP within the DBER community.

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.

Multiple-choice assessments provide a straightforward way for instructors of large classes to collect data related to student understanding of key concepts at the beginning and end of a course. By tracking student performance over time, instructors receive formative feedback about their teaching and can assess the impact of instructional changes. The evidence of instructional effectiveness can in turn inform future instruction, and vice versa. In this study, we analyzed student responses on an optimized pretest and posttest administered during four different quarters in a large-enrollment biochemistry course. Student performance and the effect of instructional interventions related to three fundamental concepts—hydrogen bonding, bond energy, and pK_a—were analyzed. After instructional interventions, a larger proportion of students demonstrated knowledge of these concepts compared with data collected before instructional interventions. Student responses trended from inconsistent to consistent and from incorrect to correct. The instructional effect was particularly remarkable for the later three quarters related to hydrogen bonding and bond energy. This study supports the use of multiple-choice instruments to assess the effectiveness of instructional interventions, especially in large classes, by providing instructors with quick and reliable feedback on student knowledge of each specific fundamental concept.

First-year students often become discouraged during introductory biology courses when repeated attempts to understand concepts nevertheless result in poor test scores. This challenge is exacerbated by traditional course structures that impose premature judgments on students’ achievements. Repeated testing has been shown to benefit student ability to recognize and recall information, but an effective means to similarly facilitate skill with higher-order problems in introductory courses is needed. Here, we show that an innovative format that uses a creative grading scheme together with weekly formative midterm exams produced significant gains in student success with difficult items requiring analysis and interpretation. This format is designed to promote tenacity and avoid discouragement by providing multiple opportunities to attempt demanding problems on exams, detailed immediate feedback, and strong incentives to retain hope and improve. Analysis of individual performance trajectories with heat maps reveals the diversity of learning patterns and provides rational means for advising students.

Recent reports calling for change in undergraduate biology education have resulted in the redesign of many introductory biology courses. Reports on one common change to course structure, the active-learning environment, have placed an emphasis on student preparation, noting that the positive outcomes of active learning in the classroom depend greatly on how well the student prepares before class. As a possible preparatory resource, we test the efficacy of a learning module developed for the Virtual Cell Animation Collection. This module presents the concepts of meiosis in an interactive, dynamic environment that has previously been shown to facilitate learning in introductory biology students. Participants (n = 534) were enrolled in an introductory biology course and were presented the concepts of meiosis in one of two treatments: the interactive-learning module or a traditional lecture session. Analysis of student achievement shows that students who viewed the learning module as their only means of conceptual presentation scored significantly higher (d = 0.40, p < 0.001) than students who only attended a traditional lecture on the topic. Our results show the animation-based learning module effectively conveyed meiosis conceptual understanding, which suggests that it may facilitate student learning outside the classroom. Moreover, these results have implications for instructors seeking to expand their arsenal of tools for “flipping” undergraduate biology courses.

The Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education reports cite the critical role of professional societies in undergraduate life science education and, since 2008, have called for the increased involvement of professional societies in support of undergraduate education. Our study explored the level of support being provided by societies for undergraduate education and documented changes in support during the Vision and Change era. Society representatives responded to a survey on programs, awards, meetings, membership, teaching resources, publications, staffing, finances, evaluation, and collaborations that address undergraduate faculty and students. A longitudinal comparison group of societies responded to surveys in both 2008 and 2014. Results indicate that life science professional societies are extensively engaged in undergraduate education in their fields, setting standards for their discipline, providing vetted education resources, engaging students in both research and education, and enhancing professional development and recognition/status for educators. Societies are devoting funding and staff to these efforts and engaging volunteer leadership. Longitudinal comparison group responses indicate there have been significant and quantifiable expansions of undergraduate efforts in many areas since 2008. These indicators can serve as a baseline for defining, aligning, and measuring how professional societies can promote sustainable, evidence-based support of undergraduate education initiatives.

Disabled individuals, women, and individuals from cultural/ethnic minorities continue to be underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Research has shown that mentoring improves retention for underrepresented individuals. However, existing mentoring surveys were developed to assess the majority population, not underrepresented individuals. We describe the development of a next-generation mentoring survey built upon capital theory and critical race theory. It emphasizes community cultural wealth, thought to be instrumental to the success of individuals from minority communities. Our survey targets relationships between deaf mentees and their research mentors and includes Deaf community cultural wealth. From our results, we identified four segregating factors: Being a Scientist, which incorporated the traditional capitals; Deaf Community Capital; Asking for Accommodations; and Communication Access. Being a Scientist scores did not vary among the mentor and mentee variables that we tested. However, Deaf Community Capital, Asking for Accommodations, and Communication Access were highest when a deaf mentee was paired with a mentor who was either deaf or familiar with the Deaf community, indicating that cultural competency training should improve these aspects of mentoring for deaf mentees. This theoretical framework and survey will be useful for assessing mentoring relationships with deaf students and could be adapted for other underrepresented groups.

Undergraduate research experiences confer benefits on students bound for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers, but the low number of research professionals available to serve as mentors often limits access to research. Within the context of our summer research program (BRAIN), we tested the hypothesis that a team-based collaborative learning model (CLM) produces student outcomes at least as positive as a traditional apprenticeship model (AM). Through stratified, random assignment to conditions, CLM students were designated to work together in a teaching laboratory to conduct research according to a defined curriculum led by several instructors, whereas AM students were paired with mentors in active research groups. We used pre-, mid-, and postprogram surveys to measure internal dispositions reported to predict progress toward STEM careers, such as scientific research self-efficacy, science identity, science anxiety, and commitment to a science career. We are also tracking long-term retention in science-related career paths. For both short- and longer-term outcomes, the two program formats produced similar benefits, supporting our hypothesis that the CLM provides positive outcomes while conserving resources, such as faculty mentors. We discuss this method in comparison with course-based undergraduate research and recommend its expansion to institutional settings in which mentor resources are scarce.

Undergraduate research is often hailed as a solution to increasing the number and quality of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduates needed to fill the high-tech jobs of the future. Student benefits of research are well documented but the emerging literature on advisors’ perspectives is incomplete: only a few studies have included the graduate students and postdocs who often serve as research advisors, and not much is known about why research advisors choose to work with undergraduate researchers. We report the motivations for advising undergraduate researchers, and the related costs and benefits of doing so, from 30 interviews with research advisors at various career stages. Many advisors stated intrinsic motivations, but a small group of early-career advisors expressed only instrumental motivations. We explore what this means for how advisors work with student researchers, the benefits students may or may not gain from the experience, and the implications for training and retaining research advisors who can provide high-quality research experiences for undergraduate students.

In an undergraduate introductory biology laboratory course, we used a summative assessment to directly test the learning objective that students will be able to apply course material to increasingly novel and complex situations. Using a factorial framework, we developed multiple true–false questions to fall along axes of novelty and complexity, which resulted in four categories of questions: familiar content and low complexity (category A); novel content and low complexity (category B); familiar content and high complexity (category C); and novel content and high complexity (category D). On average, students scored more than 70% on all questions, indicating that the course largely met this learning objective. However, students scored highest on questions in category A, likely because they were most similar to course content, and lowest on questions in categories C and D. While we anticipated students would score equally on questions for which either novelty or complexity was altered (but not both), we observed that student scores in category C were lower than in category B. Furthermore, students performed equally poorly on all questions for which complexity was higher (categories C and D), even those containing familiar content, suggesting that application of course material to increasingly complex situations is particularly challenging to students.

Equitable gender representation is an important aspect of scientific workforce development to secure a sufficient number of individuals and a diversity of perspectives. Biology is the most gender equitable of all scientific fields by the marker of degree attainment, with 52.5% of PhDs awarded to women. However, equitable rates of degree completion do not translate into equitable attainment of faculty or postdoctoral positions, suggesting continued existence of gender inequalities. In a national cohort of 336 first-year PhD students in the biological sciences (i.e., microbiology, cellular biology, molecular biology, developmental biology, and genetics) from 53 research institutions, female participants logged significantly more research hours than males and were significantly more likely than males to attribute their work hours to the demands of their assigned projects over the course of the academic year. Despite this, males were 15% more likely to be listed as authors on published journal articles, indicating inequality in the ratio of time to credit. Given the cumulative advantage that accrues for students who publish early in their graduate careers and the central role that scholarly productivity plays in academic hiring decisions, these findings collectively point to a major potential source of persisting underrepresentation of women on university faculties in these fields.

National calls to improve student academic success in college have sparked the development of bridge programs designed to help students transition from high school to college. We designed a 2-week Summer Bridge program that taught introductory biology content in an active-learning way. Through a set of exploratory interviews, we unexpectedly identified that Bridge students had developed sophisticated views of active learning, even though this was not an explicit goal of the program. We conducted an additional set of semistructured interviews that focused on active learning and compared the interviews of Bridge students with those from non-Bridge students who had been eligible for but did not participate in the program. We used the constant comparative method to identify themes from the interviews. We found that Bridge students perceived that, because they knew how to approach active learning and viewed it as important, they benefited more from active learning in introductory biology than non-Bridge students. Specifically, Bridge students seemed to be more aware of their own learning gains from participating in active learning. Compared with the majority of non-Bridge students, the majority of Bridge students described using a greater variety of strategies to maximize their experiences in active learning. Finally, in contrast to non-Bridge students, Bridge students indicated that they take an equitable approach to group work. These findings suggest that we may be able to prime students to maximize their own and other’s experiences in active learning.

Created to foster inclusive excellence, Smith College’s Achieving Excellence in Mathematics, Engineering, and Science (AEMES) Scholars program provides early faculty-mentored research opportunities and other programming as a way to foster success in academic outcomes for underrepresented women in science. Using academic record data, we compared Scholars’ outcomes over time with those of underrepresented students before program launch and to relevant peer comparison groups. Since its launch, AEMES Scholars have achieved significantly higher gateway life sciences course grade point averages (GPAs), rates of persistence in life and natural sciences, and participation in natural sciences advanced research relative to baseline. Gains for Scholars in gateway course GPA eliminated the significant gap that previously existed between science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)-underrepresented and other students, whereas gains in natural sciences persistence now has Scholars continuing in STEM at significantly higher rates than all other students. Many of the gains for AEMES Scholars were echoed in findings of improved outcomes for our STEM students overall since AEMES’ launch. Underrepresented students who were not part of the Scholars program also evidenced increased gateway course GPA over this same period. We discuss potential explanations for these outcomes and ongoing work aimed at achieving further inclusive excellence for women in the sciences.

For science learning to be successful, students must develop attitudes toward support future engagement with challenging social issues related to science. This is especially important for increasing participation of students from underrepresented populations. This study investigated how participation in inquiry-based biology laboratory classes affected students’ attitudes toward science, focusing on deaf, hard-of-hearing, and hearing signing students in bilingual learning environments (i.e., taught in American Sign Language and English). Analysis of reflection assignments and interviews revealed that the majority of students developed positive attitudes toward science and scientific attitudes after participating in inquiry-based biology laboratory classes. Attitudinal growth appears to be driven by student value of laboratory activities, repeated direct engagement with scientific inquiry, and peer collaboration. Students perceived that hands-on experimentation involving peer collaboration and a positive, welcoming learning environment were key features of inquiry-based laboratories, affording attitudinal growth. Students who did not perceive biology as useful for their majors, careers, or lives did not develop positive attitudes. Students highlighted the importance of the climate of the learning environment for encouraging student contribution and noted both the benefits and pitfalls of teamwork. Informed by students’ characterizations of their learning experiences, recommendations are made for inquiry-based learning in college biology.

Learning student names has been promoted as an inclusive classroom practice, but it is unknown whether students value having their names known by an instructor. We explored this question in the context of a high-enrollment active-learning undergraduate biology course. Using surveys and semistructured interviews, we investigated whether students perceived that instructors know their names, the importance of instructors knowing their names, and how instructors learned their names. We found that, while only 20% of students perceived their names were known in previous high-enrollment biology classes, 78% of students perceived that an instructor of this course knew their names. However, instructors only knew 53% of names, indicating that instructors do not have to know student names in order for students to perceive that their names are known. Using grounded theory, we identified nine reasons why students feel that having their names known is important. When we asked students how they perceived instructors learned their names, the most common response was instructor use of name tents during in-class discussion. These findings suggest that students can benefit from perceiving that instructors know their names and name tents could be a relatively easy way for students to think that instructors know their names.

A major research thrust in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education is focused on how to retain students as STEM majors. The accumulation of seemingly insignificant negative experiences in STEM classes can, over time, lead STEM students to have a low sense of belonging in their disciplines, and this can lead to lower retention. In this paper, we explore how Judeo-Christian students in biology have experiences related to their religious identities that could impact their retention in biology. In 28 interviews with Judeo-Christian students taking undergraduate biology classes, students reported a religious identity that can conflict with the secular culture and content of biology. Some students felt that, because they are religious, they fall within a minority in their classes and would not be seen as credible within the biology community. Students reported adverse experiences when instructors had negative dispositions toward religion and when instructors were rigid in their instructional practices when teaching evolution. These data suggest that this may be a population susceptible to experiences of cultural conflict between their religious identities and their STEM identities, which could have implications for retention. We argue that more research should explore how Judeo-Christian students’ experiences in biology classes influence their sense of belonging and retention.

Student-centered learning environments with upside-down pedagogies (SCALE-UP) are widely implemented at institutions across the country, and learning gains from these classrooms have been well documented. This study investigates the specific design feature(s) of the SCALE-UP classroom most conducive to teaching and learning. Using pilot survey data from instructors and students to prioritize the most salient SCALE-UP classroom features, we created a low-tech “Mock-up” version of this classroom and tested the impact of these features on student learning, attitudes, and satisfaction using a quasi-­experimental setup. The same instructor taught two sections of an introductory biology course in the SCALE-UP and Mock-up rooms. Although students in both sections were equivalent in terms of gender, grade point average, incoming ACT, and drop/fail/withdraw rate, the Mock-up classroom enrolled significantly more freshmen. Controlling for class standing, multiple regression modeling revealed no significant differences in exam, in-class, preclass, and Introduction to Molecular and Cellular Biology Concept Inventory scores between the SCALE-UP and Mock-up classrooms. Thematic analysis of student comments highlighted that collaboration and whiteboards enhanced the learning experience, but technology was not important. Student satisfaction and attitudes were comparable. These results suggest that the benefits of a SCALE-UP experience can be achieved at lower cost without technology features.

Despite the ubiquity of prerequisites in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics curricula, there has been minimal effort to assess their value in a data-driven manner. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, we examined the impact of prerequisites in the context of a microbiology lecture and lab course pairing. Through interviews and an online survey, students highlighted a number of positive attributes of prerequisites, including their role in knowledge acquisition, along with negative impacts, such as perhaps needlessly increasing time to degree and adding to the cost of education. We also identified a number of reasons why individuals do or do not enroll in prerequisite courses, many of which were not related to student learning. In our particular curriculum, students did not believe the microbiology lecture course impacted success in the lab, which agrees with our analysis of lab course performance using a previously established “familiarity” scale. These conclusions highlight the importance of soliciting and analyzing student feedback, and triangulating these data with quantitative performance metrics to assess the state of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics curricula.

While there is a wealth of research evidencing the benefits of active-learning approaches, the extent to which these teaching practices are adopted in the sciences is not well known. The aim of this study is to establish an evidential baseline of teaching practices across a bachelor of science degree program at a large research-intensive Australian university. Our purpose is to contribute to knowledge on the adoption levels of evidence-based teaching practices by faculty within a science degree program and inform our science curriculum review in practical terms. We used the Teaching Practices Inventory (TPI) to measure the use of evidence-based teaching approaches in 129 courses (units of study) across 13 departments. We compared the results with those from a Canadian institution to identify areas in need of improvement at our institution. We applied a regression analysis to the data and found that the adoption of evidence-based teaching practices differs by discipline and is higher in first-year classes at our institution. The study demonstrates that the TPI can be used in different institutional contexts and provides data that can inform practice and policy.