The think–pair–share is a common teaching tool, but how critical is the “share” step in helping students achieve learning goals? This feature examines assumptions that instructors may make about the share, explores unanticipated impacts of the share, and provides alternatives to having students share their thoughts in front of the class.

Inspired by the biology education research community’s collective reading of Kendi’s How to Be an Antiracist, I draw together recent articles related to “achievement gaps”—a construct identified by Kendi as perpetuating racist ideas. At the same time, I recognize that, for many in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, the notion that achievement gaps exist is evidence of a problem that motivates reform. My hope is that this small collection of recent work can stimulate critical reflection on what we mean by “achievement” in STEM, how we can understand the causes of “gaps,” and what we might consider to be productive steps toward racial equity and justice.

A central focus in science education is to foster the success of students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC). However, representation and achievement gaps relative to the majority still exist for minoritized students at all levels of science education and beyond. We suggest that majority groups defining the definitions and measures of success may exert “soft power” over minoritized student success. Using a hegemonic and critical race theory lens, we examined five years of research articles in CBE—Life Sciences Education to explore how success was defined and measured and what frameworks guided the definitions of student success. The majority of articles did not explicitly define success, inherently suggesting “everyone knows” its definition. The articles that did define success often used quantitative, academic outcomes like grade point average and exam scores, despite commonly cited frameworks with other metrics. When students defined success, they focused on different aspects, such as gaining leadership skills and building career networks, suggesting a need to integrate student voice into current success definitions. Using these results, we provide suggestions for research, policy, and practice regarding student success. We urge self-reflection and institutional change in our definitions of success, via consideration of a diversity of student voices.

Maintaining your research team’s productivity during the COVID-19 era can be a challenge. Developing new strategies to mentor your research trainees in remote work environments will not only support research productivity and progress toward degree, but also help to keep your mentees’ academic and research careers on track. We describe a three-step process grounded in reflective practice that research mentors and mentees can use together to reassess, realign, and reimagine their mentoring relationships to enhance their effectiveness, both in the current circumstances and for the future. Drawing on evidence-based approaches, a series of questions for mentees around documented mentoring competencies provide structure for remote mentoring plans. Special consideration is given to how these plans must address the psychosocial needs and diverse backgrounds of mentors and mentees in the unique conditions that require remote interactions.

While student stress and anxiety are frequently cited as having negative effects on students’ academic performance, the role that instructors can play in mitigating these challenges is often underappreciated. We provide summaries of different evidence-based strategies, ranging from changes in instructional strategies to specific classroom interventions, that instructors may employ to address and ameliorate student stress and anxiety. While we focus on students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, the strategies we delineate may be more broadly applicable. We begin by highlighting ways in which instructors can learn about and prepare to act to alleviate stress and anxiety. We then discuss how to better connect with students and build an inclusive, equitable, and empowering classroom environment. When coupled with strategies to change student evaluation and assessment, these approaches may collectively reduce student stress and anxiety, as well as improve student performance. We then discuss the roles that instructors may play in empowering students with skills that improve their time management, studying, and approach toward learning, with an eye toward ensuring their success across all their academic endeavors. We conclude by noting areas in which further research is needed to determine best practices for alleviating student stress and anxiety.

Student impressions formed during the first day of class can impact course satisfaction and performance. Despite its potential importance, little is known about how instructors format the first day of class. Here, we report on observations of the first day of class in 23 introductory science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses. We first described how introductory STEM instructors structure their class time by characterizing topics covered on the first day through inductive coding of class videos. We found that all instructors discussed policies and basic information. However, a cluster analysis revealed two groups of instructors who differed primarily in their level of STEM content coverage. We then coded the videos with the noncontent Instructor Talk framework, which organizes the statements instructors make unrelated to disciplinary content into several categories and subcategories. Instructors generally focused on building the instructor–student relationship and establishing classroom culture. Qualitative analysis indicated that instructors varied in the specificity of their noncontent statements and may have sent mixed messages by making negatively phrased statements with seemingly positive intentions. These results uncovered variation in instructor actions on the first day of class and can help instructors more effectively plan this day by providing messages that set students up for success.

Low persistence in science majors and limited participation in high-impact research experiences contribute to the nationwide underrepresentation of minorities in the science workforce, particularly jobs requiring a graduate degree. The Program for Excellence in Education and Research in the Sciences (PEERS) is an academic support program at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) that supports first- and second-year science majors from underrepresented and underserved backgrounds to maximize student success and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) persistence. Here, we evaluate the success of PEERS through data from the UCLA registrar, student surveys, and longitudinal tracking of student outcomes. Results show that PEERS students have significantly higher participation rates in undergraduate research, despite PEERS having no formal research component. Importantly, PEERS students were seven times as likely to enroll in PhD programs, and twice as likely to enroll in MD programs compared with propensity-matched controls. Combined results show that increased success of PEERS students in their first 2 years as science majors resulted in improved outcomes later in their undergraduate studies and had tangible impacts on subsequent educational trajectories that will increase participation of underrepresented groups in high-skill STEM careers.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) and inquiry-based curricula both expose students to the scientific process. CUREs additionally engage students in novel and scientifically relevant research, with the intention of providing an “authentic” research experience. However, we have little understanding of which course design elements impact students’ beliefs that they are experiencing “authentic” research. We designed a study to explore introductory biology students’ perceptions of research authenticity in CURE and inquiry classes. Using the Laboratory Course Assessment Survey, we found that students in CURE sections perceived higher levels of authentic research elements than students in inquiry-based sections. To identify specific factors that impact perceptions of research authenticity, we administered weekly reflection questions to CURE students. Coding of reflection responses revealed that experiences of failure, iteration, using scientific practices, and the relevant discoveries in their projects enhanced students’ perceived authenticity of their research experiences. Although failure and iteration can occur in both CUREs and inquiry-based curricula, our findings indicate these experiences–in conjunction with the Relevant Discovery element of a CURE–may be particularly powerful in enhancing student perceptions of research authenticity in a CURE.

Science self-efficacy, a student’s confidence in being able to perform scientific practices, interacts with science identity and outcomes expectations, leading to improved performance in science courses, persistence in science majors, and ultimately, the pursuit of advanced training in the sciences. Inquiry-based laboratory courses have been shown to improve undergraduate student self-efficacy, but the mechanisms involved and specific components of instructional practices that lead to improved self-efficacy are not clear. In the current study, we determined whether student and faculty perceptions of laboratory instructional practices (scientific synthesis, science process skills, and instructor-directed teaching) were related to postsemester self-efficacy across 19 guided-inquiry laboratory courses from 11 different institutions. Self-efficacy related to science literacy increased significantly from the beginning of the semester to the end of the semester. Variation in individual student perceptions of instructional practices within a course were significantly related to differences in student self-efficacy at the end of the semester, but not average student perceptions or faculty perceptions of their own practices across courses. The importance of individual student perceptions suggests that faculty should engage with students during curricular development. Furthermore, faculty need to use noncontent talk to reinforce the science practices students are engaging in during inquiry-based laboratory courses.

Graduate teaching assistants (TAs) are often responsible for teaching introductory courses to undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics students. The TAs are usually novices at teaching, and an important factor in their resilience and persistence in the face of inevitable challenges is self-efficacy. Little is known about what affects TA teacher efficacy or whether and how high- and low-efficacy TAs differ in their development as teachers. Bridging these gaps in the literature will inform best practices in developing and implementing professional development (PD) for TAs. Using a mixed-methods sequential exploratory research design, this study found differences in high- and low-efficacy TAs in both TAs’ self-reflection and their students’ perceptions. These differences concerned the focus of TAs’ attention: inward at their own practices and emotions (salient in low-efficacy TAs) versus outward at the impact of their instructional guidance on their learners (prevalent in high-efficacy TAs). A proposed model of teacher efficacy based on TAs but generally applicable is presented to inform future research and provide suggestions for TA PD opportunities.

Recent research has begun to explore the experiences of Christian undergraduates and faculty in biology to illuminate reasons for their underrepresentation. In this study, we focused on the experiences of graduate students and explored Christianity as a concealable stigmatized identity (CSI) in the biology community. We constructed interview questions using this CSI framework, which originates in social psychology, to research the experiences of those with stigmatized identities that could be hidden. We analyzed interviews from 33 Christian graduate students who were enrolled in biology programs and found that many Christian graduate students believe the biology community holds strong negative stereotypes against Christians and worry those negative stereotypes will be applied to them as individuals. We found that students conceal their Christian identities to avoid negative stereotypes and reveal their identities to counteract negative stereotypes. Despite these experiences, students recognize their value as boundary spanners between the majority secular scientific community and majority Christian public. Finally, we found that Christian students report that other identities they have, including ethnicity, gender, nationality, and LGBTQ+ identities, can either increase or decrease the relevance of their Christian identities within the biology community.

The next generation of life science professionals will require far more quantitative skills than prior generations. Calculus is important for understanding dynamical systems in biology and, therefore, is often a required course for life science students. However, many life science students do not understand the utility value of mathematics to biology. Therefore, according to expectancy-value theory, life science students may experience lower motivation, which can impact their performance in a calculus course. This study examines how two different biocalculus courses, which integrated calculus and biological concepts and successfully halved the rates of students earning a D, F, or withdrawing (DFW), affected life science students’ utility value, interest, and overall attitudes toward mathematics. Using pre and post surveys, we found that students’ interest in mathematics increased by the end of the semester, and they demonstrated a more sophisticated understanding of how mathematics is used in biology. Students whose attitudes toward mathematics improved primarily attributed these changes to a better understanding of the utility of mathematics to biology, feelings of competence in mathematics, or rapport with the instructor. Thus, communicating the utility value of mathematics to biology through integrated mathematics–biology courses can contribute to improved attitudes toward mathematics that can impact students’ motivation and performance.

The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) provides descriptive feedback to instructors by capturing student and instructor behaviors occurring in the classroom. Due to the increasing prevalence of COPUS data collection, it is important to recognize how researchers determine whether groups of courses or instructors have unique classroom characteristics. One approach uses cluster analysis, highlighted by a recently developed tool, the COPUS Analyzer, that enables the characterization of COPUS data into one of seven clusters representing three groups of instructional styles (didactic, interactive, and student centered). Here, we examine a novel 250 course data set and present evidence that a predictive cluster analysis tool may not be appropriate for analyzing COPUS data. We perform a de novo cluster analysis and compare results with the COPUS Analyzer output and identify several contrasting outcomes regarding course characterizations. Additionally, we present two ensemble clustering algorithms: 1) k-means and 2) partitioning around medoids. Both ensemble algorithms categorize our classroom observation data into one of two clusters: traditional lecture or active learning. Finally, we discuss implications of these findings for education research studies that leverage COPUS data.

Students must master content for success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), but “how to” is rarely taught in college. Faculty are reluctant to sacrifice class time, believe such instruction is remedial, or assume students possess or will attain these skills independently. To determine whether explicit instruction would improve skills and performance by first-year undergraduates likely to major in STEM, we invited all students in an introductory biology course to participate in an 8-week Co-Curricular (CoC) program. Students who participated improved time management, used more methods to plan and organize their study, and used a variety of active-learning strategies. A validated model was used to predict students’ probability of achieving a “C+” or better in the course. The model, based on 5 years of data, used students’ demographic characteristics and previous academic performance to provide a measure of their preparedness. Students with low and medium preparedness who participated in CoC performed better than those who did not participate. All students who participated were retained in the course compared with 88.7% of students who did not participate. Specific behavioral changes at the start of STEM gateway courses can dramatically improve student metacognition, retention, and academic performance, particularly for students underrepresented in the discipline.

Students’ study sessions outside class are important learning opportunities in college courses. However, we often depend on students to study effectively without explicit instruction. In this study, we described students’ self-reported study habits and related those habits to their performance on exams. Notably, in these analyses, we controlled for potential confounds, such as academic preparation, self-reported class absences, and self-reported total study time. First, we found that, on average, students used approximately four active strategies to study and that they spent about half of their study time using active strategies. In addition, both the number of active strategies and the proportion of their study time using active strategies positively predicted exam performance. Second, on average, students started studying 6 days before an exam, but how early a student started studying was not related to performance on in-term (immediate) or cumulative (delayed) exams. Third, on average, students reported being distracted about 20% of their study time, and distraction while studying negatively predicted exam performance. These results add nuance to lab findings and help instructors prioritize study habits to target for change.

Abstract biological processes that occur at the submicroscopic level, such as osmosis and diffusion, are inherently difficult for many students to conceptualize when traditional learning and teaching methods are used. This study introduced an immersive 320° three-dimensional (3D) experience of osmosis in which students became engaged with the cellular environment in a Cave Automatic Virtual Environment. The aims of this study were: 1) to explore whether a textbook diagram of osmosis recreated as an immersive 3D learning experience would be a meaningful tutorial activity for first-year cell biology students at a regional Australian university; and 2) to gather preliminary evidence of the utility of the tutorial by examining student performance data. The experience was perceived by students to be fun, useful, and educational. Performance of all students improved on a multiple-choice exam question, with the percentage of students choosing the osmosis distractor answer decreasing from 26 to 15% (p < 0.001). Those students with moderate to high base-level knowledge also performed better on short-answer questions about the cell membrane and osmosis (10–14% better, depending on base-level knowledge, p < 0.001). We give recommendations for future studies to investigate using immersive visualization in science teaching.

Understanding metabolic function requires knowledge of the dynamics, interdependence, and regulation of metabolic networks. However, multiple professional societies have recognized that most undergraduate biochemistry students acquire only a surface-level understanding of metabolism. We hypothesized that guiding students through interactive computer simulations of metabolic systems would increase their ability to recognize how individual interactions between components affect the behavior of a system under different conditions. The computer simulations were designed with an interactive activity (i.e., module) that used the predict–observe–explain model of instruction to guide students through a process in which they iteratively predict outcomes, test their predictions, modify the interactions of the system, and then retest the outcomes. We found that biochemistry students using modules performed better on metabolism questions compared with students who did not use the modules. The average learning gain was 8% with modules and 0% without modules, a small to medium effect size. We also confirmed that the modules did not create or reinforce a gender bias. Our modules provide instructors with a dynamic, systems-driven approach to help students learn about metabolic regulation and equip students with important cognitive skills, such as interpreting and analyzing simulation results, and technical skills, such as building and simulating computer-based models.

Although active learning improves student outcomes in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs, it may provoke anxiety in some students. We examined whether two psychological variables, social anxiety (psychological distress relating to the fear of negative evaluation by others) and academic self-efficacy (confidence in one’s ability to overcome academic challenges), interact with student perceptions of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) and associate with their final grades in a STEM-related course. Human anatomy and physiology students in community college courses rated various EBIPs for their perceived educational value and their capacity to elicit anxiety (N = 227). In general, practices causing students the most anxiety (e.g., cold calling) were reported by students as having the least educational value. When controlling for students’ self-reported grade point averages, socially anxious students rated several EBIPs as more anxiety inducing, whereas high-efficacy students reported less anxiety surrounding other EBIPs. Furthermore, mediation analysis revealed that individual differences in academic self-efficacy at the beginning of the term explained some of the negative association between students’ social anxiety levels and final grades in the course. Our results, obtained in a community college context, support a growing body of evidence that social anxiety and academic self-efficacy are linked with how students perceive and perform in an active-learning environment.