Community colleges expand access to higher education and play a key role in efforts to increase and diversify the future science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. While community colleges increase access to higher education and millions of students attend them for some portion of their education, the experiences of transfer students remain relatively understudied. Transferring during an academic journey can compound the barriers that students already face when pursuing a STEM degree. This study uses Schlossberg’s model for analyzing human adaptation to transition to understand how STEM community college transfer students navigate and adapt to the 4-year university. Five semistructured focus groups were conducted with STEM community college transfer students attending an urban university. Analysis of the focus groups resulted in a new model: the amended model of adaptation to transfer transition, or AMATT, which illustrates various factors that played a role in STEM community college transfer students’ adaptation a university. Analyses illumined two broad pathways that students tend to diverge into during their transitions—thriving or simply surviving. This work provides a framework for understanding factors influencing the transfer process and ideally will inform institutions and students as they consider maximal transfer student success.

In this paper, we use narrative analysis to examine the case study of “Nicole” (pseudonym), a student in a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) program who transferred from a 2-year college (TYC) to a 4-year college (FYC). We draw from longitudinal qualitative data that follow Nicole’s experience pre- and posttransfer, while acknowledging the impact of her experience at the TYC. We use an anti-deficit lens by highlighting the role of supporting characters for Nicole, especially at the TYC. Narrative analysis of Nicole’s experiences highlights differences in her sense of community at the two different institutions. Organizing our data in these narrative components revealed how impactful supporting characters are in Nicole’s story and how drastically they can shape the outcome of scenes in her story. Instructors and programmatic staff at FYCs who aim to better support transfer students in their transition can learn from the kinds of scenes Nicole cited as helpful in her time at the TYC as well as the FYC. It is our aim in sharing Nicole’s story to provide guidelines for how faculty and program directors could be impactful supporting characters to create welcoming settings for transfer students.

This study assesses the impacts of the Science program at Piedmont Virginia Community College and its flagship capstone research experience, Supervised Study, through psychosocial perceptions associated with persistence in science and through a comparative analysis of subsequent science bachelor’s degree attainment. Supervised Study involves authentic, independent projects, a research methods course and learning community, and one-on-one faculty mentoring. The Persistence in the Sciences survey was used as a repeated-measures instrument in four semesters of Supervised Study. Positive trends were observed for self-efficacy, science identity, community values, and networking, while responses related to project ownership were mixed (n = 13). To contextualize these observations, transfer and bachelor’s degree completion rates were analyzed. Students who earn an associate’s degree in Science (n = 113 between 2012 and 2019) complete bachelor’s degrees at high rates (66.4%). Moreover, they are two to four times more likely to major in physical and natural sciences than their science-oriented peers, who take many of the same courses, with the exception of Supervised Study. Notably, these comparison rates remain consistent between different demographic groups. These findings further describe a model for research at the community college level that supports persistence in undergraduate science for a broad group of students.

Learning about evolution is a foundational part of biology education, but most current studies that explore college student evolution education are conducted at universities. However, community college students tend to be more diverse in characteristics shown to be related to evolution education outcomes. To explore how studies involving university students may generalize to community college students, we surveyed students from seven community college (n = 202) and nine university (n = 2288) classes. We measured students’ evolution interest, acceptance, and understanding, and for religious students, we measured their perceived conflict between their religions and evolution. Controlling for state and major, we found that community college students had similar levels of evolution interest as university students but perceived greater conflict between their religions and evolution. Further, community college students had lower evolution understanding and acceptance compared with university students. Religiosity was a strong factor predicting community college and university students’ evolution acceptance. However, unique to community college students, evolution understanding was not related to their macroevolution or human evolution acceptance. This indicates that, although some results between community college and university students are similar, there are differences that have implications for evolution instruction that warrant the need for more evolution education research at community colleges.

The Current Insights feature is designed to introduce life science educators and researchers to current articles of interest in other social science and education journals. In this installment, I highlight three recent studies from the fields of psychology and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education that can inform life science education. The first assesses the impact of a novel study strategy: having students deliberately make mistakes and correct them. The second encourages educators to think more carefully about the impact of different types of interest on student learning. The third reminds us of the impact of personal beliefs in diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.

Learning objectives (LOs) are used to communicate the purpose of instruction. Done well, they convey the expectations that the instructor—and by extension, the academic field—has in terms of what students should know and be able to do after completing a course of study. As a result, they help students better understand course activities and increase student performance on assessments. LOs also serve as the foundation of course design, as they help structure classroom practices and define the focus of assessments. Understanding the research can improve and refine instructor and student use of LOs. This essay describes an online, evidence-based teaching guide published by CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE) at http://lse.ascb.org/learning-objectives. The guide contains condensed summaries of key research findings organized by recommendations for writing and using LOs, summaries of and links to research articles and other resources, and actionable advice in the form of a checklist for instructors. In addition to describing key features of the guide, we also identify areas that warrant further empirical studies.

To frame their work, biology education researchers need to consider the role of literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks as critical elements of the research and writing process. However, these elements can be confusing for scholars new to education research. This Research Methods article is designed to provide an overview of each of these elements and delineate the purpose of each in the educational research process. We describe what biology education researchers should consider as they conduct literature reviews, identify theoretical frameworks, and construct conceptual frameworks. Clarifying these different components of educational research studies can be helpful to new biology education researchers and the biology education research community at large in situating their work in the broader scholarly literature.

Open educational resources, or OER, are teaching materials that reside in the public domain and are available under an open license. While the creation of high-quality materials and cyberinfrastructure to share these resources is important, OER are much more than static resource repositories. Vibrant OER communities function as collaboration hubs and often include librarians, instructional technologists, instructors, education researchers, funders, open-source software developers, and college administrators. Together, these individuals work as a community to respond to changes in the education landscape, support student learning impacts both in terms of cost savings and student retention, and solve issues related to broadly sharing open resources on the web. This essay provides general information about OER, describes communities developing OER for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education, and presents insights about sustainability challenges. The sustainability challenges are organized according to multiple dimensions: cultural and social, economic and financial, and technological and environmental. In addition, OER provide important opportunities to address and promote social justice and open and accessible education philosophies. Knowing more about the OER landscape, sustainability challenges, and educational justice opportunities can help instructors use and contribute to this growing movement to reshape the landscape of undergraduate education.

Most science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments inadequately evaluate teaching, which means they are not equipped to recognize or reward effective teaching. As part of a project at one institution, we observed that departmental chairs needed help recognizing the decisions they would need to make to improve teaching evaluation practices. To meet this need, we developed the Guides to Advance Teaching Evaluation (GATEs), using an iterative development process. The GATEs are designed to be a planning tool that outlines concrete goals to guide reform in teaching evaluation practices in STEM departments at research-intensive institutions. The GATEs are grounded in the available scholarly literature and guided by existing reform efforts and have been vetted with STEM departmental chairs. The GATEs steer departments to draw on three voices to evaluate teaching: trained peers, students, and the instructor. This research-based resource includes three components for each voice: 1) a list of departmental target practices to serve as goals; 2) a characterization of common starting places to prompt reflection; and 3) ideas for getting started. We provide anecdotal examples of potential uses of the GATEs for reform efforts in STEM departments and as a research tool to document departmental practices at different time points.

Learning molecular biology involves using visual representations to communicate ideas about largely unobservable biological processes and molecules. Genes and gene expression cannot be directly visualized, but students are expected to learn and understand these and related concepts. Theoretically, textbook illustrations should help learners master such concepts, but how are genes and other DNA-linked concepts illustrated for learners? We examined all DNA-related images found in 12 undergraduate biology textbooks to better understand what biology students encounter when learning concepts related to DNA. Our analysis revealed a wide array of DNA images that were used to design a new visual framework, the DNA Landscape, which we applied to more than 2000 images from common introductory and advanced biology textbooks. All DNA illustrations could be placed on the landscape framework, but certain positions were more common than others. We mapped figures about “gene expression” and “meiosis” onto the landscape framework to explore how these challenging topics are illustrated for learners, aligning these outcomes with the research literature to showcase how the overuse of certain representations may hinder, instead of help, learning. The DNA Landscape is a tool to promote research on visual literacy and to guide new learning activities for molecular biology.

Writing is an important skill for communicating knowledge in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and an aid to developing students’ communication skills, content knowledge, and disciplinary thinking. Despite the importance of writing, its incorporation into the undergraduate STEM curriculum is uneven. Research indicates that understanding faculty beliefs is important when trying to propagate evidence-based instructional practices, yet faculty beliefs about writing pedagogies are not yet broadly characterized for STEM teaching at the undergraduate level. Based on a nationwide cross-disciplinary survey at research-intensive institutions, this work aims to understand the extent to which writing is assigned in undergraduate STEM courses and the factors that influence faculty members’ beliefs about, and reported use of, writing-based pedagogies. Faculty attitudes about the effectiveness of writing practices did not differ between faculty who assign and do not assign writing; rather, beliefs about the influence of social factors and contextually imposed instructional constraints informed their decisions to use or not use writing. Our findings indicate that strategies to increase the use of writing need to specifically target the factors that influence faculty decisions to assign or not assign writing. It is not faculty beliefs about effectiveness, but rather faculty beliefs about behavioral control and constraints at the departmental level that need to be targeted.

Cognitive scientists have previously shown that students’ perceptions of their learning and performance on assessments often do not match reality. This process of self-assessing performance is a component of metacognition, which also includes the practice of thinking about one’s knowledge and identifying and implementing strategies to improve understanding. We used a mixed-methods approach to investigate the relationship between students’ perceptions of their performance through grade predictions, their metacognitive reflections after receiving their grades, and their actual performance during a semester-long introductory genetics course. We found that, as a group, students do not display better predictive accuracy nor more metacognitive reflections over the semester. However, those who shift from overpredicting to matching or underpredicting also show improved performance. Higher performers are overall more likely to answer reflection questions than lower-performing peers. Although high-performing students are usually more metacognitive in their reflections, an increase in a student’s frequency of metacognitive responses over time does not necessarily predict a grade increase. We illustrate several example trends in student reflections and suggest possible next steps for helping students implement better metacognitive regulation.

Stronger metacognition, or awareness and regulation of thinking, is related to higher academic achievement. Most metacognition research has focused at the level of the individual learner. However, a few studies have shown that students working in small groups can stimulate metacognition in one another, leading to improved learning. Given the increased adoption of interactive group work in life science classrooms, there is a need to study the role of social metacognition, or the awareness and regulation of the thinking of others, in this context. Guided by the frameworks of social metacognition and evidence-based reasoning, we asked: 1) What metacognitive utterances (words, phrases, statements, or questions) do students use during small-group problem solving in an upper-division biology course? 2) Which metacognitive utterances are associated with small groups sharing higher-quality reasoning in an upper-division biology classroom? We used discourse analysis to examine transcripts from two groups of three students during breakout sessions. By coding for metacognition, we identified seven types of metacognitive utterances. By coding for reasoning, we uncovered four categories of metacognitive utterances associated with higher-quality reasoning. We offer suggestions for life science educators interested in promoting social metacognition during small-group problem solving.

Student self-perception is related to persistence in science. Yet how self-perception develops over time is less clear. We examined student self-perception trajectories and their relationship with gender, persons excluded due to ethnicity or race (PEER) status, and first-generation college student (FGCS) status across a yearlong introductory biology sequence. While we found similar rates of change in self-efficacy and science identity for all groups, females and PEER students had lower initial scores that failed to “catch up” to male and non-PEER scores by the end of the year. Students grouped into either high and stable or lower and decreasing trajectories for scientific community values, with first-generation college students overrepresented in the latter group. Additionally, we found no evidence for intersectionality of subgroups. We did find evidence that the relationship between gender and PEER status and science identity is likely mediated via self-efficacy. Taken together, our results suggest that introductory biology students develop self-efficacy and science identity at similar rates regardless of gender, PEER status, or FGCS status and that interventions targeting scientific community values for all students and self-efficacy of female and PEER students may be fruitful areas to pursue to increase persistence of students in the sciences and to reduce score differences between groups.

Quantitative and computational skills are required of 21st-century biologists. While biology student abilities and attitudes toward math have been studied extensively, less is known about corresponding attitudes toward computer science (CS). It is important to understand how students perceive math and CS subjects and whether those perceptions are linked or operate contradictorily to determine instructional best practices. This study 1) determined biology students’ perceptions of math and CS in biological contexts, 2) measured the linkage of those perceptions, and 3) examined additional factors affecting attitudes. Students (N = 272) were surveyed using the original and a CS-adapted version of the Math-Biology Values Instrument to determine interest, perceived utility, and perceived costs toward math and CS in biological contexts. Mixed-effects models were used to determine correlations between task values and investigate effects of exposure to topics and demographic factors. Math and CS values exhibited positive correlations, but utility and cost were more negative for CS, possibly due to less exposure to CS before college, and overall attitudes were influenced by CS background and gender. Given these findings, we make educational recommendations for CS and math exposure early, often, and embedded in the biology curriculum.

Students’ perceptions of challenges in biology influence performance outcomes, experiences, and persistence in science. Identifying sources of student struggle can assist efforts to support students as they overcome challenges in their undergraduate educations. In this study, we characterized student experiences of struggle by 1) quantifying which external factors relate to perceptions of encountering and overcoming struggle in introductory biology and 2) identifying factors to which students attribute their struggle in biology. We found a significant effect of Course, Instructor, and Incoming Preparation on student struggle, in which students with lower Incoming Preparation were more likely to report struggle and the inability to overcome struggle. We also observed significant differences in performance outcomes between students who did and did not encounter struggle and between students who did and did not overcome their struggle. Using inductive coding, we categorized student responses outlining causes of struggle, and using axial coding, we further categorized these as internally or externally attributed factors. External sources (i.e., Prior Biology, COVID-19, External Resources, Classroom Factors) were more commonly cited as the reason(s) students did or did not struggle. We conclude with recommendations for instructors, highlighting equitable teaching strategies and practices.

Having students work in small groups has been shown to promote better student outcomes, even in large lecture classes. On an institutional scale, the creation of learning communities that span multiple classes has also been proven to improve student outcomes. Research has shown that both interventions can help narrow the performance gaps that are often observed for students from certain demographic backgrounds. However, both have their drawbacks. When used solely for discussions in class, students in small groups rarely continue working together outside lecture in an intentional manner. Grading based on group performance leads to the perception of unfairness due to “weak” or “poor” members or disproportionate workloads. Learning communities, on the other hand, require a fair amount of administrative support to implement. Here, we describe a novel course and incentive structure that allows individual instructors to create sustainable learning communities in their classes. This course structure is relatively easy to implement, requiring very few changes to existing courses, and is adaptable to a variety of contexts, including remote teaching. Finally, we show that such learning communities provide additional learning gains for students and demonstrate that these class-based learning communities help narrow performance gaps for minoritized students.

While group work in undergraduate science education tends to have overall benefit, less is known about the specific peer–peer dynamics that optimize learning during group interaction. The current study used peer ratings and self-reported data from 436 students enrolled in team-based undergraduate science courses (biology or chemistry) to determine group dynamics that predicted both willingness to work with peers in the future and individual achievement in the course. Results show that greater personal connection and contributions predicted willingness to work with a group member (R²_biology = 0.75; R²_chemistry = 0.59). While active contribution to a group predicted greater achievement, more noncontent interactions (e.g., encouragement, listening to feedback, being polite) predicted lower achievement, despite these being on-task and relevant. Additionally, having group members who were willing to continue working with a student was a positive predictor of that student’s achievement regardless of course. Strikingly, students in chemistry were significantly less willing to work with women in their groups compared with men. Finally, not all forms of group conflict predict decreased achievement. These findings highlight group factors such as student behavior within the group, aspects of the group social environment, and peer support that can be targeted for optimizing undergraduate science learning.

This study examined longitudinal education and career outcomes of the Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership, the longest-running National Cancer Institute (NCI) Comprehensive Partnerships in Advancing Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) program site in the United States. Degree completion rates were calculated and progression along the entire postsecondary “pipeline” was quantified for 204 participants recruited between 2011 and 2020. For participants who had entered the workforce, career outcomes were also analyzed. Relative to comparison data, participants completed degrees and progressed through the higher education “pipeline” to earn advanced degrees at remarkably high rates; the majority entered careers in which they support or conduct cancer research. The latter is important, because most participants identify with demographic categories currently underrepresented in the cancer research workforce. This article makes two contributions to knowledge on research training programs for underrepresented students: 1) it quantifies participants’ progression along the entire postsecondary education pipeline as well as into the workforce, and 2) it identifies points where participants are most prone to exit the pipeline rather than progress. We identify two types of exits—permanent and temporary—and offer empirically supported operational definitions for both. Evaluators may find the quantitative model and/or definitions useful for analyzing similar programs.

While previous literature finds many benefits to participation in undergraduate field courses, the mechanisms for how these benefits develop is still unknown. This study explores these mechanisms and any unique benefits of field courses by examining results from pre and post surveys about scientific literacy, future science plans, and motivation and belonging for undergraduate students who took courses in one field station setting (n = 249) and one traditional on-campus setting (n = 118). We found positive associations between the field station setting and scientific literacy as well as future science plans. In addition, this study finds support for the serial and multiple mediation of class learning goal orientation and class belonging in explaining the relationships between the field station setting and scientific literacy as well as future science plans. The results of this study have implications for enhancing field course design and increasing access and inclusion.

Infusing undergraduate curricula with authentic research training is an important contemporary challenge. Such exposure typically occurs through mentored research (MR) or course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). In Asian contexts, CURE implementation is rare, while MR is often a graduation requirement. In this study, mentor interviews and mentee focus groups were used to characterize the learning challenges associated with this requirement at a Chinese university. An intensive 6-week CURE was then implemented as an MR preparatory program to help mitigate the identified challenges. This program contained seven site-specific features not typically included in other CUREs, each designed to improve different aspects of student readiness for MR. Post-CURE surveys, focus groups, and interviews demonstrated CURE enrollment significantly improved subsequent MR outcomes. Almost 90% of all enrollees, for example, began their first MR experience in their second year, more than twice the rate of non-enrollees. Enrollees also reported greater confidence in their research skills and more frequent experiences working in multiple labs. This study reports both immediate CURE and downstream MR outcomes, using the former to help explain the latter. A comprehensive CURE implementation process is described, offering a potential model for the design of other programs with similar research enhancement goals.

Effective mentorship is critical to the success of trainees in research career pathways, significantly impacting their research productivity, academic and research self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. Research faculty may be unaware of or unprepared to address mentor–mentee dynamics in mentoring relationships, especially those that go beyond traditional scientific skill development. Addressing mentorship dynamics can be even more challenging for mentors from well-represented backgrounds working with mentees from historically excluded racial/ethnic groups. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute supports programmatic interventions, like the Mentorship Skills Development (MSD) course, an innovative program that aims to advance the mentorship competencies and cultural diversity awareness of mentors. Between 2015 and 2020, more than 200 faculty mentors participated in the MSD. Quantitative and qualitative data reveal significant gains in mentorship skills and cultural awareness, with mentors reporting increases in their confidence to have conversations around race and culture with their mentees. More than 85% reported actual or intended changes to their cultural responsiveness or mentorship behaviors. Importantly, behavioral changes were also observed by their mentees. These data indicate that culturally responsive mentorship education can increase knowledge and efficacy in effective mentorship practices and improve mentorship experiences of both mentors and mentees.

Undergraduate education represents an important transitional stage in which students make career decisions, and undergraduate research experiences (UREs) play a critical role in training the next generation of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics researchers. Extensive studies have identified the different ways in which researchers and graduate students understand their profession, but little work has focused on undergraduate students. To contribute to this gap in literature, this study examines how undergraduate students conceptualize successful researchers. Data were collected using semistructured interviews with transfer students at a research-intensive university, in which participants articulated how they perceive a successful researcher and how their conception had changed based on their undergraduate experiences. Using phenomenography as the research approach, three conceptions of successful researchers were identified based on variations within the following aspects: process of research, interactions with other researchers, and scope of contribution. Retrospective conceptions were more simplistic, with little appreciation for the complex methodological processes and collaborations needed to meaningfully contribute to the research community. After UREs, participants reported conceptions with more nuanced understanding that successful researchers demonstrate proactive engagement, collaboration, and contribution. These findings can be applied to facilitate meaningful research experiences and target undergraduates’ professional development as they are enculturated into the research community.

Understanding homeostasis is a goal of biology education curricula, as homeostasis is a core feature of living systems. Identifying and understanding the underlying molecular feedback mechanisms appear to be challenging for students. Understanding the properties and mechanisms of such complex homeostatic systems requires feedback loop reasoning, which is a part of systems thinking. Novices seem to struggle to 1) consider more than one initiating condition in cause–effect relationships and 2) track cause and effect across a sequence of processes. In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed how these factors impede feedback loop reasoning. High school and undergraduate students analyzed the organizational, behavioral, and modeling-related features of a homeostatic system (blood calcium regulation). Using multidimensional item response theory, we were able to confirm the three-dimensional structure of the theoretical systems-thinking model and to identify the factors causing item difficulty. As hypothesized, indirect relationships and derived inverse conditions are challenging factors for participants in the context of homeostasis across dimensions. Hence, we recommend paying special attention to these factors when teaching homeostasis as part of systems thinking. We assume that allowing students to reason from different initiating conditions in a learning setting may improve their systems-thinking skills.