Re: misconceptions are "so yesterday!"

Using Test Question Templates to teach physiology core concepts

The past ∼15 years have seen increasing interest in defining disciplinary core concepts. Within the field of physiology, Michael, McFarland, Modell, and colleagues have published studies that defined physiology core concepts and have elaborated many of these as detailed conceptual frameworks. With such helpful definitions now in place, attention is turning to the related issue of how to maximize student understanding of the core concepts by linking these "big ideas" to concrete student-facing resources for active learning and assessment. Our practitioner-based view begins with the recognition that in many if not most undergraduate physiology courses assessment drives learning. We have therefore linked published conceptual frameworks to Test Question Templates (TQTs), whose structure promotes transparent assessments as well as the active learning needed to prepare for such assessments. We provide examples of conceptual framework-linked TQTs for the physiology core concepts of Homeostasis, Flow Down Gradients, the Cell Membrane, and Cell-Cell Communication. We argue that this deployment of TQTs has at least two distinct benefits for the teaching and learning of core concepts. First, documenting the connections between conceptual frameworks and TQTs may clarify coverage and assessment of the core concepts for both instructors and students. Second, misconceptions about core concepts may be directly targeted and dispelled via thoughtful construction, arrangement, and iteration of TQTs. We propose that the TQT framework or similar approaches may be applied fruitfully to any sufficiently articulated physiology core concept for high school, undergraduate, or graduate students.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Our students often focus on the grades they need to advance through academic programs. How can instructors harness this understandable interest in grades to help students gain a true understanding of core concepts? The new framework of Test Question Templates (TQTs) shows promise in linking student priorities like test scores to instructor priorities like core concepts.

What Can We Do for Amphibians and Reptiles at Schools? Between Personal Conceptions, Conceptual Change and Students' Pro-Environmental Attitudes

Simple Summary

Amphibians and reptiles play an important role in ecosystems, usually in the middle of trophic networks, but at the same time they are one of the most endangered groups. Their value seems still to be underestimated by society and is based on many misconceptions and a simple lack of knowledge, which in turn might influence society’s willingness to protect these animals. The authors investigated students’ conceptions about amphibians and reptiles, then designed a teaching sequence in order to trace some possible conceptual changes and to shape pro-environmental attitudes towards amphibians and reptiles.

Abstract

Students’ conceptions and conceptual change are deeply investigated phenomena, and the results of such studies can be implemented in the didactic process. For this research, amphibians and reptiles were chosen, because they are animals which are significant for ecosystems but at the same time are often confused with each other. The goal of this study was to investigate students’ conceptions about both groups, and on the basis of the results to design a teaching sequence (TS) which could lead to conceptual and attitudinal change. Authors used questionnaires and in-depth interviews to investigate conceptions and the results of the intervention. The significant correlations show that students tend to classify animals as amphibians or reptiles according to their skin and their living environment. Students’ conceptions about animals indicate a tendency of being focused on purposefulness towards environment and evolution, and therefore can be considered an essentialist approach. The alternative conceptions did not change much after intervention, and results did not differ between age or gender groups. On the other hand, conceptions after intervention were more developed, and students asked more diverse questions about evolution and environmental protection, indicating their growing interest in these animals and attitudinal change.

Development and Validation of the Homeostasis Concept Inventory

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.

Investigating Undergraduate Students' Use of Intuitive Reasoning and Evolutionary Knowledge in Explanations of Antibiotic Resistance

Natural selection is a central concept throughout biology; however, it is a process frequently misunderstood. Bacterial resistance to antibiotic medications provides a contextual example of the relevance of evolutionary theory and is also commonly misunderstood. While research has shed light on student misconceptions of natural selection, minimal study has focused on misconceptions of antibiotic resistance. Additionally, research has focused on the degree to which misconceptions may be based in the complexity of biological information or in pedagogical choices, rather than in deep-seated cognitive patterns. Cognitive psychology research has established that humans develop early intuitive assumptions to make sense of the world. In this study, we used a written assessment tool to investigate undergraduate students' misconceptions of antibiotic resistance, use of intuitive reasoning, and application of evolutionary knowledge to antibiotic resistance. We found a majority of students produced and agreed with misconceptions, and intuitive reasoning was present in nearly all students' written explanations. Acceptance of a misconception was significantly associated with production of a hypothesized form of intuitive thinking (all p ≤ 0.05). Intuitive reasoning may represent a subtle but innately appealing linguistic shorthand, and instructor awareness of intuitive reasoning's relation to student misunderstandings has potential for addressing persistent misconceptions.

Development of the Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory (SRBCI)

We followed established best practices in concept inventory design and developed a 12-item inventory to assess student ability in statistical reasoning in biology (Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory [SRBCI]). It is important to assess student thinking in this conceptual area, because it is a fundamental requirement of being statistically literate and associated skills are needed in almost all walks of life. Despite this, previous work shows that non-expert-like thinking in statistical reasoning is common, even after instruction. As science educators, our goal should be to move students along a novice-to-expert spectrum, which could be achieved with growing experience in statistical reasoning. We used item response theory analyses (the one-parameter Rasch model and associated analyses) to assess responses gathered from biology students in two populations at a large research university in Canada in order to test SRBCI's robustness and sensitivity in capturing useful data relating to the students' conceptual ability in statistical reasoning. Our analyses indicated that SRBCI is a unidimensional construct, with items that vary widely in difficulty and provide useful information about such student ability. SRBCI should be useful as a diagnostic tool in a variety of biology settings and as a means of measuring the success of teaching interventions designed to improve statistical reasoning skills.

Development of the Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory (SRBCI)

We followed established best practices in concept inventory design and developed a 12-item inventory to assess student ability in statistical reasoning in biology (Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory [SRBCI]). It is important to assess student thinking in this conceptual area, because it is a fundamental requirement of being statistically literate and associated skills are needed in almost all walks of life. Despite this, previous work shows that non-expert-like thinking in statistical reasoning is common, even after instruction. As science educators, our goal should be to move students along a novice-to-expert spectrum, which could be achieved with growing experience in statistical reasoning. We used item response theory analyses (the one-parameter Rasch model and associated analyses) to assess responses gathered from biology students in two populations at a large research university in Canada in order to test SRBCI's robustness and sensitivity in capturing useful data relating to the students' conceptual ability in statistical reasoning. Our analyses indicated that SRBCI is a unidimensional construct, with items that vary widely in difficulty and provide useful information about such student ability. SRBCI should be useful as a diagnostic tool in a variety of biology settings and as a means of measuring the success of teaching interventions designed to improve statistical reasoning skills.

Development of the Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory (SRBCI)

We followed established best practices in concept inventory design and developed a 12-item inventory to assess student ability in statistical reasoning in biology (Statistical Reasoning in Biology Concept Inventory [SRBCI]). It is important to assess student thinking in this conceptual area, because it is a fundamental requirement of being statistically literate and associated skills are needed in almost all walks of life. Despite this, previous work shows that non-expert-like thinking in statistical reasoning is common, even after instruction. As science educators, our goal should be to move students along a novice-to-expert spectrum, which could be achieved with growing experience in statistical reasoning. We used item response theory analyses (the one-parameter Rasch model and associated analyses) to assess responses gathered from biology students in two populations at a large research university in Canada in order to test SRBCI's robustness and sensitivity in capturing useful data relating to the students' conceptual ability in statistical reasoning. Our analyses indicated that SRBCI is a unidimensional construct, with items that vary widely in difficulty and provide useful information about such student ability. SRBCI should be useful as a diagnostic tool in a variety of biology settings and as a means of measuring the success of teaching interventions designed to improve statistical reasoning skills.

The genetic drift inventory: a tool for measuring what advanced undergraduates have mastered about genetic drift

Understanding genetic drift is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of biology, yet it is difficult to learn because it combines the conceptual challenges of both evolution and randomness. To help assess strategies for teaching genetic drift, we have developed and evaluated the Genetic Drift Inventory (GeDI), a concept inventory that measures upper-division students' understanding of this concept. We used an iterative approach that included extensive interviews and field tests involving 1723 students across five different undergraduate campuses. The GeDI consists of 22 agree-disagree statements that assess four key concepts and six misconceptions. Student scores ranged from 4/22 to 22/22. Statements ranged in mean difficulty from 0.29 to 0.80 and in discrimination from 0.09 to 0.46. The internal consistency, as measured with Cronbach's alpha, ranged from 0.58 to 0.88 across five iterations. Test-retest analysis resulted in a coefficient of stability of 0.82. The true-false format means that the GeDI can test how well students grasp key concepts central to understanding genetic drift, while simultaneously testing for the presence of misconceptions that indicate an incomplete understanding of genetic drift. The insights gained from this testing will, over time, allow us to improve instruction about this key component of evolution.

Misconceptions Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow

A recent essay in CBE-Life Sciences Education criticized biology education researchers' use of the term misconceptions and recommended that, in order to be up-to-date with education research, biology education researchers should use alternative terms for students' incorrect ideas in science. We counter that criticism by reviewing the continued use and the meaning of misconceptions in education research today, and describe two key debates that account for the controversy surrounding the term. We then identify and describe two areas of research that have real implications for tomorrow's biology education research and biology instruction: 1) hypotheses about the structure of student knowledge (coherent vs. fragmented) that gives rise to misconceptions; and 2) the "warming trend" that considers the effects of students' motivation, beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning (their epistemic beliefs), and learning strategies (their cognitive and metacognitive skills) on their ability to change their misconceptions in science. We conclude with a description of proposed future work in biology education research related to misconceptions.

Development of the Biological Experimental Design Concept Inventory (BEDCI)

Interest in student conception of experimentation inspired the development of a fully validated 14-question inventory on experimental design in biology (BEDCI) by following established best practices in concept inventory (CI) design. This CI can be used to diagnose specific examples of non-expert-like thinking in students and to evaluate the success of teaching strategies that target conceptual changes. We used BEDCI to diagnose non-expert-like student thinking in experimental design at the pre- and posttest stage in five courses (total n = 580 students) at a large research university in western Canada. Calculated difficulty and discrimination metrics indicated that BEDCI questions are able to effectively capture learning changes at the undergraduate level. A high correlation (r = 0.84) between responses by students in similar courses and at the same stage of their academic career, also suggests that the test is reliable. Students showed significant positive learning changes by the posttest stage, but some non-expert-like responses were widespread and persistent. BEDCI is a reliable and valid diagnostic tool that can be used in a variety of life sciences disciplines.

The Dominance Concept Inventory: A Tool for Assessing Undergraduate Student Alternative Conceptions about Dominance in Mendelian and Population Genetics

Despite the impact of genetics on daily life, biology undergraduates understand some key genetics concepts poorly. One concept requiring attention is dominance, which many students understand as a fixed property of an allele or trait and regularly conflate with frequency in a population or selective advantage. We present the Dominance Concept Inventory (DCI), an instrument to gather data on selected alternative conceptions about dominance. During development of the 16-item test, we used expert surveys (n = 12), student interviews (n = 42), and field tests (n = 1763) from introductory and advanced biology undergraduates at public and private, majority- and minority-serving, 2- and 4-yr institutions in the United States. In the final field test across all subject populations (n = 709), item difficulty ranged from 0.08 to 0.84 (0.51 ± 0.049 SEM), while item discrimination ranged from 0.11 to 0.82 (0.50 ± 0.048 SEM). Internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.77, while test-retest reliability values were 0.74 (product moment correlation) and 0.77 (intraclass correlation). The prevalence of alternative conceptions in the field tests shows that introductory and advanced students retain confusion about dominance after instruction. All measures support the DCI as a useful instrument for measuring undergraduate biology student understanding and alternative conceptions about dominance.