2021 NABT Biology Education Research Symposium

Friday, November 13, 2021, in Atlanta, Georgia

Presentations for the 13th Annual NABT Biology Education Research Symposium were accepted through a double-blind peer-review process that was open to biology educators and researchers at all levels. The NABT Four-Year University & College Section Research Committee Co-Chairs were Suann Yang, SUNY Geneseo, Geneseo, NY, and William Heyborne, Southern Utah University, Cedar City, UT

We extend a special thank you to our reviewers for their time and detailed feedback.

2021 Presentations

Differences in How STEM Students Define Themselves as a “STEM Person”: Implications for College STEM Instructors

Valentina Espinosa Suarez, Heidi Cian, & Remy Dou, Florida International University, Miami, FL

ABSTRACT: Recognition by others in the STEM community plays a crucial role in STEM identity construction, which is related to the pursuit of and persistence in STEM careers. For undergraduate students, recognition that is especially formative to their STEM identity comes from their university STEM instructors. Identity research with STEM professionals suggest that the types of recognition needed to sustain STEM pursuits differ depending on career aspirations—particularly noting differences for those in research compared to health fields—implying that students may need different identity-supportive experiences based on their career intentions. We extend that work to pre-career individuals by using mixed methods to explore how premed students differ from their peers in how they see themselves as a “STEM person.” Results show that, while students rate themselves as a “STEM person” similarly regardless of premed status, the reasons that contribute to this self-perception differ in ways that align with their chosen fields. Results additionally highlight some intersection between gender and experiences that contribute to STEM identity. Implications for college biology instructors include the potential value in selecting laboratory experiences that reflect diverse ways of “doing STEM” and in explicitly communicating the relationship between their discipline and career aspirations associated with care.

Instructor Conceptions and Implementation of Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) Features

Ruth Kaggwa, Lisa Walsh, & Kristine Callis-Duehl, Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, St. Louis, MO

ABSTRACT: Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) defined by five features/attributes; use of scientific practices/process, iteration, collaboration, broad relevance and discovery, are a unique form of pedagogy that incorporates authentic research into classroom teaching. Despite their contributions to improving student outcomes, CUREs are not widespread. Insights into the conceptions of instructors that implement CUREs might inform efforts towards increased adoption and improved student outcomes. The goal of our study was therefore to investigate instructor conceptions of the CURE features and their influence on implementation. We developed a survey informed by research goals targeting biology undergraduate instructors and shared it on the online platform Qualtrics to professional scientific organization directories. Our respondents comprised 53 instructors with CUREs experience including faculty and graduate students. Of the five CURE features, the highest proportions of misaligned conceptions were in the discovery and broad relevance aspects. Furthermore, fewer respondents reported including broad relevance and iteration in implementation of their CUREs relative to the other three. Our findings suggest the need for greater professional development efforts focused on the framework of CUREs to improve fidelity of implementation and consequently student outcomes; and a revision of the current framework to incorporate new instructor suggested aspects such as student-centered communication.

Performance, Prediction, and Preparedness:  Do Biology-Major-Specific Courses Provide an Advantage?

Emily Weigel, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA and Juanita Pardo-Sanchez; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

ABSTRACT: Active learning’s success in STEM courses has sparked hope in lessening the fear non-STEM majors have towards STEM courses (Garcia et al, 2015). But what of STEM majors in STEM coursework that does not match their major? We hypothesized that student major will not dictate performance, but rather differences in how students prepare for and anxiety around exams. We used two sections (Biology vs. Any-STEM Major) of an identically-taught introductory-level biology course at a large, southeastern R1 university. Each section was team-taught in an active-learning format for 50 minutes three times a week. Throughout the semester, 4 multiple-choice exams with questions spanning all Bloom’s levels were administered alongside an ‘exam wrapper’ survey (Thompson, 2012) which included a 5-item Likert-scale and short, open-ended questions regarding student’s perceived anxiety and satisfaction levels, preparation for the exam, and predicted scores. No significant difference was found in anxiety levels, days spent preparing for exams, studying satisfaction levels, total hours studying, and test score predictions. This suggests that students may treat STEM courses similarly, regardless of being in-major, which may relieve teaching burdens on departments where efforts may be better spent on providing cohort-like or additional external classroom experiences to provide community within-major and increase persistence.

Evaluating Science Identity, Communication Self-efficacy, Value, and Skills Gained in a Hybrid CURE Lab

Austin Leone and Donald French, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK

ABSTRACT: Disseminating research and communicating scientific findings is an accepted part of the research experience, but few science programs include explicit curricula for practicing oral science communication at the undergraduate level. Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) can provide opportunities for students to practice oral science communication, but few studies describe or assess authentic oral science communication activities within CUREs. Additionally, existing literature lacks substantial evidence for how science communication activities impact students' science identity, science communication self-efficacy, and the relationships therein. To address this, we collected students' quantitative perceptions of science identity and science communication self-efficacy and qualitative perceptions of a poster activity in a hybrid lab CURE. While we found students' science identity and science communication significantly improved, we did not find a significant relationship between these perceptions. Students reported gaining personal development, quantitative process skills, and conversational science skills. They also reported valuing the more focused and straightforward approach of research posters, their improved communication about science, and the authentic nature of research posters. Our results will be valuable to educators who are interested in improving their students' science identity and science communication self-efficacy, as affective factors strongly relate to students' persistence in science.

Collaboration Affects Student Learning and Sense of Belonging in Introductory Biology

Sayali Kukday, Iowa State University, Ames, IA; Patricia Habersham; College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA; J. Elizabeth Richey; Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA

ABSTRACT: Although there is a large body of research on collaborative learning, less is known about the impact of collaboration on student belonging, especially in undergraduate biology courses. Addressing student belonging could be one pathway to achieve greater diversity and inclusion in STEM disciplines. We investigated social and cognitive impacts of collaboration in introductory biology by asking the research question: How does collaboration impact cognitive and social outcomes in collaborative teams compared to students working independently? This study was conducted in introductory biology courses at two institutions (n=731). We varied the conditions under which the students completed specific learning activities either in teams or individually. Students’ test performance and pre-post responses to student affect assessments were analyzed using analyses of covariance. Initial results indicate that a positive team experience is better for fostering an increased sense of belonging. Unexpectedly, we found that a less-positive team experience correlated with significantly higher test scores indicating that productive struggle is beneficial to student learning. Our work identifies a relatively simple instructional intervention to increase students’ experiences of belonging while achieving better course learning outcomes.

Special Guest Presenter: Jason R. Wiles, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, Recipient of the 2021 NABT Four-Year College Section Research in Biology Education Award

Peer-Led Team Learning is Associated with an Increased Retention Rate for STEM Majors from Marginalized Groups

Jeremy D. Sloane, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY; Ryan D.P. Dunk, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO; Julia J. Snyder, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY; Christina I. Winterton, Villanova University, Villanova, PA; Kelly M. Schmid, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY;  and Jason R. Wiles, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY

ABSTRACT: Lack of diversity in the science community is a serious concern for social justice, scientific productivity, equity, and efficacy. The first year of undergraduate education is of critical importance in increasing diversity in these fields. Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) has previously been shown to be associated with higher student achievement in gateway courses, particularly among students from populations that have been underserved and excluded within STEM fields (often referred to as underrepresented minorities, or URMs). We sought to determine whether participation in PLTL in an undergraduate introductory biology course is associated long-term retention rates among URM students in STEM majors. We used institutional data related to student recruitment and retention rates as well as pertinent demographic information over three and a half years subsequent to the introductory biology course experience. These data were combined with data on PLTL participation from the introductory biology course. Among students who did not engage in PLTL, URM students were significantly less likely to remain in STEM fields than non-URM students. However, no significant difference in STEM retention rates between URM and non-URM students was observed among those students who engaged in PLTL. Additionally, we found that retention rates were significantly higher for URM students who engaged in PLTL versus those who did not. These findings identify PLTL as a potential strategy to improve URM student recruitment and retention in STEM majors and indicate a need for further studies to determine the important aspects of PLTL that may lead to improved outcomes for URM students.