Search

This study compared syntactic complexity between undergraduate students' research papers and published research papers. A 2 (Groups: experts, students) × 4 (Sections: introduction, methods, results, discussions) mixed factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on each of the following variables: T-unit length, clause density, the frequencies of adverbial clauses, relative clauses, and nominal clauses. The analyses showed there were longer T-units and fewer adverbial clauses in the published papers than in the student papers. Section effects were robust. Qualitative analyses were further conducted to reveal how the student research paper is different from the published papers syntactically. Implications for education were discussed.

This article focuses on the dilemmas science educators face when having to introduce Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) to science student teachers in a predominantly paper-based distance learning environment. It draws on the premise that science education is bound by the Nature of Science (NOS), and by the Nature of Scientific Inquiry (NOSI). Furthermore, science educators' own PCK, and the limitations of a predominantly paper-based distance education (DE) model of delivery are challenges that they have to face when introducing PCK and authentic inquiry-based learning experiences. It deprives them and their students from optimal engagement in a science-oriented community of practice, and leaves little opportunity to establish flourishing communities of inquiry. This study carried out a contextual analysis of the tutorial material to assess the PCK that the student teachers had been exposed to. This comprised the ideas of a community of inquiry, a community of science, the conceptualization of PCK, scientific inquiry, and the 5E Instructional Model of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. The analysis confirmed that the lecturers had a good understanding of NOS, NOSI and science process skills, but found it difficult to design interventions to optimize the PCK development of students through communities of inquiry. Paper-based tutorials are ideal to share theory, policies and practices, but fail to monitor the engagement of learners in communities of inquiry. The article concludes with a number of suggestions to address the apparent lack of impact power of the paper-based mode of delivery, specifically in relation to inquiry-based teaching and learning (IBTL).

Our system of research self-regulation, designed to provide internal checks and balances for those who participate in research involving human subjects, is under considerable stress. Much of this crisis has been caused by what we call mission creep, in which the workload of IRBs has expanded beyond their ability to handle effectively. Mission creep is caused by rewarding wrong behaviors, such as focusing more on procedures and documentation than difficult ethical questions; unclear definitions, which lead to unclear responsibilities; efforts to comply with unwieldy federal requirements even when research is not federally funded; exaggerated precautions to protect against program shutdowns; and efforts to protect against lawsuits. We recommend collecting data. We also call for refinements to our regulatory system that will provide a set of regulations designed for non-biomedical research. This will enable IRBs to direct attention to the areas of greatest risk while intentionally scaling back oversight in areas of lesser risk. We recommend removing some kinds of activity from IRB review altogether. Our system, if not broken, is seriously straining at the seams. It is imperative that we have a respected and effective system in place to protect human research subjects, so that much-needed research into the causes and prevention of disease and other research expanding the boundaries of knowledge can proceed. We hope that this White Paper will further the discussion about what reasonable procedures can be instituted to help get IRBs back on track and do what they were originally meant to do--protect the rights and welfare of human subjects while allowing the research enterprise to progress and its benefits to society to accrue. (Contains 8 notes.)

Artificial intelligence (AI) is now affecting all aspects of our social lives. Without always knowing it, we interact daily with intelligent systems. They serve us invisibly. At least that is the goal we assign to them: to make our lives better, task by task. Artificial intelligence has the potential to make biology education more engaging, personalized, and effective by providing students with interactive simulations, personalized learning experiences, and other tools that help them understand complex biological concepts. In this paper, we discuss the integration of AI into the virtual classroom, which significantly enhances student learning experiences in various ways. The study shows that an effective integration of technology into the virtual classroom requires a thoughtful approach that aligns with educational goals and the specific needs of students. In fact, interactive simulations can help make biology more engaging and memorable for students. Besides, personalized learning AI algorithms can help biology students receive a more tailored and effective learning experience, helping them to better understand the course material and develop a deeper appreciation for the natural world. In this work, we will discuss the use of AI to enhance interactive simulation-based cellular processes, with additional application in anatomy, physiology, and ecology teaching. Moreover, this paper discusses how AI could be used to analyze student data and propose personalized learning using adaptive assessments, content recommendations, and data sciences. This paper illustrates examples of AI algorithms that could be useful for teaching biology.

Instructions are given for constructing two models, one to illustrate the general principles of symmetry in T=1, T=3, and T=4 viruses, and the other to illustrate the disposition of protein subunits in the T=3 plant viruses and the picornaviruses. (Author/CW)

In calibration tasks students assess exemplar texts using criteria against which their own work will be assessed. Typically, these tasks are used in the context of training for peer assessment. Little research has been conducted on the benefits of calibration tasks, such as benchmarking, as learning opportunities in their own right. This paper examines a dataset from a long-running benchmarking task (~500 students per semester, for four semesters). We investigate the relationship of benchmarking performance to other student outcomes, including ability to self-assess accurately. We show that students who complete the benchmarking perform better, that there is a relationship between benchmarking performance and self-assessment performance, and that students appreciate the support for learning that benchmarking tasks provide. We discuss implications for teaching and learning flagging the potential of calibration tasks as an under-explored tool.

Presented is a committee report which gives background information about the science of physiology and discusses the roles of academic physiology departments and the American Physiological Society. Recommendations for the future of the discipline in its various dimensions are provided. (CW)