Search

Nearly half of all undergraduates are enrolled at community colleges (CCs), including the majority of U.S. students who represent groups underserved in the sciences. Yet only a small minority of studies published in discipline-based education research journals address CC biology students, faculty, courses, or authors. This marked underrepresentation of CC biology education research (BER) limits the availability of evidence that could be used to increase CC student success in biology programs. To address this issue, a diverse group of stakeholders convened at the Building Capacity for Biology Education Research at Community Colleges meeting to discuss how to increase the prevalence of CC BER and foster participation of CC faculty as BER collaborators and authors. The group identified characteristics of CCs that make them excellent environments for studying biology teaching and learning, including student diversity and institutional cultures that prioritize teaching, learning, and assessment. The group also identified constraints likely to impede BER at CCs: limited time, resources, support, and incentives, as well as misalignment between doing research and CC faculty identities as teachers. The meeting culminated with proposing strategies for faculty, administrators, journal editors, scientific societies, and funding agencies to better support CC BER., (© 2017 J. N. Schinske et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2017 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).)

We provide a tutorial on differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, an analytic method useful for identifying potentially biased items in assessments. After explaining a number of methodological approaches, we test for gender bias in two scenarios that demonstrate why DIF analysis is crucial for developing assessments, particularly because simply comparing two groups' total scores can lead to incorrect conclusions about test fairness. First, a significant difference between groups on total scores can exist even when items are not biased, as we illustrate with data collected during the validation of the Homeostasis Concept Inventory. Second, item bias can exist even when the two groups have exactly the same distribution of total scores, as we illustrate with a simulated data set. We also present a brief overview of how DIF analysis has been used in the biology education literature to illustrate the way DIF items need to be reevaluated by content experts to determine whether they should be revised or removed from the assessment. Finally, we conclude by arguing that DIF analysis should be used routinely to evaluate items in developing conceptual assessments. These steps will ensure more equitable-and therefore more valid-scores from conceptual assessments., (© 2017 P. Martinková et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2017 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).)

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., (© 2017 J. L. McFarland, R. M. Price, M. P. Wenderoth, P. Martinková, et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2017 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).)