Over the past several decades, numerous reports have been published advocating for changes to undergraduate science education. These national calls inspired the formation of the National Academies Summer Institutes on Undergraduate Education in Biology (SI), a group of regional workshops to help faculty members learn and implement interactive teaching methods. The SI curriculum promotes a pedagogical framework called Scientific Teaching (ST), which aims to bring the vitality of modern research into the classroom by engaging students in the scientific discovery process and using student data to inform the ongoing development of teaching methods. With the spread of ST, the need emerges to systematically define its components in order to establish a common description for education researchers and practitioners. We describe the development of a taxonomy detailing ST’s core elements and provide data from classroom observations and faculty surveys in support of its applicability within undergraduate science courses. The final taxonomy consists of 15 pedagogical goals and 37 supporting practices, specifying observable behaviors, artifacts, and features associated with ST. This taxonomy will support future educational efforts by providing a framework for researchers studying the processes and outcomes of ST-based course transformations as well as a concise guide for faculty members developing classes.

Measuring students’ conceptual understandings has become increasingly important to biology faculty members involved in evaluating and improving departmental programs. We developed the Molecular Biology Capstone Assessment (MBCA) to gauge comprehension of fundamental concepts in molecular and cell biology and the ability to apply these concepts in novel scenarios. Targeted at graduating students, the MBCA consists of 18 multiple-true/false (T/F) questions. Each question consists of a narrative stem followed by four T/F statements, which allows a more detailed assessment of student understanding than the traditional multiple-choice format. Questions were iteratively developed with extensive faculty and student feedback, including validation through faculty reviews and response validation through student interviews. The final assessment was taken online by 504 students in upper-division courses at seven institutions. Data from this administration indicate that the MBCA has acceptable levels of internal reliability (α = 0.80) and test–retest stability (r = 0.93). Students achieved a wide range of scores with a 67% overall average. Performance results suggest that students have an incomplete understanding of many molecular biology concepts and continue to hold incorrect conceptions previously documented among introductory-level students. By pinpointing areas of conceptual difficulty, the MBCA can provide faculty members with guidance for improving undergraduate biology programs.

Postdoctoral positions in biology education research (BER) are becoming increasingly common as the field grows. However, many life science graduate students are unaware of these positions or do not understand what these positions entail or the careers with which they align. In this essay, we use a backward-design approach to inform life science graduate students of postdoctoral opportunities in BER. Beginning with the end in mind, we first discuss the types of careers to which BER postdoctoral positions lead. We then discuss the different types of BER postdoctoral positions, drawing on our own experiences and those of faculty mentors. Finally, we discuss activities in which life science graduate students can engage that will help them gauge whether BER aligns with their research interests and develop skills to be competitive for BER postdoctoral positions.

Formative assessments (FAs) can occur as preclass assignments, in-class activities, or postclass homework. FAs aim to promote student learning by accomplishing key objectives, including clarifying learning expectations, revealing student thinking to the instructor, providing feedback to the student that promotes learning, facilitating peer interactions, and activating student ownership of learning. While FAs have gained prominence within the education community, we have limited knowledge regarding student perceptions of these activities. We used a mixed-methods approach to determine whether students recognize and value the role of FAs in their learning and how students perceive course activities to align with five key FA objectives. To address these questions, we administered a midsemester survey in seven introductory biology course sections that were using multiple FA techniques. Overall, responses to both open-ended and closed-ended questions revealed that the majority of students held positive perceptions of FAs and perceived FAs to facilitate their learning in a variety of ways. Students consistently considered FA activities to have accomplished particular objectives, but there was greater variation among FAs in how students perceived the achievement of other objectives. We further discuss potential sources of student resistance and implications of these results for instructor practice.

The benefits of introducing active learning in college science courses are well established, yet more needs to be understood about student buy-in to active learning and how that process of buy-in might relate to student outcomes. We test the exposure–persuasion–identification–commitment (EPIC) process model of buy-in, here applied to student (n = 245) engagement in an undergraduate science course featuring active learning. Student buy-in to active learning was positively associated with engagement in self-regulated learning and students’ course performance. The positive associations among buy-in, self-regulated learning, and course performance suggest buy-in as a potentially important factor leading to student engagement and other student outcomes. These findings are particularly salient in course contexts featuring active learning, which encourage active student participation in the learning process.

Assessments represent an important component of undergraduate courses because they affect how students interact with course content and gauge student achievement of course objectives. To make decisions on assessment design, instructors must understand the affordances and limitations of available question formats. Here, we use a crossover experimental design to identify differences in how multiple-true-false (MTF) and free-response (FR) exam questions reveal student thinking regarding specific conceptions. We report that correct response rates correlate across the two formats but that a higher percentage of students provide correct responses for MTF questions. We find that MTF questions reveal a high prevalence of students with mixed (correct and incorrect) conceptions, while FR questions reveal a high prevalence of students with partial (correct and unclear) conceptions. These results suggest that MTF question prompts can direct students to address specific conceptions but obscure nuances in student thinking and may overestimate the frequency of particular conceptions. Conversely, FR questions provide a more authentic portrait of student thinking but may face limitations in their ability to diagnose specific, particularly incorrect, conceptions. We further discuss an intrinsic tension between question structure and diagnostic capacity and how instructors might use multiple formats or hybrid formats to overcome these obstacles.

The Scientific Teaching (ST) pedagogical framework provides various approaches for science instructors to teach in a way that more closely emulates how science is practiced by actively and inclusively engaging students in their own learning and by making instructional decisions based on student performance data. Fully understanding the impact of ST requires having mechanisms to quantify its implementation. While many useful instruments exist to document teaching practices, these instruments only partially align with the range of practices specified by ST, as described in a recently published taxonomy. Here, we describe the development, validation, and implementation of the Measurement Instrument for Scientific Teaching (MIST), a survey derived from the ST taxonomy and designed to gauge the frequencies of ST practices in undergraduate science courses. MIST showed acceptable validity and reliability based on results from 7767 students in 87 courses at nine institutions. We used factor analyses to identify eight subcategories of ST practices and used these categories to develop a short version of the instrument amenable to joint administration with other research instruments. We further discuss how MIST can be used by instructors, departments, researchers, and professional development programs to quantify and track changes in ST practices.

A new assessment tool, Ecology and Evolution–Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science or EcoEvo-MAPS, measures student thinking in ecology and evolution during an undergraduate course of study. EcoEvo-MAPS targets foundational concepts in ecology and evolution and uses a novel approach that asks students to evaluate a series of predictions, conclusions, or interpretations as likely or unlikely to be true given a specific scenario. We collected evidence of validity and reliability for EcoEvo-MAPS through an iterative process of faculty review, student interviews, and analyses of assessment data from more than 3000 students at 34 associate’s-, bachelor’s-, master’s-, and doctoral-granting institutions. The 63 likely/unlikely statements range in difficulty and target student understanding of key concepts aligned with the Vision and Change report. This assessment provides departments with a tool to measure student thinking at different time points in the curriculum and provides data that can be used to inform curricular and instructional modifications.

The Vision and Change report provides a nationally agreed upon framework of core concepts that undergraduate biology students should master by graduation. While identifying these concepts was an important first step, departments also need ways to measure the extent to which students understand these concepts. Here, we present the General Biology–Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science (GenBio-MAPS) assessment as a tool to measure student understanding of the core concepts at key time points in a biology degree program. Data from more than 5000 students at 20 institutions reveal that this instrument distinguishes students at different stages of the curriculum, with an upward trend of increased performance at later time points. Despite this trend, we identify several concepts that advanced students find challenging. Linear mixed-effects models reveal that gender, race/ethnicity, English-language status, and first-generation status predict overall performance and that different institutions show distinct performance profiles across time points. GenBio-MAPS represents the first programmatic assessment for general biology programs that spans the breadth of biology and aligns with the Vision and Change core concepts. This instrument provides a needed tool to help departments monitor student learning and guide curricular transformation centered on the teaching of core concepts.

The instructional practices used in introductory college courses often differ dramatically from those used in high school courses, and dissatisfaction with these practices is cited by students as a prominent reason for leaving science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. To better characterize the transition to college course work, we investigated the extent to which incoming expectations of course activities differ based on student demographic characteristics, as well as how these expectations align with what students will experience. We surveyed more than 1500 undergraduate students in large introductory STEM courses at three research-intensive institutions during the first week of classes about their expectations regarding how class time would be spent in their courses. We found that first-generation and first-semester students predict less lecture than their peers and that class size had the largest effect on student predictions. We also collected classroom observation data from the courses and found that students generally underpredicted the amount of lecture observed in class. This misalignment between student predictions and experiences, especially for first-generation and first-semester college students and students enrolled in large- and medium-size classes, has implications for instructors and universities as they design curricula for introductory STEM courses with explicit retention goals.

The Vision and Change report called for the biology community to mobilize around teaching the core concepts of biology. This essay describes a collection of resources developed by several different groups that can be used to respond to the report’s call to transform undergraduate education at both the individual course and departmental levels. First, we present two frameworks that help articulate the Vision and Change core concepts, the BioCore Guide and the Conceptual Elements (CE) Framework, which can be used in mapping the core concepts onto existing curricula and designing new curricula that teach the biology core concepts. Second, we describe how the BioCore Guide and the CE Framework can be used alongside the Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education curricular rubric as a way for departments to self-assess their teaching of the core concepts. Finally, we highlight three sets of instruments that can be used to directly assess student learning of the core concepts: the Biology Card Sorting Task, the Biology Core Concept Instruments, and the Biology—Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science instruments. Approaches to using these resources independently and synergistically are discussed.

Student impressions formed during the first day of class can impact course satisfaction and performance. Despite its potential importance, little is known about how instructors format the first day of class. Here, we report on observations of the first day of class in 23 introductory science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses. We first described how introductory STEM instructors structure their class time by characterizing topics covered on the first day through inductive coding of class videos. We found that all instructors discussed policies and basic information. However, a cluster analysis revealed two groups of instructors who differed primarily in their level of STEM content coverage. We then coded the videos with the noncontent Instructor Talk framework, which organizes the statements instructors make unrelated to disciplinary content into several categories and subcategories. Instructors generally focused on building the instructor–student relationship and establishing classroom culture. Qualitative analysis indicated that instructors varied in the specificity of their noncontent statements and may have sent mixed messages by making negatively phrased statements with seemingly positive intentions. These results uncovered variation in instructor actions on the first day of class and can help instructors more effectively plan this day by providing messages that set students up for success.

Understanding metabolic function requires knowledge of the dynamics, interdependence, and regulation of metabolic networks. However, multiple professional societies have recognized that most undergraduate biochemistry students acquire only a surface-level understanding of metabolism. We hypothesized that guiding students through interactive computer simulations of metabolic systems would increase their ability to recognize how individual interactions between components affect the behavior of a system under different conditions. The computer simulations were designed with an interactive activity (i.e., module) that used the predict–observe–explain model of instruction to guide students through a process in which they iteratively predict outcomes, test their predictions, modify the interactions of the system, and then retest the outcomes. We found that biochemistry students using modules performed better on metabolism questions compared with students who did not use the modules. The average learning gain was 8% with modules and 0% without modules, a small to medium effect size. We also confirmed that the modules did not create or reinforce a gender bias. Our modules provide instructors with a dynamic, systems-driven approach to help students learn about metabolic regulation and equip students with important cognitive skills, such as interpreting and analyzing simulation results, and technical skills, such as building and simulating computer-based models.

The General Biology–Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science (GenBio-MAPS) assessment measures student understanding of the Vision and Change core concepts at the beginning, middle, and end of undergraduate biology degree programs. Assessment coordinators typically administer this instrument as a low-stakes assignment for which students receive participation credit. While these conditions can elicit high participation rates, it remains unclear how to best measure and account for potential variation in the amount of effort students give to the assessment. To better understand student test-taking motivation, we analyzed GenBio-MAPS data from more than 8000 students at 20 institutions. While the majority of students give acceptable effort, some students exhibited behaviors associated with low motivation, such as low self-reported effort, short test completion time, and high levels of rapid-selection behavior on test questions. Standard least-squares regression models revealed that students’ self-reported effort predicts their observable time-based behaviors and that these motivation indices predict students’ GenBio-MAPS scores. Furthermore, we observed that test-taking behaviors and performance change as students progress through the assessment. We provide recommendations for identifying and filtering out data from students with low test-taking motivation so that the filtered data set better represents student understanding.

Instructors use a variety of online formative assessment (FA) activities to support learning outside class. Previous studies have revealed barriers for students in online courses, but little is known about the barriers students experience when completing online FA assignments. Understanding these barriers to access is critical to fostering more inclusive learning for all students. Using a framework from previous work in online learning, we examined student perceptions of online FA access with respect to five barrier categories: technical resources, instructor organization, social interactions, personal engagement, and learning environment. We developed and administered a survey to more than 1200 undergraduate biology students at 2-year and 4-year institutions. Students responded to statements using Likert scales and open-ended prompts. Statistical models indicated differences in access across the barrier categories and revealed that demographic characteristics were associated with certain barrier categories. Furthermore, technical resources, instructor organization, and personal engagement barriers were associated with lower course performance. In open-ended responses, students most frequently suggested that changes to scheduling logistics, course delivery, and FA format would improve their online FA experience. We discuss how these findings and student suggestions can inform instruction, particularly how instructors can alter their FA characteristics to better suit their student populations.

Biology instructors use concept assessments in their courses to gauge student understanding of important disciplinary ideas. Instructors can choose to administer concept assessments based on participation (i.e., lower stakes) or the correctness of responses (i.e., higher stakes), and students can complete the assessment in an in-class or out-of-class setting. Different administration conditions may affect how students engage with and perform on concept assessments, thus influencing how instructors should interpret the resulting scores. Building on a validity framework, we collected data from 1578 undergraduate students over 5 years under five different administration conditions. We did not find significant differences in scores between lower-stakes in-class, higher-stakes in-class, and lower-stakes out-of-class conditions, indicating a degree of equivalence among these three options. We found that students were likely to spend more time and have higher scores in the higher-stakes out-of-class condition. However, we suggest that instructors cautiously interpret scores from this condition, as it may be associated with an increased use of external resources. Taken together, we highlight the lower-stakes out-of-class condition as a widely applicable option that produces outcomes similar to in-class conditions, while respecting the common desire to preserve classroom instructional time.

Scientific practices are the skills used to develop scientific knowledge and are essential for careers in science. Despite calls from education and government agencies to cultivate scientific practices, there remains little evidence of how often students are asked to apply them in undergraduate courses. We analyzed exams from biology courses at 100 institutions across the United States and found that only 7% of exam questions addressed a scientific practice and that 32% of biology exams did not test any scientific practices. The low occurrence of scientific practices on exams signals that undergraduate courses may not be integrating foundational scientific skills throughout their curriculum in the manner envisioned by recent national frameworks. Although there were few scientific practices overall, their close association with higher-order cognitive skills suggests that scientific practices represent a primary means to help students develop critical thinking skills and highlights the importance of incorporating a greater degree of scientific practices into undergraduate lecture courses and exams.