Search

Abstract Background This study investigates undergraduate STEM students’ interpretation of quantities and quantitative relationships on graphical representations in biology (population growth) and chemistry (titration) contexts. Interviews (n = 15) were conducted to explore the interplay between students’ covariational reasoning skills and their use of disciplinary knowledge to form mental images during graphical interpretation. Results Our findings suggest that disciplinary knowledge plays an important role in students’ ability to interpret scientific graphs. Interviews revealed that using disciplinary knowledge to form mental images of represented quantities may enhance students’ covariational reasoning abilities, while lacking it may hinder more sophisticated covariational reasoning. Detailed descriptions of four students representing contrasting cases are analyzed, showing how mental imagery supports richer graphic sense-making. Conclusions In the cases examined here, students who have a deep understanding of the disciplinary concepts behind the graphs are better able to make accurate interpretations and predictions. These findings have implications for science education, as they suggest instructors should focus on helping students to develop a deep understanding of disciplinary knowledge in order to improve their ability to interpret scientific graphs.

There is a nationwide effort to increase the representation and engagement of minoritized students in computer science education. Discourse about the barriers to diversity among computer science majors is often characterized by student pathologies and does not consider the impacts of classroom culture and instructor pedagogies. Amid the push for strategies to recruit and retain minoritized students in computer science, little has been done to transform curriculum and analyze faculty perspectives on curriculum and pedagogy as methods to increase students’ access to the computer science major. This paper presents an example of curriculum redesign for an undergraduate introductory computer science course (ICS) that sought to address issues of inequitable representation by centering student identities and redistributing power in favor of students. The authors draw upon critical sociocultural and the 4Es heuristic for disciplinary literacy to reimagine the ICS course as a space that centers on the important roles of identity and power in solving for diversity in computer science education. We highlight for researchers and practitioners how our work may be used to disrupt meritocratic practices that alienate minoritized and economically disadvantaged students and to expand definitions of mastery and expertise in computer science education.

Effective science communication is important for mitigating the spread of COVID-19, but little is known about how college science students, who are the future of science, have communicated about COVID-19. In this study, we surveyed 538 biology students in the Southeastern United States about how they communicated about COVID-19 with others and how prepared they felt to communicate. We found that many students were communicating frequently but did not feel prepared to communicate accurately, particularly about vaccine safety and effectiveness. Students also wrote about their communication strategies, and many students reported using potentially ineffective communication. Finally, we explored student misconceptions about COVID-19 and found differences among religious, political, and racial/ethnic groups that could impact their communication to their communities about COVID-19. These results indicate a need for science communication education about COVID-19 among undergraduate scientists in training.

Most biology undergraduates learn about mutations in multiple classrooms throughout their college career. Understanding personalised genome test results, genome editing controversies, and the appearance of new variants of viruses or antibiotic resistant bacteria all require foundational knowledge about mutations. However, the abstract nature of molecular processes surrounding mutations makes them one of the more difficult topics for students to understand and apply. Instructors need valid assessment tools to document student understanding and tailor their instructional methods to address student knowledge gaps. We describe here the development and validation of the Mutations Criterion Referenced Assessment (MuCRA). This formative assessment was developed through an iterative process involving expert feedback and student responses to both open-ended and multiple-choice questions. The final MuCRA is composed of 10 multiple-choice questions aligned with three learning objectives. The item difficulty for each question was between 0.32-0.65, while the discrimination index ranged from 0.31-0.75 and the reliability (KR20) for the MuCRA was 0.69. The congruence analyses demonstrated distractors are capturing student misconceptions in 9/10 questions. These data indicate that the MuCRA can be used to reliably assess student learning and common misconceptions about mutations.