A New Two-Step Approach for Hands-On Teaching of Gene Technology: Effects on Students’ Activities During Experimentation in an Outreach Gene Technology Lab

Emphasis on improving higher level biology education continues. A new two-step approach to the experimental phases within an outreach gene technology lab, derived from cognitive load theory, is presented. We compared our approach using a quasi-experimental design with the conventional one-step mode. The difference consisted of additional focused discussions combined with students writing down their ideas (step one) prior to starting any experimental procedure (step two). We monitored students’ activities during the experimental phases by continuously videotaping 20 work groups within each approach (N = 131). Subsequent classification of students’ activities yielded 10 categories (with well-fitting intra- and inter-observer scores with respect to reliability). Based on the students’ individual time budgets, we evaluated students’ roles during experimentation from their prevalent activities (by independently using two cluster analysis methods). Independently of the approach, two common clusters emerged, which we labeled as ‘all-rounders’ and as ‘passive students’, and two clusters specific to each approach: ‘observers’ as well as ‘high-experimenters’ were identified only within the one-step approach whereas under the two-step conditions ‘managers’ and ‘scribes’ were identified. Potential changes in group-leadership style during experimentation are discussed, and conclusions for optimizing science teaching are drawn.     

Evaluating the reflexive practices in a learning experience

Reflexivity is a primary requirement for professional work. Our aim was to describe a methodology suitable for detecting the development of reflexive practice through the analysis of 59 Master’s degree students’ journals. We explore the use and changes of reflexive practice in relation to the settings and activities of the course using analysis of the mental language: We analyse how the reflexive practice is characterized, how it evolves through time and how it can be promoted. Data analysis shows that reflexivity is not monodimensional but multidimensional. Reflexive practice increases during the course: The different dimensions vary over time according to different organizational and educational conditions. This methodology allows us to formulate new hypotheses about which elements of the setting and process are effective in supporting participants’ reflexive practice.     

The quality of student dialogue in citizenship education

This study investigates the relationship between the quality of student dialogue and students’ ability to justify their viewpoints on a moral issue. A curriculum unit for dialogic citizenship education was developed and implemented in the 8th grade of secondary education. In the final lesson, students discussed a moral issue and then wrote an essay on it. The results show that students who made more value-related utterances during the discussion also referred more often and more explicitly in their individually written essays to moral values. This study indicates that the quality of the content of students’ dialogue is important for their ability to substantiate their opinion on moral issues with value-laden argumentation. Approaches to citizenship education in which dialogue is a central element should, therefore, pay specific attention to the validation of ideas in student dialogue.     

Measuring the Diversity Inclusivity of College Courses

Most studies of curricular diversity have focused on the effects of participation in diversity courses on student outcomes. Though the results have been positive, these studies have used limited measures of curricular diversity and there is a great need for a complimentary body of research demonstrating what faculty and what types of courses are more likely to include diversity. This study relies on 12 diversity inclusivity items derived from a comprehensive model of how diversity is included into a course to investigate how much diversity is being included in collegiate courses and what predicts diversity inclusivity, as measured by two scales: diverse grounding and inclusive learning. The results, based on 7,101 responses from faculty participating in the 2007 Faculty Survey of Student Engagement, suggest that most faculty are including diversity in their courses in some way, but that women and faculty of color tend to include diversity to a greater extent than their colleagues. Also, courses taught in the soft fields are more likely to be inclusive of diversity.     

Acting White: A Critical Review

The hypothesis of acting White has been heatedly debated and influential over the last 20 years or so in explaining the Black–White test score gap. Recently, economists have joined the debate and started providing new theoretical and empirical analyses of the phenomenon. This paper critically reviews the arguments that have been advanced to support and refute the hypothesis. This review particularly covers the analyses in economics because the economic analyses are relatively new and usually neglected in other disciplines. Also, nationally representative data are emphasized, whenever possible, to improve the generalizability of the arguments. This review concludes that although the analyses in both non-economics and economics are thought-provoking and compelling in some respect, a substantial body of empirical evidence is inconsistent with the assumptions of and results from the analyses.     

Evaluating research and researchers by the journal impact factor: Is it better than coin flipping?

The journal impact factor (JIF) is the average of the number of citations of the papers published in a journal, calculated according to a specific formula; it is extensively used for the evaluation of research and researchers. The method assumes that all papers in a journal have the same scientific merit, which is measured by the JIF of the publishing journal. This implies that the number of citations measures scientific merits but the JIF does not evaluate each individual paper by its own number of citations. Therefore, in the comparative evaluation of two papers, the use of the JIF implies a risk of failure, which occurs when a paper in the journal with the lower JIF is compared to another with fewer citations in the journal with the higher JIF. To quantify this risk of failure, this study calculates the failure probabilities, taking advantage of the lognormal distribution of citations. In two journals whose JIFs are ten-fold different, the failure probability is low. However, in most cases when two papers are compared, the JIFs of the journals are not so different. Then, the failure probability can be close to 0.5, which is equivalent to evaluating by coin flipping.