Remodeling pedagogical evaluation tools to incorporate student self-efficacy and sense of belonging in scientific research.

IF 1.2 4区 教育学 Q4 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Richelle L Tanner, Nicholas P Burnett, Emily E King, Anne E Todgham
{"title":"Remodeling pedagogical evaluation tools to incorporate student self-efficacy and sense of belonging in scientific research.","authors":"Richelle L Tanner, Nicholas P Burnett, Emily E King, Anne E Todgham","doi":"10.1002/bmb.21881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Curated undergraduate research experiences have been widely used at colleges and universities for decades to build student interest, technical preparation, and confidence in the pursuit of scientific careers. Educators often employ standardized survey instruments to evaluate learning outcomes for research experiences, but many of these assessments consider only technical skill development and career interests and are not rooted in discrete pedagogical theories. As higher education aims to create inclusive and equitable learning experiences for students, we argue that pedagogical assessment tools for undergraduate research experiences need to expand to consider outcomes such as increased science literacy, confidence in relational \"soft\" skills, and a sense of belonging to a community that values scientific inquiry. We report on and critique a survey instrument that uses validated metrics to evaluate student sense of belonging and the relational skills developed during an undergraduate research experience. We also provide a revised survey instrument that is founded in social and emotional learning principles and expectation disconfirmation theory. We describe best practices for remodeling the undergraduate research environment to prioritize these inclusive learning objectives alongside publishable research output that is sought by research advisors. Survey tools, like the one described here, are critical for helping colleges and universities train students in science while evolving to promote inclusivity, self-efficacy, and sense of belonging. Higher education programs will continue to produce scientists, but a focus on confidence-building and soft-skill development is essential for creating a general population that is scientifically literate and supportive and trusting of the scientific process.</p>","PeriodicalId":8830,"journal":{"name":"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21881","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Curated undergraduate research experiences have been widely used at colleges and universities for decades to build student interest, technical preparation, and confidence in the pursuit of scientific careers. Educators often employ standardized survey instruments to evaluate learning outcomes for research experiences, but many of these assessments consider only technical skill development and career interests and are not rooted in discrete pedagogical theories. As higher education aims to create inclusive and equitable learning experiences for students, we argue that pedagogical assessment tools for undergraduate research experiences need to expand to consider outcomes such as increased science literacy, confidence in relational "soft" skills, and a sense of belonging to a community that values scientific inquiry. We report on and critique a survey instrument that uses validated metrics to evaluate student sense of belonging and the relational skills developed during an undergraduate research experience. We also provide a revised survey instrument that is founded in social and emotional learning principles and expectation disconfirmation theory. We describe best practices for remodeling the undergraduate research environment to prioritize these inclusive learning objectives alongside publishable research output that is sought by research advisors. Survey tools, like the one described here, are critical for helping colleges and universities train students in science while evolving to promote inclusivity, self-efficacy, and sense of belonging. Higher education programs will continue to produce scientists, but a focus on confidence-building and soft-skill development is essential for creating a general population that is scientifically literate and supportive and trusting of the scientific process.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of BAMBED is to enhance teacher preparation and student learning in Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and related sciences such as Biophysics and Cell Biology, by promoting the world-wide dissemination of educational materials. BAMBED seeks and communicates articles on many topics, including: Innovative techniques in teaching and learning. New pedagogical approaches. Research in biochemistry and molecular biology education. Reviews on emerging areas of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology to provide background for the preparation of lectures, seminars, student presentations, dissertations, etc. Historical Reviews describing "Paths to Discovery". Novel and proven laboratory experiments that have both skill-building and discovery-based characteristics. Reviews of relevant textbooks, software, and websites. Descriptions of software for educational use. Descriptions of multimedia materials such as tutorials on various aspects of biochemistry and molecular biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信