The impact of instruction on undergraduates' understanding of homeostasis: results from administering the homeostasis concept inventory.

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Advances in Physiology Education Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-10 DOI:10.1152/advan.00136.2024
Gregory J Crowther, Amy K Hebert, Usha Sankar, Joel Michael
{"title":"The impact of instruction on undergraduates' understanding of homeostasis: results from administering the homeostasis concept inventory.","authors":"Gregory J Crowther, Amy K Hebert, Usha Sankar, Joel Michael","doi":"10.1152/advan.00136.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Homeostasis Concept Inventory (HCI) is a validated instrument for measuring students' knowledge of homeostasis. It is comprised of 20 multiple-choice questions covering key components of the previously validated Homeostasis Conceptual Framework (HCF). In this paper, we present the first multi-institutional study of the impact of physiology instruction on students' HCI performance. Five cohorts of physiology or anatomy and physiology (A&P) students at four academic institutions took the HCI both at the start of their academic term (pretest) and at the end of their term (posttest). Statistically significant but relatively modest improvements in overall scores were seen from pretest to posttest. Among the 20 questions, 8 questions had incorrect choices identified as \"attractive distractors\" on the pretest, meaning that they were chosen at higher-than-random frequencies. From pretest to posttest, there were only modest declines in selections of incorrect answers generally and of attractive distractors in particular. Three attractive distractors that all target one specific misconception, that homeostatic mechanisms are active only when a regulated variable is not at its setpoint, remained persistently attractive except for students of one instructor who directly addressed that misconception in lecture and lab. These data are sobering in that they show a limited impact of instruction on HCI performance. However, these data also include encouraging evidence that instructional targeting of a specific misconception may help students overcome that misconception.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> How is undergraduate students' understanding of homeostasis impacted by a physiology course? This study indicates that many students do not improve that much on a validated multiple-choice concept inventory but may improve noticeably on questions about a misconception if that misconception is specifically targeted by the instructor.</p>","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":" ","pages":"423-429"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00136.2024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Homeostasis Concept Inventory (HCI) is a validated instrument for measuring students' knowledge of homeostasis. It is comprised of 20 multiple-choice questions covering key components of the previously validated Homeostasis Conceptual Framework (HCF). In this paper, we present the first multi-institutional study of the impact of physiology instruction on students' HCI performance. Five cohorts of physiology or anatomy and physiology (A&P) students at four academic institutions took the HCI both at the start of their academic term (pretest) and at the end of their term (posttest). Statistically significant but relatively modest improvements in overall scores were seen from pretest to posttest. Among the 20 questions, 8 questions had incorrect choices identified as "attractive distractors" on the pretest, meaning that they were chosen at higher-than-random frequencies. From pretest to posttest, there were only modest declines in selections of incorrect answers generally and of attractive distractors in particular. Three attractive distractors that all target one specific misconception, that homeostatic mechanisms are active only when a regulated variable is not at its setpoint, remained persistently attractive except for students of one instructor who directly addressed that misconception in lecture and lab. These data are sobering in that they show a limited impact of instruction on HCI performance. However, these data also include encouraging evidence that instructional targeting of a specific misconception may help students overcome that misconception.NEW & NOTEWORTHY How is undergraduate students' understanding of homeostasis impacted by a physiology course? This study indicates that many students do not improve that much on a validated multiple-choice concept inventory but may improve noticeably on questions about a misconception if that misconception is specifically targeted by the instructor.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
19.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.
×
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