Identifying Group Work Experiences That Increase Students' Self-Efficacy for Quantitative Biology Tasks.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Melissa L Aikens, Alexander R Kulacki
{"title":"Identifying Group Work Experiences That Increase Students' Self-Efficacy for Quantitative Biology Tasks.","authors":"Melissa L Aikens,&nbsp;Alexander R Kulacki","doi":"10.1187/cbe.22-04-0076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative skills are a critical competency for undergraduates pursuing life science careers. To help students develop these skills, it is important to build their self-efficacy for quantitative tasks, as this ultimately affects their achievement. Collaborative learning can benefit self-efficacy, but it is unclear what experiences during collaborative learning build self-efficacy. We surveyed introductory biology students about self-efficacy-building experiences they had during collaborative group work on two quantitative biology assignments and examined how students' initial self-efficacy and gender/sex related to the experiences they reported. Using inductive coding, we analyzed 478 responses from 311 students and identified five group work experiences that increased students' self-efficacy: accomplishing the problems, getting help from peers, confirming answers, teaching others, and consulting with a teacher. Higher initial self-efficacy significantly increased the odds (odds ratio: 1.5) of reporting that accomplishing the problems benefited self-efficacy, whereas lower initial self-efficacy significantly increased the odds (odds ratio: 1.6) of reporting peer help benefited self-efficacy. Gender/sex differences in reporting peer help appeared to be related to initial self-efficacy. Our results suggest that structuring group work to facilitate collaborative discussions and help-seeking behaviors among peers may be particularly beneficial for building self-efficacy in low self-efficacy students.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f5/4d/cbe-22-ar19.PMC10228271.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-04-0076","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Quantitative skills are a critical competency for undergraduates pursuing life science careers. To help students develop these skills, it is important to build their self-efficacy for quantitative tasks, as this ultimately affects their achievement. Collaborative learning can benefit self-efficacy, but it is unclear what experiences during collaborative learning build self-efficacy. We surveyed introductory biology students about self-efficacy-building experiences they had during collaborative group work on two quantitative biology assignments and examined how students' initial self-efficacy and gender/sex related to the experiences they reported. Using inductive coding, we analyzed 478 responses from 311 students and identified five group work experiences that increased students' self-efficacy: accomplishing the problems, getting help from peers, confirming answers, teaching others, and consulting with a teacher. Higher initial self-efficacy significantly increased the odds (odds ratio: 1.5) of reporting that accomplishing the problems benefited self-efficacy, whereas lower initial self-efficacy significantly increased the odds (odds ratio: 1.6) of reporting peer help benefited self-efficacy. Gender/sex differences in reporting peer help appeared to be related to initial self-efficacy. Our results suggest that structuring group work to facilitate collaborative discussions and help-seeking behaviors among peers may be particularly beneficial for building self-efficacy in low self-efficacy students.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

确定提高学生定量生物学任务自我效能的小组工作经验。
定量分析能力是追求生命科学事业的本科生的一项关键能力。为了帮助学生发展这些技能,重要的是建立定量任务的自我效能感,因为这最终会影响他们的成就。协作学习可以提高自我效能感,但目前还不清楚协作学习过程中哪些经历会提高自我效能感。我们调查了生物学导论专业的学生在完成两项定量生物学作业时的自我效能感建立经历,并研究了学生最初的自我效能感和性别/性别与他们报告的经历之间的关系。通过归纳编码,我们分析了来自311名学生的478份反馈,并确定了五种提高学生自我效能感的小组工作经验:完成问题、获得同伴帮助、确认答案、教导他人和咨询老师。较高的初始自我效能显著增加了报告解决问题获得自我效能的几率(优势比为1.5),而较低的初始自我效能显著增加了报告同伴帮助获得自我效能的几率(优势比为1.6)。报告同伴帮助的性别差异似乎与最初的自我效能感有关。我们的研究结果表明,组织小组工作以促进同伴之间的协作讨论和寻求帮助行为可能对低自我效能的学生建立自我效能特别有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
×
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