Why Students Struggle in Undergraduate Biology: Sources and Solutions

"It let me merge my love of teaching with research": A qualitative investigation of the career pathways of biology education researchers

Discipline-based education research-a field of research that investigates teaching and learning within STEM disciplines-has emerged over the last few decades to improve the quality of STEM education worldwide. Simple qualitative questions concerning the career backgrounds and motivations of the individuals who conduct this research have yet to be explored. Here, we surveyed and interviewed discipline-based education researchers about their career trajectories and motivations to pursue this field of research. We focused specifically on recruiting biology education research faculty members at colleges and universities. We used the Social Influence Model and Social Cognitive Career Theory to develop and analyze survey and semi-structured interview questions. Findings revealed participant career paths all began with disciplinary undergraduate and graduate-level biology education. We noticed participants began conducting biology education research due to their values and personal interests, while additionally being swayed by contextual factors. Specifically, participants valued biology education research because it allowed them to make a difference in the world and provided them with a community open to change and collaboration. Biology education research allowed them to explore their interests in teaching and evidence-based approaches to education. These values and interests were impacted by contextual factors, including discoveries of opportunities, positive (or negative) experiences with mentorship, exposure to evidence-based teaching literature, considerations of salary and job security, and experiences with gender-based discrimination. Our results underscore the importance of harnessing individual values and interests-especially those centered on evidence-based teaching practices and making a difference in the world-while fostering a positive and supportive academic environment. This research reveals pathways toward discipline-based education research careers. Additionally, this research can inform the development of graduate programs and funding opportunities.

Metacognitive Exam Preparation Assignments in an Introductory Biology Course Improve Exam Scores for Lower ACT Students Compared with Assignments that Focus on Terms

Preparing for exams in introductory biology classrooms is a complex metacognitive task. Focusing on lower achieving students (those with entering ACT scores below the median at our institution), we compared the effect of two different assignments distributed ahead of exams by dividing classes in half to receive either terms to define or open-ended metacognitive questions. Completing metacognitive assignments resulted in moderately higher exam scores for students on the second and third exams. Metacognitive assignments also improved accuracy (difference between predicted and actual exam scores) for the second and third exam in lower ACT students, but that improvement was driven largely by higher exam scores in the metacognitive group. Thus, despite the fact that the metacognitive assignments specifically asked students to reflect on their previous exam performance, their previous estimates and predict how well they expected to perform on the exam they were preparing for, there was little evidence that these assignments influenced lower achieving students' confidence levels any more than assignments where students defined terms. While understanding relevant terms was certainly important in this course, these results highlight that open-ended metacognitive prompts may improve exam scores in some students in introductory biology classrooms.

A Comparison of Study Behaviors and Metacognitive Evaluation Used by Biology Students

Student-study behaviors and metacognition are predictors of student-academic success. However, student metacognitive evaluation of their own study habit behavior use has been largely unexplored. To address this gap, we gave students enrolled in three different Biology courses (n = 1140) a survey that asked them to identify the study behaviors used to prepare for their first and third exams and to appraise the effectiveness of each behavior. We observed that, across all courses, students used different counts of active- and passive-study behaviors. However, there were no differences in performance across courses, and the use of effective (i.e., active) study behaviors resulted in improved exam performance for all students, regardless of course, while the use of ineffective (i.e., passive) study behaviors had no significant impact on exam performance. Finally, our qualitative analysis revealed that students across all courses demonstrated similar ability in identifying effective-study behaviors, but students could not explain why those behaviors were effective. Taken together, our study demonstrates that students use various study behaviors to prepare for exams without understanding their effectiveness. We encourage instructors to structure their courses to promote the development of metacognitive evaluation and effective-study behaviors.

Peer-Modeled Mindsets: An Approach to Customizing Life Sciences Studying Interventions

Mindset interventions, which shift students' beliefs about classroom experiences, have shown promise for promoting diversity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Psychologists have emphasized the importance of customizing these interventions to specific courses, but there is not yet a protocol for doing so. We developed a protocol for creating customized "peer-modeled" mindset interventions that elicit advice from former students in videotaped interviews. In intervention activities, clips from these interviews, in which the former students' stories model the changes in thinking about challenge and struggle that helped them succeed in a specific course, are provided to incoming life sciences students. Using this protocol, we developed a customized intervention for three sections of Introductory Biology I at a large university and tested it in a randomized controlled trial (N = 917). The intervention shifted students' attributions for struggle in the class away from a lack of potential to succeed and toward the need to develop a better approach to studying. The intervention also improved students' approaches to studying and sense of belonging and had promising effects on performance and persistence in biology. Effects were pronounced among first-generation college students and underrepresented racial/ethnic minority students, who have been historically underrepresented in the STEM fields.