Cargando…
Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature
Student engagement in the analysis of primary scientific literature increases critical thinking, scientific literacy, data evaluation, and science process skills. However, little is known about the process by which expertise in reading scientific articles develops. For this reason, we decided to com...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Society for Cell Biology
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6829068/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31675277 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077 |
_version_ | 1783465468290400256 |
---|---|
author | Nelms, April A. Segura-Totten, Miriam |
author_facet | Nelms, April A. Segura-Totten, Miriam |
author_sort | Nelms, April A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Student engagement in the analysis of primary scientific literature increases critical thinking, scientific literacy, data evaluation, and science process skills. However, little is known about the process by which expertise in reading scientific articles develops. For this reason, we decided to compare how faculty experts and student novices engage with a research article. We performed think-aloud interviews of biology faculty and undergraduates as they read through a scientific article. We analyzed these interviews using qualitative methods. We grounded data interpretation in cognitive load theory and the ICAP (interactive, constructive, active, and passive) framework. Our results revealed that faculty have more complex schemas than students and that they reduce cognitive load through two main mechanisms: summarizing and note-taking. Faculty also engage with articles at a higher cognitive level, described as constructive by the ICAP framework, when compared with students. More complex schemas, effectively lowering cognitive load, and deeper engagement with the text may help explain why faculty encounter fewer comprehension difficulties than students in our study. Finally, faculty analyze and evaluate data more often than students when reading the text. Findings include a discussion of successful pedagogical approaches for instructors wishing to enhance undergraduates’ comprehension and analysis of research articles. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6829068 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American Society for Cell Biology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68290682019-12-01 Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature Nelms, April A. Segura-Totten, Miriam CBE Life Sci Educ Article Student engagement in the analysis of primary scientific literature increases critical thinking, scientific literacy, data evaluation, and science process skills. However, little is known about the process by which expertise in reading scientific articles develops. For this reason, we decided to compare how faculty experts and student novices engage with a research article. We performed think-aloud interviews of biology faculty and undergraduates as they read through a scientific article. We analyzed these interviews using qualitative methods. We grounded data interpretation in cognitive load theory and the ICAP (interactive, constructive, active, and passive) framework. Our results revealed that faculty have more complex schemas than students and that they reduce cognitive load through two main mechanisms: summarizing and note-taking. Faculty also engage with articles at a higher cognitive level, described as constructive by the ICAP framework, when compared with students. More complex schemas, effectively lowering cognitive load, and deeper engagement with the text may help explain why faculty encounter fewer comprehension difficulties than students in our study. Finally, faculty analyze and evaluate data more often than students when reading the text. Findings include a discussion of successful pedagogical approaches for instructors wishing to enhance undergraduates’ comprehension and analysis of research articles. American Society for Cell Biology 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6829068/ /pubmed/31675277 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077 Text en © 2019 A. A. Nelms and M. Segura-Totten. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2019 The American Society for Cell Biology. “ASCB®” and “The American Society for Cell Biology®” are registered trademarks of The American Society for Cell Biology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License. |
spellingShingle | Article Nelms, April A. Segura-Totten, Miriam Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title | Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title_full | Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title_fullStr | Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title_short | Expert–Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students’ Analysis of Primary Literature |
title_sort | expert–novice comparison reveals pedagogical implications for students’ analysis of primary literature |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6829068/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31675277 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nelmsaprila expertnovicecomparisonrevealspedagogicalimplicationsforstudentsanalysisofprimaryliterature AT seguratottenmiriam expertnovicecomparisonrevealspedagogicalimplicationsforstudentsanalysisofprimaryliterature |