29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Is It the Intervention or the Students? Using Linear Regression to Control for Student Characteristics in Undergraduate STEM Education Research

      other
      * ,
      CBE Life Sciences Education
      American Society for Cell Biology

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Existing methods for analyzing pre/posttest data can lead to incorrect conclusions, as they do not control for student academic ability and preparation. Using an example data set from an introductory biology course, this paper shows how regression models offer a solution to this problem.

          Abstract

          Although researchers in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education are currently using several methods to analyze learning gains from pre- and posttest data, the most commonly used approaches have significant shortcomings. Chief among these is the inability to distinguish whether differences in learning gains are due to the effect of an instructional intervention or to differences in student characteristics when students cannot be assigned to control and treatment groups at random. Using pre- and posttest scores from an introductory biology course, we illustrate how the methods currently in wide use can lead to erroneous conclusions, and how multiple linear regression offers an effective framework for distinguishing the impact of an instructional intervention from the impact of student characteristics on test score gains. In general, we recommend that researchers always use student-level regression models that control for possible differences in student ability and preparation to estimate the effect of any nonrandomized instructional intervention on student performance.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Synthesizing standardized mean-change measures

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Teaching more by lecturing less.

              We carried out an experiment to determine whether student learning gains in a large, traditionally taught, upper-division lecture course in developmental biology could be increased by partially changing to a more interactive classroom format. In two successive semesters, we presented the same course syllabus using different teaching styles: in fall 2003, the traditional lecture format; and in spring 2004, decreased lecturing and addition of student participation and cooperative problem solving during class time, including frequent in-class assessment of understanding. We used performance on pretests and posttests, and on homework problems to estimate and compare student learning gains between the two semesters. Our results indicated significantly higher learning gains and better conceptual understanding in the more interactive course. To assess reproducibility of these effects, we repeated the interactive course in spring 2005 with similar results. Our findings parallel results of similar teaching-style comparisons made in other disciplines. On the basis of this evidence, we propose a general model for teaching large biology courses that incorporates interactive engagement and cooperative work in place of some lecturing, while retaining course content by demanding greater student responsibility for learning outside of class.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Monitoring Editor
                Journal
                CBE Life Sci Educ
                CBE-LSE
                CBE-LSE
                CBE-LSE
                CBE Life Sciences Education
                American Society for Cell Biology
                1931-7913
                1931-7913
                Spring 2014
                : 13
                : 1
                : 41-48
                Affiliations
                [1]*Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-4322
                [2] Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-4322
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Roddy Theobald ( roddy@ 123456u.washington.edu ).
                Article
                cbe-13-07-0136
                10.1187/cbe-13-07-0136
                3940461
                24591502
                7034e04d-5edd-465f-8e5f-857eb033f718
                © 2014 R. Theobald and S. Freeman. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2014 The American Society for Cell Biology. 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 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).

                “ASCB®” and “The American Society for Cell Biology®” are registered trademarks of The American Society of Cell Biology.

                History
                : 19 July 2013
                : 15 October 2013
                : 21 October 2013
                Categories
                Research Methods
                Custom metadata
                March 3, 2014

                Education
                Education

                Comments

                Comment on this article