37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A Deliberate Practice Approach to Teaching Phylogenetic Analysis

      research-article

      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

          The authors implemented a deliberate practice approach to engage students over the course of a semester in a series of increasingly complex hands-on tasks related to phylogenetic tree construction. Final exam scores, pre- and postconcept surveys, and student feedback support that the approach improved student comprehension of this difficult subject.

          Abstract

          One goal of postsecondary education is to assist students in developing expert-level understanding. Previous attempts to encourage expert-level understanding of phylogenetic analysis in college science classrooms have largely focused on isolated, or “one-shot,” in-class activities. Using a deliberate practice instructional approach, we designed a set of five assignments for a 300-level plant systematics course that incrementally introduces the concepts and skills used in phylogenetic analysis. In our assignments, students learned the process of constructing phylogenetic trees through a series of increasingly difficult tasks; thus, skill development served as a framework for building content knowledge. We present results from 5 yr of final exam scores, pre- and postconcept assessments, and student surveys to assess the impact of our new pedagogical materials on student performance related to constructing and interpreting phylogenetic trees. Students improved in their ability to interpret relationships within trees and improved in several aspects related to between-tree comparisons and tree construction skills. Student feedback indicated that most students believed our approach prepared them to engage in tree construction and gave them confidence in their abilities. Overall, our data confirm that instructional approaches implementing deliberate practice address student misconceptions, improve student experiences, and foster deeper understanding of difficult scientific concepts.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • 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: found
            • Article: not found

            Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology.

            Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics instructors have been charged with improving the performance and retention of students from diverse backgrounds. To date, programs that close the achievement gap between students from disadvantaged versus nondisadvantaged educational backgrounds have required extensive extramural funding. We show that a highly structured course design, based on daily and weekly practice with problem-solving, data analysis, and other higher-order cognitive skills, improved the performance of all students in a college-level introductory biology class and reduced the achievement gap between disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged students--without increased expenditures. These results support the Carnegie Hall hypothesis: Intensive practice, via active-learning exercises, has a disproportionate benefit for capable but poorly prepared students.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Education. Scientific teaching.

                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
                Winter 2013
                : 12
                : 4
                : 676-686
                Affiliations
                [1]*Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405
                [2] §Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: F. Collin Hobbs ( chobbs@ 123456huntington.edu ).
                Article
                CBE-13-03-0046
                10.1187/cbe-13-03-0046
                3846518
                24297294
                d8fe8b41-0cd4-4ed0-81db-a7aef5cbc83e
                © 2013 F. C. Hobbs et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2013 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
                : 3 March 2013
                : 21 September 2013
                : 24 September 2013
                Categories
                Articles
                Custom metadata
                December 2, 2013

                Education
                Education

                Comments

                Comment on this article