21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Development of the Biological Experimental Design Concept Inventory (BEDCI)

      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 Biological Experimental Design Concept Inventory (BEDCI) is a carefully designed diagnostic tool. The process of development and assessment of reliability and validity of the instrument are documented. BEDCI can be used to identify non-expert-like conceptions, inform teaching practices, and measure the effectiveness of targeted instruction.

          Abstract

          Interest in student conception of experimentation inspired the development of a fully validated 14-question inventory on experimental design in biology (BEDCI) by following established best practices in concept inventory (CI) design. This CI can be used to diagnose specific examples of non–expert-like thinking in students and to evaluate the success of teaching strategies that target conceptual changes. We used BEDCI to diagnose non–expert-like student thinking in experimental design at the pre- and posttest stage in five courses (total n = 580 students) at a large research university in western Canada. Calculated difficulty and discrimination metrics indicated that BEDCI questions are able to effectively capture learning changes at the undergraduate level. A high correlation ( r = 0.84) between responses by students in similar courses and at the same stage of their academic career, also suggests that the test is reliable. Students showed significant positive learning changes by the posttest stage, but some non–expert-like responses were widespread and persistent. BEDCI is a reliable and valid diagnostic tool that can be used in a variety of life sciences disciplines.

          Related collections

          Most cited references68

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

          Education. Scientific teaching.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The problem of pseudoreplication in neuroscientific studies: is it affecting your analysis?

              Background Pseudoreplication occurs when observations are not statistically independent, but treated as if they are. This can occur when there are multiple observations on the same subjects, when samples are nested or hierarchically organised, or when measurements are correlated in time or space. Analysis of such data without taking these dependencies into account can lead to meaningless results, and examples can easily be found in the neuroscience literature. Results A single issue of Nature Neuroscience provided a number of examples and is used as a case study to highlight how pseudoreplication arises in neuroscientific studies, why the analyses in these papers are incorrect, and appropriate analytical methods are provided. 12% of papers had pseudoreplication and a further 36% were suspected of having pseudoreplication, but it was not possible to determine for certain because insufficient information was provided. Conclusions Pseudoreplication can undermine the conclusions of a statistical analysis, and it would be easier to detect if the sample size, degrees of freedom, the test statistic, and precise p-values are reported. This information should be a requirement for all publications.
                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
                Fall 2014
                : 13
                : 3
                : 540-551
                Affiliations
                [1]*Departments of Botany and Zoology, Biology Program, Faculty of Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
                [2] Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
                [3] Science Centre for Learning and Teaching, Faculty of Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Kathy Nomme ( nomme@ 123456zoology.ubc.ca ).
                Article
                CBE-13-11-0218
                10.1187/cbe.13-11-0218
                4152214
                25185236
                d52a1c32-fbdc-49d8-b65f-ad328b5213ca
                © 2014 T. Deane et al. 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
                : 8 November 2013
                : 16 June 2014
                : 19 June 2014
                Categories
                General Articles
                Custom metadata
                September 2, 2014

                Education
                Education

                Comments

                Comment on this article