Aiming for the Bullseye : Targeted activities decrease misconceptions related to enzyme function for undergraduate biochemistry students
Aiming for the Bullseye : Targeted activities decrease misconceptions related to enzyme function for undergraduate biochemistry students
复制标题
瞄准靶心：有针对性的活动减少了生物化学本科生对酶功能的误解
DOI：
10.1002/bmb.21575
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Nickodem, Kyle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Terrell, Cassidy R.;Ekstrom, Thomas;Nguyen, Brian;Nickodem, Kyle
生物化学课程对具有抽象概念的本科生来说是一个特别的挑战，这些概念可能导致阻碍学习的误解。特别是，这些学生很难理解酶的结构和功能概念。提出了有针对性的学习活动和三维物理模型来帮助学生挑战这些误解并增加概念理解。在这里，我们使用酶-底物相互作用概念清单（ESICI）来评估这些教学工具，以测量在一个学期的本科生物化学课程中，从前时间点到后时间点的概念变化。控制组的学生在没有3D物理模型的情况下进行主动学习活动，干预组的学生在使用3D物理模型的情况下进行这些活动。在后时间点，两组的ESICI得分都较高，但与全国样本中得分最高的组相同。与此同时，与全国样本相比，许多误解标记物有所减少，尽管其中一些在对照组和干预组之间有所不同。基于这一评估，两种教学方法都成功地提高了对概念的理解，并针对了ESICI测量的许多误解，然而，一些误解仍然存在。令人惊讶的是，使用3D物理模型的学生并没有表现出误解标记的进一步减少。此外，ESICI的心理测量评估与我们的样本建议修改几个问题，以提高该评估的有效性。我们也提出建议，以改善教学和教学工具，进一步研究学习的途径。
Biochemistry curricula present a particular challenge to undergraduate students with abstract concepts which can lead to misconceptions that impede learning. In particular, these students have difficulty understanding enzyme structure and function concepts. Targeted learning activities and three‐dimensional (3D) physical models are proposed to help students challenge these misconceptions and increase conceptual understanding. Here we assessed such pedagogical tools using the Enzyme‐Substrate Interactions Concept Inventory (ESICI) to measure (mis)conceptual changes from Pre‐ to Post‐ time points in a single semester undergraduate biochemistry course. A Control group of students engaged with the active learning activities without the 3D physical models and students in the Intervention group utilized these activities with the 3D physical models. At the Post‐ time point both groups had higher, yet similar ESICI scores of the same magnitude as the highest scoring group from the national sample. Concomitantly, many misconception markers decreased compared to the national sample, although some of these differed between the Control and Intervention groups. Based on this assessment, both pedagogical approaches successfully increased conceptual understanding and targeted many of the misconceptions measured by the ESICI, however, several misconceptions persisted. Surprisingly, the students who used the 3D physical models did not demonstrate a further decrease in the misconception markers. Additionally, psychometric evaluation of the ESICI with our sample recommends the revision of several questions to improve the validity of this assessment. We also offer suggestions to improve instruction and pedagogical tools with further avenues for research on learning.