Reflecting on Graphs: Attributes of Graph Choice and Construction Practices in Biology.
Reflecting on Graphs: Attributes of Graph Choice and Construction Practices in Biology.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1187/cbe.16-08-0245
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gardner SM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Angra A;Gardner SM
作者进行了有声思维访谈，以揭示本科生物学学生，研究生和教授在纸笔绘图任务中的推理和图形质量的差异。参与者群体之间的相似性和差异和推理过程中发生的规划，建设和反思阶段进行了讨论。本科生物学教育改革旨在让学生参与科学实践，如实验设计，实验，数据分析和交流。图形在生物科学中无处不在，创建有效的图形表示涉及定量和学科概念和技能。过去的研究记录了学生在课堂或国家评估的背景下制图的困难，而没有评估学生的推理。在元表征能力框架下，我们进行了有声思维访谈，以揭示本科生物学学生，研究生和教授之间在笔和纸绘图任务中的推理和图形质量的差异。所有的教授在构建图形之前都对数据进行了规划和思考。在反思他们的图表时，教授和研究生专注于图表的功能和实验设计，而大多数本科生则依赖于直觉和任务中提供的数据。大多数本科生用比例轴仔细绘制所有数据，而教授和一些研究生则转换数据，将图表与研究问题对齐，并反映统计数据和样本大小。在图的选择和建设中采取的推理和方法的差异证实和扩展以前的研究结果，并为本科生和研究生教学提供了丰富的目标。
The authors conducted think-aloud interviews to reveal differences in reasoning and graph quality among undergraduate biology students, graduate students, and professors in a pen-and-paper graphing task. Similarities and differences between participant groups and the reasoning that occurred during planning, construction, and reflection phases are discussed. Undergraduate biology education reform aims to engage students in scientific practices such as experimental design, experimentation, and data analysis and communication. Graphs are ubiquitous in the biological sciences, and creating effective graphical representations involves quantitative and disciplinary concepts and skills. Past studies document student difficulties with graphing within the contexts of classroom or national assessments without evaluating student reasoning. Operating under the metarepresentational competence framework, we conducted think-aloud interviews to reveal differences in reasoning and graph quality between undergraduate biology students, graduate students, and professors in a pen-and-paper graphing task. All professors planned and thought about data before graph construction. When reflecting on their graphs, professors and graduate students focused on the function of graphs and experimental design, while most undergraduate students relied on intuition and data provided in the task. Most undergraduate students meticulously plotted all data with scaled axes, while professors and some graduate students transformed the data, aligned the graph with the research question, and reflected on statistics and sample size. Differences in reasoning and approaches taken in graph choice and construction corroborate and extend previous findings and provide rich targets for undergraduate and graduate instruction.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
CBE life sciences education
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bangera G;Brownell SE
通讯作者：
Brownell SE
DOI：
10.1187/cbe.14-05-0092
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
CBE life sciences education
影响因子：
--
作者：
Brownell SE;Hekmat-Scafe DS;Singla V;Chandler Seawell P;Conklin Imam JF;Eddy SL;Stearns T;Cyert MS
通讯作者：
Cyert MS
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Bowen, GM;Roth, WM
通讯作者：
Roth, WM
DOI：
10.1080/00207390902759584
发表时间：
2009-01-01
影响因子：
0.9
作者：
Bruno, A.;Espinel, M. C.
通讯作者：
Espinel, M. C.
影响因子：
6.2
作者：
Cooper, RJ;Schriger, DL;Close, RJH
通讯作者：
Close, RJH