Mixed Student Ideas about Mechanisms of Human Weight Loss

Abstract

Recent calls for college biology education reform have identified “pathways and transformations of matter and energy” as a big idea in biology crucial for students to learn. Previous work has been conducted on how college students think about such matter-transforming processes; however, little research has investigated how students connect these ideas. Here, we probe student thinking about matter transformations in the familiar context of human weight loss. Our analysis of 1192 student constructed responses revealed three scientific (which we label “Normative”) and five less scientific (which we label “Developing”) ideas that students use to explain weight loss. Additionally, students combine these ideas in their responses, with an average number of 2.19 ± 1.07 ideas per response, and 74.4% of responses containing two or more ideas. These results highlight the extent to which students hold multiple (both correct and incorrect) ideas about complex biological processes. We described student responses as conforming to either Scientific, Mixed, or Developing descriptive models, which had an average of 1.9 ± 0.6, 3.1 ± 0.9, and 1.7 ± 0.8 ideas per response, respectively. Such heterogeneous student thinking is characteristic of difficulties in both conceptual change and early expertise development and will require careful instructional intervention for lasting learning gains.

Comparison of Machine Learning Performance Using Analytic and Holistic Coding Approaches Across Constructed Response Assessments Aligned to a Science Learning Progression

“…For our study, since we began with a holistic coding rubric aligned to the levels of the LP, we spent additional time developing and applying the set of analytic coding rubrics. Because the analytic bins are meant to identify conceptual pieces relevant to the specific item and levels, we developed a procedure to guide the process of creating these rubrics (Doherty et al 2019;Haudek et al 2019;Jescovitch et al 2019aJescovitch et al , 2019bScott et al 2019;Sripathi et al 2019). Therefore, the analytic coding rubrics in our study were unique to each item, although other reports have found such conceptual rubrics may hold across items in similar contexts (Moharreri et al 2014;Weston et al 2015).…”

“…Various automated scoring tools and approaches have been developed for evaluation of student CR in science, over a range of grade levels and topics (Liu et al 2016;Mitchell et al 2002;Mayfield and Penstein-Rose 2010;Nehm and Haertig 2012;Sieke et al 2019;Sripathi et al 2019). For example, automated scoring systems have been applied to conceptual assessments aligned with key disciplinary ideas in undergraduate biology Sieke et al 2019).…”

Introductory biology undergraduate students' mixed ideas about genetic information flow

“…We developed three analytic rubrics, one for each question (namely replication, transcription, and translation) using an approach of emergent coding and expert review, that our group has used successfully for similar work. 30 Some of the ideas targeted by our rubrics were originally identified via lexical analysis, which groups and quantifies words and phrases in text. 14 In contrast to lexical analysis, categorization with an analytic rubric uses words and phrases in context of the entire response.…”

“…Responses to CR questions are thought to better diagnose student misconceptions and can contain mixtures of normative and nonnormative ideas. 26,27,29,30 Studies on CR instruments demonstrate that they are capable of eliciting key concepts and misconceptions and that student verbal responses in an interview closely match written responses. 27,31 Including CR items in assessment instruments can provide instructors with an opportunity to more accurately assess student conceptual understanding.…”

“…Constructed response (CR) questions require students to respond in their own words. Responses to CR questions are thought to better diagnose student misconceptions and can contain mixtures of normative and nonnormative ideas 26,27,29,30 . Studies on CR instruments demonstrate that they are capable of eliciting key concepts and misconceptions and that student verbal responses in an interview closely match written responses 27,31 .…”