Students’ identities shape and are shaped by learning experiences inside and outside classrooms. Three recent papers present theoretical frameworks for understanding the complex dynamics of identity development with implications for equity in science and mathematics education.

The 2019 Undergraduate Biology Education Research Gordon Research Conference (UBER GRC), titled “Achieving Widespread Improvement in Undergraduate Education,” brought together a diverse group of researchers and practitioners working to identify, promote, and understand widespread adoption of evidence-based teaching, learning, and success strategies in undergraduate biology. Graduate students and postdocs had the additional opportunity to present and discuss research during a Gordon Research Seminar (GRS) that preceded the GRC. This report provides a broad overview of the UBER GRC and GRS and highlights major themes that cut across invited talks, poster presentations, and informal discussions. Such themes include the importance of working in teams at multiple levels to achieve instructional improvement, the potential to use big data and analytics to inform instructional change, the need to customize change initiatives, and the importance of psychosocial supports in improving undergraduate student well-being and academic success. The report also discusses the future of the UBER GRC as an established meeting and describes aspects of the conference that make it unique, both in terms of facilitating dissemination of research and providing a welcoming environment for conferees.

The Vision and Change report called for the biology community to mobilize around teaching the core concepts of biology. This essay describes a collection of resources developed by several different groups that can be used to respond to the report’s call to transform undergraduate education at both the individual course and departmental levels. First, we present two frameworks that help articulate the Vision and Change core concepts, the BioCore Guide and the Conceptual Elements (CE) Framework, which can be used in mapping the core concepts onto existing curricula and designing new curricula that teach the biology core concepts. Second, we describe how the BioCore Guide and the CE Framework can be used alongside the Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education curricular rubric as a way for departments to self-assess their teaching of the core concepts. Finally, we highlight three sets of instruments that can be used to directly assess student learning of the core concepts: the Biology Card Sorting Task, the Biology Core Concept Instruments, and the Biology—Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science instruments. Approaches to using these resources independently and synergistically are discussed.

The study of genetics centers on how encoded information in DNA underlies similarities and differences between individuals and how traits are inherited. Genetics topics covered in a wide variety of undergraduate biology classrooms can relate to various identities held by students such as gender identity, disability, and race/ethnicity, among others. An instructor’s sensitive approaches and deliberate language choices regarding these topics has the potential to make the critical difference between welcoming or alienating students and can set a tone that communicates to all students the importance of diversity. Separating the sperm/egg binary from gendered terms in coverage of inheritance patterns, along with inclusion of transgender people in pedigree charts, may make the classroom more welcoming for students of diverse gender identities. Choosing nonstigmatizing language and acknowledging disability identities in discussions of genetic conditions may help students with visible and invisible disabilities feel validated. Counteracting genetics-based pseudoscientific racism and the stereotype threat to which it contributes may be facilitated by more thorough integration of quantitative and population genetics topics. Instructors may thus potentially enhance retention of students of diverse backgrounds in biology through careful consideration and crafting of how human differences are described and connected with principles of genetics.

Diversity-focused committees continue to play essential roles in the efforts of professional scientific societies to foster inclusion and facilitate the professional development of underrepresented minority (URM) young scientists in their respective scientific disciplines. Until recently, the efforts of these committees have remained independent and disconnected from one another. Funding from the National Science Foundation has allowed several of these committees to come together and form the Alliance to Catalyze Change for Equity in STEM Success, herein referred to as ACCESS. The overall goal of this meta-organization is to create a community in which diversity-focused committees can interact, synergize, share their collective experiences, and have a unified voice on behalf of URM trainees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. In this Essay, we compare and contrast the broad approaches that scientific societies in ACCESS use to implement and assess their travel award programs for URM trainees. We also report a set of recommendations, including both short- and long-term outcomes assessment in populations of interest and specialized programmatic activities coupled to travel award programs.

Visual representations, such as pathway models, are increasingly being used to both communicate higher education science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education program evaluation plans as well as accurately represent complex programs and the systems within which the educational programs reside. However, these representations can be overwhelming to audiences that are not familiar with the program’s structure or engaged in the evaluation process. The goal of this methods essay is to help both evaluators and discipline-based education researchers improve communication about program evaluation with a variety of stakeholders. We propose a three-stage method for developing progressively less complex visualizations to build affordances that help make the program evaluation process and statements of program impact more meaningful to a wider range of audiences. The creation of less complex visualizations can facilitate understanding by allowing a stakeholder to more easily “see” the structure of the program and thereby may evoke a greater willingness to take action and make meaningful programmatic changes based on strategic evaluation planning. To aid readers, we describe how we modified the Systems Evaluation Protocol (SEP) to develop simplified visualizations when evaluating a long-standing college science faculty development program, the Summer Institutes on Scientific Teaching.

Instructors have inherited a model for conscientious instruction that suggests they must cover all the material outlined in their syllabus, and yet this model frequently diverts time away from allowing students to engage meaningfully with the content during class. We outline the historical forces that may have conditioned this teacher-centered model as well as the disciplinary pressures that inadvertently reward it. As a way to guide course revision and move to a learner-centered teaching approach, we propose three evidence-based strategies that instructors can adopt: 1) identify the core concepts and competencies for your course; 2) create an organizing framework for the core concepts and competencies; and 3) teach students how to learn in your discipline. We further outline examples of actions that instructors can incorporate to implement each of these strategies. We propose that moving from a content-coverage approach to these learner-centered strategies will help students better learn and retain information and apply it to new situations.

We describe here the development and validation of the Academic Career Readiness Assessment (ACRA) rubric, an instrument that was designed to provide more equity in mentoring, transparency in hiring, and accountability in training of aspiring faculty in the biomedical life sciences. We report here the results of interviews with faculty at 20 U.S. institutions that resulted in the identification of 14 qualifications and levels of achievement required for obtaining a faculty position at three groups of institutions: research intensive (R), teaching only (T), and research and teaching focused (RT). T institutions hire candidates based on teaching experience and pedagogical practices and ability to serve diverse student populations. RT institutions hire faculty on both research- and teaching-related qualifications, as well as on the ability to support students in the laboratory. R institutions hire candidates mainly on their research achievements and potential. We discuss how these hiring practices may limit the diversification of the life science academic pathway.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an effective way to expose large numbers of students to authentic research, yet most laboratory courses still use traditional “cookbook” methods. While barriers to using CUREs have been captured postimplementation, little is known about the decision mindset before implementation or what features of CURE design may mitigate perceived barriers. Perception of an innovation (such as a CURE) influences the likelihood of its adoption, and diffusion of innovations theory posits that the decision to adopt is largely influenced by five perceived features of an innovation: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability. We conducted interviews with instructors considering using the Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance in the Environment (PARE) project to assess their perceptions of CUREs and motivations for using PARE. Instructors viewed CUREs as having relative advantages over traditional methods; however, CUREs were also viewed as complex, with instructors citing multiple barriers. Instructors were motivated to use PARE because of its potential scientific impact and compatibility with their courses’ structures and resources. Instructors perceived PARE to have few barriers to implementation compared with other CUREs. Designing CUREs that address common instructor barriers and drivers could increase the rate of diffusion of CUREs.

Student anxiety is a growing concern for colleges and universities. As science classrooms transition from traditional lecture to active learning, researchers have sought to understand how active learning affects undergraduate anxiety. However, although community colleges educate nearly half of all undergraduates, no studies have explored the relationship between anxiety and active learning in the context of community college science courses. In this study, we interviewed 29 students enrolled across nine community colleges in the southwestern United States to probe factors that increase and decrease their anxiety in active-learning science courses. Using inductive coding, we identified a set of common factors that affect community college student anxiety in active learning. We found that community college student anxiety decreased when students perceived that active-learning activities enhanced their learning by providing them with multiple ways of learning or the opportunity to learn from others. We also identified fear of negative evaluation as the primary construct underlying student anxiety in active learning and described factors that mediated students’ fear of negative evaluation in the community college science classroom. This work highlights how instructors can create more inclusive active-learning science classrooms by reducing student anxiety during active-learning instruction.

Depression is a top mental health concern among undergraduates and has been shown to disproportionately affect individuals who are underserved and underrepresented in science. As we aim to create a more inclusive scientific community, we argue that we need to examine the relationship between depression and scientific research. While studies have identified aspects of research that affect graduate student depression, we know of no studies that have explored the relationship between depression and undergraduate research. In this study, we sought to understand how undergraduates’ symptoms of depression affect their research experiences and how research affects undergraduates’ feelings of depression. We interviewed 35 undergraduate researchers majoring in the life sciences from 12 research-intensive public universities across the United States who identify with having depression. Using inductive and deductive coding, we identified that students’ depression affected their motivation and productivity, creativity and risk-taking, engagement and concentration, and self-perception and socializing in undergraduate research experiences. We found that students’ social connections, experiencing failure in research, getting help, receiving feedback, and the demands of research affected students’ depression. Based on this work, we articulate an initial set of evidence-based recommendations for research mentors to consider in promoting an inclusive research experience for students with depression.

Expanding the scope of previous undergraduate research assessment tools, the Entering Research Learning Assessment (ERLA) measures undergraduate and graduate research trainee learning gains in the seven areas of trainee development in the evidence-based Entering Research conceptual framework: Research Comprehension and Communication Skills, Practical Research Skills, Research Ethics, Researcher Identity, Researcher Confidence and Independence, Equity and Inclusion Awareness and Skills, and Professional and Career Development Skills. In this paper, we present multiple sources of validity evidence for the ERLA trainee self-assessment and mentor assessment of trainee learning gains. Evidence of internal structure of the initial scales via exploratory factor analysis (N_trainees = 193; N_mentors = 130) revealed seven factors that align with the Entering Research conceptual framework. Validity evidence for internal structure using confirmatory factor analysis, convergent validity, and evidence of internal consistency for the revised scale were examined with a larger sample (N_trainees = 489; N_mentors = 256). Evidence of internal structure and alignment for a paired version of the ERLA was also examined with a subset of the original sample (N = 121 pairs). Each analysis revealed acceptable model–data fit. Guidance on using the ERLA instruments and interpreting their scores is presented.

Departments are now recognized as an important locus for sustainable change on university campuses. Making sustainable changes typically requires a shift in culture, but culture is complex and difficult to measure. For this reason, cultural changes are often studied using qualitative methods that provide rich, detailed data. However, this imposes barriers to measuring culture and studying change at scale (i.e., across many departments). To address this issue, we introduce the Departmental Education and Leadership Transformation Assessment (DELTA), a new survey aimed at capturing cultural changes in undergraduate departments. We describe the survey’s development and validation and provide suggestions for its utility for researchers and practitioners.

Random call is a randomized approach to select a student or group of students to share their thinking with the whole class. There are potential costs and benefits of random call in undergraduate courses, yet we lack insight about how this strategy is actually implemented and why instructors choose to use it. We interviewed 12 college biology instructors who use random call in courses with 50 or more students. Qualitative content analysis revealed why these instructors chose to use random call, the specific ways they implemented random call, and the reasoning behind their implementation. Instructors used random call to increase the diversity of voices heard in the classroom and to hold students accountable for working. Random call users showed concern about student anxiety and took specific steps to mitigate it. We break random call down into a series of components, identify the components that our participants considered most critical, and describe the reasoning underlying random call components. This work lays a foundation for future investigations of how specific random call components influence student outcomes, in what contexts, and for which students.

Overwhelming evidence demonstrating the benefits of active-learning pedagogy has led to a shift in teaching that requires students to interact more in the classroom. To date, few studies have assessed whether there are gender-specific differences in participation in active-learning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses, and fewer have looked across different types of classroom participation. Over two semesters, we observed an introductory biology course at a large research-intensive university and categorized student participation into seven distinct categories to identify gender gaps in participation. Additionally, we collected student grades and administered a postcourse survey that gauged student scientific self-efficacy and salience of gender identity. We found that men participated more than expected based on the class composition in most participation categories. In particular, men were strongly overrepresented in voluntary responses after small-group discussions across both semesters. Women in the course reported lower scientific self-efficacy and greater salience of gender identity. Our results suggest that active learning in itself is not a panacea for STEM equity; rather, to maximize the benefits of active-learning pedagogy, instructors should make a concerted effort to use teaching strategies that are inclusive and encourage equitable participation by all students.

We previously developed an online multiple-choice question authoring, learning, and self-assessment tool that we termed Quizzical. Here we report statistical analyses over two consecutive years of Quizzical use in a large sophomore-level introductory molecular biology course. Students were required to author two questions during the term and were also afforded opportunities to earn marks for quiz participation. We found that students whose final grade was “A,” “B,” or “C” exhibited similar patterns of Quizzical engagement. The degree to which students participated was positively associated with performance on formal exams, even if prior academic performance was considered as a covariable. During both terms investigated, students whose Quizzical engagement increased from one exam to the next earned statistically significant higher scores on the subsequent exam, and students who attempted Quizzical questions from earlier in the term scored higher, on average, on the cumulative portion of the final exam. We conclude that the structure and value of the assignment, and the utility of Quizzical as a discipline-independent active-learning and self-assessment tool, enabled students to better master course topics.

Although many scientists agree that evolution does not make claims about God/god(s), students might assume that evolution is atheistic, and this may lead to lower evolution acceptance. In study 1, we surveyed 1081 college biology students at one university about their religiosity and evolution acceptance and asked what religious ideas someone would have to reject if that person were to accept evolution. Approximately half of students wrote that a person cannot believe in God/religion and accept evolution, indicating that these students may have atheistic perceptions of evolution. Religiosity was not related to whether a student wrote that evolution is atheistic, but writing that evolution is atheistic was associated with lower evolution acceptance among the more religious students. In study 2, we collected data from 1898 students in eight states in the United States using a closed-ended survey. We found that 56.5% of students perceived that evolution is atheistic even when they were given the option to choose an agnostic perception of evolution. Further, among the most religious students, those who thought evolution is atheistic were less accepting of evolution, less comfortable learning evolution, and perceived greater conflict between their personal religious beliefs and evolution than those who thought evolution is agnostic.