This investigation examines college success in freshman and sophomore level biology courses for students with biology AP credit by addressing the following questions: One, Does AP biology experience increase academic performance in freshman biology? Do AP students with scores of 3 significantly outperform non-AP students? Do AP students with scores of 5 significantly outperform non-AP students in sophomore level biology courses? Two groups of college freshman and sophomores, those with AP biology scores and those without, were matched in regards to gender and SAT scores and instructor of record. Results suggest that students with biology AP scores of 3 may not, as suggested by the College Board, be adequately prepared to enroll directly into sophomore level biology courses. Results from this dissertation suggest the following implications: (a) AP students with final AP exam scores of 1 and 2 have derived little if any benefit from their yearlong AP biology course and the AP final exam in regards to Freshman Biology I; (b) AP biology students with scores of 3 and 4 on their end-of-the-year biology AP exam appear to be well prepared to be successful, based on mean final grades, in Freshman Biology I; (c) There is no supporting evidence that suggests AP students with AP final exam scores of 3 or 4 are adequately prepared to enroll directly into sophomore level biology courses and be successful; and (d) AP students with scores of 5 who have enrolled directly into sophomore level biology courses did not significantly outperform, based on mean final grades, non-AP students who have taken the two semester sequence of freshman biology courses. Further research needs to be done at each college and university participating in the Advanced Placement program to set appropriate cut off scores for the end-of-the-year AP exam score in regards to awarding college credit. Moreover, a considerable amount of research carried out thus far fails to capture many of the variables known to be associated with college success. Therefore, further research done in this area needs to control for these other variables. / Ed. D.

The problem of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the note-test method and the traditional lecture method of teaching general introductory microbiology. The study was prompted by the desire to improve teaching strategies in microbiology in order to improve the attitudes of students taking microbiology at the Indiana College of Mortuary Science. The conclusions are that the note-test method of teaching is at least as effective as the traditional lecture method but is not better than the traditional method in regard to student achievement or student attitudes about the microbiology course to which they were assigned. Since the method requires less lecturing than the traditional lecture method used in this study, it may be used effectively by some instructors in certain subject matter areas and may hold promise in maintaining achievement and acceptable attitude levels.

The purpose of this quantitative study was to determine if there were significant differences in student success in face-to-face and online biology courses as categorized by gender, major, and age; and as measured by lecture grades, lab grades, and final course grades. The data used for analyses included data from 170 face-to-face sections and 127 online sections from a biology course during the fall and spring semesters beginning fall 2008 through spring 2011. Researchers have reported mixed findings in previous studies juxtaposing online and face-to-face course delivery formats, from no significant differences to differences in grades, learning styles, and satisfaction levels. Four research questions guided this study with data analysis involving t-tests for independent groups and chi-square tests. This researcher noted significant differences in the results of this study: grades, success rates by gender, success rates by health and nonhealth majors, and nontraditional age (≥25) success rate were higher for students in the face-to-face courses; and the attrition rate was higher for students in the online course sections. There was no significant difference found in the success rate for traditional age (<25) students in the face-to-face sections compared to those in the online sections.

No description available.

<p dir="ltr">In 2011, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) published a report titled “Vision & Change: A Call to Action” that called for reform in undergraduate biology education. The report proposed core competencies that educators should target so students are graduating ready to tackle 21st-century challenges. Of these core competencies is the ability to reason quantitatively, which includes graphing. However, undergraduate biology students struggle with applying essential graph knowledge. The following dissertation project addresses these challenges by exploring two graphing tasks: constructing versus evaluating graphs. We primarily focused on introductory biology students' reasoning practices in applying graph knowledge between these two tasks. As such, we used a digital performance-based assessment tool, <i>GraphSmarts</i>, to analyze students' graphing choices and their justifications in an ecology-based scenario. Chapter 2 discusses the findings of these analyses (n=301), which revealed a disconnect in graph knowledge application between students' graph construction and evaluation skills. While students tend to create basic bar graphs when constructing graphs, they prefer more sophisticated representations, such as bar graphs with averages and error bars, during evaluation tasks—suggesting that the framing of a task influences students' application of graph knowledge between their recognition of effective data representation and their ability to produce such graphs independently. While insightful, we needed to explore ‘why’ this variation exists. Chapter 3 explores the root of this variation through student interviews (n=12). Students would complete the two tasks, followed by questions that help clarify their thought processes. Through the lens of the Conceptual Dynamics framework and the Dynamic Mental Construct model, the study identified two critical cognitive patterns, ‘mode-switching’ and ‘mode-stability.’ Results reaffirm the context-dependent nature of students' graphing knowledge and the influence of task framing on their reasoning processes, as seen in Chapter 2. Results from this project can inform recommendations that biology educators can consider, including 1) having students conduct multiple types of graphing tasks beyond construction, 2) teaching statistical features more explicitly by integrating them into course content, and 3) encouraging students to reflect on their graphing practices. That would be expected to address these instructional needs and foster characteristics of quantitative reasoning and graphing that transfer out of biology. Future directions on this work include exploring other standard graphing tools (Excel, R studio) on graph knowledge, examining the transferability of graphing skills across biological sub-disciplines, and developing targeted interventions for gaps in students' graphing competencies across various graphing tasks. Overall, the work contributes toward developing evidence-based instructional strategies that will be supportive in cultivating competent, robust quantitative reasoning and graphing skills among undergraduate biology students.</p>

No description available.

The purpose of this quantitative study was to determine if there were significant differences in student success in terms of face-to-face and online biology courses as categorized by gender, major, and age; and as measured by lecture grades, lab grades, and final course grades. The data used for analyses included data from 170 face-to-face sections and 127 online sections from a biology course during the fall and spring semesters beginning fall 2008 through spring 2011. Researchers have reported mixed findings in previous studies juxtaposing online and face-to-face course delivery formats, from no significant differences to differences in grades, learning styles, and satisfaction levels. Four research questions guided this study with data analysis involving t-tests for independent groups and chi-square tests. The results of this study enabled this researcher to note significant differences between grades, success rates by gender, success rates by health and non-health majors, non-traditional age (at least 25 years of age) success rate, and attrition rate for students in the face-to-face course compared to the online students. There was no significant difference found in the success rate for traditional age (less than 25 years of age) students in the face-to-face sections compared to those in the online sections.