Preparing students for upper-level biology courses; pre-requisite to failure?
As indicated by test scores, students in Microbiology, Anatomy and Physiology, and Nutrition courses appear to be most challenged by course material related to cellular metabolism and molecular genetics. A key assumption guiding the development of these (and other) upper-level biology courses is that students who successfully complete pre-requisite courses comprehend basic principles of biology and chemistry. To evaluate this, students were provided with a concept evaluation instrument consisting of 10 questions requiring the recall of basic cell biology, energy metabolism, and genetics concepts. The questions were open ended, written in plain language, and intended to be answered in one or a few words. With few exceptions, students demonstrated little to no recollection of the fundamental concepts evaluated with this instrument. The following semester a second instrument was designed using exam questions from the non-majors level introductory biology course most often used as a pre-requisite. Again the questions were written plainly with no jargon, and the foils were in part based on students’ answers to the open-ended instrument. Students were also asked to self-report which pre-requisite(s) they had completed and their approximate grade. Overall, a slightly greater percentage of the questions were answered correctly, but the difference was not significant and could be attributed to students feeling less intimidated by the multiple choice format. Additionally, there appeared to be no significant correlation between students who reported receiving an “A” or “B” in the stated prerequisite(s), and their score on the concept evaluation instrument. These results imply that students are able to recall biology and chemistry concepts long enough to be successful in pre-requisite courses, but do not transfer that knowledge to the upper-level course and are therefore unable to understand more complex topics such as physiology and metabolism. This apparent disconnect invites examination of the purported role of pre-requisite courses in the design and pedagogy of upper-level biology courses at the community college level.
I agree with Jenny. The first couple of lines obscure the thrust of the abstract to me. Removing them could allow you to include more information such as the number of students tested.
I like how you are looking up the course chain! Understanding how little students transfer from one course to the next is a great question and I look forward to talking with you about your results.
I am not sure if you are submitting to ASM-CUES or not, but you might want to check out their abstract format requirements if you are (no more than 1850 characters with spaces -- you have over 3400, title and author format as well as author contact information). It is all available at: http://www.asmcue.org/page05b.shtml.
I agree with Chris and Jenny: cut back on the introduction and include some numbers, if possible.
Best, Anne-Marie
Sounds like a great project. Without repeating any of the above : towards the end "Preliminary analysis of the data related to course grade" Which course grade - the prerequisite or the upper level? Also "inherent problem in the way students are being prepared for upper-level study at the community college level" I might not go quite this far- I think you will find similar problems with 4 year schools. The only way to answer would be to partner with the closest instititution you send students to and find out if their students entering the upper level are similarly unprepared. Perhaps you can change the last statement so that it reflects either overall inabilty to remember and apply material after they leave your classrooms which is either inherent to your program or to the manner in which students enter your program. LIkely a consequence of both and that would be apparent if you were to look at the broader cohort ie as they move into you program and other programs. Looking forward to seeing the project at the meeting. Sherri