American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/education Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Educational Research. 2015, 3(5), 581-587
DOI: 10.12691/education-3-5-8
Open AccessArticle

Entry-Level Biology Courses for Majors and Non-Majors: Performance and Assessment

Mamta Singh1, and Sandra West2

1Lamar University, Beaumont, TX

2Texas State University, San Marcos, TX

Pub. Date: April 21, 2015

Cite this paper:
Mamta Singh and Sandra West. Entry-Level Biology Courses for Majors and Non-Majors: Performance and Assessment. American Journal of Educational Research. 2015; 3(5):581-587. doi: 10.12691/education-3-5-8

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to assess students’ performance in entry-level biology courses. The instruments used for this study were pre-post content knowledge tests to address two research questions: 1. Did students’ scores improve from pre-to post- tests and were there differences between cohort one and cohort two on the content knowledge test in Functional and Orgaismal Biology? 2. Did students correctly answer more questions at the three higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy test from pre-to post-tests and were there differences in cohorts on the content knowledge in Functional Biology and Organismal Biology? The results indicated that students’ scores on the content knowledge tests increased from pre-to post- tests and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05) between cohort one and cohort two on the content knowledge test in Functional and Orgaismal Biology. Furthermore, the students were able to answer higher order thinking skill questions on the post-test and pre-posttests’ scores difference were statistically significant (p<0.05).

Keywords:
bloom’s taxonomy high school GPA Functional and Orgaismal Biology

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]  American Council on Education. (1996). Remedial education: An undergraduate student profile. Washington, DC: Author.
 
[2]  Beyer, L. E., &, Liston, D. P. (1996). Curriculum in Conflict: Social Visions, Educational Agendas, and Progressive School Reform. Teachers College Press: New York.
 
[3]  Bloom, B. M., Englehart, E., Furst, E. H., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: McKay.
 
[4]  Clune, W. H., & Webb, N. L. (1997). An introduction to the papers and think piece themes. In W. H. Clune, S. B. Millar, S. A. Raizen, N. L. Webb, D. C. Bowcock, E. D. Britton, R. L. Gunter, & R. Mesquita, Research on systemic reform: What have we learned? What do we need to know? (Workshop Report No. 4, Vol. 1, pp. 6-12). Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, National Institute for Science Education.
 
[5]  Ewell, P. T. (2002). Grading Student Learning: You Have to Start Somewhere. Retrieved May 1, 2009 from http://measuringup.highereducation.org/2002/articles/peterewell.htm.
 
[6]  Fraenkel, J. K., & Wallen, N. E. (Eds.). (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. The McGraw-Hill Company, Inc. New York.
 
[7]  Gainen, J. (1995). Barriers to success in quantitative gatekeeper courses. In J. Gainen, & E. W. Williamson (Eds.). Fostering student success in the quantitative gateway courses (pp. 61, 5-14) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 
[8]  Goodman, B. E., Koster, K. L., & Redinius, P. L. (2005). Comparing biology majors from large lecture classes with TA-facilitated laboratories to those from small lecture classes with faculty-facilitated laboratories. Advance Physiology Education, 29, 112-117.
 
[9]  Gungor, A., Eryilmaz, A., & Fakioglu, T. (2007). The relationship of freshman’s physics achievement and their related affective characteristics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1036-1056.
 
[10]  Hand, J. E. (2002). Assessment of course specific content area knowledge, writing skills, and higher order thinking skills of students participating in an entry-level biology major’s course. Unpublished Master, Texas State University-San Marcos, Texas.
 
[11]  Kahveci, A., Southerland, S. A., & Gilmer, P. J. (2006). Retaining undergraduate women in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36, 34-38.
 
[12]  Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (Eds.). (2000). Foundations of Behavioral Research. Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.
 
[13]  Kulik, C-L., Kulik, J., & Schwalb, B. (1983). College programs for high risk and disadvantaged students: A meta-analysis of findings. Review of Educational Research, 53, 397-414.
 
[14]  Lord, T. R., & Rauscher, C. (1991). A sampling of basic life science literacy in a college population. The American Biology Teacher, 53, 419-424.
 
[15]  Libarkin, J. C., & Anderson, S. W. (2005). Assessment of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the geoscience concept inventory. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 394.
 
[16]  National Research Council (Nrc). (1996). National science education standards. No. National Academy Press. Washington: D.C.
 
[17]  Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). Predicting freshman persistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical model. The Journal of Higher Education, 51, 60-75.
 
[18]  Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skills factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261-303.
 
[19]  Sadler, P. M., & Tai, R. H. (2000). Success in introductory college physics: The role of high school preparation. Science Education, 85, 111-136.
 
[20]  Schrock, J. R. (Eds.). (1997). Instructor's manual and test item file for sylvia s. mader inquiry into life. Dubuque, IA (non-major's text): Wm. C. Brown Publishers.
 
[21]  Service, E. T. (1994). AP biology: Free response scoring guide with multiple-choice section. New York: The College Board.
 
[22]  Selingo, J. (2003). What Americans think about higher education? The Chronicle of Higher Education. pp. A10-A17.
 
[23]  Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
 
[24]  Tai, R. H., Sadler, P. M., & Loehr, J. F. (2005). Factors influencing success in introductory college chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 987-1012.
 
[25]  Webb, N. L. (1997a). Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education (Research Monograph No. 6). Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, National Institute for Science Education.
 
[26]  Webb, N. L. (1997b). Determining alignment of expectations and assessments in Mathematics and science education (NISE Brief Vol. 1, No. 2). Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, National Institute for Science Education.
 
[27]  Wood, W. B., & Gentile, J. M. (2003). Teaching in a research context. Science, 302, 1510.