Funded Inquiry Projects

All projects were funded by SFU Institute for the Study of Teaching and Learning in the Disciplines (ISTLD, now TILT) with an in-kind donation from the Faculty of Health Sciences. I have worked on four projects. Three will be described here. The projects on decolonizing my teaching is discussed here on a separate page.

The first project investigates whether using iClickers data collection can enhance student self-efficacy as scientists. It is based on an assessment I developed in HSCI100—Human Biology.

The second two projects build on each other. I was very interested in understanding how students read primary literature and wanted to develop targeted interventions to help them improve their process. This work was conducted in two parts, resulting in a published paper in the International Journal of Science Education. 

In many of these projects, I hired or mentored undergraduate student research assistants. I showed their work to students in my classes so they could see that they could actively participate in research on their own educational process.

In This Project We Investigated 

•  Can using iClickers to ask questions or pose hypotheses and collect data help students understand the scientific method? 

•  Can using iClickers to ask questions or pose hypotheses and collect data help students to feel more confident in applying the scientific method at the end of the term? 

We Found That

• Some students showed increased skill applying the scientific method. 

• Students grew more adept at identifying dependent variables at the end of the course. However, they continued to struggle with the concept of the null hypothesis.

• Students in both sections reported a modest increase in confidence in applying the scientific method.

• By the end of the term, there was an increase in the number of students who self-identified as scientists.   

Dissemination

• van Houten NE*, Emmioglu E & Lechner M. Working with Student Generated Data Enhances Scientific Literacy in Human Biology. Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) National Meeting, June 11-14, 2013, U of M, Twin Cities

• Lechner M*, Emmioglu E & van Houten NE. Applying and understanding the scientific method with iClicker surveys in "Human Biology". SFU Teaching and Learning Symposium. May 14, 2014  

• van Houten NE* & Lechner MS*.  IClicker Epidemiology: Giving Students Hands-on experience in the scientific method with student directed data sets and ideas. Symposium on Teaching and Learning: Leading change @SFU. 2012, SFU Burnaby BC. Authors contributed equally.

In This Project We Investigated 

In this project, we investigated the hypothesis that undergraduate students read primary literature using a text-based reading approach and avoid independent interpretation of results in the context of research methodology. Student approaches to reading literature are influenced by attitudes that they hold towards challenging reading practices. 

To do this we surveyed attitudes and approaches towards primary literature in 1st and 4th year students, we then conducted one-on-one individual “think aloud” interviews that were analyzed for in-depth reading process. We looked at attitudes and evidence-pointing behaviors.

We Found That

• Students avoid technically challenging sections such as methods and results due to limited self-efficacy (statistics phobia, technical language) 

• Students are aware that data is the foundation of evidence when questioned, yet they don’t apply that understanding to supporting their points.

• EAL students might benefit from figure-centered approach to reading articles – ties into Universal Design guidelines that suggest multiple modes of representing information (CAST, 2011).

• Experienced students in upper undergrad could benefit from more instruction to enhance their interpretation skills.

Dissemination

• Hepburn K, Leaman E & van Houten NE*. What is evidence? How students support a main point in primary literature. Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) National Meeting, July 14-17, 2016, U of M, Twin Cities 

• Leaman E, Hum G, & van Houten NE*. Methods are important? Understanding student attitudes towards reading primary life sciences literature. Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) National Meeting, July 29 -August 2, 2015, U of M, Twin Cities

• Leaman E, Hum G ,  & van Houten NE*. Barriers Faced by Undergraduate Students when Reading Primary Literature. Achieving Harmony: Tuning into Practice. Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (STLHE) annual conference. June 16 – 19, 2015, Westin Bayshore Hotel, Vancouver BC.

In This Project We Investigated 

We investigated student processes when they read primary literature, identify suboptimal reading practices and develop an instructional intervention to enhance student reading approaches. 

We detailedly analyzed the think-aloud interviews and mapped student reading approaches to a deep vs surface learning model. We then developed a 5-step reading intervention and a detailed case-study-based lesson plan, which I tested in HSCI 212 - Perspectives on Infectious and Immunological Diseases. 

We Found That

• Students with low performance on the selecting evidence task used surface approaches to reading, such as skimming text in the discussion section for the main point.

• Students who referred to figures and data as evidence used approaches consistent with deep learning (e.g., reading for understanding).

• Neither experienced nor novice students employed optimal reading practices.

• Over-engagement with text-based, summative information across all skill levels.

• Under-engagement with methods, figures, and data.

• Lack of confidence in the core of the article (materials and methods, results).

• Learned incomprehension of statistics and figures.

• The priming shift (i.e., student competency pre- and post-receiving a specific task) was most marked at the intermediate and novice levels.

For the Intervention, Students Reported That

• methods became more important to evidence-finding.

• a moderate increase in using figures and tables for evidence-finding.

• they relied less on discussion for evidence-finding.

I continue to use this intervention in many of my classes from second to fourth year. I recently had a graduate student thank me for teaching her this process. Students have repeatedly told me that they are thankful that someone has finally taught them this skill and that it will serve them well in their future classes and employment. 

Dissemination

• Workshop: Aistov N*1  & van Houten NE* Comprehension in 5 steps: A Reading Approach that engages students in critical reading of Primary Scientific Literature. A workshop for 17th Symposium on Teaching and Learning: Assessing and Celebrating Teaching and Student Learning SFU Vancouver. Spring 2019 1Undergraduate student volunteer who shared his experience in learning as part of the workshop

• Published Abstract and Talk: Lennox R, Hepburn K, Leaman E, Ogolo G, Sambo T & van Houten NE*. Comparison of Student Primary Literature Reading Approaches to a Deep and Surface Learning Model. Universidad Zaragoza, Zaragoza Spain, XII Conference for European Researchers in Didactics of Biology, (ERIDOB 2018)

• Seminar: Development of an Evidence-based Reading Approach for Primary Scientific Literature and Impact on Student Learning. May 28, 2019. Hosted by: Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (CWSEI) at the University of British Columbia

• Seminar: Investigating challenges faced by undergraduate students when reading primary scientific literature and identifying instructional approaches to enhance their reading. Institute for Science Education and Communication, University of Groningen, Netherlands. June 2018

• Research Paper: Lennox R, Hepburn K, Leaman E & van Houten NE (2020) ‘I’m probably just gonna skim’: an assessment of undergraduate students’ primary scientific literature reading approaches, International Journal of Science Education, 42:9, 1409-1429, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2020.1765044

Abstract

We investigated undergraduate students’ approaches to reading primary scientific literature (PSL). Self-report surveys and think-aloud reading interviews were used to uncover students’ approaches to PSL with respect to evidence finding, prioritisation of paper sections, and reading skill in relation to task context. Self-report and observational interview data were also analysed to investigate the relationship between students’ self-reported and actual reading approaches. Our findings indicate that undergraduate students exhibit a spectrum of approaches to evidence finding, that many use pre-interpreted text to make meaning of PSL, and that student reading approaches are enhanced by task context. Data also indicate a misalignment between students’ self-reported and actual reading approaches, with students generally over-confident in their abilities. We interpret these findings using deep vs. surface learning criteria and the Structure Building Model (SBM) of reading comprehension. Our exploratory research extends the small body of literature on student PSL reading and indicates that more in-depth work needs to be done to support the development of educational interventions aimed at enhancing student reading approaches.