Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Molecular biology can be difficult for undergraduate students because course content is often taught using highly-abstract visual representations. Genetic concepts can be depicted with lines, letters, shapes, and symbols, and students need to engage their visual literacy skills to appropriately decipher these abstract representations. We previously found that undergraduate course materials almost always represent chromosomes in abstract forms, such as "X" shapes or straight lines with a dot for the centromere. We hypothesized that students struggle to apply their visual literacy skills to accurately interpret these abstract representations of chromosomes, which may be related to the frequently-documented incomplete or incorrect ideas students have about chromosome structure and function. To explore students' visual literacy related to representations of chromosomes, we conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with students who had taken at least a year of biology courses. We asked them to sketch chromosomes, interpret an abstract representation of chromosomes, and use the abstract representation to answer a question about meiosis. We found that 97% of participants (34 of 35) held conceptual errors related to chromosome structure and function. These conceptual errors were often not evident in participants' verbal definitions of chromosomes and were only revealed in their sketches or explanations of their sketches. We found that participants frequently misinterpreted X-shaped representations of chromosomes, mistook unreplicated homologous chromosomes as separated sister chromatids, and held misconceptions related to the structure and function of centromeres. These findings have implications for how chromosomes are taught in biology courses. We recommend that instructors explicitly discuss the conventions and norms of representing chromosomes as a pathway for increasing students' visual literacy in molecular biology.
Molecular biology can be difficult for undergraduate students because course content is often taught using highly-abstract visual representations. Genetic concepts can be depicted with lines, letters, shapes, and symbols, and students need to engage their visual literacy skills to appropriately decipher these abstract representations. We previously found that undergraduate course materials almost always represent chromosomes in abstract forms, such as "X" shapes or straight lines with a dot for the centromere. We hypothesized that students struggle to apply their visual literacy skills to accurately interpret these abstract representations of chromosomes, which may be related to the frequently-documented incomplete or incorrect ideas students have about chromosome structure and function. To explore students' visual literacy related to representations of chromosomes, we conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with students who had taken at least a year of biology courses. We asked them to sketch chromosomes, interpret an abstract representation of chromosomes, and use the abstract representation to answer a question about meiosis. We found that 97% of participants (34 of 35) held conceptual errors related to chromosome structure and function. These conceptual errors were often not evident in participants' verbal definitions of chromosomes and were only revealed in their sketches or explanations of their sketches. We found that participants frequently misinterpreted X-shaped representations of chromosomes, mistook unreplicated homologous chromosomes as separated sister chromatids, and held misconceptions related to the structure and function of centromeres. These findings have implications for how chromosomes are taught in biology courses. We recommend that instructors explicitly discuss the conventions and norms of representing chromosomes as a pathway for increasing students' visual literacy in molecular biology.
Visual models are a necessary part of molecular biology education because submicroscopic compounds and processes cannot be directly observed. Accurately interpreting the biological information conveyed by the shapes and symbols in these visual models requires engaging visual literacy skills. For students to develop expertise in molecular biology visual literacy, they need to have structured experiences using and creating visual models, but there is little evidence to gauge how often undergraduate biology students are provided such opportunities. To investigate students’ visual literacy experiences, we surveyed 66 instructors who taught lower division undergraduate biology courses with a focus on molecular biology concepts. We collected self-reported data about the frequency with which the instructors teach with visual models and we analyzed course exams to determine how instructors incorporated visual models into their assessments. We found that most instructors reported teaching with models in their courses, yet only 16% of exam items in the sample contained a visual model. There was not a statistically significant relationship between instructors’ self-reported frequency of teaching with models and extent to which their exams contained models, signaling a potential mismatch between teaching and assessment practices. Although exam items containing models have the potential to elicit higher-order cognitive skills through model-based reasoning, we found that when instructors included visual models in their exams the majority of the items only targeted the lower-order cognitive skills of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Together, our findings highlight that despite the importance of visual models in molecular biology, students may not often have opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of these models on assessments.
Students in STEM know well the stress, challenge, and effort that accompany college exams. As a widely recognizable feature of the STEM classroom experience, high-stakes assessments serve as crucial cultural gateways in shaping both preparation and motivation for careers. In this essay, we identify and discuss issues of power around STEM exams to further the understanding of exam practices that can unjustly hold students back. Through theory and practical examples, we consider the numerous ways in which power manifests both on and off the pages of the exams themselves, as well as ways in which power is consolidated away from students through logistical norms and tradeoffs. Centering the “rules of the culture of power” as delineated by Dr. Lisa Delpit, we reflect on exam practices that prioritize faculty voice and faculty convenience above student learning and student identity. We share some of what we have learned from our students as part of a call to improve STEM education by relinquishing some of our exam-related power over students, redistributing it to students so that they have more power to shape their own education.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.