ABSTRACT
The 2011 Vision & Change report outlined several recommendations for transforming undergraduate biology education, sparking multiple pedagogical reform efforts. Among these was the Promoting Active Learning and Mentoring (PALM) network, an NSF-funded program that provided mentorship and training to instructors on implementing active learning in the classroom. Here, we provide a perspective on how members of the biology education community in PALM view the recommendations of Vision & Change, drawing upon our experiences both as members of PALM and as leaders of an associated project funded by another NSF grant that hosted PALM alumni at various conferences. These efforts have allowed us to gain insight into how our alumni think of Vision & Change, including how they interpret its recommendations, the challenges and opportunities that they view for implementing these recommendations, and the areas they see as critical to be addressed in future national reports for supporting undergraduate biology education. We synthesize these voices here, providing perspectives from a diverse group of biology instructors on what they think about Vision & Change, and provide recommendations for the biology education community based upon these PALM community voices.
KEYWORDS: Vision & Change, Promoting active learning and mentoring network, undergraduate biology education
PERSPECTIVE
The release of the 2011 Vision & Change report was a watershed moment for the undergraduate life science education community. The report, a product of some of this community’s intellectual leaders, called for the transformation of undergraduate biology education by incorporating a student-centered model of education based on active learning techniques and getting students to think and act as “real scientists” (Box 1). The past 13 years have seen significant progress towards the widespread adoption of this goal, with many individual instructors and entire departments working to bring their pedagogical practices in line with the goals set out by the 2011 report, while maintaining the unique character of their individual classrooms. Vision & Change has also sparked the development of several organizations and networks devoted to facilitating the spread of pedagogical reform as well as initiatives sponsored by life science professional societies to make Vision & Change recommendations accessible to their members.
Box 1. Summary of the Vision & Change report.
What does the Vision & Change report recommend?
The Vision & Change report was a collaborative report written after a 2009 national conference organized by the American Association for the Advancement of Science with support from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The resulting call to action presented in the report reviewed the landscape of undergraduate biology education before making recommendations for transforming biology education in several areas:
First, the report developed a set of core concepts and competencies (i.e., main ideas and skills for undergraduate biology majors to master), providing a framework for instructors to promote biological literacy to their students.
A centerpiece of Vision & Change is a call for student-centered biology education through an embrace of scientific teaching practices (e.g., using backward design to iteratively improve learning objectives, assessment, and instruction) (1). In addition, the report encouraged the implementation of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs), including a number of active learning techniques.
The report also called for providing students with more opportunities to engage with scientific questions as “real scientists” would do. This includes integrating more authentic research practices (e.g., generating questions and hypotheses, interpreting data) into lecture-based courses, developing course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) (2, 3), and expanding opportunities for students to engage in more traditional apprenticeship-based research experiences.
In addition, the report provided specific recommendations for sustainable, structural changes to support biology instructors. For example, Vision & Change emphasized the need to provide pedagogical professional development opportunities for instructors and early career scientists, to leverage professional societies as a vehicle for sustaining change, and to integrate faculty with expertise in biology education into traditional biology departments (4). Similarly, the report highlighted the importance of fostering collaboration between instructors and additional stakeholders across an institution (e.g., staff at centers for teaching and learning and program administrators) to promote sustainable institutional change.
Finally, the report identified several “next steps” for the biology education community, including developing teaching materials aligned with the core concepts and competencies for instructors, building additional assessment tools for biology education, and providing more professional incentives and resources for faculty to spend time on pedagogical development.
As Vision & Change is now well into its second decade of existence, a number of groups have undertaken efforts to assess its overall impacts on the ways students learn the life sciences as well as how it has shaped the current landscape of undergraduate life science education. The size and scope of Vision & Change, however, makes such an assessment a significant challenge. Despite several efforts to document the overall impact of Vision & Change on the undergraduate life science community (5–7), many gaps in knowledge persist, particularly with respect to understanding how instructors have incorporated these recommendations from this reform movement into their teaching practices. Working to address these knowledge gaps would be invaluable to undergraduate life science educators, as such work could suggest potential novel directions for the future reform of life science pedagogical practices based on current needs.
THE PROMOTING ACTIVE LEARNING AND MENTORING (PALM) NETWORK
In response to the standards laid out in the Vision & Change, we worked with Dr. Sue Wick of the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities starting in 2015 to establish and expand the Promoting Active Learning and Mentoring (PALM) network (NSF Awards 1539870 and 1624200) (8, 9). PALM was originally formed as an offering of the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) to promote active learning practices among instructors in undergraduate lecture classrooms (9) and expanded into a consortium of life science professional societies in 2016 working together for this common pedagogical goal. The centerpiece of the PALM network was one-on-one mentorship for PALM Fellows. This mentorship provided life science instructors guidance in implementing evidence-based teaching practices from veteran instructors with expertise in active learning. The ultimate goal of the mentorship was to promote the active-learning philosophies proposed in Vision & Change by adopting and implementing specific practices appropriate to the PALM Fellow’s courses. The mentoring program helped Fellows to select a mentor based on the specific aspects of their pedagogy they wished to improve. PALM attracted Fellows and mentors from a large range of institutions dedicated to undergraduate instruction as well as a breadth of life science subdisciplines (8). From 2015 to 2022, PALM supported over 120 mentors and Fellows in 63 mentorships covering the gamut of classroom types, levels, and biological subjects (9).
USING PALM AS A LENS FOR UNDERSTANDING THE CURRENT LANDSCAPE OF UNDERGRADUATE BIOLOGY EDUCATION
While the funding for the original PALM network lapsed in 2022, the network has evolved into several spin-off projects to continue its legacy. One of these projects focuses on assessing the impact of Vision & Change on the life science education community through an examination of PALM network alumni. Specifically, the project is investigating the relationships that may exist between the report and Fellows’ decisions to join PALM and work to change their teaching practices (NSF Award #2223276). Over the past several years, this project hosted gatherings of PALM alumni in conjunction with seven professional society meetings, in order to hold conversations on PALM alumni’s perceptions of the network and its relationship with Vision & Change, with an eye toward promoting future change efforts and networks supporting Vision & Change principles. These gatherings allowed us to learn about the efforts and needs of instructors as they attempted to effectively implement evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs).
Thus, as leaders of the PALM network and its spin-off projects, we have had the opportunity to get a sense of the current landscape in undergraduate life education. PALM alumni represent a cross-section of the life science education community by virtue of their diverse professional backgrounds and experiences; for example, PALM fellows and mentors together held memberships in nearly three dozen professional societies (personal communications, Sue Wick) and have published and presented their work at a variety of conferences and symposiums (https://palm.ascb.org/publications-and-presentations/). By hearing the thoughts of the PALM community with respect to the benefits and challenges of understanding and utilizing Vision & Change, we have developed a strong and educated perspective on both the current concerns of undergraduate life science instructors and the potential ways in which the goals of Vision & Change could be adjusted to align with the current landscape. In our discussions, it became clear that the challenges felt by PALM alumni with respect to Vision & Change fell into three distinct categories: interpretation (who PALM alumni think was the target audience for Vision & Change), design (the functionality of Vision & Change and the lens through which it was written), and expansion (how to ensure that everyone has the resources necessary to interpret and implement Vision & Change) (Table 1). For each of these three categories, we developed guiding questions as a summary of what we heard from the PALM community. Below each question, we detail what we heard from the community regarding Vision & Change and then provide our collective recommendation based on our expertise and experiences for the leaders of future reform efforts to consider in their efforts.
TABLE 1.
Summary of recommendations
| Guiding question category | Guiding question | Our recommendation(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Interpretation | Who is Vision & Change for (individual vs department) and how do we make it accessible for every level at an institution? |
|
| Design | Is there more to Vision & Change beyond core concepts and competencies? |
|
| How does Vision & Change address diversity, equity, and inclusion? |
|
|
| Expansion | How can our community connect instructors who feel isolated in implementing Vision & Change recommendations with each other? |
|
| How can Vision & Change better reach 2-year college instructors? |
|
|
| How can future reform efforts build upon the successes Vision & Change has had in mitigating resistance to educational reform? |
|
INTERPRETATION
Who is Vision & Change for (individuals vs departments) and how do we make it accessible for everyone?
What we heard
A common theme expressed among PALM alumni is the utilization of Vision & Change as a catalyst for change in their own teaching practices. However, few PALM alumni recognized that Vision & Change also included more structural recommendations that would lead to programmatic change. Additionally, our alumni communicated that the perspective of their administrators was that Vision & Change was designed to support individual-level change and was therefore not useful as a tool to guide departmental teaching reform efforts.
What we recommend
One way to address this disconnect would be to propagate and expand networks that promote collaborations between institutions to facilitate reform, thus involving more instructors in programmatic-level change. Through increasing access to these networks, instructors will become more aware of how reform efforts like Vision & Change can be used to foster programmatic-level change. We recognize that there are existing groups that already address this, such as the Partnership for Life Science Education (PULSE) network for department-level implementation of Vision & Change recommendations (10). While PULSE has been able to make significant headway in this arena, the sheer scope of the problem of reaching the whole of the life science education community suggests that there remains much work to be done. For instance, there is great potential to forge collaborations between institutions with similar pedagogical challenges (i.e., institutions with mostly commuter students and minority-serving institutions) as they will be better positioned to understand and support each other’s needs.
We recommend that future efforts to build on Vision & Change follow the PULSE blueprint for developing tools that help faculty, departments, and institutions translate recommendations into resources that are accessible to a broad audience, also raising awareness of Vision & Change’s programmatic recommendations. This includes supporting the development of more groups dedicated to facilitating reform, especially ones that are designed to aid specific institution types, with reform implementation. We also recommend that specific dissemination and training efforts be inclusive of institutional administrators so that stakeholders with the power to provide resources for reform understand the need to do so.
DESIGN
Is there more to Vision & Change beyond core concepts and competencies?
What we heard
Many of our conversations with PALM alumni centered around Vision & Change’s core concepts and competencies. Multiple participants equated Vision & Change solely with the core concepts and/or competencies, not recognizing the other recommendations to both faculty and departments within the report. Others reported knowing about the core concepts and/or competencies but having limited knowledge of how to use them to best support their teaching due to their breadth and lack of specific guidance on utilizing the core concepts and competencies.
What we recommend
First, we encourage the biology education community to continue disseminating Vision & Change through professional societies and networks, emphasizing that the report extends beyond a list of core concepts and competencies. Many members of PALM appeared to be unfamiliar with other recommendations, suggesting an overall deficiency of knowledge in the wider biology education community with respect to the specific recommendations in Vision & Change.
Second, we encourage the biology education community to expand the dissemination of existing resources that attempt to translate Vision & Change recommendations into more specific tools for instructors. These resources include the BioCore and BioSkills Guides, which provide instructors with a practicable framework for interpreting the core concepts and competencies. They were developed by the biology education community with explicit alignment to Vision & Change (11, 12). Another valuable set of tools are the BioMAPS assessments, which provide a series of assessments aligned to the core concepts and competencies (13). More recently, others in the biology education community have developed a consensus list of specific learning objectives aligned with Vision & Change for instructors to use in introductory biology courses (14). Given that our conversations revealed a lack of knowledge of these resources, we encourage professional societies and networks to better highlight their utility and for graduate programs in biology to include professional development that teaches students about these resources and how to use them.
Similarly, we recommend the continued development of additional practicable resources that translate the Vision & Change recommendations into more specific guidance for individuals. For instance, past work has suggested that many undergraduate biology programs may not be incorporating all of the core competencies in the curriculum (15), and we are not familiar with any resources that would help department chairs to better provide guidance on supporting their colleagues in implementing sustainable reforms. Thus, there is a need to develop evidence-based, practicable resources that support department chairs and administrators in broader pedagogical reform.
How does Vision & Change address diversity, equity, and inclusion?
What we heard
Our conversations with PALM alumni revealed a strong sentiment that any future reform efforts center strategies for inclusion in their recommendations. In 2011, when the initial Vision & Change report was written, discussions of creating inclusive educational spaces were just getting started. The inclusive education movement gained significant national attention in biology education in 2016 with the creation of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Inclusive Excellence and NSF’s Eddie Bernice Johnson Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science funding initiatives to support institutions and groups to make their courses and programs more inclusive (16, 17). Likewise, the final Vision & Change report, released in 2018, took steps to show how some of the Vision & Change recommendations support diverse student needs (18). Therefore, while many of the recommendations in the original Vision & Change report align with diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in undergraduate education, the need for centering these efforts in new reform efforts remains paramount.
What we recommend
We echo similar calls for centering inclusion in future undergraduate reform efforts (19, 20). To acknowledge the considerable amount of work that has been done in this space since the publication of Vision & Change, we recommend that the framers of future reform efforts review their work through the lens of this body of scholarship. For example, there have been a number of studies that examine how different classroom pedagogies impact students of different identities (21–24), assess programmatic and structural changes that reduce opportunity gaps among various groups of students (e.g., 25, 26) and establish professional development programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion within the professoriate (27, 28). Similarly, our conversations with PALM alumni revealed high interest among current biology educators for additional resources and professional development that translates recent research examining ways to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion inside and beyond the classroom into practicable suggestions for instructors and administrators.
EXPANSION
How can our community connect instructors who feel isolated in implementing Vision & Change recommendations with each other?
What we heard
Many PALM alumni expressed frustration with the lack of institutional support they had received to implement evidence-based teaching practices, including integrating active learning techniques into the classroom and transforming lab courses to CUREs. These instructors reported feeling isolated at their institutions and indicated they would appreciate opportunities to collaborate with like-minded colleagues at other institutions.
What we recommend
We encourage the continued development of networks and faculty communities that unite instructors within and across institutions. For instance, we highlight existing networks like Equity and Diversity in Undergraduate STEM (29) and the Inclusive Environments and Metrics in Biology Education and Research networks (30) funded by the National Science Foundation that have brought together instructors from diverse institutions. Similarly, we highlight the continued demand for personalized mentorship and support for implementing the Vision & Change recommendations, similar to what PALM offered its Fellows.
How can Vision & Change better reach 2-year college students and instructors?
What we heard
While many PALM alumni shared their success stories with the implementation of EBIPs into their classrooms, many instructors at 2-year colleges (2YCs) reported additional barriers to implementing these practices. These barriers include a lack of discipline-specific professional development tailored for 2YC faculty, a lack of resources for attending existing professional development opportunities, and the absence of centers for teaching and learning at many of their institutions. Similarly, 2YC instructors reported barriers for their students to engage in undergraduate research, citing logistical barriers (e.g., 2YC faculty typically do not have research responsibilities, potentially limiting their ability to offer research opportunities for students).
What we recommend
We recommend that the biology education community develop and expand support for students and instructors at 2YCs, recognizing their unique challenges. For instance, the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society developed the Community College Anatomy and Physiology Education Research (CAPER) program, an NSF-funded program that seeks to expand participating 2YC instructors’ knowledge bases on teaching and learning by providing a tailored pedagogy course, a learning community of 2YC instructors, and funds to travel to a conference focused on biology education. We encourage the formation of additional networks along the lines of CAPER and the newly developed Community College Undergraduate Research Initiative (NSF Award #1524353) to support 2YC instructors. Similarly, we recommend additional resources that can directly benefit 2YC students and instructors. For instance, there are a few NSF-sponsored Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs) that explicitly target students from 2YCs, and expanding the number of REUs that do so would increase the number of 2YC students who are able to engage in authentic research. In addition, we echo recent calls for an increase in resources that support the development, implementation, and assessment of CUREs at 2YCs, particularly CUREs that are aligned with the workforce development mission of many 2YCs (31).
How can future reform efforts build upon the successes Vision & Change has had in mitigating resistance to educational reform?
What we heard
One important legacy of Vision & Change in its decade-plus existence has been its role in supporting departments and individuals alike in pursuing reform in undergraduate instructional practices. This support largely derives from the vast level of expertise brought to bear in crafting Vision & Change’s ideas and recommendations. Our conversations with PALM members emphasized the importance of Vision & Change being a document backed by leaders at the forefront of undergraduate life science education as a critical supporting reason for its acceptance in their departments and the community at large. Because Vision & Change resulted from the combined effort of several significant national scientific bodies in the United States and the intellectual leaders in life science pedagogy at the time, it has been useful in convincing skeptical instructors and administrators that its recommendations for life science education hold merit and for instructors to justify their pedagogical choices in tenure and/or promotion evaluations. The intellectual authority backing Vision & Change also drove the formation of the PULSE network, a force for encouraging the document’s goals at the department level. Concurrently, life science professional societies began offering training opportunities to make Vision & Change recommendations accessible to their members. The PALM network was one such training opportunity, beginning as an initiative of the ASCB (9). For novice instructors unsure of how to best implement Vision & Changes’ suggestions, the strong intellectual foundation of the document provided confidence that the suggestions were worth considering and adopting and reassurance that they would be able to justify their pedagogical changes in their tenure and/or promotion evaluations. Taken together, the significant impact that Vision & Change has had in pedagogical reform would not have been possible without the unified effort of the individual and societal leaders of the life science community.
What we recommend
As the impact of Vision & Change becomes clear through the work of groups like ours, how the legacy of Vision & Change can be solidified and further expanded upon also becomes apparent. To replicate the impact of Vision & Change in new initiatives, a diverse body of thinkers that represent the whole undergraduate life science education community must be assembled. This includes representatives from 2YCs, minority-serving institutions, and institutions that run the gamut from small teaching-focused colleges to large research universities. By doing so, all voices will be heard in the development of future reform recommendations that can be impactful and accessible to all groups. Another key recommendation is for this body to consider the many studies that have revealed both the successes of Vision & Change and the areas where opportunities for significant reform remain. These studies, in essence, constitute a meta- “Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats” analysis (32) from which new directions and initiatives for reform may be drawn. The technique of identifying the positive and negative states of the current landscape and what those states afford for future planning development has strong potential in the undergraduate education arena to provide similar strategies for bringing the strongest pedagogical practices to as many instructors and departments as possible.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Vision & Change has sparked reform and impacted how instructors teach biology for the past 13 years. However, members of the PALM community still see significant gaps and needs in the application, adoption, and effective implementation of Vision & Change recommendations. Therefore, based on what we have learned and the recommendations we have made, we urge the biology education community to consider further reform efforts, including resources and a new report that builds upon the legacy of Vision & Change that centers inclusion and addresses the critical elements of interpretation, design, and expansion.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the members of the PALM network.
This work was funded by NSF Awards #2223350 and #2223276.
Contributor Information
Jeremy L. Hsu, Email: hsu@chapman.edu.
Michael E. Moore, Email: memoore5@ualr.edu.
Pamela A. Marshall, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA
REFERENCES
- 1. Handelsman J, Miller S, Pfund C. 2007. Scientific teaching. Macmillan. Available from: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=suf0MvxqoLQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Handelsman+learning+objectives&ots=_IQvatEP1_&sig=BYGt2_8UUEqbYcrPS5bxKgeQwzY [DOI] [PubMed]
- 2. Auchincloss LC, Laursen SL, Branchaw JL, Eagan K, Graham M, Hanauer DI, Lawrie G, McLinn CM, Pelaez N, Rowland S, Towns M, Trautmann NM, Varma-Nelson P, Weston TJ, Dolan EL. 2014. Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: a meeting report. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:29–40. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-01-0004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Bangera G, Brownell SE. 2014. Course-based undergraduate research experiences can make scientific research more inclusive. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:602–606. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) . 2022. Vision and Change in undergraduate biology education: a view for the 21st century. Available from: https://visionandchange.org/about-vc-a-call-to-action-2011
- 5. D’Avanzo C. 2013. Post-Vision and Change: do we know how to change? CBE Life Sci Educ 12:373–382. doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-01-0010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Kuddus RH. 2013. Who should change biology education: an analysis of the final report on the Vision and Change in undergraduate biology education conference. Int J Biol Educ 3:63–83. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Vasaly HL, Feser J, Lettrich MD, Correa K, Denniston KJ. 2014. Vision and Change in the biology community: snapshots of change. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:16–20. doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-12-0234 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Moore ME, Naganathan A, Blumer SL, Goller CC, Misra A, Raut SA, Swamy U, Wick S, Wolyniak MJ. 2020. Facilitating long-term mentoring to effectively implement active learning instruction: formation of the promoting active learning and mentoring (PALM) network. J Microbiol Biol Educ 21:80. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v21i3.2203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Prunuske AJ, Evans-Anderson HJ, Furniss KL, Goller CC, Mirowsky JE, Moore ME, Raut SA, Swamy U, Wick S, Wolyniak MJ. 2022. Using personas and the ADKAR framework to evaluate a network designed to facilitate sustained change toward active learning in the undergraduate classroom. Discov Educ 1:22. doi: 10.1007/s44217-022-00023-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Musante S. 2013. PULSE: implementing change within and among life science departments. Bioscience 63:254–254. doi: 10.1525/bio.2013.63.4.4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Brownell SE, Freeman S, Wenderoth MP, Crowe AJ. 2014. BioCore guide: a tool for interpreting the core concepts of vision and change for biology majors. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:200–211. doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-12-0233 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Clemmons AW, Timbrook J, Herron JC, Crowe AJ. 2020. BioSkills guide: development and national validation of a tool for interpreting the Vision and Change core competencies. CBE Life Sci Educ 19:ar53. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-11-0259 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Smith MK, Brownell SE, Crowe AJ, Holmes NG, Knight JK, Semsar K, Summers MM, Walsh C, Wright CD, Couch BA. 2019. Tools for change: measuring student conceptual understanding across undergraduate biology programs using Bio-MAPS assessments. J Microbiol Biol Educ 20:20. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v20i2.1787 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Hennessey KM, Freeman S. 2024. Nationally endorsed learning objectives to improve course design in introductory biology. PLOS ONE 19:e0308545. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308545 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Clark N, Hsu JL. 2023. Insight from biology program learning outcomes: implications for teaching, learning, and assessment. CBE Life Sci Educ 22:ar5. doi: 10.1187/cbe.22-09-0177 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. 2024. Inclusive excellence 1 & 2 | HHMI. Available from: https://www.hhmi.org/programs/inclusive-excellence-1-2
- 17. 2022. NSF’s Eddie Bernice Johnson Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science Initiative | NSF - National Science Foundation. Available from: https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/nsfs-eddie-bernice-johnson-inclusion-across-nation
- 18. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) . 2018. Vision and Change in undergraduate biology education: unpacking a movement and sharing lessons learned. Available from: https://visionandchange.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/VandC-2018-finrr.pdf
- 19. Dewsbury B, Brame CJ. 2019. Inclusive teaching. CBE Life Sci Educ 18:fe2. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-01-0021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Moore ME, Vega DM, Wiens KM, Caporale N. 2020. Connecting theory to practice: using self-determination theory to better understand inclusion in STEM. J Microbiol Biol Educ 21:05. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.1955 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Aguillon SM, Siegmund G-F, Petipas RH, Drake AG, Cotner S, Ballen CJ. 2020. Gender differences in student participation in an active-learning classroom. CBE Life Sci Educ 19:ar12. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Eddy SL, Brownell SE, Thummaphan P, Lan M-C, Wenderoth MP. 2015. Caution, student experience may vary: social identities impact a student’s experience in peer discussions. CBE Life Sci Educ 14:ar45. doi: 10.1187/cbe.15-05-0108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Henning JA, Ballen CJ, Molina SA, Cotner S. 2019. Hidden identities shape student perceptions of active learning environments. Front Educ 4. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00129 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Lund Dean K, Jolly JP. 2012. Student identity, disengagement, and learning. AMLE 11:228–243. doi: 10.5465/amle.2009.0081 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Beltran RS, Marnocha E, Race A, Croll DA, Dayton GH, Zavaleta ES. 2020. Field courses narrow demographic achievement gaps in ecology and evolutionary biology. Ecol Evol 10:5184–5196. doi: 10.1002/ece3.6300 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Theobald EJ, Hill MJ, Tran E, Agrawal S, Arroyo EN, Behling S, Chambwe N, Cintrón DL, Cooper JD, Dunster G, et al. 2020. Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117:6476–6483. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1916903117 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Ahern‐Dodson J, Clark CR, Mourad T, Reynolds JA. 2020. Beyond the numbers: understanding how a diversity mentoring program welcomes students into a scientific community. Ecosphere 11:e03025. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.3025 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Campbell-Montalvo RA, Caporale N, McDowell GS, Idlebird C, Wiens KM, Jackson KM, Marcette JD, Moore ME. 2020. Insights from the inclusive environments and metrics in biology education and research network: our experience organizing inclusive biology education research events. J Microbiol Biol Educ 21:25. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.2083 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Thompson SK, Hebert S, Berk S, Brunelli R, Creech C, Drake AG, Fagbodun S, Garcia-Ojeda ME, Hall C, Harshman J, Lamb T, Robnett R, Shuster M, Cotner S, Ballen CJ. 2020. A call for data-driven networks to address equity in the context of undergraduate biology. CBE Life Sci Educ 19:mr2. doi: 10.1187/cbe.20-05-0085 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Tennial RE, Solomon ED, Hammonds-Odie L, McDowell GS, Moore M, Roca AI, Marcette J. 2019. Formation of the inclusive environments and metrics in biology education and research (iEMBER) network: building a culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion. CBE Life Sci Educ 18:mr1. doi: 10.1187/cbe.18-03-0042 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Leonetti CT, Lindberg H, Schwake DO, Cotter RL. 2023. A call to assess the impacts of course-based undergraduate research experiences for career and technical education, allied health, and underrepresented students at community colleges. CBE Life Sci Educ 22:ar4. doi: 10.1187/cbe.21-11-0318 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Namugenyi C, Nimmagadda SL, Reiners T. 2019. Design of a SWOT analysis model and its evaluation in diverse digital business ecosystem contexts. Proc Comput Sci 159:1145–1154. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.283 [DOI] [Google Scholar]