Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Performance monitoring of at-risk and not-at-risk students was performed during the spring 1994 semester in a general biology course for non-science majors at a large land-grant institution in the southern United States. This course is required in such curricula as the social sciences, humanities, management, and engineering. Students' potential for success was assessed by Marsh's (1985) Biomathematical Skills Test (BST), a 46-item test using quantitatively-focused questions dealing with biological topics. Additionally, the opportunity was used to examine achievement levels and other characteristics of this class, with the assumption that its makeup and performance represented the profile of students who might typically enroll in this course. Beyond grades, comparative performance assessments were made among several criteria including gender and rank in both the at-risk and not-at-risk populations. Inventory measurements of self-concept and nature of science surveys were also given. This study was supported by a Teaching Excellence and Faculty Initiative Grant provided by the author's home institution and was approved by its Use of Human Subjects in Research Committee.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Campbell

P. B.

, & Clewell

B. C.

(1999, September 15). Science, math, and girls. http://www.edweek.org.

Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2000). Assessment and accreditation in higher education bibliography. One Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 510, Washington, D.C. 20036–1135. http://www.chea.org.

Haning

B. C.

, & Donley

(2002). Effects of a learning strategies course on at-risk freshman science majors. Journal of the First Year Experience and Students in Transition, 14(2), 31–56.

Dillon

J. C.

, & James

R. K.

(1976). Attitudes of black college students toward science. School Science and Mathematics, 12, 592–600.

Hixson

, & Tinzmann

M. B.

(1990). Who are the “at-risk” students of the 1990s? North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL) Oak Brook. 1–17. http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/equity.htm.

Humphreys

Musil

C. M.

Teraguchi

D. H.

, & Migueroa

(2000). Women and scientific literacy: Building two-way streets. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Karabenick

S. A.

, & Knapp

J. R.

(1991). Relationship of academic help seeking to the use of learning strategies and other instrumental achievement behavior in college students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 221–230.

Karabenick

S. A.

, & Sharma

(1994). Seeking academic assistance as a strategic learning response. In Pintrick

P. R.

Brown

D. R.

, & Weinstein

C. E.

(Eds.), Student Motivation, Cognition, and Learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Leonard

D. K.

, & Jiang

(1999). Gender bias and the college predictions of the SATS: A cry of despair. Research in Higher Education, 40(4) 375–407.

10.

Marsh

H. W.

Byrne

B. M.

, & Yeung

A. S.

(1999). Causal ordering of academic self-concept and achievement: Reanalysis of a pioneering study and revised recommendations. Education Psychologist, 34(3), 155–166.

11.

Marsh

J. F.

(1985). Assessment of the quantitative skills of students taking introductory college biology courses. D. H. Hill Library. Box 7111. North Carolina State University. Raleigh, NC 27695–7611.

12.

Maxwell

(1997). Implications of motivation, learning styles and the experience of failure. In Improving Student Learning Skills (pp. 135–157). Clearwater, FL: H&H Publishing.

13.

Ministry of Education. Education plan for at-risk students. http://www.education.govt.nz/Schools/ImprovingAchievment/7.htm.

14.

Murtaugh

P. A.

Burns

L. D.

, & Schuster

(1999). Predicting the retention of university students. Research in Higher Education, 40(3), 355–371.

15.

National Center for Education Statistics (1997). Findings from the condition of education 1997: Women in mathematics and science. http://www.ed.gov/.

16.

Pajares

(1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543–578.

17.

Pallas

A. M.

(1989). Making schools more responsive to at-risk students. ERIC/CUE Digest No. 60. ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. New York, NY. http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed316617.html.

18.

Rubba

P. A.

, & Andersen

H. O.

(1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school students' understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449–458.

19.

Steele

C. M.

(1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.

20.

The Nature of Science. http://www.project2061.org//tools/benchol/ch1/ch1.html.

21.

University 101: Research & References (1999). 4 pp. http://www.sc.edu/fye/101/infopiece/re_re.htm.

22.

Walsh

Hickey

, & Duffy

(1999). Influence of item content and stereotype situation on gender differences in mathematical problem solving. Sex Roles, 41(314), 219–240.

23.

Women Science Students and Science Faculty and Staff at NECUSE Colleges (1996). Achieving gender equity in science classrooms, a guide for faculty. Office of the Dean of the College at Brown University.

24.

Woodroff

N. H.

(1939). Mathematics used in biology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.

Performance Profile of Students in a University General Biology Course

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References