Abstract
BackgroundWe present an analysis of students’ responses to application-based questions on the topic of growth and control of microorganisms, from a questionnaire administered to 348 second and third year students of an Indian university who were enrolled in its undergraduate programs in Biotechnology or Microbiology. We examined aspects of the laboratory practice as reported by teachers and of the university assessment patterns that may explain our findings. Reports by teachers also included their views on the impact of the laboratory curriculum on building student capabilities. Studies such as this play an important role in informing the ongoing discourse in the country about much-needed reforms in undergraduate education.ResultsOur analysis revealed several lacunae in students’ understanding. Students’ performance on the questionnaire was also found to be poorly correlated with their academic achievement in the university examinations. Teachers’ reports revealed that there was a minimal student involvement in planning and designing of the experiments in their laboratory course; rather, cookbook protocols were commonly used by the students. There was a striking disparity between students’ stated career aspirations and their preparedness for them.ConclusionsOur analysis points to underlying issues in the teaching-learning and assessment process; we discuss these issues and possible alternatives to the current practices. This study, to the best of our knowledge, is the first in the country that has explored students’ conceptions for an elementary topic in biology education at the tertiary level. We believe that the results of the study will be useful in shaping the ongoing educational reforms in higher education and will also be useful in developing a concept inventory on this topic.
Highlights
We present an analysis of students’ responses to application-based questions on the topic of growth and control of microorganisms, from a questionnaire administered to 348 second and third year students of an Indian university who were enrolled in its undergraduate programs in Biotechnology or Microbiology
A similar performance by third year students is further indicative of a systemic failure—in both teaching and assessment—to build even the basic practicable knowledge expected of an undergraduate student enrolled for a degree in microbiology or biotechnology
The results corroborate the finding of a previous study by Phadnis and Pandit (2011) that the conventional assessment system in Mumbai University has led to a practice of superficial learning suited only for passing the university examinations which are typically designed to test lower level cognitive skills
Summary
We present an analysis of students’ responses to application-based questions on the topic of growth and control of microorganisms, from a questionnaire administered to 348 second and third year students of an Indian university who were enrolled in its undergraduate programs in Biotechnology or Microbiology. Reports by teachers included their views on the impact of the laboratory curriculum on building student capabilities. Studies such as this play an important role in informing the ongoing discourse in the country about much-needed reforms in undergraduate education. There is an urgent need to build a repository of such studies rooted in research, both qualitative and quantitative, to reveal the problems of the existing education system and inform the reform process. Studies diagnosing students’ understanding form the first step in the process of such reforms; the nature of ideas presented by students, when they deviate from those that are scientifically accepted, can provide insights into formative steps of knowledge construction by students and serve as feedback for improving the teaching and learning process (diSessa and Sherin 1998; Tanner and Allen 2005). A large repertoire of studies identifying misconceptions/alternative conceptions in biology highlights the importance of such studies in determining the origin and structure of these diverse ideas (Fisher 1985; Michael et al 1999; Nehm and Reilly 2007; Pinarbasi 2007; Cooper and Shore 2008)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have