We present as a case study the evolution of a series of participant-centered workshops designed to meet a need in the life sciences education community-the incorporation of best practices in the assessment of student learning. Initially, the ICABL (Inclusive Community for the Assessment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology/BMB Learning) project arose from a grass-roots effort to develop material for a national exam in biochemistry and molecular biology. ICABL has since evolved into a community of practice in which participants themselves-through extensive peer review and reflection-become integral stakeholders in the workshops. To examine this evolution, this case study begins with a pilot workshop supported by seed funding and thoughtful programmatic assessment, the results of which informed evidence-based changes that, in turn, led to an improved experience for the community. Using participant response data, the case study also reveals critical features for successful workshops, including participant-centered activities and the value of frequent peer review of participants' products. Furthermore, we outline a train-the-trainer model for creating a self-renewing community by bringing new perspectives and voices into an existing core leadership team. This case study, then, offers a blueprint for building a thriving, evolving community of practice that not only serves the needs of individual scientist-educators as they seek to enhance student learning, but also provides a pathway for elevating members to positions of leadership.

Assessment is a critical feature of effective instruction. Beyond assigning a grade to student performance, regular assessment can provide instructors, departments, and institutions with ongoing feedback on instructor, course, and program effectiveness. Despite its importance, designing assessments that are accessible to all students and measure relevant learning outcomes can be challenging for many biochemistry and molecular biology (BMB) instructors because they receive little, if any, formal training in assessment practices. Consequently, we ‐ a team of writers for the ASBMB Certification Examination ‐ have launched ICABL, an inclusive community for the assessment of BMB learning. With funding from an NSF grant (Award No. 2018204), we piloted a virtual workshop on summative assessment in Summer 2020. The 28 participants discussed best practices in summative assessment, including Bloom’s taxonomy, backward design using the ASBMB Foundational Concepts and Skills, and rubrics development as tools for informing instructors on the effectiveness of instruction. An explicit objective of the workshop was to broaden representation in the ASBMB education community. Accordingly, 68% of participants taught at minority‐serving institutions, as compared with less than 10% of current ASBMB membership. Both immediate and six‐month follow‐up surveys highlighted the efficacy of this virtual workshop in supporting participants’ professional development. In addition, we have subsequently recruited many of the participants to write and score for the ASBMB Certification Exam as one step in our goal to develop an examination team that better represents and can more effectively address the diversity of individuals in our BMB classrooms. With continued support from the NSF (Award No. 2120673), over the next three years we will be offering a series of additional workshops, both in the United States and overseas, addressing summative, formative, and alternative assessment.

Scientific societies serve as communities of practice in which scientists develop many of the skills and connections required for the progression of their careers. For example, scientific societies offer their members opportunities to attend career development programs, gain experience in communicating science, and receive recognition for achievements within their discipline. Programming for undergraduate student members has recently been increasing, both in prevalence and in its range of offerings. The Alliance to Catalyze Change for Equity in STEM Success, ACCESS, a meta-organization seeking equity and inclusivity in life sciences fields, has examined programs and opportunities focused on undergraduates across its member scientific societies to identify common themes, promising practices and challenges. In this article, we share and discuss our findings.

ABSTRACTThe extracellular matrix (ECM) is a complex assembly of macromolecules that provides both architectural support and molecular signals to cells and modulate their behaviors. Originally considered a passive mechanical structure, decades of research have since demonstrated how the ECM dynamically regulates a diverse set of cellular processes in development, homeostasis, and disease progression. In September 2021, the American Society for Matrix Biology (ASMB) organized a hybrid scientific meeting, integrating in-person and virtual formats, to discuss the latest developments in ECM research. Here, we highlight exciting scientific advances that emerged from the meeting including (1) the use of model systems for fundamental and translation ECM research, (2) ECM-targeting approaches as therapeutic modalities, (3) cell-ECM interactions, and (4) the ECM as a critical component of tissue engineering strategies. In addition, we discuss how the ASMB incorporated mentoring, career development, and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in both virtual and in-person events. Finally, we reflect on the hybrid scientific conference format and how it will help the ASMB accomplish its mission moving forward.

Georgetown University offers unique undergraduate opportunities for experiential learning in global health. Since the early 2000s, all global health seniors participate in the Practical Experience Abroad (PEA), conducting semester-long research and engaging in service-learning in mostly developing countries. This study examines the PEA’s medium- and long-term effect on students’ careers and life choices and assesses the program’s objective of developing essential global health competencies. Ninety percent of alumni (n = 129) rated their PEA as an excellent or good experience, over 85% felt that the experience influenced their personal and professional decisions after graduation, and most believed the PEA had a positive impact on their job search and/or graduate education. The main competencies students developed abroad were intercultural communication, flexibility, adaptability, self-direction, and research skills. The findings underline the great value of experiential learning in global health education and suggest that extended field experiences greatly enhance students’ global competency and career prospects.

With support from the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB), a community of biochemistry and molecular biology (BMB) scientist-educators has developed and administered an assessment instrument designed to evaluate student competence across four core concept and skill areas fundamental to BMB. The four areas encompass energy and metabolism; information storage and transfer; macromolecular structure, function, and assembly; and skills including analytical and quantitative reasoning. First offered in 2014, the exam has now been administered to nearly 4000 students in ASBMB-accredited programs at more than 70 colleges and universities. Here, we describe the development and continued maturation of the exam program, including the organic role of faculty volunteers as drivers and stewards of all facets: content and format selection, question development, and scoring.

Each year, volunteers from the biochemistry and molecular (BMB) community come together to construct and score the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) Certification Exam, a tool provided to ASBMB-accredited programs for assessing key competencies in the discipline. Grounded in a community consensus about core BMB concept and skill areas, the annual exam is designed to evaluate undergraduate students’ competence in the areas of energy and metabolism; information storage and transfer; macromolecular structure, function, and assembly; and skills including analytical and quantitative reasoning. First offered in 2014, this assessment tool is now representative of a relatively mature exam development process. The one-hour exam consists of 12 questions, with a mix of multiple-select/multiple-choice and constructed-response formats, balanced across the four concept and skill areas and addressing both lower- and higher-order cognitive processing levels. Each constructed response is scored by a team of at least three BMB scientist-educators, and inter-rater reliability is calculated to ensure consistency. All questions are piloted and revised before they contribute to students’ exam scores. To date, nearly 5,000 students from over 70 colleges and universities have taken the ASBMB exam. Of these, an average of approximately 42% of students per year have scored sufficiently well to earn “Certification” of their exam performance by ASBMB; approximately 13% of students have earned “Certification with Distinction”. Upwards of 120 scientist-educators – with professional affiliations ranging from small, primarily undergraduate institutions to large research universities – have contributed to question development and/or scoring. Many volunteers have participated over multiple years; for example, 97% of the 2020 scorers plan to score again in 2021. Future directions include building the community of volunteers, expanding the question bank, delivering the exam online (in spring of 2021), and investigating the potential of the ASBMB Certification Exam to inform programmatic assessment.

Assessment of student learning is a cornerstone of biochemistry and molecular biology (BMB) education. Yet few BMB instructors receive meaningful professional development in best practices in assessment. To promote such training in the BMB education community, we conducted a workshop on writing questions for summative assessment in the summer of 2020. Recognizing the individual and institutional homogeneity in our BMB education community, we recruited workshop participants primarily from the Southeastern United States due to the multitude of Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions in the region. 28 participants were selected to provide diversity in individual and institutional demographics. Led by six members of the ASBMB Accreditation and Certification Exam Team, the online workshop, spread across nine days, featured whole-group discussions interspersed with small-group activities. Post-workshop surveys revealed significant gains in self-reported professional development in assessment creation. Surveys also highlighted the inclusive environment of the workshop. 43% of the workshop participants were subsequently recruited into the ASBMB Certification Exam Team, providing fresh voices and perspective to the group. This workshop is an excellent example of how the intentional partnership with individuals and institutions from historically marginalized populations can begin a movement toward necessary and meaningful change in the BMB education community.

Scientific societies aiming to foster inclusion of scientists from underrepresented (UR) backgrounds among their membership often delegate primary responsibility for this goal to a diversity-focused committee. The National Science Foundation has funded the creation of the Alliance to Catalyze Change for Equity in STEM Success (ACCESS), a meta-organization bringing together representatives from several such STEM society committees to serve as a hub for a growing community of practice. Our goal is to coordinate efforts to advance inclusive practices by sharing experiences and making synergistic discoveries about what works. ACCESS has analyzed the approaches by which member societies have sought to ensure inclusivity through selection of annual meeting speakers. Here we discuss how inclusive speaker selection fosters better scientific environments for all and identify challenges and promising practices for societies striving to maximize inclusivity of speakers in their scientific programming.