The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature
Analysis of the primary literature in the undergraduate curriculum is associated with gains in student learning. In particular, the CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) method is associated with an increase in student critic...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Society for Microbiology
2013-08-01
|
Series: | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://jmbesubmissions.asm.org/index.php/jmbe/article/view/506 |
id |
doaj-f5009a163bca4ebba6adee7933e342d2 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f5009a163bca4ebba6adee7933e342d22020-11-25T02:07:03ZengAmerican Society for MicrobiologyJournal of Microbiology & Biology Education1935-78771935-78852013-08-0114210.1128/jmbe.v14i2.506304The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary LiteratureMiriam Segura-Totten0Nancy E. Dalman1University of North GeorgiaUniversity of North GeorgiaAnalysis of the primary literature in the undergraduate curriculum is associated with gains in student learning. In particular, the CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) method is associated with an increase in student critical thinking skills. We adapted the CREATE method within a required cell biology class and compared the learning gains of students using CREATE to those of students involved in less structured literature discussions. We found that while both sets of students had gains in critical thinking, students who used the CREATE method did not show significant improvement overb students engaged in a more traditional method for dissecting the literature. Students also reported similar learning gains for both literature discussion methods. Our study suggests that, at least in our educational context, the CREATE method does not lead to higher learning gains than a less structured way of reading primary literature. http://jmbesubmissions.asm.org/index.php/jmbe/article/view/506critical thinkinginquirycell biologyCREATEliterature discussion |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Miriam Segura-Totten Nancy E. Dalman |
spellingShingle |
Miriam Segura-Totten Nancy E. Dalman The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education critical thinking inquiry cell biology CREATE literature discussion |
author_facet |
Miriam Segura-Totten Nancy E. Dalman |
author_sort |
Miriam Segura-Totten |
title |
The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature |
title_short |
The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature |
title_full |
The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature |
title_fullStr |
The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature |
title_full_unstemmed |
The CREATE Method Does Not Result in Greater Gains in Critical Thinking than a More Traditional Method of Analyzing the Primary Literature |
title_sort |
create method does not result in greater gains in critical thinking than a more traditional method of analyzing the primary literature |
publisher |
American Society for Microbiology |
series |
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education |
issn |
1935-7877 1935-7885 |
publishDate |
2013-08-01 |
description |
Analysis of the primary literature in the undergraduate curriculum is associated with gains in student learning. In particular, the CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) method is associated with an increase in student critical thinking skills. We adapted the CREATE method within a required cell biology class and compared the learning gains of students using CREATE to those of students involved in less structured literature discussions. We found that while both sets of students had gains in critical thinking, students who used the CREATE method did not show significant improvement overb students engaged in a more traditional method for dissecting the literature. Students also reported similar learning gains for both literature discussion methods. Our study suggests that, at least in our educational context, the CREATE method does not lead to higher learning gains than a less structured way of reading primary literature.
|
topic |
critical thinking inquiry cell biology CREATE literature discussion |
url |
http://jmbesubmissions.asm.org/index.php/jmbe/article/view/506 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT miriamseguratotten thecreatemethoddoesnotresultingreatergainsincriticalthinkingthanamoretraditionalmethodofanalyzingtheprimaryliterature AT nancyedalman thecreatemethoddoesnotresultingreatergainsincriticalthinkingthanamoretraditionalmethodofanalyzingtheprimaryliterature AT miriamseguratotten createmethoddoesnotresultingreatergainsincriticalthinkingthanamoretraditionalmethodofanalyzingtheprimaryliterature AT nancyedalman createmethoddoesnotresultingreatergainsincriticalthinkingthanamoretraditionalmethodofanalyzingtheprimaryliterature |
_version_ |
1715567725775945728 |