A comparison of discussion-based methods (CREATE) for improving scientific literacy

Background/Question/Methods

Many undergraduate and graduate level classes use primary scientific literature for class discussions and as required citations for class projects.  Yet, students are infrequently taught skills for reading, comprehending and evaluating this literature.  Methods for teaching scientific literacy skills have been developed, but are often targeted toward lower level classes and their effectiveness over standard techniques is rarely experimentally tested.  This study sought to test gains in learning using an adapted version of the CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate the hypotheses, Analyze the data, Think of the next Experiment) methodology (Hoskins 2007), which aims to place students in the role of researcher/discoverer by having students read, analyze and discuss a research article removed of title, authors, abstract, and discussion section.  This forces students to draw their own conclusions from the paper by placing heavy emphasis on figure, graph, and data interpretation using a worksheet.  During class, students then work to develop their own version of the discussion section. We adapted this method for an upper-level undergraduate and graduate ecology class.  Students were divided into an experimental group using the CREATE method and a control group using standard discussion techniques.  Gains in student learning and self-perceived skills were assessed pre- and post-class.  

Results/Conclusions

Pre- and mid-semester assessments demonstrated that students in the experimental group perceived that they understood more about the assigned primary scientific literature readings due to the CREATE methodology.  While this effect may be an artifact of the additional time spent reading the paper due to the additional worksheet assignment, students also showed a strong preference for using the adapted CREATE method over standard discussion techniques. Moreover, time spent in class discussing the conclusions, merits, and implications of the study versus explaining the specifics of the methodologies employed in the reading were greater in the experimental group compared to the control group.  These results suggest that using the CREATE methodology, which forces students to interpret and draw their own conclusions from assigned readings, can achieve gains in scientific literacy and understanding relative to standard discussion techniques. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that the CREATE methodology can be easily adapted for upper- or lower-level undergraduate and graduate classes.