Since
the students of the science faculty have limited experience in reading and
analyzing scientific primary literature, they often find themselves in fixes in
utilizing and appreciating the information. As the title of the article
suggests, the intent of its author is to enable students, especially of science
faculty, to critically read, analyze, discuss and utilize the information of
scientific primary literature. Although the subtitle suggests, the article is
purported to improve the analytical ability of students of an Advanced Cell
Biology Course, students of other fields of study would be greatly benefited from
this article as well. Therefore, the author intends to provide a useful
guideline for students in this regard. As for me, I want to be benefited from
this article since I am also a student of the science faculty.
In
most cases, the students fail to critically read and analyze the scientific
primary literature as they find difficult jargons and unfamiliar way of
discussion. However, the author believes that most students have the required
ability in this regard; proper guideline is the only necessary thing. Once the
author found that when instructors provide specific guidelines as to how they
should be researching on information, then not only students can properly
analyze an original research article and realize the information but also they
find the task as an enjoyable endeavor. Besides, group discussions in a
friendly atmosphere inside and outside of formal class, and reading outside
sources in addition to the textbooks are necessary.
The
author gave the students a list of necessary books, a set of questions as to
how to review a scientific article and discussed with them in a trustworthy
manner, and then wanted to find out how the students respond to the course they
were undergoing. All of the students showed their zeal and most of them
participated in the discussions everyday. While the students found that
preparation of article “reviews was extremely time consuming, they also felt
that it really forced them to closely examine the articles and prepared them
for discussion” [1]. The outcome of this method was very positive. The author
found that students were highly motivated and readily engaged in discussion and
they got quite high grades.
Students’
response to the course was very positive. Data were collected on the basis of
the IDEA Form Survey. In the summary of the survey provided in the article
shows that 97 percent of the students progressed on relevant goals in all
courses and 95 percent in similar goals. 98 percent improved their attitude
toward the field in all courses and 92 percent in similar courses. 98 percent
liked to take instructor again in all courses and 96 percent in similar courses
[2]. Moreover, the course improved the reading, writing, and analytical skills
of the students. It did increase their ability to critique the scientific primary
literature, to design their own experiment, to interpret data. Most
importantly, the students could use the research methods employed by the
authors of the articles they read. The “out-of-class meetings were useful,
productive, and enhanced … in-class dialogue” [3]. Therefore, the author
emphasizes on group discussions both in and outside of class.
This
article is very useful for me as it provides some very useful advice and
guidelines for analyzing the scientific primary literature. In think the method
described in this article would be equally useful for me to do better in my own
courses. It will increase my ability to read, review and utilize the scientific
articles. The set of questions guideline questions provided for preparing
article review would be especially beneficial for me and my group. After
reading this article, I did realize the importance of group discussion.
Overall, I think the article would turn to be very useful for me and my group.
References
[1]
Diane Janick-Buckner, “Getting
Undergraduates to Critically Read and Discuss Primary Literature,” JCST, pp.
29-33, September/October 1997
[2]
Diane Janick-Buckner, “Getting
Undergraduates to Critically Read and Discuss Primary Literature,” JCST, pp.
29-33, September/October 1997
[3]
Diane Janick-Buckner, “Getting
Undergraduates to Critically Read and Discuss Primary Literature,” JCST, pp.
29-33, September/October 1997
Labels: Biology, Science, Scientific Literature,
No comments:
Post a Comment