Yowler, Joanna Yang

When COVID-19 caused worldwide cancellations of summer research immersion programs in 2020, Mayo Clinic rallied to create an alternate virtual experience called Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR). SFIR was designed not only to ensure the continuance of science pathways training for undergraduate scientists but also to support undergraduate mental wellbeing, given the known pandemic stressors. A total of 170 participants took part in the program and were surveyed pre-post for outcomes in biomedical research career knowledge, biomedical research career interest, research skills confidence, and three dimensions of mental wellbeing. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following participation in SFIR. The participants’ mean research skills confidence also rose between 0.08 and 1.32 points on a 7-point scale across 12 items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Success in science pathways support was accompanied by positive shifts in participant mental wellbeing. Measurable decreases in stress (Perceived Stress Scale, p < 0.0001) accompanied gains in resilience (Brief Resilience Scale, p < 0.0001) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale, p = 0.0005). Collectively, the data suggest that core objectives of traditional in-person summer research programming can be accomplished virtually and that these programs can simultaneously impact student wellbeing. This theoretical framework is particularly salient during COVID-19, but the increased accessibility of virtual programs such as SFIR can continue to bolster science education pathways long after the pandemic is gone.

The processes of mitosis and meiosis are oft-cited and long-standing examples of concepts that are difficult for students to learn and understand. While there are many examples in the literature of “how-to-do-it,” innovative instructional approaches for teaching mitosis and meiosis, publications that include measurement of learning gains are fewer. Moreover, when measurement of learning gains are reported, the outcomes of innovative approaches are most often compared to outcomes from traditional lecture-format instruction. In contrast, this research compares two active-learning approaches to teaching meiosis through modeling in an introductory undergraduate biology course for health sciences majors. Items from the published, validated Meiosis Concept Inventory were used for pre- and post-instruction assessment. In addition, we collected data regarding student perceptions of the learning experience in each modeling scenario through two Likert-scale items and two free-response items. Overall, students demonstrated significant learning gains from pre- to post-assessment. We found no significant differences in performance on the posttest between the two modeling approaches, indicating that the selection of the modeling activity used to support student learning can be made on the basis of other criteria, such as instructor preference, physical classroom layout, or available supplies.