Dataset Information

BioSkills Guide: Development and National Validation of a Tool for Interpreting the Vision and Change Core Competencies.

ABSTRACT: To excel in modern science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers, biology majors need a range of transferable skills, yet competency development is often a relatively underdeveloped facet of the undergraduate curriculum. We have elaborated the Vision and Change core competency framework into a resource called the BioSkills Guide, a set of measurable learning outcomes that can be more readily implemented by faculty. Following an iterative review process including more than 200 educators, we gathered evidence of the BioSkills Guide's content validity using a national survey of more than 400 educators. Rates of respondent support were high (74.3-99.6%) across the 77 outcomes in the final draft. Our national sample during the development and validation phases included college biology educators representing more than 250 institutions, including 73 community colleges, and a range of course levels and biology subdisciplines. Comparison of the BioSkills Guide with other science competency frameworks reveals significant overlap but some gaps and ambiguities. These differences may reflect areas where understandings of competencies are still evolving in the undergraduate biology community, warranting future research. We envision the BioSkills Guide supporting a variety of applications in undergraduate biology, including backward design of individual lessons and courses, competency assessment development, and curriculum mapping and planning.

SUBMITTER: Clemmons AW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8693931 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of the study was to develop quality indicators that can be used for quality assessment of registries of occupational diseases in relation to preventive policy on a national level. The research questions were: 1. Which indicators determine the quality of national registries of occupational diseases with respect to their ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy? 2. What are the criteria that can distinguish low quality from high quality?MethodsFirst, we performed a literature search to assess which output of registries can be considered appropriate for preventive policy and to develop a set of preliminary indicators and criteria. Second, final indicators and criteria were assessed and their content validity was tested in a Delphi study, for which experts from the 25 EU Member States were invited.ResultsThe literature search revealed two different types of information output to be appropriate for preventive policy: monitor and alert information. For the evaluation of the quality of the monitor and alert function we developed ten indicators and criteria. Sixteen of the twenty-five experts responded in the first round of the Delphi study, and eleven in the second round. Based on their comments, we assessed the final nine indicators: the completeness of the notification form, coverage of registration, guidelines or criteria for notification, education and training of reporting physicians, completeness of registration, statistical methods used, investigation of special cases, presentation of monitor information, and presentation of alert information. Except for the indicator "coverage of registration" for the alert function, all the indicators met the preset requirements of content validity.ConclusionWe have developed quality indicators and criteria to evaluate registries for occupational diseases on the ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy on a national level. Together, these indicators form a tool which can be used for quality improvement of registries of occupational diseases.

Dataset Information

BioSkills Guide: Development and National Validation of a Tool for Interpreting the Vision and Change Core Competencies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets