NSF-Style Peer Review for Teaching Undergraduate Grant-Writing

Department of Biology, Jacksonville State University, Джексонвилл, Alabama, United States
The American Biology Teacher (Impact Factor: 0.26). 12/2006; 69(Jan 2007):34-37. DOI: 10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[34:NPRFTU]2.0.CO;2
Download full-text


Available from: Benjie G Blair, Jun 12, 2014
  • Source
    • "The current report illustrates one way to involve a larger number of students in both laboratory neuroscience and scientific publishing in an economically feasible manner; the exercise of submitting articles to the undergraduate Neuroscience journal IMPULSE was a successful learning experience. The specific impact of peer review on the scientific learning experience has not been addressed in this work, but future studies expanding on the work of others in this area (Woodget, 2003; Prichard, 2005; Blair et al., 2007; Hartberg et al., 2008) using the IMPULSE experience are currently being planned by the student editorial team. This report illustrates that IMPULSE can be incorporated as an integral part of an academic curriculum allowing for larger student involvement with hands-on neuroscience research and scientific publishing. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The journal IMPULSE offers undergraduates worldwide the opportunity to publish research and serve as peer reviewers for the submissions of others. Undergraduate faculty have recognized the journal's value in engaging students working in their labs in the publication process. However, integration of scientific publication into an undergraduate laboratory classroom setting has been lacking. We report here on a course at Ursinus College where 20 students taking Molecular Neurobiology were required to submit manuscripts to IMPULSE. The syllabus allowed for the laboratory research to coincide with the background research and writing of the manuscript. Students completed their projects on the impact of drugs on the Daphnia magna nervous system while producing manuscripts ready for submission by week 7 of the course. Findings from a survey completed by the students and perceptions of the faculty member teaching the course indicated that students spent much more time writing, were more focused on completing the assays, completed the assays with larger data sets, were more engaged in learning the scientific concepts and were more thorough with their revisions of the paper knowing that it might be published. Further, the professor found she was more thorough in critiquing students' papers knowing they would be externally reviewed. Incorporating journal submission into the course stimulated an in depth writing experience and allowed for a deeper exploration of the topic than students would have experienced otherwise. This case study provides evidence that IMPULSE can be successfully used as a means of incorporating scientific publication into an undergraduate laboratory science course. This approach to teaching undergraduate neuroscience allows for a larger number of students to have hands-on research and scientific publishing experience than would be possible with the current model of a few students in a faculty member's laboratory. This report illustrates that IMPULSE can be incorporated as an integral part of an academic curriculum with positive outcomes on student engagement and performance.
    Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education 03/2011; 9(2):A84-A91.
  • Source
    • "students who anticipate taking on the role of tutor compared with those simply demonstrating their knowledge for a grade (Hooper 1992). Through critiquing the work of peers, students experience one of the ways in which scientists interact within a professional community, collectively constructing knowledge (Blair et al. 2007; Kern et al. 2003; Koprowski 1997; Liu et al. 2002; Trautmann et al. 2003). Although benefits of student peer review have been widely reported, evidence in support of these benefits is primarily anecdotal. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Two studies analyzed impacts of writing and receiving web-mediated peer reviews on revision of research reports by undergraduate science students. After conducting toxicology experiments, 77 students posted draft reports and exchanged double-blind reviews. The first study randomly assigned students to four groups representing full, partial, or no peer review. Students engaging in any aspect of peer review made more revisions than students confined to reviewing their own reports. In the second study, all students engaged in peer review, and the influence of writing versus receiving critiques was analyzed using linear regression. Both studies showed receiving reviews to be more significant than writing them in terms of triggering report revisions. Students valued the peer review experience and credited it with giving them insights about their work. Conclusions address implications for optimal design of online peer review systems and for further research into student learning gains.
    Educational Technology Research and Development 10/2009; 57(5):685-704. DOI:10.1007/s11423-007-9077-y · 1.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: “Publish or perish” is a phrase familiar to untenured and tenured faculty alike. In recent years, prominence has been placed on academicians to secure external funding for their research and training projects. The counselor education field has not been immune to this call for externally funded projects. This article includes strategies for seeking and receiving external funding for counseling-related research in an effort to help counselor educators flourish in a paradigm that increasingly calls for greater external funding. Emphasis is placed on gaining knowledge and experience with federal funding agencies.
    06/2012; 51(2). DOI:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2012.00010.x