Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Essay
  • Published:

Cell biology should be taught as science is practised

Abstract

Over the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic transformation in the goals of science teaching at all levels and within all disciplines. The emphasis has moved from students obtaining a base of scientific facts to students developing a deep understanding of important concepts. This transformation requires a significant shift in the approach and attitude of the instructors and students, as well as in the procedures and techniques that are required to teach cell biology.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Problem-based learning.
Figure 2: A concept map.

References

  1. Project on Liberal Education and the Sciences. The Liberal Art of Science: Agenda for Action. The Report of the Project on Liberal Education and the Sciences (American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington DC, 1990).

  2. Wood, W. B. Inquiry-based undergraduate teaching in the life sciences at large research universities: a perspective on the Boyer Commission Report. Cell Biol. Educ. 2, 112?116 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Morgan, E. BIO2010. Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists (National Academy, Washington DC, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Howard, D. & Miskowski, J. Using a module-based laboratory to incorporate inquiry into a large cell biology course. Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 249?260 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tanner, K. & Allen, D. Approaches to biology teaching and learning: learning styles and the problem of instructional selection ? engaging all students in science courses. Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 197?201 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tanner, K. & Allen, D. Approaches to cell biology teaching: a primer on standards. Cell Biol. Educ. 1, 95?100 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. National Research Council. Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology (National Academy, Washington DC, 1999).

  8. National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School (eds Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R. & Bransford, J. D.) (National Academy, Washington DC, 2000).

  9. Boyer, E. L. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: Three Years After the Boyer Report (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Stony Brook, New York, 2002).

  11. Fox, M. A. & Hackerman, N. Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science and Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (National Academy, Washington DC, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  12. National Research Council. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop (eds McCray, R., DeHaan, R. & Schuck, J.) (National Academy, Washington DC, 2003).

  13. Poincaré, H. in Science and Hypothesis Ch. IX, 140?159 (Walter Scott, London, 1905).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tanner, K. & Allen, D. Approaches to biology teaching: understanding the wrong answers ? teaching toward conceptual change. Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 112?117 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wright, R. L. Content versus process: is this a fair choice? Undergraduate biology courses for nonscientists: toward a lived curriculum. Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 189?198 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lodish, H. F., Rodriguez, R. K. & Klionsky, D. J. Lectures: can't learn with them, can't learn without them. Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 202?211 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Powell, K. Science education: spare me the lecture. Nature 425, 234?236 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Klionsky, D. Constructing knowledge in the lecture hall. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 31, 246?251 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  19. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Project 2061: Science for all Americans (Oxford Univ., New York, 1989).

  20. Tanner, K. D., Chatman, L. & Allen, D. Approaches to biology teaching and learning: science teaching and learning across the school?university divide ? cultivating conversations through scientist?teacher partnerships. Cell Biol. Educ. 2, 195?201 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Arwood, L. Teaching cell biology to nonscience majors through forensics, or how to design a killer course. Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 131?138 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Novak, J. D. The promise of new ideas and new technology for improving teaching and learning. Cell Biol. Educ. 2, 122?132 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wood, W. B. Advanced high school biology in an era of rapid change: a summary of the biology panel report from the NRC Committee on Programs for Advanced Study of Mathematics and Science in American High Schools. Cell Biol. Educ. 1, 123?127 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Allen, D. & Tanner, K. Approaches to cell biology teaching: learning content in context ? problem-based learning. Cell Biol. Educ. 2, 73?81 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Woods, D. What about problem-based learning? J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 15, 62?64 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ausubel, D. P. The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Ausubel, D. P. In defense of advance organizers: a reply to the critics. Rev. Educ. Res. 48, 251?257 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. & Hanesian, H. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View 2nd edn (Reprinted, Warbel & Peck, New York, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ausubel, D. P. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View (Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ping, C. Teaching cell biology in a medical course in China: applying appropriate methods. The China Papers July, 48?52 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rao, S. P. & DiCarlo, S. E. Active learning of respiratory physiology improves performance on respiratory physiology examinations. Am. J. Physiol. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 25, 55?61 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rao, S. P. & DiCarlo, S. E. Peer instruction improves performance on quizzes. Am. J. Physiol. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 24, 51?55 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Cortright, R. N., Collins, H. L. & DiCarlo, S. E. Peer instruction enhanced meaningful learning: ability to solve novel problems. Am. J. Physiol. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 29, 107?111 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Cortright, R. N., Collins, H. L., Rodenbaugh, D. W. & DiCarlo, S. E. Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing. Am. J. Physiol. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 27, 102?108 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Dewey, J. How We Think: a Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process (Revised edn) (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1933).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Piaget, J. The Psychology of the Child (Basic Books, New York, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  37. National Research Council. Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook Ch. 4 (National Academy, Washington DC, 1997).

  38. Marrs, K. & Novak, G. Just-in-time teaching in biology: creating an active learner classroom using the internet. Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 49?61 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Stith, B. Use of animation in teaching cell biology. Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 181?188 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Brown, J. S. Growing up digital: how the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change 32, 11?20 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cuban, L. Oversold and Underused: Computers in Classroom (Harvard Univ., Cambridge, USA, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cates, W., Price, B. & Bodzin, A. Implementing technology-rich curricular materials: findings from the Exploring Life project. Comput. Schools 20, 153?169 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kelly, H. Education for tomorrow needs innovation today. Carnegie Rep. 2, 44?45 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Gagné, R. M. The Conditions of Learning (Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Rieber, L. P. Computers, Graphics, and Learning (Brown & Benchmark, Madison,1994).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Paivio, A. Dual coding theory: retrospect and current status. Can. J. Psychol. 45, 255?287 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Paivio, A. Imagery and Verbal Processes (Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  48. McClean, P. et al. Molecular and cellular biology animations: development and impact on student learning. Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 169?179 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Blystone, R. V. & MacAlpine, B. WWW. cell biology education: using the World Wide Web to develop a new teaching topic. Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 105?111 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Campbell, A. M. Public access for teaching genomics, proteomics, and bioinformatics. Cell Biol. Educ. 2, 98?111 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Solomon, R. C. & Solomon, J. Up the University: Recreating Higher Education in America (Addison-Wesely, Reading, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Vander, A. J. The Claude Bernard Distinguished Lecture. The excitement and challenge of teaching physiology: shaping ourselves and the future. Am. J. Physiol. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 267, S3?S16 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Haramati, A. Teaching physiology: filling a bucket or lighting a fire? Physiologist 43, 117?121 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. Understanding by Design (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Mintzes, J. J. & Wandersee, J. H. in Teaching Science for Understanding: a Human Constructivist View (eds Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H. & Novak, J.) Ch. 2 (Academic, San Diego, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Whitehead, A. The Aims of Education and Other Essays (Macmillan, New York, 1929).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DiCarlo, S. Cell biology should be taught as science is practised. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 7, 290–296 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1856

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1856

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing