[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-594591-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-594591-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","impacts-of-digital-imaging-versus-drawing-on-student-learning-in-undergraduate-biodiversity-labs","Impacts of Digital Imaging versus Drawing on Student Learning in Undergraduate Biodiversity Labs","","The study examines how documenting observations with digital imaging compares to hand drawing in inquiry-based undergraduate biodiversity labs. Plant biodiversity labs were split into digital imaging (N=221) and hand drawing (N=238) treatments, taught by graduate teaching assistants. Results show digital imaging significantly reduced lower-order content included in lab reports, affected overall student perceptions, decreased learning time efficiency, and lowered perceived excitement, while documentation style did not significantly change lower- or higher-order learning or biology attitudes.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/impacts-of-digital-imaging-versus-drawing-on-student-learning-in-undergraduate-biodiversity-labs/594591/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/impacts-of-digital-imaging-versus-drawing-on-student-learning-in-undergraduate-biodiversity-labs/594591.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Ben ","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-23","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":33},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What comparison does the study make between digital imaging and hand drawing?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"It compares documenting observations using digital imaging versus hand drawing in inquiry-based college biodiversity labs.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How did digital imaging affect lower-order learning compared with hand drawing?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"Imaging had a significant negative effect on the lower-order content students included in their lab reports.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"Did the documentation style influence higher-order learning or attitudes toward biology?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"No. Documentation style showed no significant influence on lower-order or higher-order learning or on attitudes toward biology as a discipline.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},594591,1792210175,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":33,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":106,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},2336478951081,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Impacts of Digital Imaging versus Drawing on Student Learning in Undergraduate Biodiversity Labs  \nJohn M. Basey1*, Anastasia P. Maines1, Clinton D. Francis2, and Brett Melbourne1  \n1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology/University of Colorado at Boulder, 334 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309, 2Department of Biological Sciences/California Polytechnic State University, 1 Grand  \nAve, San Louis Obispo, CA 93407  \n*Corresponding Author: [John.Basey@colorado.edu](John.Basey@colorado.edu)  \nAbstract: We examined the effects of documenting observations with digital imaging versus hand drawing in inquiry-based college biodiversity labs. Plant biodiversity labs were divided into two treatments, digital imaging (N = 221) and hand drawing (N = 238) . Graduate-student teaching assistants (N = 24) taught one class in each treatment. Assessments revealed that imaging relative to drawing had a significant negative effect on the lower order content students included in their lab reports, student perceptions ofthe lab overall, the time efficiency of their learning experience and perceived excitement. Documentation style had no significant influence on lower-order or higher-order learning or attitudes towards biology as a discipline. Contrary to overall trends, observations indicated that a proportion of students were excited and motivated by digital imaging. A mixed model of allowing students the choice of documenting observations with digital imaging or drawing may be the best model.  \nINTRODUCTION  \nThe United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) recognized biodiversity education as a worldwide priority (Lindemann-Methies et al., 2009) . In the United States a great opportunity for biodiversity education exists in the hands-on lab component of college introductory biology classes. Although advocates for biodiversity education emphasize a need for engaging learning experiences that are grounded in evolution and go beyond rote memorization (LindemannMethies et al., 2009, Basey et al., 2014), commonplace undergraduate biodiversity labs take on the form of “marches through the phyla” that emphasize declarative knowledge (see Morgan and Carter 2009, Scully & Fisher 2009) . The need for information on how to transform these biodiversity labs to engaging experiences grounded in science and emphasizing evolution-based higher-order reasoning is paramount.  \nBasey et al. (2014) argued that commonplace biodiversity labs are particularly difficult to transform because of the theoretical nature of evolution, the relatively large quantity of novel and highly interactive terminology required for evolutionbased higher-order reasoning and limitations on working memory. Studies on the effects of transformative designs for biodiversity labs are rare. Smith and Cheruvelil (2009) reported a substantial loss in content understanding by their students when they used a transformed design for their biodiversity labs. Timmerman et al. (2008) reported substantially lower effect sizes for their transformed inquiryoriented biodiversity segment in lab + lecture (0.6) than for their non-transformed non-biodiversity segments (plant anatomy = 2.1, animal anatomy =  \n1.8) . However, neither study analyzed the effects of their transformed design on higher-order cognition learning (i.e. application, analysis and synthesis) . Basey et al. (2014) successfully promoted both lower-order and higher-order learning in a transformed biodiversity lab by reducing overall lower-order content, increasing time allocation through time-efficient hands-on pre-labs, and including written post-labs emphasizing higher-order learning by having students use documented observations as evidence for evolution-based higherorder argumentation. In this study, we extended the model for biodiversity labs of Basey et al. (2014) by analyzing whether observation documentation through digital imaging or hand drawing impacted student learning and attitudes.  \nBiodiversity lab educ","cbCaifunoNPKfgCB","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaifunoNPKfgCB","pdf",131930,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Background and motivation\n## Prior research and limitations\n## Study extension and goal","[{\"question\":\"What comparison does the study make between digital imaging and hand drawing?\",\"answer\":\"It compares documenting observations using digital imaging versus hand drawing in inquiry-based college biodiversity labs.\"},{\"question\":\"How did digital imaging affect lower-order learning compared with hand drawing?\",\"answer\":\"Imaging had a significant negative effect on the lower-order content students included in their lab reports.\"},{\"question\":\"Did the documentation style influence higher-order learning or attitudes toward biology?\",\"answer\":\"No. Documentation style showed no significant influence on lower-order or higher-order learning or on attitudes toward biology as a discipline.\"}]","Impacts of Digital Imaging versus Drawing on Student Learning in Undergraduate Biodiversity Labs | PDF",1792079451,18]