What’s the Eberly Center reading and thinking about this month?

The Research and Scholarship Digest, published the first Monday of each month, consists of short summaries of recently peer-reviewed studies on teaching and learning topics. This digest offers a view into what we are reading and thinking about at the Eberly Center that:

• adds to our understanding of how students learn
• is potentially generalizable across teaching contexts in higher education
• provokes reflection on implications for our teaching and educational development practices.

We hope the readers of this digest will find it a useful resource for staying in-tune with the rapidly expanding education research literature.

Chen, X., Twomey, K. E., Hayes, M., & Westermann, G. (2025). The limits of curiosity? New evidence for the roles of metacognitive abilities and curiosity in learning. Metacognition and Learning, 20(1), 1. 

This study explores how metacognitive abilities and curiosity influence learning. The study uses a blurred picture paradigm, in which participants viewed blurred images, rated their confidence in their knowledge (Knowledge Confidence) and guesses (Correctness Confidence), and expressed their curiosity. The findings reveal that curiosity peaks when learners are moderately uncertain about their knowledge, while Correctness Confidence—confidence in the accuracy of their guesses—linearly increases curiosity. Surprisingly, learning is best predicted by Knowledge Confidence, particularly when learners are uncertain ("Not Sure" state), rather than by curiosity itself. These results highlight the different roles of metacognitive appraisals in driving curiosity and learning, potentially offering insights for instructors when they aim at optimizing knowledge acquisition.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09407-9

Chow, M. F. (2024). Understanding student perspectives on peer feedback: Written versus video versus face-to-face dialog. Active Learning in Higher Education. 

What is the most preferred way to receive peer feedback? A study involving two undergraduate courses explored this by having students engage in peer feedback across three formats: face-to-face, written text, and video recordings. Each student provided feedback on their peers’ assignments using all three methods, guided by explicit assessment criteria. Afterward, students completed surveys to evaluate their experiences, focusing on usefulness, engagement, and overall preference. 

Face-to-face feedback emerged as the most preferred format. Students appreciated its immediacy and opportunity for real-time clarification, which enhanced their understanding and strengthened peer connections. Written feedback followed, valued for its clarity and permanence. Video feedback was the least preferred due to technical challenges, such as low video quality and difficulty understanding accents, and its lack of interactivity.

Face-to-face interactions for peer feedback were the most preferred, while written feedback serves as a clear and structured complement. Video feedback requires addressing technical and engagement barriers to improve effectiveness.

http://doi.org/10.1177/14697874241301263

Rosemary Pradell, L., Parmenter, J. G., Galliher, R. V., & Berke, R. (2024). LGBTQ+ engineering students’ recommendations for sustaining and supporting diversity in STEM. Journal of LGBT Youth, 1-31. 

In this study, the authors interviewed ten LGBTQ+ engineering students about their experiences in higher education engineering programs and then analyzed the interviews thematically for recommendations to improve DEI efforts and feelings of safety, belonging, and inclusion for LGBTQ+ students in STEM fields. The interviews followed a semi-structured interview format and were conducted for 40-60 minutes. Follow-up questions focused on eliciting more information about emerging themes. Participants were asked about their experiences as LGBTQ+ students in an engineering program and their recommendations or advice for programs seeking to improve DEI efforts. Participants’ recommendations focused on three areas: (1) improving the DEI culture within their department and discipline; (2) increasing LGBTQ+ visibility within the curriculum and program; and (3) building community to promote feelings of belonging.

http://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2024.2321463.

Wickline, V. B., Ford, C., Gurung, R. A. R., & Appleby, D. (2025). Can syllabus snapshots predict student perceptions of course and instructor? Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. Advance online publication. 

Researchers created two versions of a syllabus addendum known as a “snapshot”, which are one-page, color, image-heavy documents that feature information allowing students to get a glimpse into who an instructor is and what their class is like, and conducted an experiment to assess their impact on student perceptions. One of the snapshots was a syllabus snapshot, which provided an overview of course information, and the other was an instructor snapshot, which featured a photo of the instructor and information about the instructor’s background and hobbies. Using a 2x2 design, researchers recruited students (n = 181) to view a course syllabus along with both, one, or neither of the snapshots before responding to a questionnaire asking them about their perceptions of the instructor’s care, competency, and the course in general. Overall results showed favorable perceptions and no significant differences across the conditions. Exploratory analysis of individual items on the questionnaire, however, showed that students who viewed the syllabus snapshot did indicate some more favorable perceptions compared to those who did not view it (e.g., more likely to take the course and recommend it to others). Implications are discussed and all experimental materials (including the snapshots) are available online at http://osf.io/gtyaj/.

http://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000432