Back

Making Course Structure Visible in a Multi-Instructor Graduate Genomics Course: A Course-Level Evaluation of Standardized Learning Supports

SAITOU, M.; Diblasi, C.

2026-05-08 scientific communication and education
10.64898/2026.05.06.723173 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Graduate-level genomics courses require students to integrate dense material across subfields, concepts and methods. In modular, multi-instructor courses, students may struggle because the coherence between lectures can be difficult to navigate, while the course structure may be visible to instructors. We evaluated a 2025 navigation redesign of BIO322, a graduate genomics course at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, while preserving course content, multi-instructor teaching, modular organization and assessment framework. The redesign includes introducing a standardized self-learning guide, expanded syllabus, enriched online quiz feedback, and added support for a final group research proposal. Using anonymized course evaluation scores from 2021-2025 and aggregated learning management system access data from 2023-2025, we examined student experience and resource use. In 2025, five of six course evaluation items reached their highest observed BIO322 scores, while one, lecture-specific score remained within the previous range. The consolidated self-learning guide was accessed by nearly all students, whereas access to optional readings declined across the course sequence, despite comparatively stable page views per accessing student. These course-level findings are consistent with improved perceived navigability following the introduction of standardized learning support. However, some students continued to report difficulty identifying priorities and connections among course components, indicating that challenges in perceived course coherence remained for part of the cohort despite the redesign. Practitioner PointsO_LIMaking course structure explicit may improve students perceived navigability in multi-instructor graduate genomics courses. C_LIO_LIA centralized self-learning guide can broaden access to preparatory guidance without changing core course content or assessment. C_LIO_LIOptional learning supports may be used unevenly, so resource availability should not be assumed to translate into uniform resource access. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.4%
3
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
4
FASEB BioAdvances
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.4%
6
Glycobiology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
8
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.7%
9
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 9%
3.7%
10
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
11
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.8%
12
BMC Medical Education
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.8%
14
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
15
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
16
BioData Mining
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
17
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
18
FEBS Open Bio
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
19
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
20
Journal of Cellular Physiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
21
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
22
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
FEBS Letters
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
24
Behavior Research Methods
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%