Article

Figure Analysis: A Teaching Technique

to Promote Visual Literacy and Active
s
Learningw

Amy M. Wiles*

From the Department of Biology, Mercer University, Macon, Georgia

31207

Abstract
Learning often improves when active learning techniques
are used in place of traditional lectures. For many of these
techniques, however, students are expected to apply concepts that they have already grasped. A challenge, therefore, is how to incorporate active learning into the
classroom of courses with heavy content, such as
molecular-based biology courses. An additional challenge
is that visual literacy is often overlooked in undergraduate
science education. To address both of these challenges, a
technique called figure analysis was developed and implemented in three different levels of undergraduate biology
courses. Here, students learn content while gaining practice in interpreting visual information by discussing figures

with their peers. Student groups also make connections

between new and previously learned concepts on their
own while in class. The instructor summarizes the material
for the class only after students grapple with it in small
groups. Students reported a preference for learning by figure analysis over traditional lecture, and female students in
particular reported increased confidence in their analytical
abilities. There is not a technology requirement for this
technique; therefore, it may be utilized both in classrooms
and in nontraditional spaces. Additionally, the amount of
preparation required is comparable to that of a traditional
C 2016 by The International Union of Biochemistry
lecture. V
and Molecular Biology, 44(4):336344, 2016.

Keywords: visual literacy; active learning; multimedia instruction;

undergraduate biology education

Introduction
Scientists have long relied on visual representations for the
communication of data [1]. Students, however, are novices
at interpreting diagrams and other pictorial representations, and their struggle can be confounded in molecularbased disciplines because of the multitude of ways in which
a single component may be illustrated [2]. Students need to
be visually literate just as they need to be verbally literate,
but skills required to develop visual literacy are often overlooked in undergraduate education.
Visual literacy is the ability to understand, produce,
and use culturally significant images, objects, and visible

Volume 44, Number 4, July/August 2016, Pages 336344

w
s Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online
version of this article.
*Address for correspondence to: Amy M. Wiles, Department of Biology,
Mercer University, Macon, GA 31207. E-mail: wiles_am@mercer.edu
Received 9 June 2015; Revised 3 November 2015; Accepted 8
December 2015
DOI 10.1002/bmb.20953
Published online 19 February 2016 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com)

336

actions and may be thought of in parallel to textual literacy [3]. Often instructors assume that students understand
diagrams or other visual aids as quickly as they do, yet students need additional time and instruction as to how to
interpret the symbolism within diagrams [2]. Novices also
may find it difficult to determine the important elements of
the figure and how the information conveyed in the diagram relates to other concepts [4].
This article offers a teaching technique called figure analysis that addresses two challenges in the undergraduate science
classroom: incorporating active learning as the main teaching
mechanism in a course with heavy content and increasing students perception of their own visual literacy skills and comfort
in the sciences. This teaching technique was inspired by the
authors attendance of Tuftes One-Day Course [5], in which he
proposed the idea that If a picture is worth a thousand words,
it should be given that much of your time. Figures, though,
should not stand alone. A textual explanation is important in
orienting students to understand symbolism in a figure [1]. It
has been shown that when figures are combined with verbal
explanations, either textually or orally communicated, deeper
learning occurs [6]. Additionally, when that verbal communication is more conversational, learning is increased [6]. The
figure analysis technique may be summarized briefly: students

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education

TABLE 1

Courses and texts used in this study

Gender
Text

Time

Class

Total

fr

so

jr

sr

BIO 460: Eukaryotic Cell Biology

F12

Alberts [7]

MWF 50 m

19

16

S15

Alberts [8]

TR 75 m

32

20

11

22

BIO 310: Genetics

S13

Brooker [9]

TR 75 m

37

25

11

18

11

S14

Sanders [10]

TR 75 m

32

18

14

11

12

F14

Sanders [10]

MWF 50 m

41

23

18

20

18

MTWR 120 m

15

BIO 212: Introduction to Biology II

Su14

Reece [11]

The total number of students submitting a survey, not the number enrolled in the course at the beginning of the semester, is reported.

are asked to examine one to three figures in their textbooks

and talk with each other about the information, and then the
instructor summarizes the material. With figure analysis, students are exposed to visual literacy skills as they analyze textbook figures while actively discussing content with their peers.

The University and Courses

The Biology Department at Mercer University resides in the
College of Liberal Arts, a strictly undergraduate college
with 1,500 students. Three courses were chosen in which
to implement figure analysis as an active learning teaching
tool (Table 1): Introduction to Biology II (BIO 212), which
focuses on cellular and molecular biology and genetics;
Genetics (BIO 310); and Eukaryotic Cell Biology (BIO 460).
Both the Biology major and the related Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology (BMB) interdisciplinary major require
BIO 212 and BIO 310, whereas only the BMB major
requires BIO 460. The author had taught each course at
least once before at Mercer using traditional whiteboard
lecture techniques before employing the figure analysis
technique.

Implementation of Figure Analysis

Figure analysis has four phases: introduction, examination,
discussion, and summarization. In brief, the lecturer
presents a succinct introduction to the material, students
examine a figure or figures as requested by the lecturer,
students discuss the figure with their neighbors, and finally
the lecturer summarizes the information for the class and
explains the more difficult concepts. In smaller classes, the
lecturer may call upon students to explain the figure before
she or he presents a summary.

Wiles

The instructor introduced each new major subsection of

material by giving a brief overview of the scope of the sections content and defining terminology with which students
might not yet be familiar. If introductory or summary figures
were available, the overview was shortened, and group figure analysis was begun sooner. The purpose of the overview
was to orient the students to the bigger picture, relate the
material to a larger context, and ensure that students could
begin talking about the material with the correct terms. A
chalkboard, whiteboard, or document camera was employed
in communicating the overview material.
Students were then asked to examine a particular figure
or figures in their text, which they had each brought to class.
They were also asked to talk with their neighbors about the
information, a task that averaged 45 min. Discussion in small
groups of two or three kept students on task, made them
responsible to each other, and allowed the instructor to gauge
the progress of the class. Occasionally, the instructor called
students attention to a certain aspect of the figure or asked
them how it related to a previous figure while they were still
discussing it with their peers if a portion of the class was not
making progress with the figure. The instructor would also
walk around the room, listening to conversations. This encouraged students to remain on task and helped the instructor to
determine if the class as a whole was struggling with a concept. Additional background information or explanation as to
how to interpret a diagram was interjected if needed.
Finally, the lecturer summarized the information,
depending on the level of difficulty of the figure for that
particular class. Introductory figures did not require the
same level of explanation as detailed figures describing

337

Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education
complex pathways. The instructor clarified concerns overheard during her walk-through in order that the entire
class might benefit. Symbolism and meaning of figures
were defined, and limitations of the figure were addressed
[2]. At the beginning of the semester in particular, the
instructor modeled how to analyze a figure during her
summary.
In modeling, the instructor demonstrated a variety of
figure interpretation techniques. Often the figure itself was
the starting point, rather than the figure legend. The
instructor described the process of examining and interpreting the figure by beginning with identifying the type of
figure (e.g., a chart, table, or graph representing observed
data; a diagram representing a cellular response at the
molecular level; or an electron micrograph).
For charts, the instructor guides students to examine
the axes first, then the shape of the curve and its relationship to the axes followed by an interpretation of what it
means biologically. Likewise for tables, the instructor
guides students to examine row and column headers first,
to determine the units reported, and then examining the
data with an interpretation of biological relevance.
Many figures in biological textbooks are diagrams. In
diagrams with biological membranes represented, the
instructor first modeled the identification the membrane
and its orientation. The instructor also discussed the depiction of any proteinswhat is the shape representing? Some
examples include a regular shape as a simple placeholder
for a protein; an irregular shape, perhaps alluding to its
function; the outline of the proteins known threedimensional structure; or a ribbon model with particular
amino acids indicated with space-filling atoms. The instructor explained how the composers depiction of the molecule
relates to the detail he wanted to convey. The instructor
also interpreted arrows and the progression implied,
whether it is activation/inhibition, temporal, or spatial
movement.
There are a few interpretation skills with which students
struggle. Students need to be reminded that there are more
copies of a particular molecule in the cell than illustrated.
Occasionally, the composers choice of color is important, for
instance when tracing carbons through the Krebs Cycle or
tracking the origins of pieces of chromosomes that have
crossed over. Students need to be reminded that these features are not marked in a similar manner in the cell. Students need to be advised that the figure may employ various
changes in scale as an emphasis. For instance, membranes
may not be as thick as indicated, or molecules may be drawn
at different scales than the organelle containing them.
Finally, it should be emphasized that some components of a
process may be dropped entirely from a figure for clarity and
emphasis on other aspects.
For extremely challenging figures or content, a fifth
phase was added: review. For a challenging figure, the
class would be asked to review the material once again

338

with the knowledge they gained from the instructors

explanation. Students might be asked what would happen
if something were slightly different in a certain pathway
(e.g., What would be the effect if a protein had a loss- or
gain-of-function or if there were a different level of protein
expression). Occasionally, up to 20 minutes were spent on
a single figure.
In the classroom, students were involved in other active
learning exercises that were not strictly the analysis of
textbook figures. They were challenged to draw their own
figures with corresponding legends, whether by composing
a figure using elements of figures from the text or de novo
from content the instructor explained but that was not represented diagrammatically. Additionally, when content was
not readily representable visually and the instructor gave a
short lecture instead, students would be asked to review
their notes with their peers for two minutes as a thinkpair-share activity.
Implementation of figure analysis addresses several of
the ten fundamental guidelines for teaching visual liternborn and Anderson [4], in particular:
acy put forth by Scho
working with students on their reasoning skills in interpreting a figure; walking students through the figure after discussion to ensure they understand the main points; working with students who do not understand conventions of
diagrams, such as orientation of membranes and protein
ribbon diagrams; challenging students to transfer skills as
they compare diagrams within and between chapters; and
having students create their own figures in class.
The author provides an example in-class dialogue,
which demonstrates the implementation of the technique,
in a companion paper [12]. Timing and example questions
between the students and instructor are also given.

Student Response
During the last week of each course, students were given a
survey on their opinions of figure analysis (Table 2 and
Supporting Information). The survey also included opportunity for open-ended responses. Most students reported that
figure analysis helped them learn (88%) and helped them
learn more than traditional lectures (74%) (Table 2 #1, #2).
Students also reported that figure analysis taught them
how to read and interpret figures (84%) (Table 2 #15). Several students related that they did not like the figure analysis technique at the beginning of the semester, but as the
semester progressed, they enjoyed it; many indicated that
they preferred it to traditional lecture.

Students Learned from Peers

Most students (75%) agreed or strongly agreed that talking
with their peers facilitated their understanding better than
examining the figure on their own (Table 2 #8). Some
groups analyzed figures alone before talking about them,
while other groups immediately began discussing information. Peers helped those who were struggling with a particular concept as they themselves worked through it. In

Figure Analysis: Technique

TABLE 2

Select student opinion question from post-course survey

Total
n 5 176

BIO 460
n 5 51

BIO 310
n 5 110

BIO 212
n 5 15

1) Figure analysis helped me understand course material.

4.1

4.5

4.0

4.3

2) Figure analysis helped me understand course material

better than traditional lecture without figure analysis.

4.0

4.4

3.8

4.3

3) Figure analysis helped maintain my interest in lecture.

3.7

4.0

3.6

3.9

4) Figure analysis helped me stay

more engaged in lecture.

4.0

4.3

3.9

4.0

8) Discussing figures with my peers helped me understand

the material better than examining the figure alone.

4.0

4.0

4.0

3.9

10) I used the figure analysis technique in

studying for this course on my own.

4.0

4.3

3.9

4.5

11) I used the figure analysis discussion technique in

studying for this course with my peers.

3.5

3.8

3.3

3.4

13) Explaining figures to the class encouraged me

to stay on task during figure analysis exercises.

3.6

4.0

3.4

4.0

14) I felt like I had enough time to analyze and discuss the
figures in class.

3.5

3.6

3.4

3.9

15) Figure analysis helped me learn

how to read and interpret figures.

4.1

4.3

3.9

4.1

16) In class, figure analysis helped me put concepts

together from within the same chapter.

4.1

4.3

4.0

4.1

18) In class, figure analysis helped me pull

concepts together between different chapters.

3.8

3.9

3.7

4.0

20) Before this course, I felt confident about examining

figures.

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.0

21) I feel more confident about examining

figures after having taken this course.

4.2

4.3

4.1

4.3

Students were asked 23 questions about figure analysis using a Likert scale of strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4),
strongly agree (5). Mean given for each question for composite (total) and each class and semester.

listening to discussions, it was commonly overheard that

one group member would not understand but another
member would and would then assist the first student; it
was not always be the same student who was lost.
Many active learning techniques incorporate group
work. Students often worry when their grade is dependent
on the performance of others and therefore report a dislike
for group work, but cooperative learning techniques continue to show an increase in student learning [13]. Here,
students are not graded on their group work but rather
group work is replacing much of the traditional lecture,
and very few students reported that they disliked working
with peers in this setting.

Wiles

In the free response portion of the survey, some students

reported talking with their peers only confused them. These
same students often also wanted to be given slides and lists
to memorize. Many studies have shown that students learn
better when they work through concepts themselves and
also analyze information as they are learning it rather than
when they are expected to know the material before analysis
[14]. Students were challenged with thinking for themselves
before receiving feedback on that thinking but then were
allowed to try again [14]. Other students remarked that
being able to talk about concepts with their peers in class
greatly facilitated their learning and that it particularly kept
them engaged during an early morning class.

339

Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education
Several students who favored figure analysis over traditional lecture stated that they preferred getting additional
time to discuss the figure after the instructor summarized
it, but additional discussion was limited to more difficult
concepts due to time constraints. Almost half (45%) of the
29 students who disliked or strongly disliked figure analysis
related that they did not have enough time to discuss figures (Table 2 #14), which may be a reason they disliked
the technique. The difficulty is when a large portion of the
class understands and indicates their readiness to move on
while select groups are not. This might have led students to
report that they did not think they had enough time to discuss the figures with their peers. Not all groups work at
the same speed, and one must balance the time so that not
too many groups are left with nothing to discuss.

Students Remained on Task

Almost all students remained on task during figure analysis
and were more engaged in class (instructor observation).
Students reported that they were more interested (64%)
and engaged (78%) in class (Table 2 #3, #4). They also
asked better, more direct questions, which yielded more
productive office hours. Many students reported that their
study habits had improved after using this technique.
Figure analysis helped me to break down large concepts
and apply them to the topic of the chapter. It also helped
me learn the processes better on my own time after we discussed it in class because I could look at the figure and be
reminded of key points and what was occurring in the figure. (BIO 212 Su14). And Figure analysis forces me to do
more outside practice/reading than a traditional lectured
course. (BIO 212 Su14); this student strongly agreed on
questions 16 and agreed on question 7 (Table 2 and
Supporting Information).
Students reported that they found themselves more
likely to study simply because they had their textbooks with
them so frequently. They also used the technique as they
studied, with 54% reporting using it with their peers and
84% reporting using it on their own (Table 2 #10, #11).

Students Used Their Text

Students relied on the figure legend and their text to assist
evaluating the content of the figure. It has been shown that
when text is adjacent to figures rather than figures standing on their own, deeper learning occurs [6]. Figure analysis employs that philosophy; when students examine a figure from their text in class, they often use the legend to
assist in interpretation or to place the figure in the broader
context. Occasionally, students would refer to the relevant
parts of the text to tie content together. Further, some
groups would link figures from previous chapters with
what they were currently examining. Some classes did this
on their own, while others needed the encouragement to
do so. This linkage is difficult to achieve in a traditional lecture (Table 2 #16, #18), in part because it is difficult to display a textual legend legibly on a slide, and because slides

340

are ordered in a stackstudents are unable to immediately

connect one slide with another earlier in the lecture or
from a previous day unless the instructor facilitates that
connection. With the figure analysis technique, students
themselves are the ones making the connections.

Females Reported a Gain in Confidence

Student responses were analyzed by reported class (sophomore through senior) and sex (female and male). For both,
students were given the option to choose prefer not to
answer. No freshman enrolled in any of the courses
herein, and little difference was seen in responses between
the other three classes. A difference was observed, however, between females and males in their confidence in
examining figures (Table 3). A Welch Two Sample t test
between female and male respondents returned a p value
of 0.003 for question #20 and 0.028 for question #21.
Females indicated that they were less confident in examining figures before taking a class in which figure analysis
was employed (#20), and they reported a greater confidence boost after having using figure analysis (#21) than
their male peers. By working through so many figures
throughout a single semester, students were exposed to a
vast array of molecular symbolism, and both genders were
more confident in their ability to glean information from a
diagram.

Variations for Implementation

The figure analysis technique uses multiple aspects of
active learning and gives students of all learning types [15]
something to grasp. Digital (readwrite) learners can read
the figure legend and text itself, taking handwritten notes
in class. They can readily pull information out of a figure.
Auditory learners hear themselves and their peers explain
concepts from the figures in front of them. They can also
hear the instructor explain the concept after participating
in small group discussion. Visual learners are especially
helped with this technique because content is concentrated
in the figures, and they are examining them in their own
way in class. These students may take notes by hand in a
more diagrammatical manner or draw additions onto the
figures already in their textbook. Flipping back and forth
between the current figure and previous material helps
these students. Kinesthetic learners benefit in the same
way that Visual learners do, and with the added instructor
questions of what if, the challenge of reorganizing material in their own drawings, and asking students to discuss
the more difficult material again should assist these learners. All students are reminded throughout the semester to
take notes, on paper or in the book, as they talk with their
peers.
The first time students are asked to participate in figure analysis, there may be a few weeks before they are
comfortable discussing figures. Here, they struggled to find
words early on, but they would be encouraged to just tell
your neighbor what you see or they were given more

Figure Analysis: Technique

TABLE 3

Gender differences in self-reported confidence

Survey questions #20 and #21 (Table 2) plotted by sex. Likert scale of strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4), strongly
agree (5). Number of students answering (n), mean (x), and standard deviation (r) are given. Boxplots have individual student responses
plotted as jitter in order to view their densities.

prompting: describe where this protein is moving or

how are these lipids different from each other and how
are they the same? Some groups needed further assistance, and asking them to point to the figure and explain
what each part or symbol represented benefited these
groups. Additionally, the modeling by instructor or peers
during summarization helped these groups.

Choosing a Textbook
The figure analysis technique, as employed here, relies
heavily on an appropriate textbook. One could reimagine
the technique using figures from other sources, as long as
copyrights were not infringed. A large portion of the content of the course should be presented in figure form,
although not all material need be presented in this manner.
In BIO 310, for instance, the teaching of transmission
genetics relied more heavily on problem solving, whereas
the molecular aspects of the course were taught using figure analysis supplemented with some lecture.
When choosing a textbook or a set of figures to use,
instructors should look for diagrams with bright, contrasting
colors, symbols, and stylistic elements that are kept constant
throughout. This makes it easier for students to compare figures from disparate parts of the text, such as the representation of membranes, phosphate groups, and the shapes of specific proteins. Easy to read keys that are embedded in the
figure or clear use of indicator lines to connect labels to the

Wiles

labeled item keep the student from having to look back and
forth from the figure to the legend. Legends are important,
however, and should contain enough explanation that the
reader can fully interpret the figure and perhaps relate it to
other concepts. Clear use of arrows or other directional marks
are also beneficial when indicating movement or progress of a
mechanism. The instructor may need to provide assistance to
some students because novices may not understand if an
arrow represents a spatial or temporal change. Further, figures composed of a series of diagrams showing change over
time may assist in students interpretation of temporal change.
Countering this, it may sometimes be beneficial for the effects
of one occurrence to be placed adjacent to the outcome when
relating cause and effect on different scales. For instance,
when presenting crossing over, chromosome rearrangements
may be pictured adjacent to depictions of the whole-organism
phenotype of the offspring rather than only explaining the phenotype in the legend. Full-page figures encompassing a large
mechanism, system, or organizational scheme (such as an
explanation of epistatic ratios showing the genotype and phenotype of the crosses, effect of mutation on a biochemical pathway, ratios and Punnett squares, and phenotype of offspring
[10]) can help students see how concepts relate to each other
in one place. For more complex processes, steps may be numbered with corresponding numbered explanations as part of
the figure. Molecular Biology of the Cell is an exemplary text
for clear figures that deliver substantial content and that can

341

Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education

TABLE 4

Distribution of student responses by semester

Question #1 (Table 2), plotted by class and semester. Likert scale of strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4), strongly
agree (5). Number of students answering (n), mean (x
), and standard deviation (r) are given. Boxplots have individual student responses
plotted as jitter in order to view their densities.

be related to each other across chapters [7, 8]. Means of

responses from student opinion for question #1 of the survey
are representative of the entire survey when separated by
semester. This also separates by textbook used, and therefore
student responses by textbook are shown in Table 4.
A variation on implementation may be possible at schools
that require students to purchase a laptop or tablet, thus alleviating the need to carry a heavy textbook to class. Here,
some students chose to view the text on their tablet in class.
One problem related by students using this technology was
that it was difficult to flip back and forth between figures for
comparison. Another problem was that it was difficult to view

342

full-page figures. These two concerns are reduced, however,

when students work in groups; students may share a bound
copy of the book for a short amount of time.

Other Course Possibilities

This technique was employed in molecular-based courses at
all levels of the undergraduate biology curriculum: introductory biology, genetics, and eukaryotic cell biology. Courses
whose content may be best represented as mechanistic diagrams or compositional diagrams [16], such as biochemistry, are good candidates for figure analysis because of the
level of detail and the amount of mental engagement needed

Figure Analysis: Technique

to interpret such a figure. Likewise, courses that rely upon

information represented in schematic diagrams [16], such
as anatomy and physiology, may also be good candidates.
Students were asked the open-ended question, What
other courses should/could incorporate figure analysis?
(Supporting Information). Of those who replied, 41% listed
any or all biology courses, all upper level biology
courses, or all science courses. Other biology course suggestions included introductory biology and biochemistry. In
short, figure analysis could be employed in any course in
which content may be presented pictorially or
diagrammatically.

Class Size
In smaller classes (<25), students were called to the lectern
to explain the information that they had reviewed, but no
more than two students per day. This allowed each student
to speak at least twice during the semester but also kept
the class from slowing down. The goal was two-fold: to
keep students on task as well as to model how they should
be analyzing figures at their desks. The instructor corrected or further explained any important information that
a student missed. Students reported that knowing they
might be called upon to explain the figure kept them on
task (Table 2 #13). This was attempted in a classroom of
48 without successthere were just too many students for
their summaries to be effective and the class seemed to be
slowed by the activity.
This technique has been implemented in class sizes
from 17 to 50 students, with classrooms chosen for their
forward-facing tables rather than desks. It is scalable to
even larger classrooms, but instructors teaching in traditional lecture halls may find students need to be flexible
with respect to immovable desks as they discuss in small
groups. Other variations on implementation include involving teaching assistants either to walk around the class with
the instructor or to engage students with figure analysis in
smaller groups during supplemental instruction or lab
time. This technique was employed in sophomore, junior,
and senior biology courses for majors at Mercer University,
but this technique is readily adaptable for freshman and
high school classes.

Figure Analysis Allows Instructors More Flexibility

Requiring students to carry their texts with them and to
heavily rely upon those texts in class permits the instructor
to have more flexibility with technology required. There is
no requirement for Internet access or even for a projector
or computer. Class may even be held outside. The technique also enables the instructor to judge more easily
where students are encountering difficulty or, conversely,
rapidly understanding so adjustments can be made to allotted time or to level of detail.
A document camera used to project the textbook works
well with this teaching technique. The instructor can point
to the figure as well as the legend and text in the book in

Wiles

order to model the technique. Students find it somewhat

easier to follow along during the instructors summary with
the book projected. Another option may be to project digitized figures using slideware or as a PDF of the whole text.
The benefit of projecting a page from the text is that the
legend is included. Here, a document camera was only
used during the last two semesters, but it is not required
for this technique.
One qualm in using active learning techniques in
courses heavy with content is that some techniques (case
studies, role playing) may take time away from content in
the classroom. Active learning techniques may also seem to
increase the instructors preparation workloadmost faculty who adopt active learning in the classroom drop it
after several semesters [17]. The authors biggest reservation about implementing the figure analysis was therefore
that she would not be able to present all of the material
historically presented in the course. This was found not to
be a concern; the amount of material presented was the
same as that presented in previous implementations of
each course with no increase in workload.

Conclusion
Figure analysis is distinct from other forms of visual analysis or discussion of content because it combines interpretation of visual information with discussion of material as
students are learning it for the first time. Concept maps
[18] and mind maps are ways in which students can plot
connections between ideas to build a framework of concepts, or, if they are using a map developed by others, a
way for students to see those connections. These maps
stimulate critical thinking about the topic, but in creating
these maps, students must have at least a basic understanding of the topic first. Likewise, giving students a
prompt to discuss what they know about a topic encourages peer-learning and critical thinking, but again, students must have basic understanding first. Although
think-pair-share activities are becoming more common in
active learning classrooms, the implementation of the figure analysis approach is novel in that it is used extensively
within a course to convey content through visual representations. A similar technique, see-think-wonder, asks students to critically observe an image or object and orally
state what they see, think, and wonder about that image
[19], but figure analysis takes this further by asking students to discover content and gain knowledge without the
instructor delivering it first and replaces lecture as a
means by which to deliver the material.
Figure analysis is an active learning technique used in
the classroom to expose students to visual interpretation
skills while simultaneously to present information. It is
appropriate to any course, content-heavy or not, whose
material may be readily presented in pictures or diagrams.
The technique can be implemented at multiple levels of

343

Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education
undergraduate education and across a wide variety of disciplines. Students are engaged in critical thinking and discussing with peers but also hear the instructor clarify any
confusion they might have. Because of the multiple
approaches used to convey information, figure analysis is
suited to teach all types of learners.

Acknowledgements
The author thanks her former students for feedback on the
technique. She also thanks Dr. Alan Smith for his in-class
observations, feedback, and encouragement. Finally, she
thanks Dr. Kathryn Kloepper for discussions regarding
both the technique and this document and Dr. Garland
Crawford and Dr. Virginia Young for their comments on
this document. The author has no conflicts of interest to
declare.

References
[1] Pauwels, L, A theoretical framework for assessing visual representational practices in Knowledge building and science communications, in
Pauwels, L., Ed. (2006) Visual Cultures of Science: Rethinking Representational Practices in Knowledge Building and Science Communication,
Dartmouth College Press, Hanover, New Hampshire, pp. 125.
nborn, K. J. and Anderson, T. R. (2010) Bridging the educational
[2] Scho
research-teaching practice gap: Foundations for assessing and developing biochemistry students visual literacy. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 38,
347354.
[3] Felten, P. (2008) Visual literacy. Change 40, 6064.
nborn, K. J. and Anderson, T. R. (2006) The importance of visual
[4] Scho
literacy in the education of biochemists. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 34,
94102.

344

[5] Tufte, E. (2012) Presenting Data and Information: A One-Day Course

Taught by Edward Tufte, Atlanta Westin Perimeter North, Atlanta, GA.
[6] Mayer, R. E. (2003) The promise of multimedia learning: Using the
same instructional design methods across different media. Learn.
Instruct. 13, 125139.
[7] Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, K., and Walter, P.
(2008) Molecular Biology of the Cell, 5th ed., Garland Science, New York.
[8] Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Morgan, D., Raff, M., Roberts, K., and
Walter, P. (2015) Molecular Biology of the Cell, 6th ed., Garland Science,
New York.
[9] Brooker, R. J. (2012) Genetics: Analysis and Principles, 4th ed., McGraw
Hill, New York.
[10] Sanders, M. F. and Bowman, J. L. (2012) Genetic Analysis: An Integrated Approach, 1st ed., Pearson, Boston.
[11] Reece, J. B., Urry, L. A., Cain, M. L., Wasserman, S. A., Minorsky, P. V.,
and Jackson, R. B. (2011) Campbell Biology, 9th ed., Pearson, Boston.
[12] Wiles, A. M. Figure analysis: An implementation dialogue. Biochem Mol
Biol Edu. (In Press)
[13] Nilson, L. B. (2003) Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for
College Instructors, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
[14] Bain, K. (2004) What the Best College Teachers Do, Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA.
[15] Fleming, N. D. and Mills, C. (1992) Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. Improve Acad. 11, 137155.
[16] Perini, L. Form and function: A semiotic analysis of figures in biology
textbooks, in Anderson, N. and Dietrich, M. R. (2012) The Educated Eye:
Visual Culture and Pedagogy in the Life Sciences, Dartmouth College
Press, Hanover, New Hampshire, pp. 235254.
[17] Spence, L. D. (2001) The case against teaching. Change 33, 1019.
[18] Mintzes, J. J. Concept mapping in college science, in Mintzes, J. J.
and Leonard, W. H. (2006) Handbook of College Science Teaching,
National Science Teachers Association Press, Danvers, Massachusetts,
pp. 6775.
[19] Ritchhart, R., Church, M., and Morrison, K. (2011) Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence
for All Learners, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Figure Analysis: Technique