Call for Poster Abstracts

Deadline: Thursday, April 15, 2021, at 11:59 p.m. PDT (UTC -07:00)

The 2021 ASMCUE Planning Committee welcomes submissions for poster abstracts. Poster presentations will have a new 2-part format for 2021 ASMCUE Virtual:  
  1. Asynchronous poster viewing.  
  2. Live question & answer (Q&A) forum. 
Note: There will be no late-breaker poster submissions for 2021 ASMCUE Virtual. All presenters are responsible for the conference registration fee.

Thank you to everyone who submitted a proposal. Submissions are now closed.

rectangular and circular headshots of men and women participating in a virtual conference

ASMCUE Virtual posters focus on education research outcomes associated with any of the subdisciplines in the biological sciences. This opportunity provides an excellent venue for faculty to showcase their educational research.


The subject of all posters at ASMCUE is the scholarship of teaching and learning or biology education research; ASMCUE does NOT accept submissions that discuss scientific (i.e. bench, laboratory, field, modelling) research. To submit an abstract with scientific content, please consider World Microbe Forum or other ASM conferences
The abstract should describe innovative teaching approaches or the specific activities conducted by students and indicate with assessment data how those changes affected student learning. Work described in the abstract must have been tested on students and assessment of the activity’s outcomes must be described. Analyzed data and conclusions must be included.  
Abstracts must be based on results that have not been published in any peer-reviewed journal before July 1, 2021. Pre-print journal publications are exempt. ASMCUE allows submission of posters that are based on results presented at other conferences.  

About the Virtual Presentation

Asynchronous Poster Viewing

  • Presenters will be required to upload poster presentations in a PDF format prior to the conference.  
  • Presenters are expected to follow ASMCUE Virtual Presentation Guidelines when designing the poster. These guidelines include features for attendee accessibility.  
  • Posters will be due Wednesday, June 23, and they will be available for attendees to view June 25 – Dec. 31, 2021. 

Live Question & Answer (Q&A) Forum

  • Date: Presenters will be required to participate in one live 30 minute poster Q&A forum, to be held during ASMCUE Virtual (June 29 – July 1). Presenters will be assigned a presentation time for their live Q&A forum. 
  • Platform & Recording: The live Q&A forum will be hosted in a virtual roundtable networking format using Remo, and it will NOT be recorded. 
  • Attendee Experience: The live Q&A forum is not intended to be an overview of the research; rather, it will be an open discussion. Attendees will be encouraged to view the poster prior to the live Q&A forum.  

Key Abstract Components

Deadline: Thursday, April 15, 2021, at 11:59 p.m. PDT (UTC -07:00)

  • Background.
  • Hypothesis statement, study design and methods. 
  • Data supporting effectiveness of strategy and conclusion. 


  • Posters abstracts may have a maximum of 4 authors. The order in which you list the authors will be the order they appear in the ASMCUE Virtual final program. If you have additional authors, contact for submission guidance. 
  • “Attendee” refers to the ASMCUE poster attendee, and “student” refers to individuals that attendees teach at their home institutions/organizations. “Strategy” refers to the concept, skill, task, approach or method of learning or instruction that is being described. 
  • Applicants can save progress on their application and return to complete at a later time. Submissions must be completed before the application date in order to be considered. 
Checklist concept on a mobile phone

Review Criteria and Guidelines 

Abstracts that fail to include all required components will automatically be rejected (either for further editing/clarification/modification or outright). No re-submissions will be allowed. All submissions are reviewed by the 2021 ASMCUE Poster Review Committee according to the following criteria (see rubric): 
  • Overall quality, relevance, scholarship, innovation and originality. 
  • Alignment with 2021 ASMCUE Virtual meeting theme. 
  • Promotes inclusive, equitable and/or anti-racist teaching practices. 
  • Abstract includes all of the necessary components (background, hypothesis statement, study design, methods, results and conclusion(s)). 
  • Abstract addresses whether the “lessons learned” of the project can be easily adopted by other educators. 
  • Specific and succinct abstract. 
View Poster Review Criteria

Commercial Products/Services  

A proposal must discuss any commercial product or service, name the product and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Proposals that promote a specific commercial product or service for purchase will be recommended for the ASMCUE Exhibit and Sponsorship Program.  


The primary contact will receive a disposition by mid-May 2021. 

Poster Example #1

Examples of previously accepted abstracts may be found in the Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education’s 2018 Spotlight Issue.

Using Metacognitive Strategies To Improve Student Learning Outcomes in a Biochemistry Course 

Melissa Srougi, North Carolina State University 
Heather Miller, High Point University 
Evidence suggests that students’ self-beliefs about their academic abilities can directly influence long-term achievement. These self-beliefs, or mindsets, can be described as fixed or growth oriented. Little is known about how these attributes affect student learning at the college level. Here, we utilize metacognitive strategies ranging from growth mindset (GM) messaging and concept mapping to written reflections, exam wrappers, and instructor GM feedback. We hypothesize that metacognitive interventions not only improve GM, but also increase achievement of student learning outcomes. We used a mixed-methods study design over four separate iterations of a one-semester Biochemistry survey course. Students had the same material and assessments. GM was measured using an 8-item pre/post growth mindset inventory (GMI; Dweck). Two sections (n=87) were exposed to GM metacognitive interventions, while the other two sections (n=74) were not (non-GM). Assessment data from in-class exams showed learning gains for all students regardless of intervention. Moreover, the GM of students did not differ (GMI 3.1 + 0.5 SD (GM) vs 3.3 + 1.3 SD (non-GM). Interestingly, there was stronger performance on the cumulative American Chemical Society Biochemistry Exam for students receiving GM interventions (Mean percentile ranking of 52.3% + 3.2 SD (GM) vs 46.2% + 4.2 SD (non-GM); p<0.01). Our findings suggest that metacognitive interventions have a positive effect on student learning.

Poster Example #2

To Buy or Not To Buy: The Impact of Open Educational Resources (OER) on Student Performance 

Samanthi Kottegoda, Texas Woman’s University 
Amy Jo Hammett, Texas Woman’s University 

Lack of student access to course texts due to their high cost is an increasing problem at colleges and universities in the United States. Although student affordability is an obvious concern, the real concern is student success as many students may forgo these key resources due to financial constraints. Open educational resources (OER) are a viable solution for this problem and studies have shown that using OER is a tremendous cost savings to students. We hypothesized that switching from a traditional textbook to a freely available online textbook in an undergraduate microbiology course would not only 32 reduce the cost but also improve student success. In this study, the final grades of students who enrolled in an undergraduate microbiology course in two successive semesters, fall 2019 (n=166) and spring 2019 (n=82), were compared. In both semesters, the course was taught by the same instructor using the same curriculum with similar exam questions who switched from a commercial textbook to a freely available online textbook. Our study found that switching to OER increased the number of A and B grades students received by 8.9% and 5.9%, respectively. Comparing the mean final grade also showed an improvement (p=0.052), while course withdrawal rate dropped by 6.7%. Our data suggest that students who are provided with free course materials at the beginning of class are more likely to be successful in the course and may also help student retention.