This qualitative study explores the experiences of six students enrolled in a special topics biology class that exclusively used primary literature as course material. Nature of science (NOS) conceptions have been linked to students' attitudes toward scientific subjects, but there has been little research specifically exploring the effects of primary literature use on NOS conceptions. To explore these effects, we used both written responses to an established and validated NOS survey taken at the beginning and end of the course and reflective essays in which students described in detail their experiences with using primary literature. The results indicate positive gains in various aspects of NOS conceptions as well as increased confidence with approaching original research. We conclude by suggesting that future research should focus on how primary literature use affects nature of science conceptions. We also suggest the expanded use of primary literature in biology education

Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding Nature of Science Instruction in Preservice Elementary Science Courses: Abandoning Scientism, But... Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 215–233.

Brill, G., Falk, H., & Yarden, A. (2003). Teachers’ journal club: bridging between the dynamics of biological discoveries and biology teachers. Journal of Biological Education, 37(4), 168–170. http://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2003.9655877

Carter, B. E., & Wiles, J. R. (2014). Scientific consensus and social controversy: exploring relationships between students’ conceptions of the nature of science, biological evolution, and global climate change. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 7(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-014-0006-3

Cobern, W. (2000). The Thinking About Science Survey Instrument. Kalamazoo, MI: Scientific Literacy and Cultural Studies Project. Retrieved from http://www.wmich.edu/slcsp/slcsp151/tssi-v2.pdf

DebBurman, S. K. (2002). Learning How Scientists Work: Experiential Research Projects to Promote Cell Biology Learning and Scientific Process Skills. Cell Biology Education, 1(4), 154–172. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.02-07-0024

Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two Views About Explicitly Teaching Nature of Science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2109–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9539-4

Glazer, F. S. (2000). Journal Clubs--A Successful Vehicle to Science Literacy. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29(5), 320–24.

Heil, M., González-Teuber, M., Clement, L. W., Kautz, S., Verhaagh, M., & Bueno, J. C. S. (2009). Divergent investment strategies of Acacia myrmecophytes and the coexistence of mutualists and exploiters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(43), 18091–18096. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0904304106

Hoskins, S. G. (2008). Using a Paradigm Shift to Teach Neurobiology and the Nature of Science—a C.R.E.A.T.E.-based Approach. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 6(2), A40–A52.

Hoskins, S. G., Lopatto, D., & Stevens, L. M. (2011). The C.R.E.A.T.E. Approach to Primary Literature Shifts Undergraduates’ Self-Assessed Ability to Read and Analyze Journal Articles, Attitudes about Science, and Epistemological Beliefs. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 368–378. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027

Hoskins, S. G., Stevens, L. M., & Nehm, R. H. (2007). Selective Use of the Primary Literature Transforms the Classroom Into a Virtual Laboratory. Genetics, 176(3), 1381–1389. http://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183

Janzen, DH. (1973). Evolution of Polygynous Obligate Acacia-Ants in Western Mexico. Journal of Animal Ecology, 42(3), 727–750.

Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of Explicit and Reflective versus Implicit Inquiry-Oriented Instruction on Sixth Graders’ Views of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036

Kitazono, A. A. (2010). A Journal-Club-Based Class that Promotes Active and Cooperative Learning of Biology. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(1), 20–27.

Kozeracki, C. A., Carey, M. F., Colicelli, J., & Levis-Fitzgerald, M. (2006). An Intensive Primary-Literature–based Teaching Program Directly Benefits Undergraduate Science Majors and Facilitates Their Transition to Doctoral Programs. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5(4), 340–347. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-02-0144

Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034

Muench, S. B. (2000). Choosing Primary Literature in Biology To Achieve Specific Educational Goals. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29(4), 255–60.

Murray, T. A. (2014). Teaching students to read the primary literature using pogil activities. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42(2), 165–173. http://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20765

Round, J. E., & Campbell, A. M. (2013). Figure Facts: Encouraging Undergraduates to Take a Data-Centered Approach to Reading Primary Literature. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(1), 39–46. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0057

Sato, B. K., Kadandale, P., He, W., Murata, P. M. N., Latif, Y., & Warschauer, M. (2014). Practice Makes Pretty Good: Assessment of Primary Literature Reading Abilities across Multiple Large-Enrollment Biology Laboratory Courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 677–686. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-02-0025

Yarden, A., Brill, G., & Falk, H. (2001). Primary literature as a basis for a high-school biology curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 190–195. http://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2001.9655776

Brennan, P. (2013, April 2). Why I Study Duck Genitalia. Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/04/duck_penis_controversy_nsf_is_right_to_fund_basic_research_that_conservatives.html