Journal of the

This study used peer-reviewed published research re ports to teach a seminar on learning and memory to first-semester college students. Comp lete reports (not summaries, reviews, or news reports) were re-written by this aut hor to be more “student friendly” to college freshmen. These adapted published research reports (APRRs) retained original structure and key data but omitted references and t gential data while providing explanatory notes. Rather than lecturing the students about the papers , the approach was to engage students directly in scientific thinking by requiring them t o work first individually and then as analysis teams to conduct a simulated peer review o f the APRRs. To prod higher-level analysis, students were required to develop insight ful answers to 21 scaffolding questions. All questions required critical thinking, an d seven specifically called for creative responses. The questions prompted the students to t hink deeply about alternative approaches for testing, organizing and presenting res ults, meaning of the results, and the broader implications of the research. An end-of-course survey revealed that students rega rd d the experience positively. Most believed they learned more than they would have fro m lectures, had more interest in the subject matter, were less intimidated by research r eports, grew in ability to comprehend research, and felt pride in realizing they could th ink at this level. This application of APRR seems to be a useful and e ngaging way to teach in a freshman seminar. Lessons learned include the need to provid e more advance explanation about the nature of research in the field and more professor feedback on the students’ simulated peer reviews. But, the results do lend support to t he claim of others that APRRs can teach the nature of scholarship better than textbooks.