- Award ID(s):
- 1712039
- PAR ID:
- 10219575
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- PLoS biology
- ISSN:
- 1544-9173
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
This complete research paper details an investigation into the influence of instructors' pedagogical knowledge on their classroom practices in the context of teaching first-year engineering courses. Background and Motivation: First-year engineering courses serve as the foundational setting in which students are introduced to the field of engineering as well as the pedagogies specific to engineering teaching and learning. These courses are pivotal in equipping students with essential knowledge and skills, setting the stage for their success in more advanced engineering topics. Understanding how instructors' pedagogical knowledge affects their teaching practices is crucial. Pedagogical knowledge encompasses a wide range of techniques to effectively manage a classroom and engage students. This includes the use of instructional strategies that cater to diverse student needs, the design of impactful and engaging lesson plans, etc. There is, however, limited research on how instructors’ pedagogical knowledge influences their classroom practices in first-year engineering courses. Hence, it seems opportune and essential to conduct additional research on engineering instructors' classroom practices. Research Question: The central question driving this research is: How does instructors' pedagogical knowledge influence their pedagogical practices for first-year engineering courses? Method: For this study, we chose the model of teacher professional knowledge and skill (TPK&S) that includes pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). The model recognizes the fundamental importance of pedagogical knowledge and contextualizes PCK within that framework, encompassing the intricate nature of teaching and learning. A descriptive case study was utilized as a methodology for this work to delve into the phenomenon. The context of the study was a first-year introductory engineering course offered at a large public research institution. This is a pilot study for an NSF-funded project (blinded for review), the study involved two instructors, Chandler and Joey (pseudonyms), chosen through purposive sampling, with varying levels of teaching experience. Data collection involved direct classroom observation using the Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (TDOP) and semi-structured interviews conducted after the observations. The interviews were conducted after classroom observations, allowing the researcher to explore specific findings from the observations. Results: Thematic analysis was used to categorize the data based on the constructs of the theoretical framework. The analysis revealed three major themes: (a) Instructors' topic-specific professional knowledge significantly influences their pedagogical practices. Both instructors adapt their teaching methods based on their understanding of course material and students' difficulties. (b) The interaction between instructors' personal pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and the classroom context shapes their classroom practices. (c) Instructors' beliefs and prior knowledge act as amplifiers or filters based on the situation. They filter out their teaching practices that do not align with their beliefs and prior knowledge. Conclusion: The findings presented in this paper provide valuable insights into the complex interplay between instructors' pedagogical knowledge and their classroom practices. This work holds significant implications for current and future first-year instructors in that this paper will showcase how instructors use their understanding of the content and their students to teach, which is a critical aspect of helping students successfully integrate into engineering.more » « less
-
The COVID-19 pandemic forced many colleges and universities to remain on a completely online or remote educational learning for more than a year; however, due to distraction, lack of motivation or engagement, and other internal/external pandemic contributing factors, learners could not pay attention 100% to the learning process. Additionally, given that transportation classes are very hands-on, students could not do the experiment from home due to limited resources available, thereby hampering all three phases of learner interactions. The limitation of the implementation of physical, hands-on laboratory exercises during the pandemic further exacerbated students’ actualization of the critical Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) outcomes in transportation: An ability to develop and conduct experiments or test hypotheses, analyze and interpret data and use scientific judgment to draw conclusions. Subsequently, this paper highlights the development and implementation of experiment centric pedagogy (ECP) home-based active learning experiments in three transportation courses: Introduction to Transportation Systems, Traffic Engineering, and Highway Engineering during the pandemic. Quantitative and qualitative student success key constructs data was collected in conjunction with the execution of classroom observation protocols that measure active learning in these transportation courses. The results reveal a significant difference between the pre, and post- tests of key constructs associated with student success, such as motivation, critical thinking, curiosity, collaboration, and metacognition. The results of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) show more active student engagement when ECP is implemented.more » « less
-
Abstract Background In college science laboratory and discussion sections, student-centered active learning strategies have been implemented to improve student learning outcomes and experiences. Research has shown that active learning activities can increase student anxiety if students fear that they could be negatively evaluated by their peers. Error framing (i.e., to frame errors as natural and beneficial to learning) is proposed in the literature as a pedagogical tool to reduce student anxiety. However, little research empirically explores how an instructor can operationalize error framing and how error framing is perceived by undergraduate students. To bridge the gap in the literature, we conducted a two-stage study that involved science graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) and undergraduate students. In stage one, we introduced cold calling (i.e., calling on non-volunteering students) and error framing to 12 chemistry and 11 physics GTAs. Cold calling can increase student participation but may increase student anxiety. Error framing has the potential to mitigate student anxiety when paired with cold calling. GTAs were then tasked to rehearse cold calling paired with error framing in a mixed-reality classroom simulator. We identified GTA statements that aligned with the definition of error framing. In stage two, we selected a few example GTA error framing statements and interviewed 13 undergraduate students about their perception of those statements.
Results In the simulator, all the GTAs rehearsed cold calling multiple times while only a few GTAs made error framing statements. A thematic analysis of GTAs’ error framing statements identified ways of error indication (i.e., explicit and implicit) and framing (i.e., natural, beneficial, and positive acknowledgement). Undergraduate student interviews revealed specific framing and tone that are perceived as increasing or decreasing student comfort in participating in classroom discourse. Both undergraduate students and some GTAs expressed negative opinions toward responses that explicitly indicate student mistakes. Undergraduate students’ perspectives also suggest that error framing should be implemented differently depending on whether errors have already occurred.
Conclusion Error framing is challenging for science GTAs to implement. GTAs’ operationalizations of error framing in the simulator and undergraduate students’ perceptions contribute to defining and operationalizing error framing for instructional practice. To increase undergraduate student comfort in science classroom discourse, GTAs can use implicit error indication. In response to students’ incorrect answers, GTAs can positively frame students’ specific ideas rather than discussing broadly how errors are natural or beneficial.
-
Cognitive science research on learning and instruction is often not directly connected to discipline-based research. In an effort to narrow this gap, this essay integrates research from both fields on five learning and instruction strategies: active retrieval, distributed (spaced) learning, dual coding, concrete examples, and feedback and assessment. These strategies can significantly enhance the effectiveness of science instruction, but they typically do not find their way into the undergraduate classroom. The implementation of these strategies is illustrated through an undergraduate science course for nonmajors called Science in Our Lives. This course provides students with opportunities to use scientific information to solve real-world problems and view science as part of everyday life.more » « less
-
Annotating the genomes of multiple species allows us to analyze the evolution of their genes. While many eukaryotic genome assemblies already include computational gene predictions, these predictions can benefit from review and refinement through manual gene annotation. The Genomics Education Partnership (GEP; https://thegep.org/ ) developed a structural annotation protocol for protein-coding genes that enables undergraduate student and faculty researchers to create high-quality gene annotations that can be utilized in subsequent scientific investigations. For example, this protocol has been utilized by the GEP faculty to engage undergraduate students in the comparative annotation of genes involved in the insulin signaling pathway in 27 Drosophila species, using D. melanogaster as the reference genome. Students construct gene models using multiple lines of computational and empirical evidence including expression data (e.g., RNA-Seq), sequence similarity (e.g., BLAST and multiple sequence alignment), and computational gene predictions. Quality control measures require each gene be annotated by at least two students working independently, followed by reconciliation of the submitted gene models by a more experienced student. This article provides an overview of the annotation protocol and describes how discrepancies in student submitted gene models are resolved to produce a final, high-quality gene set suitable for subsequent analyses. The protocol can be adapted to other scientific questions (e.g., expansion of the Drosophila Muller F element) and species (e.g., parasitoid wasps) to provide additional opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in genomics research. These student annotation efforts can substantially improve the quality of gene annotations in publicly available genomic databases.more » « less