Title: Using the Intended–Enacted–Experienced Curriculum Model to Map the Vision and Change Core Competencies in Undergraduate Biology Programs and Courses
One critical step in the challenging process of curricular reform is determining how closely a curriculum aligns with national recommendations. Here, we examine the alignment of teaching, assessment, and student experience in undergraduate biology courses with the Vision and Change core competency recommendations. We applied the intended–enacted–experienced curriculum model to obtain a more complete, multiperspective view of the curriculum. First, we developed and piloted the BioSkills Curriculum Survey with more than 100 biology instructors across five institutions. Using multilevel logistic regression modeling of the survey data, we found that instructors were equally likely to report teaching all competencies; however, they reported assessing some competencies more than others. After adding course characteristics to our model, we found that the likelihood of teaching certain competencies depended on course type. Next, we analyzed class materials and student perceptions of instruction in 10 biology courses in one department. Within this smaller sample, we found that instructors messaged a narrower range of competency learning outcomes on their syllabi than they reported teaching on the survey. Finally, modeling revealed that inclusion of an outcome on assessments, but not syllabi, increased the likelihood that students and their instructor agreed whether it was taught. more »« less
To excel in modern science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers, biology majors need a range of transferable skills, yet competency development is often a relatively underdeveloped facet of the undergraduate curriculum. We have elaborated the Vision and Change core competency framework into a resource called the BioSkills Guide, a set of measurable learning outcomes that can be more readily implemented by faculty. Following an iterative review process including more than 200 educators, we gathered evidence of the BioSkills Guide’s content validity using a national survey of more than 400 educators. Rates of respondent support were high (74.3–99.6%) across the 77 outcomes in the final draft. Our national sample during the development and validation phases included college biology educators representing more than 250 institutions, including 73 community colleges, and a range of course levels and biology subdisciplines. Comparison of the BioSkills Guide with other science competency frameworks reveals significant overlap but some gaps and ambiguities. These differences may reflect areas where understandings of competencies are still evolving in the undergraduate biology community, warranting future research. We envision the BioSkills Guide supporting a variety of applications in undergraduate biology, including backward design of individual lessons and courses, competency assessment development, and curriculum mapping and planning.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are interconnected with bioengineering, yet have historically been absent from accreditation standards and curricula. Toward educating DEI-competent bioengineers and meeting evolving accreditation requirements, we took a program-level approach to incorporate, catalog, and assess DEI content through the bioengineering undergraduate program. To support instructors in adding DEI content and inclusive pedagogy, our team developed a DEI planning worksheet and surveyed instructors pre- and post-course. Over the academic year, 74% of instructors responded. Of responding instructors, 91% described at least one DEI curricular content improvement, and 88% incorporated at least one new inclusive pedagogical approach. Based on the curricular adjustments reported by instructors, we grouped the bioengineering-related DEI content into five DEI competency categories: bioethics, inclusive design, inclusive scholarship, inclusive professionalism, and systemic inequality. To assess the DEI content incorporation, we employed direct assessment via course assignments, end-of-module student surveys, end-of-term course evaluations, and an end-of-year program review. When asked how much their experience in the program helped them develop specific DEI competencies, students reported a relatively high average of 3.79 (scale of 1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much”). Additionally, based on student performance in course assignments and other student feedback, we found that instructors were able to effectively incorporate DEI content into a wide variety of courses. We offer this framework and lessons learned to be adopted by programs similarly motivated to train DEI-competent engineering professionals and provide an equitable, inclusive education.
Flaherty, Elizabeth A; Lanier, Hayley C; Varner, Johanna; Duggan, Jennifer M; Beckmann, Sean; Yahnke, Christopher J; Erb, Liesl P; Patrick, Lorelei E; Dizney, Laurie; Munroe, Karen E; et al(
, Journal of Mammalogy)
Powell, Roger
(Ed.)
Abstract In the past 30 years, leaders in undergraduate education have called for transformations in science pedagogy to reflect the process of science as well as to develop professional skills, apply new and emerging technologies, and to provide more hands-on experience. These recommendations suggest teaching strategies that incorporate active learning methods that consistently increase learning, conceptual understanding, integration of subject knowledge with skill development, retention of undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors, and inclusivity. To gain insight into current practices and pedagogy we surveyed members of the American Society of Mammalogists in 2021. The survey consisted of both fixed-response questions (e.g., multiple-choice or Likert-scale) and open-ended questions, each of which asked instructors about the structure and content of a Mammalogy or field Mammalogy course. In these courses, we found that lecturing was still a primary tool for presenting course content or information (x¯= 65% of the time); nonetheless, most instructors reported incorporating other teaching strategies ranging from pausing lectures for students to ask questions to incorporating active learning methods, such as debates or case studies. Most instructors reported incorporating skill development and inclusive teaching practices, and 64% reported that they perceived a need to change or update their Mammalogy courses or their teaching approaches. Overall, our results indicate that Mammalogy instructors have a strong interest in training students to share their appreciation for mammals and are generally engaged in efforts to increase the effectiveness of their teaching through the incorporation of more student-centered approaches to teaching and learning.
Evidence has shown that facilitating student-centered learning (SCL) in STEM classrooms enhances student learning and satisfaction [1]–[3]. However, despite increased support from educational and government bodies to incorporate SCL practices [1], minimal changes have been made in undergraduate STEM curriculum [4]. Faculty often teach as they were taught, relying heavily on traditional lecture-based teaching to disseminate knowledge [4]. Though some faculty express the desire to improve their teaching strategies, they feel limited by a lack of time, training, and incentives [4], [5]. To maximize student learning while minimizing instructor effort to change content, courses can be designed to incorporate simpler, less time-consuming SCL strategies that still have a positive impact on student experience.
In this paper, we present one example of utilizing a variety of simple SCL strategies throughout the design and implementation of a 4-week long module. This module focused on introductory tissue engineering concepts and was designed to help students learn foundational knowledge within the field as well as develop critical technical skills. Further, the module sought to develop important professional skills such as problem-solving, teamwork, and communication. During module design and implementation, evidence-based SCL teaching strategies were applied to ensure students developed important knowledge and skills within the short timeframe. Lectures featured discussion-based active learning exercises to encourage student engagement and peer collaboration [6]–[8]. The module was designed using a situated perspective, acknowledging that knowing is inseparable from doing [9], and therefore each week, the material taught in the two lecture sessions was directly applied to that week’s lab to reinforce students’ conceptual knowledge through hands-on activities and experimental outcomes. Additionally, the majority of assignments served as formative assessments to motivate student performance while providing instructors with feedback to identify misconceptions and make real-time module improvements [10]–[12].
Students anonymously responded to pre- and post-module surveys, which focused on topics such as student motivation for enrolling in the module, module expectations, and prior experience. Students were also surveyed for student satisfaction, learning gains, and graduate student teaching team (GSTT) performance. Data suggests a high level of student satisfaction, as most students’ expectations were met, and often exceeded. Students reported developing a deeper understanding of the field of tissue engineering and learning many of the targeted basic lab skills. In addition to hands-on skills, students gained confidence to participate in research and an appreciation for interacting with and learning from peers. Finally, responses with respect to GSTT performance indicated a perceived emphasis on a learner-centered and knowledge/community-centered approaches over assessment-centeredness [13].
Overall, student feedback indicated that SCL teaching strategies can enhance student learning outcomes and experience, even over the short timeframe of this module. Student recommendations for module improvement focused primarily on modifying the lecture content and laboratory component of the module, and not on changing the teaching strategies employed. The success of this module exemplifies how instructors can implement similar strategies to increase student engagement and encourage in-depth discussions without drastically increasing instructor effort to re-format course content.
Introduction.
Schaller, Michael D.; Gencheva, Marieta; Gunther, Michael R.; Weed, Scott A.(
, BMC Medical Education)
Abstract Background Traditionally, doctoral student education in the biomedical sciences relies on didactic coursework to build a foundation of scientific knowledge and an apprenticeship model of training in the laboratory of an established investigator. Recent recommendations for revision of graduate training include the utilization of graduate student competencies to assess progress and the introduction of novel curricula focused on development of skills, rather than accumulation of facts. Evidence demonstrates that active learning approaches are effective. Several facets of active learning are components of problem-based learning (PBL), which is a teaching modality where student learning is self-directed toward solving problems in a relevant context. These concepts were combined and incorporated in creating a new introductory graduate course designed to develop scientific skills (student competencies) in matriculating doctoral students using a PBL format. Methods Evaluation of course effectiveness was measured using the principals of the Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluation. At the end of each course offering, students completed evaluation surveys on the course and instructors to assess their perceptions of training effectiveness. Pre- and post-tests assessing students’ proficiency in experimental design were used to measure student learning. Results The analysis of the outcomes of the course suggests the training is effective in improving experimental design. The course was well received by the students as measured by student evaluations (Kirkpatrick Model Level 1). Improved scores on post-tests indicate that the students learned from the experience (Kirkpatrick Model Level 2). A template is provided for the implementation of similar courses at other institutions. Conclusions This problem-based learning course appears effective in training newly matriculated graduate students in the required skills for designing experiments to test specific hypotheses, enhancing student preparation prior to initiation of their dissertation research.
Clemmons, Alexa W., Donovan, Deborah A., Theobald, Elli J., and Crowe, Alison J. Using the Intended–Enacted–Experienced Curriculum Model to Map the Vision and Change Core Competencies in Undergraduate Biology Programs and Courses. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10343594. CBE—Life Sciences Education 21.1 Web. doi:10.1187/cbe.21-02-0054.
Clemmons, Alexa W., Donovan, Deborah A., Theobald, Elli J., & Crowe, Alison J. Using the Intended–Enacted–Experienced Curriculum Model to Map the Vision and Change Core Competencies in Undergraduate Biology Programs and Courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 21 (1). Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10343594. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-02-0054
Clemmons, Alexa W., Donovan, Deborah A., Theobald, Elli J., and Crowe, Alison J.
"Using the Intended–Enacted–Experienced Curriculum Model to Map the Vision and Change Core Competencies in Undergraduate Biology Programs and Courses". CBE—Life Sciences Education 21 (1). Country unknown/Code not available. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-02-0054.https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10343594.
@article{osti_10343594,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Using the Intended–Enacted–Experienced Curriculum Model to Map the Vision and Change Core Competencies in Undergraduate Biology Programs and Courses},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10343594},
DOI = {10.1187/cbe.21-02-0054},
abstractNote = {One critical step in the challenging process of curricular reform is determining how closely a curriculum aligns with national recommendations. Here, we examine the alignment of teaching, assessment, and student experience in undergraduate biology courses with the Vision and Change core competency recommendations. We applied the intended–enacted–experienced curriculum model to obtain a more complete, multiperspective view of the curriculum. First, we developed and piloted the BioSkills Curriculum Survey with more than 100 biology instructors across five institutions. Using multilevel logistic regression modeling of the survey data, we found that instructors were equally likely to report teaching all competencies; however, they reported assessing some competencies more than others. After adding course characteristics to our model, we found that the likelihood of teaching certain competencies depended on course type. Next, we analyzed class materials and student perceptions of instruction in 10 biology courses in one department. Within this smaller sample, we found that instructors messaged a narrower range of competency learning outcomes on their syllabi than they reported teaching on the survey. Finally, modeling revealed that inclusion of an outcome on assessments, but not syllabi, increased the likelihood that students and their instructor agreed whether it was taught.},
journal = {CBE—Life Sciences Education},
volume = {21},
number = {1},
author = {Clemmons, Alexa W. and Donovan, Deborah A. and Theobald, Elli J. and Crowe, Alison J.},
editor = {Long, Tammy}
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
