skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Low-Barrier Strategies to Increase Student-Centered Learning Low-Barrier Strategies to Increase Student-Centered Learning
Title: Low-Barrier Strategies to Increase Student-Centered Learning Low-Barrier Strategies to Increase Student-Centered 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.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2126251
NSF-PAR ID:
10357023
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Date Published:
Journal Name:
ASEE annual conference exposition proceedings
ISSN:
2153-5868
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ( , International Journal of STEM Education)
    Abstract Background

    An instructor’s conceptions of teaching and learning contribute to the establishment of learning environments that may benefit or hinder student learning. Previous studies have defined the continuum of teaching and learning conceptions, ranging from limited to complete, as well as the instructional practices that they help to inform (instructor-centered to student-centered), and the corresponding learning environments that these conceptions and practices establish, ranging from traditional to student-centered. Using the case of one STEM department at a research-intensive, minority serving institution, we explored faculty’s conceptions of teaching and learning and their resulting instructional practices, as well as uncovered their perspectives on the intradepartmental faculty interactions related to teaching. The study participants were drawn from both teaching-focused (called Professors of Teaching, PoTs) and traditional research (whom we call Research Professors, RPs) tenure-track faculty lines to identify whether differences existed amongst these two populations. We used interviews to explore faculty conceptions and analyzed syllabi to unveil how these conceptions shape instructional environments.

     Results

    Overall, PoTs exhibited complete conceptions of teaching and learning that emphasized student ownership of learning, whereas RPs possessed intermediate conceptions that focused more on transmitting knowledge and helping students prepare for subsequent courses. While both PoTs and RPs self-reported the use of active learning pedagogies, RPs were more likely to also highlight the importance of traditional lecture. The syllabi analysis revealed that PoTs enacted more student-centered practices in their classrooms compared to RPs. PoTs appeared to be more intentionally available to support students outside of class and encouraged student collaboration, while RPs focused more on the timeliness of assessments and enforcing more instructor-centered approaches in their courses. Finally, the data indicated that RPs recognized PoTs as individuals who were influential on their own teaching conceptions and practices.

     Conclusions

    Our findings suggest that departments should consider leveraging instructional experts who also possess a disciplinary background (PoTs) to improve their educational programs, both due to their student-centered impacts on the classroom environment and positive influence on their colleagues (RPs). This work also highlights the need for higher education institutions to offer appropriate professional development resources to enable faculty to reflect on their teaching and learning conceptions, aid in their pedagogical evolution, and guide the implementation of these conceptions into practice.

     
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ( , Numeracy)
    Grawe, Nathan D (Ed.)
    Many educators and professional organizations recommend Quantitative Reasoning as the best entry-level postsecondary mathematics course for non-STEM majors. However, novice and veteran instructors who have no prior experience in teaching a QR course often express their ignorance of the content to choose for this course, the instruction to offer students, and the assessments to measure student learning. We conducted a case study to investigate the initial implementation of an entry-level university quantitative reasoning course during fall semester, 2018. The participants were the course instructor and students. We examined the instructor’s motives and actions and the students’ responses to the course. The instructor had no prior experience teaching a QR course but did have 15 years of experience teaching student-centered mathematics. Data included course artifacts, class observations, an instructor interview, and students’ written reflections. Because this was a new course—and to adapt to student needs—the instructor employed his instructional autonomy and remained flexible in designing and enacting the course content, instruction, and assessment. His instructional decision making and flexible approach helped the instructor tailor the learning activities and teaching practices to the needs and interests of the students. The students generally appreciated and benefited from this approach, enjoyed the course, and provided positive remarks about the instructors’ practices. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ( , Proc. 2017 Physics Education Research Conference)
    A central goal of the Learning Assistant (LA) model is to improve students’ learning of science through the transformation of instructor practices. There is minimal existing research on the impact of college physics instructor experiences on their effectiveness. To investigate the association between college introductory physics instructors’ experiences with and without LAs and student learning, we drew on data from the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes (LASSO) database. The LASSO database provided us with student-level data (concept inventory scores and demographic data) for 4,365 students and course-level data (instructor experience and course features) for the students’ 93 mechanics courses. We performed Hierarchical Multiple Imputation to impute missing data and Hierarchical Linear Modeling to nest students within courses when modeling the associations be- tween instructor experience and student learning. Our models predict that instructors’ effectiveness decreases as they gain experience teaching without LAs. However, LA supported environments appear to remediate this decline in effectiveness as instructor effectiveness is maintained while they gain experience teaching with LAs. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ( , International Journal of STEM Education)
    Abstract Background

    Implementing research-based teaching practices has been repeatedly cited as an important factor for student success in university mathematics courses. Many research-based practices increase the amount of student–student and/or student–instructor interaction. However, some instructors are hesitant to implement such practices because they anticipate their students reacting negatively to experiencing an interactive classroom. As part of a larger project studying introductory undergraduate mathematics courses in the United States, we investigated students’ perceptions of the helpfulness of various classroom characteristics, particularly those that require interaction.

     Results

    From analyzing quantitative student data, we found that students reported interactive classroom characteristics (e.g., group work) as less prevalent than other classroom characteristics (e.g., lecture). Moreover, the students tended to regard characteristics that they reported experiencing often as helpful for their learning. From analyzing qualitative data from student focus groups, we found that students considered several indicators when identifying if a characteristic was helpful for their learning. In particular, students suggested that they can identify a characteristic as helpful for their learning when it supported them in solving assigned problems and understanding why the procedures work, earning good grades, building on their knowledge or applying it in different contexts, and teaching others.

     Conclusions

    The key finding from our work is that students are likely to view classroom characteristics that they experience more often as more helpful for their learning and are less likely to view characteristics that they rarely experience as helpful for their learning. Students view the characteristics that they regularly experience as helping them to solve problems and understand why the procedures work, earn good grades, build on their knowledge or apply it in different contexts, and teach others. We discuss important implications for practice, policy, and research as it relates to both student and instructor buy-in for increasing interactions in class.

     
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ( , Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education)
    Cook, S ; Katz, B ; Moore-Russo, D (Ed.)
    Studies show that Research-Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) help students learn, however their adoption has been slow. The Teacher Centered Systematic Reform Model (TCRM) is a general model for organizing enablers and barriers to adoption of new teaching methods that includes departmental, personal and teacher thinking factors. We used the TCRM model as a framework to assess the amount of formal lecture reported by 634 mathematics instructors in their undergraduate courses. Regression analyses found that instructors who participated in Project NExT (a professional development workshop) during their early careers were less likely to use lecture than non-participants. Other significant predictors of lecture less included evaluation expectations emphasizing active teaching methods, involvement in equity and diversity efforts, and prior experience with RBIS. Factors with a positive correlational association with lecture included evaluation efforts by departments where lecture was expected. Results confirmed some prior models in different disciplines. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email