An official website of the United States government
IntroductionOpen educational resources (OERs) provide instructors access to no-cost lesson materials they can incorporate into their courses. OER lessons can promote the use of innovative and evidence-based educational practices in biology education. Prior research suggests that teaching strategies are often implemented in different ways which can impact student learning. However, few studies have explored how OER lessons are modified to fit their local context. MethodsWe used the teacher-curriculum framework to understand how and why instructors modify these materials. Additionally, we explored how these materials supported instructors in enacting national priorities from Vision and Change. We surveyed 139 instructors who implemented lessons published inCourseSource, a peer-reviewed journal specifically designed to share OERs. ResultsWe found that the majority of instructors who used the lesson materials (e.g., slides, worksheets, assessments, protocols) did so without making substantial modifications, in contrast with prior research. Furthermore, we found that these materials were particularly helpful in incorporating student-centered teaching practices, like group work or discussions, sometimes for the first time. DiscussionThese insights into what instructors value in lesson materials can inform OER publishing guidelines so that these materials best meet instructional needs.
more »
« less
How are undergraduate STEM instructors leveraging student thinking?
Abstract BackgroundSTEM instructors who leverage student thinking can positively influence student outcomes and build their own teaching expertise. Leveraging student thinking involves using the substance of student thinking to inform instruction. The ways in which instructors leverage student thinking in undergraduate STEM contexts, and what enables them to do so effectively, remains largely unexplored. We investigated how undergraduate STEM faculty leverage student thinking in their teaching, focusing on faculty who engage students in work during class. ResultsFrom analyzing interviews and video of a class lesson for eight undergraduate STEM instructors, we identified a group of instructors who exhibited high levels of leveraging student thinking (high-leveragers) and a group of instructors who exhibited low levels of leveraging student thinking (low-leveragers). High-leveragers behaved as if student thinking was central to their instruction. We saw this in how they accessed student thinking, worked to interpret it, and responded in the moment and after class. High-leveragers spent about twice as much class time getting access to detailed information about student thinking compared to low-leveragers. High-leveragers then altered instructional plans from lesson to lesson and during a lesson based on their interpretation of student thinking. Critically, high-leveragers also drew on much more extensive knowledge of student thinking, a component of pedagogical content knowledge, than did low-leveragers. High-leveragers used knowledge of student thinking to create access to more substantive student thinking, shape real-time interpretations, and inform how and when to respond. In contrast, low-leveragers accessed student thinking less frequently, interpreted student thinking superficially or not at all, and never discussed adjusting the content or problems for the following lesson. ConclusionsThis study revealed that not all undergraduate STEM instructors who actively engage students in work during class are also leveraging student thinking. In other words, not all student-centered instruction is student-thinking-centered instruction. We discuss possible explanations for why some STEM instructors are leveraging student thinking and others are not. In order to realize the benefits of student-centered instruction for undergraduates, we may need to support undergraduate STEM instructors in learning how to learn from their teaching experiences by leveraging student thinking.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1821023
- PAR ID:
- 10362994
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer Science + Business Media
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International Journal of STEM Education
- Volume:
- 9
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2196-7822
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
We compared 236 geoscience instructors’ histories of professional development (PD) participation with classroom observations using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) that describe undergraduate classes as Student-Centered (score ≥ 50), Transitional (score 31–49) or Teacher-Centered (score ≤ 30). Instructors who attended PD (n = 111) have higher average RTOP scores (44.5 vs. 34.2) and are more frequently observed teaching Student-Centered classes (33% vs. 13%) than instructors with no PD (p < 0.001). Instructors who attended PD that is topically-aligned with content taught during the classroom observation are likely to have RTOP scores that are higher by 13.5 points (p < 0.0001), and are 5.6 times more likely to teach a Student-Centered class than instructors without topically-aligned PD. Comparable odds of teaching Student-Centered classes (5.8x) occur for instructors who attended two topical PD events but were observed teaching a different topic. Models suggest that instructors with at least 24 h of PD are significantly more likely to teach a Student-Centered class than instructors with fewer hours. Our results highlight the effectiveness of discipline-specific PD in impacting teaching practices, and the importance of attending more than one such PD event to aid transfer of learning.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundThe University of California system has a novel tenure-track education-focused faculty position called Lecturer with Security of Employment (working titles: Teaching Professor or Professor of Teaching). We focus on the potential difference in implementation of active-learning strategies by faculty type, including tenure-track education-focused faculty, tenure-track research-focused faculty, and non-tenure-track lecturers. In addition, we consider other instructor characteristics (faculty rank, years of teaching, and gender) and classroom characteristics (campus, discipline, and class size). We use a robust clustering algorithm to determine the number of clusters, identify instructors using active learning, and to understand the instructor and classroom characteristics in relation to the adoption of active-learning strategies. ResultsWe observed 125 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate courses at three University of California campuses using the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM to examine active-learning strategies implemented in the classroom. Tenure-track education-focused faculty are more likely to teach with active-learning strategies compared to tenure-track research-focused faculty. Instructor and classroom characteristics that are also related to active learning include campus, discipline, and class size. The campus with initiatives and programs to support undergraduate STEM education is more likely to have instructors who adopt active-learning strategies. There is no difference in instructors in the Biological Sciences, Engineering, or Information and Computer Sciences disciplines who teach actively. However, instructors in the Physical Sciences are less likely to teach actively. Smaller class sizes also tend to have instructors who teach more actively. ConclusionsThe novel tenure-track education-focused faculty position within the University of California system represents a formal structure that results in higher adoption of active-learning strategies in undergraduate STEM education. Campus context and evolving expectations of the position (faculty rank) contribute to the symbols related to learning and teaching that correlate with differential implementation of active learning.more » « less
-
Quantitative reasoning (QR) is the ability to apply mathematics and statistics in the context of real-life situations and scientific problems. It is an important skill that students require to make sense of complex biological phenomena and handle large datasets in biology courses and research as well as in professional contexts. Biology educators and researchers are responding to the increasing need for QR through curricular reforms and research into biology education. This qualitative study investigates how undergraduate biology instructors implement QR into their teaching. The study used pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and a QR framework to explore instructors’ instructional goals, strategies, and perceived challenges and affordances in undergraduate biology instruction. The participants included 21 biology faculty across various institutions in the United States, who intentionally integrated QR in their instruction. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data focusing on participants’ beliefs, experiences, and classroom practices. Findings indicated that instructors adapt their QR instruction based on course level and student preparedness. In lower-division courses, strategies emphasized building foundational skills, reducing math anxiety, and using scaffolded instruction to promote confidence. In upper-division courses, instructors expected greater math fluency but still encountered a wide range of student abilities, prompting a focus on correcting misconceptions in integrating math knowledge and fostering deeper conceptual understanding in biology. Many instructors reported that their personal and educational experiences, especially struggles with math, often shaped their inclusive and empathetic teaching practices. Additionally, instructors’ research backgrounds influenced instructional design, particularly in the use of authentic data, statistical tools, and real-world applications. Instructors’ teaching experiences led to refinement in lesson planning, pacing, and active learning strategies. Despite their efforts, instructors faced both internal and external challenges in implementing QR, including discomfort with teaching math, time limitations, student resistance, and institutional barriers. However, affordances such as departmental support, interdisciplinary collaboration, and curricular flexibility helped to overcome some of these challenges. This study highlights the complex relationships between instructors’ experiences, beliefs, and contextual factors in shaping QR instruction. This calls for professional development that supports reflective practice, builds interdisciplinary competence, and promotes instructional strategies that bridge biology and mathematics and will help instructors design a learning environment that better support students’ development of QR skills. These findings offer valuable guidance for professional development aimed at helping biology instructors incorporate quantitative reasoning into their teaching. Such efforts can better equip students to meet the quantitative demands of modern biology and promote their continued engagement in STEM fields through more inclusive and integrated instructional approaches.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundWhat and how teachers learn through teaching without external guidance has long been of interest to researchers. Yet limited research has been conducted to investigate how learning through teaching occurs. The microgenetic approach (Siegler and Crowley, American Psychologist 46:606–620, 1991) has been useful in identifying the process of student learning. Using this approach, we investigated the development of teacher knowledge through teaching as well as which factors hinder or promote such development. ResultsOur findings suggest that teachers developed various components of teacher knowledge through teaching without external professional guidance. Further, we found that the extent to which teachers gained content-free or content-specific knowledge through teaching depended on their robust understanding of the concept being taught (i.e., content knowledge), the cognitive demand of the tasks used in teaching, and the lesson structure chosen (i.e., student centered vs. teacher centered). ConclusionsIn this study, we explored teacher learning through teaching and identified the sources leading to such learning. Our findings underscore the importance of teachers’ robust understanding of the content being taught, the tasks used in teaching, and a lesson structure that promotes teachers’ learning through teaching on their own.more » « less
