Search for: All records

Small group interactions and interactions with near‐peer instructors such as learning assistants serve as fertile opportunities for student learning in undergraduate active learning classrooms. To understand what students take away from these interactions, we need to understand how and what they learn during the moment of their interaction. This study builds on practical epistemology analysis to develop a framework to study this in‐the‐moment learning during interactions by operationalizing it through the lens of discourse change and continuity toward three ends. Using video recordings of students and learning assistants interacting in a variety of contexts including remote, in‐person, and hybrid classrooms in introductory chemistry and physics at two universities, we developed an analytical framework that can characterize learning in the moment of interaction, is sensitive to different kinds of learning, and can be used to compare interactions. The framework and its theoretical underpinnings are described in detail. In‐depth examples demonstrate how the framework can be applied to classroom data to identify and differentiate different ways in which in‐the‐moment learning occurs. 

Understanding how relationships between instructors and students develop is important for understanding the undergraduate student experience. We expect the development of positive relationships is related to the social practices (e.g., greetings, using names, sympathizing, or empathizing with students) that instructors use in the course of normal classroom interactions with students. We recorded interactions between instructors and students in remote synchronous online physics problem-solving sessions and surveyed students about their perceptions of their instructors. We selected the highest-rated instructor and lowest-rated instructor in our sample and identified social practices in their conversations with students. We first characterized the frequency of social practice usage by each instructor in their conversations with students. We find that both instructors relied on a set of core social practices in most conversations with students, but that our higher-rated instructor used comparatively more positive commentary and sympathizing or empathizing behaviors than our lower-rated instructor. In comparison, our lower-rated instructor engaged in more negative commentary. Using network analysis, we then explored patterns in co-occurrences of social practices used by each instructor moment-to-moment in conversations and compared the instructors’ social practice network patterns. We find that our higher rated-instructor used a greater variety of social practices during moment-to-moment interactions with students, while our lower-rated instructor spent most of his time focused on classroom business. We suggest that professional development for instructors should include guidance on how messages are delivered in classes and encourage the use of high-impact social practices to foster positive relationships with students. 

Abstract BackgroundLearning assistants (LAs) increase accessibility to instructor–student interactions in large STEM lecture classes. In this research, we used the Formative Assessment Enactment Model developed for K-12 science teachers to characterize LA facilitation practices. The Formative Assessment Enactment Model describes instructor actions as eliciting or advancing student thinking, guided by their purposes and the perspective they center as well as by what they notice about and how they interpret student thinking. Thus, it describes facilitation practices in a holistic way, capturing the way purposes, perspectives, noticing, interpreting, and actions are intertwined and working together to characterize different LA actions. In terms of how perspectives influence actions, eliciting and advancing moves can be enacted either in authoritative ways, driven by one perspective that has authority, or in dialogic ways, driven by multiple perspectives. Dialogic practices are of particular interest because of their potential to empower students and center student thinking. ResultsOur analysis of video recordings of LA–student interactions and stimulated recall interviews with 37 introductory physical science lectures’ LAs demonstrates that instead of as a dichotomy between authoritative and dialogic, LA actions exist along a spectrum of authoritative to dialogic based on the perspectives centered. Between the very authoritative perspective that centers on canonically correct science and the very dialogic perspective that centers the perspectives of the students involved in the discussion, we find two intermediary categories. The two new categories encompass a moderately authoritative perspective focused on the LA’s perspective without the claim of being correct and a moderately dialogic perspective focused on ideas from outside the current train of thought such as from students in the class that are not part of the current discussion. ConclusionsThis spectrum further adds to theory around authoritative and dialogic practices as it reconsiders what perspectives can drive LA enactment of facilitation other than the perspective of canonically correct science and the perspectives of the students involved in the discussion. This emerging characterization may be used to give LAs and possibly other instructors a tool to intentionally shift between authoritative and dialogic practices. It may also be used to transition towards more student-centered practices.