Search for: All records

Large enrollment, introductory science and engineering classes at research universities are frequently the subject of Discipline-Based Education Research projects and are commonly taught by non-tenure track faculty. However, tenure-track and nontenure-track faculty may encounter different institutional structures that impact their implementation of, or intention to use, evidence-based instructional practices. We used a multiple nested case study framed by the Teacher-Centered Systemic Reform model to identify structural, cultural, and personal components of reform that differed by faculty position and home academic department in the context of a discipline based education research project. Structural, cultural, and personal drivers and barriers to reform differed between position types and among departments but there were interactions between these two effects, suggesting both need to be considered in reform efforts and research projects. Overall, involvement in the discipline-based education research project served as a positive experience, addressed barriers and enhanced drivers for adopting EBIP. Our study highlights factors that promote and prevent the integration of evidence-based practices, and we suggest that involvement in discipline-based education research can encourage the adoption of student-centered pedagogy in science and engineering classes. 

STEM undergraduate instructors teaching remote courses often use traditional lecture-based instruction, despite evidence that active learning methods improve student engagement and learning outcomes. One simple way to use active learning online is to incorporate exploratory learning. In exploratory learning, students explore a novel activity (e.g., problem solving) before a lecture on the underlying concepts and procedures. This method has been shown to improve learning outcomes during in-person courses, without requiring the entire course to be restructured. The current study examined whether the benefits of exploratory learning extend to a remote undergraduate physics lesson, taught synchronously online. Undergraduate physics students (N = 78) completed a physics problem-solving activity either before instruction (explore-first condition) or after (instruct-first condition). Students then completed a learning assessment of the problem-solving procedures and underlying concepts. Despite lower accuracy on the learning activity, students in the explore-first condition demonstrated better understanding on the assessment, compared to students in the instruct-first condition. This finding suggests that exploratory learning can serve as productive failure in online courses, challenging students but improving learning, compared to the more widely-used lecture-then-practice method. 

This WIP paper presents new research on exploratory learning, an educational technique that reverses the order of standard lecture-based instruction techniques. In exploratory learning, students are presented with a novel activity first, followed by instruction. Exploratory learning has been observed to benefit student learning in foundational math and science courses such as calculus, physics, and statistics; however, it has yet to be applied to engineering topics such as programming. In two studies, we tested the effectiveness of exploratory learning in the programming unit of a first-year undergraduate engineering course. We designed a new activity to help students learn about different python error types, ensuring that it would be suitable for exploration. Then we implemented two different orders (the traditional instruct-first versus exploratory learning’s explore-first) across the six sections of the course. In Study 1 (N=406), we did not detect a difference between the instruct-first and explore-first conditions. In Study 2 (N=411), we added more scaffolding to the activity. Students who received the traditional order of instruction followed by the activity scored significantly higher on the assessment. These findings contradict the exploratory learning benefits typically shown, shedding light on potential boundary conditions to this effect. 

This study tested whether exploring with simulations before instruction offers the conceptual benefits of “productive failure,” compared to a more traditional lecture-then-practice method. Undergraduate students (N=218) in introductory chemistry courses completed an activity using an online simulation about atomic structure. Students either completed the simulation activity before (explore-first condition) or after (instruct-first condition) a lecture on the topic. Students in both conditions scored equally on an assessment of basic facts taught in the instruction. However, students in the explore-first condition scored significantly higher on assessments of conceptual understanding and transfer to a new concept, compared to students in the instruct-first condition. Students in the explore-first condition also reported experiencing greater competence and curiosity during the learning activities. A guided simulation activity prior to instruction can have both motivational benefits and deepen students’ understanding. 

This work in progress paper discusses preliminary research testing the causal effectiveness of exploratory learning in undergraduate STEM courses. Exploratory learning is an active-learning technique that has been shown to improve students’ conceptual understanding, and is therefore well suited for STEM education. This method reverses the order of traditional lecture-then practice methods, by having students explore a novel problem prior to instruction. Participants (N=150) were first-year engineering students enrolled in an introductory engineering calculus course. Students were taught about two-dimensional vectors in an online, asynchronous learning module. Students were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the instruct-first condition, students viewed the instruction and then completed a Geogebra™ activity. In the explore-first condition, students completed the activity and then viewed the instruction. Thus, the exact same activities were given to students, allowing us to test the causal effectiveness of reversing the placement of the activity. Afterwards, all students completed an online quiz and a later Vector test. A number of students opened but did not complete the activity. Of those students, no effects of condition were found. For the students who completed the activity, those in the explore-first condition scored higher on the quiz than those in the instruct-first condition. Scores were trending in a similar direction on the vector test. These results demonstrate the potential of exploratory learning to improve understanding in engineering mathematics, and in an online module format. This research also suggests that Geogebra™ may be a useful tool for developing an exploration activity students can complete online.