Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Free, publicly-accessible full text available October 15, 2024
-
Free, publicly-accessible full text available October 15, 2024
-
Dyan Jones, Qing X. (Ed.)Despite the positive gains towards student learning outcomes and engagement, active learning has been shown to potentially increase student anxiety due to a fear of negative evaluation. A pedagogical strategy proposed to mediate this issue is known as error framing; it asks instructors to encourage a perception of errors as being a natural part of the learning process. Previous work on this project investigated how graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) operationalized error framing during their training in a mixed-reality simulator but did not investigate their usage of it in their classrooms. This analysis characterizes the error framing statements made by GTAs during a set of classroom observations. We find that GTAs who employ error framing effectively avoid statements that might decrease student comfort and instead tend towards implicit, indirect strategies.more » « lessFree, publicly-accessible full text available October 15, 2024
-
We draw on methods from lines-of-argument analysis in Critical Interpretive Synthesis to synthesize and critique pathways through which disabled students access supports in postsecondary STEM. Integrating recent literature about pathways to access in postsecondary education as well as our ongoing research, we describe various mechanisms through which disabled students are currently provided (or not provided) access in postsecondary STEM and identify strengths and weaknesses with these various pathways. Specifically, we describe and problematize the typical accommodations process, which requires students to register with a Disability Resource Center which then negotiates accommodations with the disabled student and their instructors. Next, we describe alternatives to the traditional accommodations model, such as normalizing discussion of access needs (a tenant of disability justice), allowing individual instructors to validate students' needs and appropriate accommodations, and access through interdependence (another tenant of disability justice). We describe dimensions along which these pathways vary, such as process, disclosure, requirements for validity, and burden. We suggest instructors and mentors pull from all these models to create a transparent ecosystem of supports.more » « less
-
Abstract Background In college science laboratory and discussion sections, student-centered active learning strategies have been implemented to improve student learning outcomes and experiences. Research has shown that active learning activities can increase student anxiety if students fear that they could be negatively evaluated by their peers. Error framing (i.e., to frame errors as natural and beneficial to learning) is proposed in the literature as a pedagogical tool to reduce student anxiety. However, little research empirically explores how an instructor can operationalize error framing and how error framing is perceived by undergraduate students. To bridge the gap in the literature, we conducted a two-stage study that involved science graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) and undergraduate students. In stage one, we introduced cold calling (i.e., calling on non-volunteering students) and error framing to 12 chemistry and 11 physics GTAs. Cold calling can increase student participation but may increase student anxiety. Error framing has the potential to mitigate student anxiety when paired with cold calling. GTAs were then tasked to rehearse cold calling paired with error framing in a mixed-reality classroom simulator. We identified GTA statements that aligned with the definition of error framing. In stage two, we selected a few example GTA error framing statements and interviewed 13 undergraduate students about their perception of those statements.
Results In the simulator, all the GTAs rehearsed cold calling multiple times while only a few GTAs made error framing statements. A thematic analysis of GTAs’ error framing statements identified ways of error indication (i.e., explicit and implicit) and framing (i.e., natural, beneficial, and positive acknowledgement). Undergraduate student interviews revealed specific framing and tone that are perceived as increasing or decreasing student comfort in participating in classroom discourse. Both undergraduate students and some GTAs expressed negative opinions toward responses that explicitly indicate student mistakes. Undergraduate students’ perspectives also suggest that error framing should be implemented differently depending on whether errors have already occurred.
Conclusion Error framing is challenging for science GTAs to implement. GTAs’ operationalizations of error framing in the simulator and undergraduate students’ perceptions contribute to defining and operationalizing error framing for instructional practice. To increase undergraduate student comfort in science classroom discourse, GTAs can use implicit error indication. In response to students’ incorrect answers, GTAs can positively frame students’ specific ideas rather than discussing broadly how errors are natural or beneficial.
-
In this paper, we present a case study with a disabled physics student to draw attention to his experiences in the physics community, and the barriers and supports that he experienced as he advanced through his physics career. Using a methodology of narrative analysis, we identify themes and genres within the stories told by the participant. Narratives are often created to explain the unexpected and to solve a problem. In the physics community, disabled students find their "differences" (i.e., disability/impairments) are often positioned as unexpected and a problem to be solved. We use narrative analysis to humanize disabled physics students and to highlight their lived experiences of progressing through the physics community over their perceived deviation from the physics "norm." From this, we create resources for physics mentors to increase their knowledge of disabled physics students' experiences and how to support accessibility and inclusion in the physics community.more » « less
-
To improve accessibility and inclusion in postsecondary STEM education, we propose implementing Universal Design for Learning (UDL) based practices to meet the needs of a variety of learners. The UDL is a design framework aimed at improving and optimizing teaching and learning for all people, regardless of their disability status. As part of a larger professional development project, interviews were conducted with members of a faculty learning community to discuss their instructional practices and to offer feedback regarding opportunities to remove barriers to access and participation. In this paper, we focus on an interview with a physics instructor and examine their beliefs about students with disabilities as evidenced by the disability-specific language used in the interview. This prompted a new perspective on professional development regarding accommodating students with disabilities that focuses on confronting ablest beliefs as a crucial component in promoting inclusion in STEM education.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Background While there have been numerous calls to increase the participation of people with disabilities in STEM, many postsecondary institutions are not equipped to support students with disabilities. We examined the accessibility of 139 webpages from 73 postsecondary institutions in the USA that contained information about the undergraduate physics curriculum and graduate research programs. We selected these webpages as they are common entry points for students interested in pursuing a physics degree. We used Tenon and Mac OS X’s VoiceOver software to assess the level of accessibility of these webpages as measured by alignment with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Results We found that only one webpage had minimal accessibility errors (i.e., 10 errors), while the other webpages had numerous accessibility errors. Five specific error types accounted for the majority of all errors. The five most common errors were related to information, structure, and relationships of content (1.3.1 Level A; 39.7%); text alternatives for non-text content (1.1.1 Level A; 27.0%); information about link purpose (2.4.4 Level A; 14.7%); capability to resize text (1.4.4 Level AA; 10.0%); and information about the name, role, and value of user interface components (4.1.2 Level A; 11.2%). Conclusions We present and describe the five common accessibility errors we identified in the webpages in our sample, suggest solutions for these errors, and provide implications for students with disabilities, instructors and staff, institutional administration, and the broader physics community.more » « less