Search for: All records

Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) have been shown to provide students with a variety of learning benefits including better conceptual understanding, improved critical thinking and data literacy skills, and increased interest in pursuing scientific careers. Additionally, CUREs provide students with opportunities to participate in authentic research experiences that have a broader impact outside of the classroom. Despite the numerous benefits, the field of astronomy has lagged behind disciplines like biology and chemistry when it comes to including CUREs in the curriculum. Not limited to astronomy, however, is the lack of research opportunities and courses offered to students enrolled in undergraduate degree programs online. In the Fall of 2020, Arizona State University (ASU) introduced the nation’s first online bachelor’s degree program in astronomy and planetary sciences (APS). To make research accessible to a more diverse population of learners, it is imperative that students in this program have access to the same opportunities to participate in authentic research as those in the parallel in-person program. In this work, we describe the development, implementation, and assessment of a fully online CURE for astronomy majors as part of the APS program. We conducted a mixed methods analysis consisting of a Likert style survey administered pre- and postcourse as well as student interviews at the conclusion of the semester. Survey results from the course’s first two offerings (N ¼ 24) indicated that students’ research self-efficacy and science identity both improved. An exoplanet-specific multiple-choice assessment (N ¼ 26) showed statistically significant improvements in conceptual understanding postcourse. Additionally, student interview (N ¼ 11) responses relayed that students felt a stronger sense of belonging to both ASU and the larger astronomy community after participation in the course. The results from this study are encouraging and suggest that student participation in this online CURE led to similar improvements across a variety of outcomes previously identified in studies of in-person CUREs spanning multiple disciplines. 

Field learning is fundamental in geoscience, but cost, accessibility, and other constraints limit equal access to these experiences. As technological advances afford ever more immersive and student-centered virtual field experiences, they are likely to have a growing role across geoscience education. They also serve as an important tool for providing high-quality online instruction, whether to fully online degree students, students in hybrid in-person/remote programs, or students experiencing disruptions to in-person learning, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. This mixed-methods study compared learning outcomes of an in-person (ipFT) and a virtual (iVFT) geoscience field trip to Grand Canyon National Park, each of which highlighted the Great Unconformity. Participants included introductory and advanced geology students. In the ipFT, students collectively explored the Canyon through the interpretive Trail of Time along the Canyon rim, guided by the course instructor. In the iVFT, students individually explored the Canyon and studied its geology at river level. 360° spherical images anchor the iVFTs and serve as a framework for programmed overlays that enable active learning and allow for adaptive feedback. We assessed cognitive and affective outcomes in both trips using common measures. Regression analysis showed the iVFT to be associated with significantly greater learning gains. The ipFT students had significantly higher positive affect scores pre-trip, reflecting their excitement for the trip. Overall, our results provide clear evidence that high-quality iVFTs can lead to better learning gains than ipFTs. Although field trips are employed for more than just content learning, this finding may encourage greater use of iVFTs in coursework. 

Large introductory lecture courses are frequently post-secondary students’ first formal interaction with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Grade outcomes in these courses are often disparate across student populations, which, in turn, has implications for student retention. This study positions such disparities as a manifestation of systemic inequities along the dimensions of sex, race/ethnicity, income, and first-generation status and investigates the extent to which they are similar across peer institutions.

We examined grade outcomes in a selected set of early STEM courses across six large, public, research-intensive universities in the United States over ten years. In this sample of more than 200,000 STEM course enrollments, we find that course grade benefits increase significantly with the number of systemic advantages students possess at all six institutions. The observed trends in academic outcomes versus advantage are strikingly similar across universities despite the fact that we did not control for differences in grading practices, contexts, and instructor and student populations. The findings are concerning given that these courses are often students’ first post-secondary STEM experiences.

STEM course grades are typically lower than those in other disciplines; students taking them often pay grade penalties. The systemic advantages some student groups experience are correlated with significant reductions in these grade penalties at all six institutions. The consistency of these findings across institutions and courses supports the claim that inequities in STEM education are a systemic problem, driven by factors that go beyond specific courses or individual institutions. Our work provides a basis for the exploration of contexts where inequities are exacerbated or reduced and can be used to advocate for structural change within STEM education. To cultivate more equitable learning environments, we must reckon with how pervasive structural barriers in STEM courses negatively shape the experiences of marginalized students.

 

Surviving Extinction is an interactive, adaptive, digital learning experience through which students learn about the history of vertebrate evolution over the last 350 million years. This experience is self-contained, providing students with immediate feedback. It is designed to be used in a wide range of educational settings from junior high school (∼12 years old) to university level. Surviving Extinction ’s design draws on effective aspects of existing virtual field trip-based learning experiences. Most important among these is the capacity for students to learn through self-directed virtual explorations of simulated historical ecosystems and significant modern-day geologic field sites. Surviving Extinction also makes significant innovations beyond what has previously been done in this area, including extensive use of gamified elements such as collectibles and hidden locations. Additionally, it blends scientifically accurate animations with captured media via a user interface that presents an attractive, engaging, and immersive experience. Surviving Extinction has been field-tested with students at the undergraduate, high school, and pre-high school levels to assess how well it achieves the intended learning outcomes. In all settings we found significant gains pre- to post-activity on a knowledge survey with medium to large effect sizes. This evidence of learning is further supported with data from the gamified elements such as the number of locations discovered and total points earned. Surviving Extinction is freely available for use and detailed resources for educators are provided. It is appropriate for a range of undergraduate courses that cover the history of life on Earth, including ones from a biology, ecology, or geology perspective and courses for either majors or non-majors. Additionally, at the high school level, Surviving Extinction is directly appropriate to teaching adaptation, one of the disciplinary core ideas in the Next Generation Science Standards. Beyond providing this resource to the educational community, we hope that the design ideas demonstrated in Surviving Extinction will influence future development of interactive digital learning experiences. 

Online education has grown rapidly in recent years with many universities now offering fully online degree programs even in STEM disciplines. These programs have the potential to broaden access to STEM degrees for people with social identities currently underrepresented in STEM. Here, we ask to what extent is that potential realized in terms of student enrollment and grades for a fully online degree program. Our analysis of data from more than 10,000 course-enrollments compares student demographics and course grades in a fully online biology degree program to demographics and grades in an equivalent in-person biology degree program at the same university. We find that women, first-generation to college students and students eligible for federal Pell grants constitute a larger proportion of students in the online program compared to the in-person mode. However, the online mode of instruction is associated with lower course grades relative to the in-person mode. Moreover, African American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Native American, and Pacific Islander students as well as federal Pell grant eligible students earned lower grades than white students and non-Pell grant eligible students, respectively, but the grade disparities were similar among both in-person and online student groups. Finally, we find that grade disparities between men and women are larger online compared to in-person, but that for first-generation to college women, the online mode of instruction is associated with little to no grade gap compared to continuing generation women. Our findings indicate that although this online degree program broadens access for some student populations, inequities in the experience remain and need to be addressed in order for online education to achieve its inclusive mission.