Search for: All records

Science as an enterprise has been and continues to be exclusionary, perpetuating inequities among whose voice is heard as well as what/whose knowledge is recognized as valid. Women, people of color, and persons with disabilities are still vastly outnumbered in science and engineering by their White, male counterparts. These types of imbalances create a gatekeeping culture of inequity and inaccessibility, particularly for traditionally underrepresented students. Science classrooms, especially at the undergraduate level, strive to mimic the broader practices of the scientific community and therefore have tremendous potential to perpetuate the exclusion of certain groups of people. They also have, however, the potential to be a catalyst for equitable participation in science. Utilizing pedagogies of empowerment such as culturally responsive science teaching (CRST) in undergraduate classrooms can mitigate the gatekeeping phenomenon seen in science. Teaching assistants (TAs) engage in more one‐on‐one time with students than most faculty in undergraduate biology education, yet minimal pedagogical training is offered to them. Therefore, training for improved pedagogical knowledge is important for TAs, but training for CRST is critical as TAs have broad and potentially lasting impact on students. This study explores the ways in which undergraduate biology TAs enact CRST. Using constructivist grounded theory methods, this study examined TAs' reflections, observation field notes, semistructured interviews, and focus groups to develop themes surrounding their enactment of CRST. Findings from this study showed that undergraduate biology TAs enact CRST in ways described by four themes:Funds of Knowledge Connections,Differentiating Instruction,Intentional Scaffolding, andReducing Student Anxiety. These findings provide new insights into the ways undergraduate science education might be reimagined to create equitable science learning opportunities for all students.

 

ABSTRACT Evidence-based teaching practices (EBTP)—like inquiry-based learning, inclusive teaching, and active learning—have been shown to benefit all students, especially women, first-generation, and traditionally minoritized students in science fields. However, little research has focused on how best to train teaching assistants (TAs) to use EBTP or on which components of professional development are most important. We designed and experimentally manipulated a series of pre-semester workshops on active learning (AL), dividing subjects into two groups. The Activity group worked in teams to learn an AL technique with a workshop facilitator. These teams then modeled the activity with their peers acting as students. In the Evidence group, facilitators modeled the activities with all TAs acting as students. We used a mixed-methods research design (specifically, concurrent triangulation) to interpret pre- and post-workshop and post-semester survey responses. We found that Evidence group participants reported greater knowledge of AL after the workshop than Activity group participants. Activity group participants, on the other hand, found all of the AL techniques more useful than Evidence group participants. These results suggest that actually modeling AL techniques made them more useful to TAs than simply experiencing the same techniques as students—even with the accompanying evidence. This outcome has broad implications for how we provide professional development sessions to TAs and potentially to faculty.