National and local initiatives focused on the transformation of STEM teaching in higher education have multiplied over the last decade. These initiatives often focus on measuring change in instructional practices, but it is difficult to monitor such change without a national picture of STEM educational practices, especially as characterized by common observational instruments. We characterized a snapshot of this landscape by conducting the first large scale observation-based study. We found that lecturing was prominent throughout the undergraduate STEM curriculum, even in classrooms with infrastructure designed to support active learning, indicating that further work is required to reform STEM education. Additionally, we established that STEM faculty’s instructional practices can vary substantially within a course, invalidating the commonly-used teaching evaluations based on a one-time observation.

Background: Research at the secondary and postsecondary levels has clearly demonstrated the critical role that individual and contextual characteristics play in instructors' decision to adopt educational innovations. Although recent research has shed light on factors influencing the teaching practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty, it is still not well understood how unique departmental environments impact faculty adoption of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) within the context of a single institution. In this study, we sought to characterize the communication channels utilized by STEM faculty, as well as the contextual and individual factors that influence the teaching practices of STEM faculty at the departmental level. Accordingly, we collected survey and observational data from the chemistry, biology, and physics faculty at a single large research-intensive university in the USA. We then compared the influencing factors experienced by faculty in these different departments to their instructional practices. Results: Analyses of the survey data reveal disciplinary differences in the factors influencing adoption of EBIPs. In particular, the physics faculty (n = 15) had primarily student-centered views about teaching and experienced the most positive contextual factors toward adoption of EBIPs. At the other end of the spectrum, the chemistry faculty (n = 20) had primarily teacher-centered views and experienced contextual factors that hindered the adoption of student-centered practices. Biology faculty (n = 25) fell between these two groups. Classroom observational data reflected these differences: The physics classrooms were significantly more student-centered than the chemistry classrooms. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that disciplinary differences exist in the contextual factors teaching conceptions that STEM faculty experience and hold, even among faculty within the same institution. Moreover, it shows that these differences are associated to the level of adoption of student-centered teaching practices. This work has thus identified the critical need to carefully characterize STEM faculty's departmental environment and conceptions about teaching before engaging in instructional reform efforts, and to adapt reform activities to account for these factors. The results of this study also caution the overgeneralization of findings from a study focused on one type of STEM faculty in one environment to all STEM faculty in any environment.

The authors performed a cluster analysis using observational data from 269 class periods and including 73 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty from 28 research universities. They used eight of the 25 Classroom Observation Protocol in Undergraduate STEM codes to produce 10 clusters of instructional styles across a range of Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol scores. A description of the clusters and their distribution across various STEM courses are provided.

This Research Methods essay describes a framework for measuring fidelity of implementation of evidence-based instructional practices in discipline-based education research and provides general guidelines, as well as a specific example using peer instruction, for how this framework should be employed to characterize the impact of evidence-based instructional practices.

Peer instruction is an evidence-based pedagogy that has been extensively studied in various science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. In this essay, the authors review and summarize the research literature on the effectiveness and intricacies of implementation of peer instruction. A research-based how-to guide and suggestions for future research investigations are provided.

POGIL is a student-centered instructional strategy that was developed by chemical educators in the late 1990s. In the following sections, the instructional structure and benefits of this practice are described. StructurePOGIL is based on social constructivist learning theory and therefore involves students' developing their conceptual un-Abstract Innovative, research-based instructional practices are critical to transforming the conventional undergraduate instructional landscape into a student-centered learning environment. Research on dissemination of innovation indicates that instructors often adapt rather than adopt these practices. These adaptations can lead to the loss of critical elements of the practice, which may affect its effectiveness. Process-oriented, guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) is a research-based instructional practice that has been widely disseminated for the past two decades. However, few studies have investigated practitioners' adaptations of POGIL and the impact of these adaptations on expected outcomes measured during recommended implementations of POGIL. In this study, we explore the impact of the implementation of POGIL in discussion sections of a general chemistry and an organic chemistry course on students' grades, retention, attitude toward chemistry, self-efficacy in chemistry, and attitude toward the learning environment provided in these courses. A quasi-experimental design was implemented and data were collected through valid and reliable surveys. Results indicate little to no impact on most measures, although positive trends favoring POGIL students were observed. Discussion of how this particular adaptation of POGIL could explain these results is presented, along with implications for research and practice.

Chemistry laboratories play an essential role in the education of undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM students. The extent of student learning in any educational environment depends largely on the effectiveness of the instructors. In chemistry laboratories at large universities, the instructors of record are typically graduate or undergraduate teaching assistants (TAs). Despite the importance of their role in the education of undergraduate students, TAs' instructional practices have been largely understudied outside specific reform efforts. In this study, we developed a segmented observation protocol, the Laboratory Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (LOPUS), in order to characterize TAs' instructional styles in a General Chemistry laboratory curriculum. LOPUS captures both students' and TAs' behaviors every 2 min as well as initiators of verbal interactions and the nature of these verbal interactions (e.g., data analysis, explanation of concepts). Analyses of 19 videos collected from 15 TAs resulted in the identification of four instructional styles: the waiters, the busy bees, the observers, and the guides on-the-side. We found that students' behaviors were independent of these styles and limited to performing the laboratory activities, initiating conversation with TAs, and asking TAs questions. Interestingly, students rather than TAs were initiators of most verbal interactions, regardless of TAs' instructional styles. Finally, we found that the nature of TA−student verbal interactions was related to the nature of the laboratory activity (e.g., only following step-by-step instructions versus carrying out extensive data analysis). Implications of these findings for future research investigations and TA training are discussed.

While research on and development of evidence‐based instructional practices (EBIPs) in STEM education has flourished, implementation of these practices classrooms has not been as prolific. Using the teacher‐centered systemic reform model as a framework, we explore the connection between chemistry instructors’ beliefs about teaching and learning and self‐efficacy beliefs, and their enacted classroom practices. Postsecondary chemistry faculty present a unique population for the study because of their role in teaching prerequisite courses, such as general and organic chemistry, which are key to many science major fields. A measure of teacher beliefs and self‐efficacy was administered to a national survey of postsecondary chemistry faculty members. Instructional practices used in a chemistry course were also collected via self‐report. While instructional practices were not directly observed, a cluster analysis of our data mirrors patterns of instructional practices found in observation‐based studies of chemistry faculty. Significant differences are found on teacher thinking and self‐efficacy measures based on enacted instructional practices. Results support the hypothesized connection between beliefs and instructional practice on a larger scale than in previous studies of this relationship, bolstering the evidence for the importance of this relationship over previously criticized results. These results present a call for reform efforts on fostering change from its core, that is, the beliefs of those who ultimately adopt EBIPs. Dissemination and design should incorporate training and materials that highlight the process by which faculty members interpret reformed practices within their belief system, and explore belief change in the complex context of education reform.