Summer Institute to Improve University Science Teaching

Pfund, Christine; Miller, Sarah; Brenner, Kerry; Bruns, Peter J.; Chang, Amy; Ebert-May, Diane; Fagen, Adam P.; Gentile, J. Ronald; Gossens, Sandra; Khan, Ishrat M.; Labov, Jay B.; Pribbenow, Christine Maidl; Susman, Millard; Tong, Lillian; Wright, Robin; Yuan, Robert; Wood, William B.; Handelsman, Jo

doi:10.1126/science.1170015

Cited by 130 publications

(147 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, extensive research on instructional change has positioned instructors at the center of successful educational reforms . In particular, researchers have sought for years to investigate instructors' actual teaching practices and knowledge about teaching, how instructors integrate their teaching knowledge with new instructional practices, and how instructors' conceptual framework about teaching and their instructional practices grow as a result of participation in professional development (Pfund et al 2009;Trigwell et al 1994;Van Driel 2014;Verloop et al 2001). Unfortunately, little progress has been made in most of these areas with respect to STEM faculty in postsecondary settings (Janssen et al 2013;National Research Council 2012;Talanquer 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…HHMI has been particularly aggressive in spending hundreds of millions of dollars on various types of training and the development of scientific teaching programs. The most significant of these investments has been the establishment of the "Summer Institutes on Scientific Teaching", a circuit of annual regional conferences designed to both train faculty and spread awareness of contemporary education research (Pfund et al, 2009). …”

Section: Institutional Challenges To Scientific Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Teaching and Active Learning yet to Revolutionize Education in East Asia

Fendos¹

2017

AES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science education in the United States has undergone a profound shift in emphasis away from lecture-based and knowledge-based approaches towards more hands-on platforms with emphasis on skill training and maximizing feedback. Of central importance in this movement has been the concept of scientific teaching: the idea of treating education like a scientific subject by performing experiments on educational outcomes. In the last two decades, a wealth of research has been conducted using this principle to examine the effectiveness of a wide range of pedagogical techniques. Of the many methods used to deliver class content to students, active learning has emerged as one of the most powerful. Another critical development in scientific teaching has been the realization of a wide range of standardized assessment tools for quantifying various student outcomes. Despite the convincing nature of empirical evidence in favor of the utility of both scientific teaching and active learning, dissemination of these platforms in average teaching practices has been slow, even in the US. This article reviews the many advances and challenges of scientific teaching reform, ending with a brief commentary of reform experiences in the US and how these may impact East Asia in the near future.

show abstract

“…Note, however, that Berk does not include informal or formative measures of teaching effectiveness that have been identified by others as important (see e.g., Refs. [5,9,10]). See Table I for a comparison of our categories to Berk's categories.…”

Section: B Assessment Methods From the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although less is written about this type of formative assessment, informal exchanges with students during class and out of class are known to be meaningful sources of feedback for college instructors [9,10] and may be one of the primary sources of information about teaching effectiveness used by K-12 teachers [48].…”

Section: Informal Formative Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of teaching effectiveness: Lack of alignment between instructors, institutions, and research recommendations

Henderson

Turpen

Dancy

et al. 2014

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summer Institute to Improve University Science Teaching

Abstract: The goal of the National Academies Summer Institute is to change teaching practices in introductory, undergraduate biology courses.

Cited by 130 publications

References 13 publications

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

Scientific Teaching and Active Learning yet to Revolutionize Education in East Asia

Assessment of teaching effectiveness: Lack of alignment between instructors, institutions, and research recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About