Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Geoscience Courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge Survey of U.S. Faculty

Macdonald, R. Heather; Manduca, Cathryn A.; Mogk, David W.; Tewksbury, Barbara J.

doi:10.5408/1089-9995-53.3.237

Cited by 77 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The type of institution was significant at three stages in the single-variable model, but this significance disappeared for the multivariable model. Thus, our findings are similar to those of other surveys mentioned earlier that did not find differences in the use of innovative teaching between types of institutions [56][57][58].…”

Section: Barriers To Innovative Instructionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Class Size (SIZE). Class size is often mentioned by faculty as a barrier to the use of RBIS [48,56,58,59]. Here we find no support for this idea.…”

Section: Barriers To Innovative Instructioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

“…In a survey of geoscience faculty, MacDonald, Manduca, Mogk, and Tewksbury found that fewer than 25% of faculty report regularly using interactive techniques (other than lecture with questions or demonstrations) [56]. They also found that faculty who teach large introductory courses use interactive techniques much less frequently than faculty who teach smaller courses.…”

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…If this is the case, one might expect faculty at teaching-oriented institutions to use more RBIS than faculty at research-oriented institutions. However, several of the studies mentioned earlier did not find differences in teaching styles between different types of institutions [56][57][58]. (c) Class size.…”

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(c) Class size. Large class sizes have consistently been found to be barriers to innovative teaching [48,56,58,59]. (d) Gender.…”

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?

Henderson

Dancy

Niewiadomska-Bugaj

2012

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.

278

303

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the fall of 2008 a web survey, designed to collect information about pedagogical knowledge and practices, was completed by a representative sample of 722 physics faculty across the United States (50.3% response rate). This paper presents partial results to describe how 20 potential predictor variables correlate with faculty knowledge about and use of research-based instructional strategies (RBIS). The innovation-decision process was conceived of in terms of four stages: knowledge versus no knowledge, trial versus no trial, continuation versus discontinuation, and high versus low use. The largest losses occur at the continuation stage, with approximately 1=3 of faculty discontinuing use of all RBIS after trying one or more of these strategies. Nine of the predictor variables were statistically significant for at least one of these stages when controlling for other variables. Knowledge and/or use of RBIS are significantly correlated with reading teaching-related journals, attending talks and workshops related to teaching, attending the physics and astronomy new faculty workshop, having an interest in using more RBIS, being female, being satisfied with meeting instructional goals, and having a permanent, full-time position. The types of variables that are significant at each stage vary substantially. These results suggest that common dissemination strategies are good at creating knowledge about RBIS and motivation to try a RBIS, but more work is needed to support faculty during implementation and continued use of RBIS. Also, contrary to common assumptions, faculty age, institutional type, and percentage of job related to teaching were not found to be barriers to knowledge or use at any stage. High research productivity and large class sizes were not found to be barriers to use of at least some RBIS.

show abstract

Section: Barriers To Innovative Instructionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Class Size (SIZE). Class size is often mentioned by faculty as a barrier to the use of RBIS [48,56,58,59]. Here we find no support for this idea.…”

Section: Barriers To Innovative Instructioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(c) Class size. Large class sizes have consistently been found to be barriers to innovative teaching [48,56,58,59]. (d) Gender.…”

Section: Diffusion Of Research-based Instructional Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?

Henderson

Dancy

Niewiadomska-Bugaj

2012

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.

278

303

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fidelity of Implementation of Research‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses

Borrego

Cutler

Prince

et al. 2013

J of Engineering Edu

124

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Increasing attention is being paid to improvement in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education through increased adoption of research-based instructional strategies (RBIS), but high-quality measures of faculty instructional practice do not exist to monitor progress.Purpose/Hypothesis The measure of how well an implemented intervention follows the original is called fidelity of implementation. This theory was used to address the research questions: What is the fidelity of implementation of selected RBIS in engineering science courses? That is, how closely does engineering science classroom practice reflect the intentions of the original developers? Do the critical components that characterize an RBIS discriminate between engineering science faculty members who claimed use of the RBIS and those who did not?Design/Method A survey of 387 U.S. faculty teaching engineering science courses (e.g., statics, circuits, thermodynamics) included questions about class time spent on 16 critical components and use of 11 corresponding RBIS. Fidelity was quantified as the percentage of RBIS users who also spent time on corresponding critical components. Discrimination between users and nonusers was tested using chi square.Results Overall fidelity of the 11 RBIS ranged from 11% to 80% of users spending time on all required components. Fidelity was highest for RBIS with one required component: casebased teaching, just-in-time teaching, and inquiry learning. Thirteen of 16 critical components discriminated between users and nonusers for all RBIS to which they were mapped.Conclusions Results were consistent with initial mapping of critical components to RBIS. Fidelity of implementation is a potentially useful framework for future work in STEM undergraduate education.

show abstract

Undergraduate geoscience education research: Evolution of an emerging field of discipline‐based education research

Arthurs¹

2018

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discipline‐based education research (DBER) conducted by faculty within geoscience departments can address identified needs in undergraduate geoscience education. This study explores the evolution of undergraduate geoscience education research (GER) from 1985 to 2016, primarily in terms of the types of published research and secondarily in terms of the insights this literature offers on the evolution of GER as a scholarly discipline. Stokes’ (1997) quadrant model of research types is used as a theoretical framework for the former and Kuhn's (1970) model of disciplinary paradigm for the latter. An exploratory sequential mixed‐methods approach to a systematic literature review of 1,760 articles is utilized. The period 1985–2000 is characterized by proto‐research as evidenced by the abundance of instructive and informational education articles rather than research articles. From 2000 to 2011, GER underwent a growth period characterized by the presence of applied, use‐inspired, and pure basic research. The period 2011–2016 appears to be a period of relative steady‐state conditions in the normalized number of GER publications per year. Existing gaps in knowledge about geoscience education, the evident unfamiliarity with education and social science research methodologies among authors of GER articles, and efforts to build consensus about what GER is and how to conduct it suggest that GER is preparadigmatic or at a low paradigm state. That is, GER is an immature discipline as far as the evolution of a discipline goes. A path forward is proposed for the continued evolutionary growth of GER. This study provides new perspectives on the emergence of GER as a discipline that can be used as a basis for studies on cross‐disciplinary DBER comparisons.

show abstract

Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Geoscience Courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge Survey of U.S. Faculty

Cited by 77 publications

References 0 publications

Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?

Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?

Fidelity of Implementation of Research‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses

Undergraduate geoscience education research: Evolution of an emerging field of discipline‐based education research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About