Research into Scientific Teaching Diane Ebert-May Department of Plant Biology Michigan State...
18
Research into Scientific Teaching Diane Ebert-May Department of Plant Biology Michigan State University
-
Upload
ruth-smith -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Research into Scientific Teaching Diane Ebert-May Department of Plant Biology Michigan State...
Research into Scientific Teaching
Diane Ebert-MayDepartment of Plant Biology
Michigan State University
Team at MSURett Weber - Plant Biology (postdoctoral researcher)
Deb Linton - Plant Biology (postdoctoral researcher)
Duncan Sibley - Geology
Doug Luckie - Physiology
Scott Harrison - Microbiology (graduate student)
Tammy Long - Plant Biology
Heejun Lim - Chemistry Education
Rob Pennock - Philosophy
Charles Ofria - Engineering
Rich Lenski - Microbiolgy
Janet Batzli - Plant Biology [U of Wisconsin]
Faculty development
Scientific Teaching
Scientific teaching involves active learning strategies to engage students in the process of science.
Research Questions
1. Have faculty changed their teaching?
2. Has student learning improved in response to the changes in teaching?
Faculty Cohorts
FIRST II - NSF– Multiple workshops over 4 years – Teams of faculty– All types of institutions - community
colleges to research universities
Summer Institutes (SI) - HHMI– 1 week-long workshop– Teams of faculty– Research extensive universities
Design Research
InstitutionsFaculty
FIRST II 10 x 2 = 20SI 2004 10 x 2 =
20SI 2005 10 x 2 =
20Total 30 Institutions
60 Faculty
Sampling Time-line
Semester starts
Faculty Survey
RTOP 1* RTOP 2
Semester Ends
Semester 1
Semester starts
Faculty Survey
RTOP 3 RTOP 4
Semester Ends
Semester 2
*RTOP during a TL Unit
Path Model
Institution Course Data
Professional Development
Time
TL Unit Assess Type RTOP
Self Report
Faculty Demographic
Teaching Pedagogy
ClassFaculty
Institution
Hierarchical Levels
Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP)
•Classroom observational instrument
•Assesses degree of active instruction based on constructivist theory.
•Reliable (r2 >0.9) (Lawson et al 2002)
•Correlated to student normalized gains (r =0.70-0.97) (Lawson et al. 2003)
Subscales of RTOP
Lesson Design and Implementation
ContentPropositionalProcedural
Classroom CultureCommunicative InteractionsStudent/Teacher Relationships
Some Expected Results
• How does class size impact teaching practice?
• How does the research:teaching ratio affect change in teaching?
• How does teaching experience influence change?
• What effect does the institution have on faculty change?
Does class size impact teaching practice?
Institution
Professional Development
Time
TL Unit Assess Type‡ RTOP
Faculty Demographic
Teaching Pedagogy
ClassFaculty
Institution
Hierarchical Levels
*class size, percent attendance†survey of instructional practices‡type of questions
Course Data*
Self Report†
Does teaching experience influence faculty change?
Institution
Professional Development
TL Unit RTOP
ClassFaculty
Institution
Hierarchical Levels
*Years teaching, rank†Teaching knowledge, confidence and experience
Course Data
Time
Assess Type
Faculty Demographic*
Teaching Pedagogy†Self Report
Does teaching:research ratio affect change?
Institution
Professional Development
Time
TL Unit Assess Type RTOP
Faculty Demographic*ClassFaculty
Institution
Hierarchical Levels
*Percent time research/teaching
Course Data
Self ReportTeaching Pedagogy
How does the institution influence change?
Professional Development
Time
TL Unit Assess Type RTOP
Faculty Demographic* ClassFaculty
Institution
Hierarchical Levels
Teaching Pedagogy
Institution†
*Faculty rating of institutional support†Carnegie classification, # of undergrad students
Self Report
Course Data
Has student learning responded to professional
development?
From T. Derting (NSF CCLI Final Report)
Has student learning responded to professional
development?
From Derting (NSF Final Report)
