A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms

Geosphere

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 608-627

  Teasdale, Rachel ^a   Viskupic, Karen ^b   Bartley, Julie K ^c   McConnell, David ^d   Manduca, Cathryn ^e   Bruckner, Monica ^e   Farthing, Dori ^f   Iverson, Ellen ^e  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS COLLEGE   (United States)

^d NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e CARLETON COLLEGE   (United States)

^f STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; GEOLOGY; SURVEYS; TEACHING;

CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION; INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES; INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY; OBSERVATION PROTOCOL; QUALITATIVE DATA; TEACHING EXPERIENCE; TEACHING PRACTICES; UPPER-LEVEL UNDERGRADUATE COURSE;

STUDENTS;

HIGHER EDUCATION; LEARNING; STUDENT; TEACHING;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 85017002758     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1553040X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1130/GES01479.1     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R., 2000, Learning: From speculation to science, in Bransford, J.D., et al., eds., How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, p. 3-18.
2. Budd, D.A., van der Hoeven Kraft, K.J., McConnell, D.A., and Vislova, T., 2013, Characterizing teaching in introductory geology courses: Measuring classroom practices: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 61, p. 461-475.
3. Carnegie Classification, 2015, The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/(retrieved February 2015).
4. Chang, T.S., Lin, H.H., and Song, M.M., 2011, University faculty members' perceptions of their teaching efficacy: Innovations in Education and Teaching International, v. 48, no. 1, p. 49-60, doi: 10.1080/14703297.2010.543770.
5. Chism, N.V.N., 2007, Peer Review of Teaching: A Sourcebook (second edition): Bolton, Massachusetts, Anker Publications, 228 p.
6. Desimone, L.M., Smith, T.M., and Frisvold, D.E., 2010, Survey measures of classroom instruction: Comparing student and teacher reports: Educational Policy, v. 24, p. 267-329, doi: 10.1177/0895904808330173.
7. Dohaney, J., Brogt, E., and Kennedy, B., 2012, Successful curriculum development and evaluation of group work in an introductory mineralogy laboratory: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 60, p. 21-33, doi: 10.5408/10-212.1.
8. Ebert-May, D., Derting, T.L., Hodder, J., Momsen, J.L., Long, T.M., and Jardeleza, S.E., 2011, What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs: Bioscience, v. 61, p. 550-558, doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9.
9. Ebert-May, D., Derting, T.L., Henkel, T.P., Middlemis Maher, J., Momsen, J.L., Arnold, B., and Passmore, H.A., 2015, Breaking the cycle: Future faculty begin teaching with learner-centered strategies after professional development: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 14, p. 1-12, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-12-0222.
10. Eddy, S.L., and Hogan, K.A., 2014, Getting under the hood: How and for whom does increasing course structure work?: Cell Biology Education, v. 13, p. 453-468, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050.
11. Eddy, S.L., Converse, M., and Wenderoth, M.P., 2015, PORTAAL: A classroom observation tool assessing evidence-based teaching practices for active learning in large science, technology, engineering, and mathematics classes: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 14, no. 2, p. 1-16, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0095.
12. Epting, L.K., Zinn, T.E., Buskist, C., and Buskist, W., 2004, Student perspectives on the distinction between ideal and typical teachers: Teaching of Psychology, v. 31, p. 181-216, doi: 10.1207/s15328023top3103_5.
13. Fairweather, J., 2009, Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education: A status report from the National Academies National Research Council Board of Science Education (BOSE): Washington, D.C., BOSE, http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse072637.pdf (accessed 9 June 2015).
14. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P., 2014, Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics: National Academy of Sciences Proceedings, v. 111, p. 8410-8415, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
15. Fung, L., and Chow, L.P.Y., 2002, Congruence of student teachers' pedagogical images and actual classroom practices: Educational Research, v. 44, p. 313-321, doi: 10.1080/0013188022000031605.
16. Gibbs, G., and Coffey, M., 2004, The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students: Active Learning in Higher Education, v. 5, p. 87-100, doi: 10.1177/1469787404040463.
17. Goldsmith, D.W., 2011, A case-based curriculum for introductory geology: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 59, p. 119-125, doi: 10.5408/1.3604824.
18. Good, T., and Brophy, J., 1997, Looking in Classrooms (seventh edition): New York, Longman Press, 509 p.
19. Greer, L., and Heaney, P.J., 2004, Real-time analysis of student comprehension: An assessment of electronic student response technology in an introductory Earth science course: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 52, p. 345-351, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-52.4.345.
20. Haak, D.C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., and Freeman, S., 2011, Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology: Science, v. 332, p. 1213-1216, doi: 10.1126/science.1204820.
21. Hake, R.R., 1998, Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses: American Journal of Physics, v. 66, p. 64-74, doi: 10.1119/1.18809.
22. Hallgren, K.A., 2012, Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial: Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, v. 8, p. 23-34, doi: 10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023.
23. Henderson, C., and Dancy, M., 2007, Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics: Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, v. 3, 020102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020102.
24. Hora, M.T., 2015, Toward a descriptive science of teaching: How the TDOP illuminates the multidimensional nature of active learning in postsecondary classrooms: Science Education, v. 99, p. 783-818, doi: 10.1002/sce.21175.
25. Hora, M.T., and Ferrare, J.J., 2013, Instructional systems of practice: A multidimensional analysis of math and science undergraduate course planning and classroom teaching: Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 22, p. 212-257, doi: 10.1080/10508406.2012.729767.
26. Kane, R., Sandretto, S., and Heath, C., 2002, Telling half the story: A critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics: Review of Educational Research, v. 72, p. 177-228, doi: 10.3102/00346543072002177.
27. Knight, J.K., and Wood, W.B., 2005, Teaching more by lecturing less: Cell Biology Education, v. 4, p. 298-310, doi: 10.1187/05-06-0082.
28. Kober, N., 2015, Reaching students: What research says about effective instruction in undergraduate science and engineering: Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 256 p., doi: 10.17226/18687.
29. Kortz, K.M., Smay, J.J., and Murray, D.P., 2008, Increasing learning in introductory geoscience courses using lecture tutorials: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 56, p. 280-290, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-56.3.280.
30. Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J., and Witt, E., 2005, Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter: San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 416 p.
31. Lawson, A., et al., 2002, Evaluating college science and mathematics instruction: A reform effort that improves teaching skills: Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 31, p. 388-393.
32. Lund, T.J., Pilarz, M., Velasco, J.B., Chakraverty, D., Rosploch, K., Undersander, M., and Stains, M., 2015, The best of both worlds: Building on the COPUS and RTOP observation protocols to easily and reliably measure various levels of reformed instructional practice: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 14, no. 2, p. 1-12, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-10-0168.
33. Macdonald, R.H., Manduca, C.A., Mogk, D.W., and Tewksbury, B.J., 2005, Teaching methods in undergraduate geoscience courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge survey of U.S. faculty: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 237-252, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-53.3.237.
34. MacIsaac, D., and Falconer, K., 2002, Reforming physics instruction via RTOP: The Physics Teacher, v. 40, p. 479-485, doi: 10.1119/1.1526620.
35. Manduca, C.A., Iverson, E.A., Czujko, R., Macdonald, R., Mogk, D.W., Tewksbury, B.J., McLaughlin, J., Sandord, C., Greenseid, L., and Luxenberg, M., 2011, Impact of the On the Cutting Edge professional development program on U.S. geoscience faculty: American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, 2011, abs. ED42A-04.
36. Markley, C.T., Miller, H., Kneeshaw, T., and Herbert, B.E., 2009, The relationship between instructors' conceptions of geoscience learning and classroom practice at a research university: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 57, p. 264-274, doi: 10.5408/1.3544276.
37. Marlowe, B.A., and Page, M.L., 2005, Creating and Sustaining the Constructivist Classroom: Thousand Oaks, California, Corwin Press, 168 p.
38. Mayer, D.P., 1999, Measuring instructional practice: Can policymakers trust survey data?: Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, v. 21, p. 29-45, doi: 10.3102/01623737021001029.
39. McConnell, D.A., Steer, D.N., and Owens, K.D., 2003, Assessment and active learning strategies for introductory geology courses: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 51, p. 205-216, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-51.2.205.
40. Michael, J., 2006, Where's the evidence that active learning works?: Advances in Physiology Education, v. 30, p. 159-167, doi: 10.1152/advan.00053.2006.
41. Multon, K.D., 2010, Interrater reliability, in Saldkin, N.J., ed., Encyclopedia of Research Design: Thousand Oaks, California, SAGE Publishing, p. 627-629, doi: 10.4135/9781412961288.n194.
42. Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylanne, S., and Nevgi, A., 2007, The effect of pedagogical training on teaching in higher education: Teaching and Teacher Education, v. 23, p. 557-571, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013.
43. Prince, M., 2004, Does active learning work? A review of the research: Journal of Engineering Education, v. 93, p. 223-231, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x.
44. Roehrig, G.H., and Kruse, R.A., 2005, The role of teachers' beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum: School Science and Mathematics, v. 105, p. 412-422, doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18061.x.
45. Sawada, D., Piburn, M.D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., and Bloom, I., 2002, Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol: School Science and Mathematics, v. 102, no. 6, p. 245-253, doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x.
46. Science Education Resource Center, 2014, Classroom Observation Project: Understanding and Improving Our Teaching: http://serc.carleton.edu/52104 (accessed April 2015).
47. Singer, S.R., Nielsen, N.R., and Schweingruber, H.A., eds., 2012, Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 282 p., doi: 10.17226/13362.
48. Smith, M.K., Jones, F.H.M., Gilbert, S.L., and Wieman, C.E., 2013, The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A new instrument to characterize University STEM classroom practices: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 12, no. 4, p. 618-627, doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-08-0154.
49. Smith, M.K., Vinson, E.L., Smith, J.A., Lewin, J.D., and Stetzer, M.R., 2014, A campus-wide study of STEM courses: New perspectives on teaching practices and perceptions: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 13, no. 4, p. 624-635, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0108.
50. Stage, F.K., Muller, P.A., Kinzie, J., and Simmons, A., 1998, Creating learning centered classrooms: What does learning theory have to say?: ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, v. 26, 151 p.
51. Stahl, R.J., 1994, Using think time and wait time skillfully in the classroom: ERIC Digest, no. ED370885, 4 p., http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED370885.pdf (accessed June 2015).
52. Tabachnick, B.G., and Fidel, L.S., 1996, Using Multivariate Statistics (third edition): New York, HarperCollins, 880 p.
53. Umbach, P.D., and Wawrzynski, M.R., 2005, Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement: Research in Higher Education, v. 46, no. 2, p. 153-184, doi: 10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1.
54. Wainwright, C., Morrell, P.D., Flick, L., and Schepige, A., 2004, Observation of reform teaching in undergraduate level mathematics and science courses: School Science and Mathematics, v. 104, no. 7, p. 322-335, doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2004.tb18251.x.
55. Walkington, C., and Marder, M., 2013, Classroom observation and value added models give complementary information about quality of mathematics teaching, in Kane, T.J., Kerr, K.A., and Pianta, R.C., eds., Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems: New Guidance from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project: San Francisco, Josey Bass, p. 234-277, doi: 10.1002/9781119210856.ch8.
56. Wenger, E., 2000, Communities of practice and social learning systems: Organization, v. 7, p. 225-246, doi: 10.1177/135050840072002.
57. Wieman, C., and Gilbert, S., 2014, The teaching practices inventory: A new tool for characterizing college and university teaching in mathematics and science: CBE Life Sciences Education, v. 13, no. 3, p. 552-569, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-02-0023.
58. Wieman, C., Perkins, K., and Gilbert, S., 2010, Transforming science education at large research universities: A case study in progress: Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, v. 42, no. 2, p. 6-14, doi: 10.1080/00091380903563035.
59. Yuretich, R.F., 2004, The effects of course redesign on an upper-level geochemistry course: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 52, p. 277-283, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-52.3.277.
60. Yuretich, R.F., Khan, S.A., Leckie, R.M., and Clement, J.J., 2001, Active-learning methods to improve student performance and scientific interest in a large introductory oceanography course: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, p. 111-119, doi: 10.5408/1089-9995-49.2.111.