Joinfeature
Incorporating Student-Centered Learning in an Ecosystems Course
Student-centered learning broadly encompasses teaching approaches that shift the focus of instruction from teacher to student by placing an emphasis on what as well as how students want to learn. This approach allows students to become active participants in their own learning and has been shown to increase learning, autonomy, and critical-thinking skills, as well as provide a more meaningful learning experience. Although there are many benefits to incorporating student-centered learning in a university or college setting, many instructors may not know how to move away from a more teacher-centered learning style. Here, I highlight how I have incorporated student-centered learning approaches in an undergraduate ecosystems course, both in lecture and lab settings as well as in assessments. By providing ways in which student-centered learning can be easily incorporated into a science classroom, as well as highlighting its benefits, I hope to inspire other instructors to employ this approach.
Student-centered learning broadly encompasses teaching approaches that shift the focus of instruction from teacher to student by placing an emphasis on what as well as how students want to learn. This approach allows students to become active participants in their own learning and has been shown to increase learning, autonomy, and critical-thinking skills, as well as provide a more meaningful learning experience.
Student-centered learning broadly encompasses teaching approaches that shift the focus of instruction from teacher to student by placing an emphasis on what as well as how students want to learn. This approach allows students to become active participants in their own learning and has been shown to increase learning, autonomy, and critical-thinking skills, as well as provide a more meaningful learning experience.
feature
Are Learning Progressions a Useful Pedagogical Tool for Instructors?
Journal of College Science Teaching—November/December 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 2)
By Charlotte R. Reed and Adele J. Wolfson
Learning progressions (LPs) present a potential tool to guide students toward deeper understanding of core concepts as they move through a curriculum. In addition to providing a theoretical scheme for education researchers, LPs can provide a powerful framework for instructors and students in organizing curricula. We have developed the outline of a learning progression on acid/base chemistry from general chemistry through biochemistry. We interviewed peer instructors, faculty, and chemistry students to determine how instructors could use LPs or how students could incorporate LPs into their own learning. The interviews suggest that students may struggle to get the most value out of LPs because they misunderstand them as topics lists rather than progressions, and they may interpret them as exhaustive rather than as guides. However, when carefully presented to students and woven into the curriculum, LPs could allow instructors to revisit concepts with more complexity rather than simply repeating information. This approach will likely be most useful for experienced instructors with deep pedagogical knowledge. Our results provide additional evidence that professional knowledge content, like that acquired over time by faculty members, is necessary for effective use of LPs and other such tools.
Learning progressions (LPs) present a potential tool to guide students toward deeper understanding of core concepts as they move through a curriculum. In addition to providing a theoretical scheme for education researchers, LPs can provide a powerful framework for instructors and students in organizing curricula. We have developed the outline of a learning progression on acid/base chemistry from general chemistry through biochemistry.
Learning progressions (LPs) present a potential tool to guide students toward deeper understanding of core concepts as they move through a curriculum. In addition to providing a theoretical scheme for education researchers, LPs can provide a powerful framework for instructors and students in organizing curricula. We have developed the outline of a learning progression on acid/base chemistry from general chemistry through biochemistry.
feature
Strategies to Increase the Workforce Development of Interdisciplinary Cohorts of Traditionally Underrepresented Students in STEM
Journal of College Science Teaching—November/December 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 2)
By Joanna Joyner-Matos and Kayleen Islam-Zwart
This article presents results from a Scholarships in STEM (S-STEM) grant from the National Science Foundation that supported students from three majors and funded the development of cocurricular activities designed to increase the workforce development of first-generation and underrepresented students. Scholar cohorts were interdisciplinary, with students majoring in biology, chemistry, and environmental science. We present details from four categories of activities: library resources and information literacy, career services, professional development, and community engagement. We discuss how the process of designing the activities created collaborations between STEM faculty and student support staff and between faculty and regional employers and nonprofit organizations. Results from formative assessments are presented from the group of scholars as a whole, as we did not detect significant differences as a function of gender, first-generation status, race or ethnicity, or academic major. Overall, the community engagement events were rated more poorly than other activities because they were viewed as contributing less to gains of knowledge or skills. Finally, we found that how the scholars viewed the activities depended more on how we discussed the activities with them than on the scholars’ academic or demographic features.
This article presents results from a Scholarships in STEM (S-STEM) grant from the National Science Foundation that supported students from three majors and funded the development of cocurricular activities designed to increase the workforce development of first-generation and underrepresented students. Scholar cohorts were interdisciplinary, with students majoring in biology, chemistry, and environmental science. We present details from four categories of activities: library resources and information literacy, career services, professional development, and community engagement.
This article presents results from a Scholarships in STEM (S-STEM) grant from the National Science Foundation that supported students from three majors and funded the development of cocurricular activities designed to increase the workforce development of first-generation and underrepresented students. Scholar cohorts were interdisciplinary, with students majoring in biology, chemistry, and environmental science. We present details from four categories of activities: library resources and information literacy, career services, professional development, and community engagement.
Freebies for Science Teachers, October 26, 2021
By Debra Shapiro
feature
Comparing Student Performance and Satisfaction Between Face-to-Face and Online Education of a Science Course in a Liberal Arts University
A Quasi-Experiment With Course Delivery Mode Fully Manipulated
Journal of College Science Teaching—November/December 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 2)
By Hongyan Geng and Mark McGinley
This study presents a quasi-experiment to assess differences in student performance and satisfaction between two different delivery modes—online and face-to-face education. We collected data from 747 (373 face-to-face cohort, 374 online cohort) students enrolled in a general education science course at a liberal arts university. There was no self-selection of delivery mode by students, since this course is required, and delivery mode of one of the cohorts changed to online education due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare the learning outcomes of the two major course assessments (midterm test and research project) and student perception between the two delivery modes using quantitative and qualitative analyses. There was no statistical difference in the student scores on the development of medium-order analytical skills (i.e., midterm test) between the two delivery modes. However, online students scored statistically higher on the development of high-order analytical skills (i.e., research project), but they scored statistically lower on measures of student satisfaction. Our study suggests that online education, although currently unfavored by students, is equally or more effective in the achievement of the learning outcomes than face-to-face education.
This study presents a quasi-experiment to assess differences in student performance and satisfaction between two different delivery modes—online and face-to-face education. We collected data from 747 (373 face-to-face cohort, 374 online cohort) students enrolled in a general education science course at a liberal arts university. There was no self-selection of delivery mode by students, since this course is required, and delivery mode of one of the cohorts changed to online education due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
This study presents a quasi-experiment to assess differences in student performance and satisfaction between two different delivery modes—online and face-to-face education. We collected data from 747 (373 face-to-face cohort, 374 online cohort) students enrolled in a general education science course at a liberal arts university. There was no self-selection of delivery mode by students, since this course is required, and delivery mode of one of the cohorts changed to online education due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
feature
Student Performance in Ground Versus Online Sections of a Biological Science I College Course
A Comparison Based on a Common Final Exam
Journal of College Science Teaching—November/December 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 2)
By Peggy Romeo, Marcela Trevino, Frederick Posey, and Scott Romeo
This study is a comparison of ground-based versus online student performance using a combination of common final examination scores and associated demographic data in a biological science college course taught by a single instructor. Multivariate and standard statistical analyses are used to examine data from five semesters of ground and online instruction. Overall, students in ground course sections scored higher than those in online sections. Demographic comparisons of the pooled student populations from all five semesters show that there was a larger proportion of female than male students in both ground and online sections. Moreover, most students in ground sections were of traditional college age (18 to 24 years old), whereas online, the majority consisted of roughly equal numbers of college-age and post-college-age students (older than 24 years old). High school–age students (younger than 18 years old) constituted the minority in both the ground and online sections, with their proportion being smaller in the latter. Regardless of gender and age group, ground students scored higher than online students. Additionally, the course pass rate was greater overall for ground students than for online students; this contrasted with the course withdrawal rate, which was greater for online students.
This study is a comparison of ground-based versus online student performance using a combination of common final examination scores and associated demographic data in a biological science college course taught by a single instructor. Multivariate and standard statistical analyses are used to examine data from five semesters of ground and online instruction. Overall, students in ground course sections scored higher than those in online sections.
This study is a comparison of ground-based versus online student performance using a combination of common final examination scores and associated demographic data in a biological science college course taught by a single instructor. Multivariate and standard statistical analyses are used to examine data from five semesters of ground and online instruction. Overall, students in ground course sections scored higher than those in online sections.
Archive: Sponsored Web Seminar: Preparing Students for Engineering Careers, December 7, 2021
High school students spend a lot of time considering what their next steps in life will be. Those interested in engineering careers can find it difficult to gain access to the basics of engineering knowledge before they start college, which can leave them feeling behind and cause many to abandon the path altogether. As educators, it’s important to have the tools and resources to help students feel as prepared as possible come graduation day.
High school students spend a lot of time considering what their next steps in life will be. Those interested in engineering careers can find it difficult to gain access to the basics of engineering knowledge before they start college, which can leave them feeling behind and cause many to abandon the path altogether. As educators, it’s important to have the tools and resources to help students feel as prepared as possible come graduation day.
High school students spend a lot of time considering what their next steps in life will be. Those interested in engineering careers can find it difficult to gain access to the basics of engineering knowledge before they start college, which can leave them feeling behind and cause many to abandon the path altogether. As educators, it’s important to have the tools and resources to help students feel as prepared as possible come graduation day.
High school students spend a lot of time considering what their next steps in life will be. Those interested in engineering careers can find it difficult to gain access to the basics of engineering knowledge before they start college, which can leave them feeling behind and cause many to abandon the path altogether. As educators, it’s important to have the tools and resources to help students feel as prepared as possible come graduation day.
Safety Blog
Creating a Culture of Science Safety: 7 Teacher Tips for This Fall (and Beyond)
By Mike Marvel
Posted on 2021-10-20