Joinfeature
Barriers to Learning Assistant Engagement
An Investigation Into Student Encounters Learning Assistants Find Challenging and Developing Training to Navigate Those Challenges
Journal of College Science Teaching—July/August 2020 (Volume 49, Issue 6)
By Alicia Purtell, Robert Talbot, and Michael E. Moore
Learning Assistants (LAs) help students develop a deeper understanding of content and are particularly effective during active learning instruction. A foundational pillar of the LA model is the LA pedagogy course, which teaches LAs about evidence-based instruction and about how students learn (Otero et al., 2010). From LA survey responses, this study identifies interactions between LAs and students that have the potential to negatively impact the classroom environment and how other students learn—what we call “challenging interactions.” Challenging interaction training was developed for LAs taking the pedagogy course by using scenarios that LAs can act out and reflect on in class. This training aims to guide LAs as they develop their own strategies for how to properly navigate these interactions. Because of the potential negative impacts of these interactions, training LAs to address and manage these situations is important. If LAs can properly navigate these challenging interactions, they will be better able to facilitate deeper learning in their respective LA-supported classrooms.
Learning Assistants (LAs) help students develop a deeper understanding of content and are particularly effective during active learning instruction. A foundational pillar of the LA model is the LA pedagogy course, which teaches LAs about evidence-based instruction and about how students learn (Otero et al., 2010).
Learning Assistants (LAs) help students develop a deeper understanding of content and are particularly effective during active learning instruction. A foundational pillar of the LA model is the LA pedagogy course, which teaches LAs about evidence-based instruction and about how students learn (Otero et al., 2010).
feature
Show Your Students How to Be More Persuasive When They Write
Journal of College Science Teaching—July/August 2020 (Volume 49, Issue 6)
By David J. Slade and Susan K. Hess
After a grueling grading campaign, a chemist asked a writing and rhetoric specialist for help improving formal reports in the introductory organic chemistry lab. Together, we realized that the very best student reports employ many persuasive moves in the combined results and discussion subsection, whereas weaker papers omit the persuasive language. To make students aware of the need for persuasive language throughout their reports, we then developed a reworked assignment prompt and a lab-period-long workshop, in which we highlight persuasive moves by walking students through three key steps: oral argument, analysis of key rhetorical patterns (color-coded) that should be present in both a combined results/discussion section and an introduction section, and peer review for those key rhetorical patterns. Set in the context of discussions of the argumentative and rhetorical functions of each subsection of a lab report, this workshop helps illustrate the purpose—to convince a skeptical audience of the most plausible interpretation of some collection of data—behind many chemistry writing conventions. After the workshop, student work shows modest but visible improvement in their use of evidence in science writing; student understanding of their task shows appreciable (and appreciated) improvement.
After a grueling grading campaign, a chemist asked a writing and rhetoric specialist for help improving formal reports in the introductory organic chemistry lab. Together, we realized that the very best student reports employ many persuasive moves in the combined results and discussion subsection, whereas weaker papers omit the persuasive language.
After a grueling grading campaign, a chemist asked a writing and rhetoric specialist for help improving formal reports in the introductory organic chemistry lab. Together, we realized that the very best student reports employ many persuasive moves in the combined results and discussion subsection, whereas weaker papers omit the persuasive language.
TWO-YEAR COMMUNITY
Backward Redesign of a Nonmajors’ Biology Course at a Two-Year Technical College
Journal of College Science Teaching—July/August 2020 (Volume 49, Issue 6)
By Margaret Long, Adrienne Cottrell-Yongye, and Tyler Huynh
Gwinnett Technical College (GTC), established in 1984, is the second-largest technical college in Georgia. As a two-year open-access college, GTC and other technical and community colleges are significant in educating STEM and non-STEM majors in the scientific process and scientific literacy. To increase the success of students enrolled in nonmajors Biology I, three GTC biology faculty collaborated to redesign the course, using a backward design method. Grade analysis performed inference about two population proportions and descriptive statistics to interpret data. After course redesign, there was a statistically significant decrease in the D, F, Withdrawal (DFW) rates and a significant increase in students passing with a C average. Further analysis showed first-semester “beginning” students, traditional-aged students, and minority students benefitted most from the curriculum redesign. The backward design model for curriculum redesign was effective in increasing learning and retention in biology at the technical college level. The redesign helped students in jeopardy of failing or withdrawing from the course, especially in groups of students considered “at risk.” This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge regarding the design of STEM curriculum at the technical college level.
Gwinnett Technical College (GTC), established in 1984, is the second-largest technical college in Georgia. As a two-year open-access college, GTC and other technical and community colleges are significant in educating STEM and non-STEM majors in the scientific process and scientific literacy. To increase the success of students enrolled in nonmajors Biology I, three GTC biology faculty collaborated to redesign the course, using a backward design method. Grade analysis performed inference about two population proportions and descriptive statistics to interpret data.
Gwinnett Technical College (GTC), established in 1984, is the second-largest technical college in Georgia. As a two-year open-access college, GTC and other technical and community colleges are significant in educating STEM and non-STEM majors in the scientific process and scientific literacy. To increase the success of students enrolled in nonmajors Biology I, three GTC biology faculty collaborated to redesign the course, using a backward design method. Grade analysis performed inference about two population proportions and descriptive statistics to interpret data.
Freebies for Science Teachers, Week of July 20, 2020
By Debra Shapiro
