首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
This article describes and assesses the effectiveness of a 3-yr, laboratory-based summer science program to improve the academic performance of inner-city high school students. The program was designed to gradually introduce such students to increasingly more rigorous laboratory experiences in an attempt to interest them in and model what “real” science is like. The students are also exposed to scientific seminars and university tours as well as English and mathematics workshops designed to help them analyze their laboratory data and prepare for their closing ceremony presentations. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of student performance in these programs indicates that participants not only learn the vocabulary, facts, and concepts of science, but also develop a better appreciation of what it is like to be a “real” scientist. In addition, the college-bound 3-yr graduates of this program appear to be better prepared to successfully academically compete with graduates of other high schools; they also report learning useful job-related life skills. Finally, the critical conceptual components of this program are discussed so that science educators interested in using this model can modify it to fit the individual resources and strengths of their particular setting.  相似文献   

2.
This essay describes how in the 1890s the Committee of Ten arrived at their recommendations about the organization of the high school biological sciences and seeks to correct the frequently held, but erroneous view that the Committee of Ten was the initiator of the Biology-Chemistry-Physics order of teaching sciences prevalent in high schools today. The essay details the factors underlying the changing views of high school biology from its “natural history” origins, through its “zoology, botany, physiology” disciplinary phase to its eventual integration into a “general biology” course. The simultaneous parallel development of the “Carnegie Unit” for measuring coursework is highlighted as a significant contributor in the evolution of the present day high school biology course. The essay concludes with a discussion of the implications of the grade placement of the sciences for the future development of high school biology.  相似文献   

3.
Instructors attempting new teaching methods may have concerns that students will resist nontraditional teaching methods. The authors provide an overview of research characterizing the nature of student resistance and exploring its origins. Additionally, they provide potential strategies for avoiding or addressing resistance and pose questions about resistance that may be ripe for research study.
“What if the students revolt?” “What if I ask them to talk to a neighbor, and they simply refuse?” “What if they do not see active learning as teaching?” “What if they just want me to lecture?” “What if my teaching evaluation scores plummet?” “Even if I am excited about innovative teaching and learning, what if I encounter student resistance?”
These are genuine concerns of committed and thoughtful instructors who aspire to respond to the repeated national calls to fundamentally change the way biology is taught in colleges and universities across the United States. No doubt most individuals involved in promoting innovative teaching in undergraduate biology education have heard these or variations on these fears and concerns. While some biology instructors may be at a point where they are still skeptical of innovative teaching from more theoretical perspectives (“Is it really any better than lecturing?”), the concerns expressed by the individuals above come from a deeply committed and practical place. These are instructors who have already passed the point where they have become dissatisfied with traditional teaching methods. They have already internally decided to try new approaches and have perhaps been learning new teaching techniques themselves. They are on the precipice of actually implementing formerly theoretical ideas in the real, messy space that is a classroom, with dozens, if not hundreds, of students watching them. Potential rejection by students as they are practicing these new pedagogical skills represents a real and significant roadblock. A change may be even more difficult for those earning high marks from their students for their lectures. If we were to think about a learning progression for faculty moving toward requiring more active class participation on the part of students, the voices above are from those individuals who are progressing along this continuum and who could easily become stuck or turn back in the face of student resistance.Unfortunately, it appears that little systematic attention or research effort has been focused on understanding the origins of student resistance in biology classrooms or the options for preventing and addressing such resistance. As always, this Feature aims to gather research evidence from a variety of fields to support innovations in undergraduate biology education. Below, we attempt to provide an overview of the types of student resistance one might encounter in a classroom, as well as share hypotheses from other disciplines about the potential origins of student resistance. In addition, we offer examples of classroom strategies that have been proposed as potentially useful for either preventing student resistance from happening altogether or addressing student resistance after it occurs, some of which align well with findings from research on the origins of student resistance. Finally, we explore how ready the field of student resistance may be for research study, particularly in undergraduate biology education.  相似文献   

4.
A host of simple teaching strategies—referred to as “equitable teaching strategies” and rooted in research on learning—can support biology instructors in striving for classroom equity and in teaching all their students, not just those who are already engaged, already participating, and perhaps already know the biology being taught.  相似文献   

5.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science 2011 report Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education encourages the teaching of developmental biology as an important part of teaching evolution. Recently, however, we found that biology majors often lack the developmental knowledge needed to understand evolutionary developmental biology, or “evo-devo.” To assist in efforts to improve evo-devo instruction among undergraduate biology majors, we designed a concept inventory (CI) for evolutionary developmental biology, the EvoDevoCI. The CI measures student understanding of six core evo-devo concepts using four scenarios and 11 multiple-choice items, all inspired by authentic scientific examples. Distracters were designed to represent the common conceptual difficulties students have with each evo-devo concept. The tool was validated by experts and administered at four institutions to 1191 students during preliminary (n = 652) and final (n = 539) field trials. We used student responses to evaluate the readability, difficulty, discriminability, validity, and reliability of the EvoDevoCI, which included items ranging in difficulty from 0.22–0.55 and in discriminability from 0.19–0.38. Such measures suggest the EvoDevoCI is an effective tool for assessing student understanding of evo-devo concepts and the prevalence of associated common conceptual difficulties among both novice and advanced undergraduate biology majors.  相似文献   

6.
A lecture section of introductory biology that historically enrolled more than 500 students was split into two smaller sections of approximately 250 students each. A traditional lecture format was followed in the “traditional” section; lecture time in the “active” section was drastically reduced in favor of a variety of in-class student-centered activities. Students in both sections took unannounced quizzes and multiple-choice exams. Evaluation consisted of comparisons of student survey responses, scores on standardized teaching evaluation forms, section averages and attendance, and open-ended student comments on end-of-term surveys. Results demonstrate that students perform as well, if not better, in an active versus traditional environment. However, student concerns about instructor expectations indicate that a judicious balance of student-centered activities and presentation-style instruction may be the best approach.  相似文献   

7.
The scale and importance of Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action challenges us to ask fundamental questions about widespread transformation of college biology instruction. I propose that we have clarified the “vision” but lack research-based models and evidence needed to guide the “change.” To support this claim, I focus on several key topics, including evidence about effective use of active-teaching pedagogy by typical faculty and whether certain programs improve students’ understanding of the Vision and Change core concepts. Program evaluation is especially problematic. While current education research and theory should inform evaluation, several prominent biology faculty–development programs continue to rely on self-reporting by faculty and students. Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty-development overviews can guide program design. Such studies highlight viewing faculty members as collaborators, embedding rewards faculty value, and characteristics of effective faculty-development learning communities. A recent National Research Council report on discipline-based STEM education research emphasizes the need for long-term faculty development and deep conceptual change in teaching and learning as the basis for genuine transformation of college instruction. Despite the progress evident in Vision and Change, forward momentum will likely be limited, because we lack evidence-based, reliable models for actually realizing the desired “change.”
All members of the biology academic community should be committed to creating, using, assessing, and disseminating effective practices in teaching and learning and in building a true community of scholars. (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 2011 , p. 49)
Realizing the “vision” in Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education (Vision and Change; AAAS, 2011 ) is an enormous undertaking for the biology education community, and the scale and critical importance of this challenge prompts us to ask fundamental questions about widespread transformation of college biology teaching and learning. For example, Vision and Change reflects the consensus that active teaching enhances the learning of biology. However, what is known about widespread application of effective active-teaching pedagogy and how it may differ across institutional and classroom settings or with the depth of pedagogical understanding a biology faculty member may have? More broadly, what is the research base concerning higher education biology faculty–development programs, especially designs that lead to real change in classroom teaching? Has the develop-and-disseminate approach favored by the National Science Foundation''s (NSF) Division of Undergraduate Education (Dancy and Henderson, 2007 ) been generally effective? Can we directly apply outcomes from faculty-development programs in other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines or is teaching college biology unique in important ways? In other words, if we intend to use Vision and Change as the basis for widespread transformation of biology instruction, is there a good deal of scholarly literature about how to help faculty make the endorsed changes or is this research base lacking?In the context of Vision and Change, in this essay I focus on a few key topics relevant to broad-scale faculty development, highlighting the extent and quality of the research base for it. My intention is to reveal numerous issues that may well inhibit forward momentum toward real transformation of college-level biology teaching and learning. Some are quite fundamental, such as ongoing dependence on less reliable assessment approaches for professional-development programs and mixed success of active-learning pedagogy by broad populations of biology faculty. I also offer specific suggestions to improve and build on identified issues.At the center of my inquiry is the faculty member. Following the definition used by the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education (www.podnetwork.org), I use “faculty development” to indicate programs that emphasize the individual faculty member as teacher (e.g., his or her skill in the classroom), scholar/professional (publishing, college/university service), and person (time constraints, self-confidence). Of course, faculty members work within particular departments and institutions, and these environments are clearly critical as well (Stark et al., 2002 ). Consequently, in addition to focusing on the individual, faculty-development programs may also consider organizational structure (such as administrators and criteria for reappointment and tenure) and instructional development (the overall curriculum, who teaches particular courses). In fact, Diamond (2002) emphasizes that the three areas of effort (individual, organizational, instructional) should complement one another in faculty-development programs. The scope of the numerous factors impacting higher education biology instruction is a realistic reminder about the complexity and challenge of the second half of the Vision and Change endeavor.This essay is organized around specific topics meant to be representative and to illustrate the state of the art of widespread (beyond a limited number of courses and institutions) professional development for biology faculty. The first two sections focus on active teaching and biology students’ conceptual understanding, respectively. The third section concerns important elements that have been identified as critical for effective STEM faculty-development programs.  相似文献   

8.
  相似文献   

9.
A series of faculty development seminars at Haverford College has been designed to address the issue of keeping science faculty teaching and research up-to-date, while building bridges between departments. To ensure coverage of emerging areas of science, we have elected to train existing faculty in new methods using a series of workshops for which faculty receive either teaching release time or stipends. The goals of these seminars include developing faculty expertise in important new topics and methodologies, stimulating the inclusion of these skills into their research and the curriculum, and broadening the scope of teaching and research collaborations. The initial three workshops have been targeted at areas of particular concern: boosting faculty expertise in scientific computing, bioinformatics, and issues surrounding the relationship of science and society. The seminar format has been designed to foster dialogue between different departments, as well as individual faculty, by including time for informal conversations and shared workshops, and by requiring collaborative curricular projects. The initial focus on the natural sciences has broadened into topics of interest to faculty in the social sciences and humanities.  相似文献   

10.
  相似文献   

11.
Most American colleges and universities offer gateway biology courses to meet the needs of three undergraduate audiences: biology and related science majors, many of whom will become biomedical researchers; premedical students meeting medical school requirements and preparing for the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT); and students completing general education (GE) graduation requirements. Biology textbooks for these three audiences present a topic scope and sequence that correlates with the topic scope and importance ratings of the biology content specifications for the MCAT regardless of the intended audience. Texts for “nonmajors,” GE courses appear derived directly from their publisher''s majors text. Topic scope and sequence of GE texts reflect those of “their” majors text and, indirectly, the MCAT. MCAT term density of GE texts equals or exceeds that of their corresponding majors text. Most American universities require a GE curriculum to promote a core level of academic understanding among their graduates. This includes civic scientific literacy, recognized as an essential competence for the development of public policies in an increasingly scientific and technological world. Deriving GE biology and related science texts from majors texts designed to meet very different learning objectives may defeat the scientific literacy goals of most schools’ GE curricula.  相似文献   

12.
The Biology Intensive Orientation for Students (BIOS) Program was designed to assess the impact of a 5-d intensive prefreshman program on success and retention of biological science majors at Louisiana State University. The 2005 pilot program combined content lectures and examinations for BIOL 1201, Introductory Biology for Science Majors, as well as learning styles assessments and informational sessions to provide the students with a preview of the requirements of biology and the pace of college. Students were tracked after their BIOS participation, and their progress was compared with a control group composed of students on the BIOS waiting list and a group of BIOL 1201 students who were identified as the academic matches to the BIOS participants (high school GPA, ACT score, and gender). The BIOS participants performed significantly better on the first and second exams, they had a higher course average, and they had a higher final grade than the control group. These students also had higher success rates (grade of “A,” “B,” or “C”) during both the fall and spring semesters and remained on track through the first semester of their sophomore year to graduate in 4 yr at a significantly higher rate than the control group.  相似文献   

13.
The utilization of biology research resources, coupled with a “learning by inquiry” approach, has great potential to aid students in gaining an understanding of fundamental biological principles. To help realize this potential, we have developed a Web portal for undergraduate biology education, WormClassroom.org, based on current research resources of a model research organism, Caenorhabditis elegans. This portal is intended to serve as a resource gateway for students to learn biological concepts using C. elegans research material. The driving forces behind the WormClassroom website were the strengths of C. elegans as a teaching organism, getting researchers and educators to work together to develop instructional materials, and the 3 P's (problem posing, problem solving, and peer persuasion) approach for inquiry learning. Iterative assessment is an important aspect of the WormClassroom site development because it not only ensures that content is up-to-date and accurate, but also verifies that it does, in fact, aid student learning. A primary assessment was performed to refine the WormClassroom website utilizing undergraduate biology students and nonstudent experts such as C. elegans researchers; results and comments were used for site improvement. We are actively encouraging continued resource contributions from the C. elegans research and education community for the further development of WormClassroom.  相似文献   

14.
The availability of reliable evidence for teaching practices after professional development is limited across science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines, making the identification of professional development “best practices” and effective models for change difficult. We aimed to determine the extent to which postdoctoral fellows (i.e., future biology faculty) believed in and implemented evidence-based pedagogies after completion of a 2-yr professional development program, Faculty Institutes for Reforming Science Teaching (FIRST IV). Postdocs (PDs) attended a 2-yr training program during which they completed self-report assessments of their beliefs about teaching and gains in pedagogical knowledge and experience, and they provided copies of class assessments and video recordings of their teaching. The PDs reported greater use of learner-centered compared with teacher-centered strategies. These data were consistent with the results of expert reviews of teaching videos. The majority of PDs (86%) received video ratings that documented active engagement of students and implementation of learner-centered classrooms. Despite practice of higher-level cognition in class sessions, the items used by the PDs on their assessments of learning focused on lower-level cognitive skills. We attributed the high success of the FIRST IV program to our focus on inexperienced teachers, an iterative process of teaching practice and reflection, and development of and teaching a full course.  相似文献   

15.
Traditional courses for graduate students in the biological sciences typically span a semester, are organized around the fundamental concepts of a single discipline, and are aimed at the needs of incoming students. Such courses demand significant time commitment from both faculty and course participants; thus, they are avoided by a subset of the academic science community. Course length and the high barrier to course development are inhibitory to the creation of new courses, especially in emerging areas of biology that may not merit a full-semester approach. Here, we describe the implementation of a new, graduate-level course format, created to allow for rapid development of courses, provide meaningful educational experiences for both junior and senior graduate students and other members of our community, and increase the breadth of faculty involvement in teaching. These courses are greatly abbreviated, and thus termed “nanocourses.” Based on experience from the first three semesters, nanocourses seem to accomplish the initial goals that we set. Importantly, nanocourses engaged students, postdoctoral fellows, faculty, and others, thus providing a new mechanism to educate our community in response to rapid advances in biology. In our view, nanocourses are a useful tool that can supplement graduate-level curricula in varied ways.  相似文献   

16.
This paper presents findings from a collaborative research study which sought to explore perspectives and understandings of the concept of inclusion, as played out in schools and colleges in northwest England, via the use of images. The research had two parts: in the first part, children and young people took photographs in their school setting that they felt represented inclusion or exclusion, offering an explanation for their choice. Some of these photographs and the accompanying comments were anonymised and formed the second part of the research that sought the viewpoints and perspectives of student-teachers, serving teachers, teaching assistants and academics via seminars and workshops. It is the responses received in the seminars and workshops that form the focus of this paper. Four images and a range of responses to them have been selected for discussion and are framed within three key inter-related themes of place, positioning and perspective. Such an analysis is made to consider how self-positioning might inform diverse interpretations of the cultural construction and visual representation of inclusion and exclusion.  相似文献   

17.
Genetics instruction in introductory biology is often confined to Mendelian genetics and avoids the complexities of variation in quantitative traits. Given the driving question “What determines variation in phenotype (Pv)? (Pv=Genotypic variation Gv + environmental variation Ev),” we developed a 4-wk unit for an inquiry-based laboratory course focused on the inheritance and expression of a quantitative trait in varying environments. We utilized Brassica rapa Fast Plants as a model organism to study variation in the phenotype anthocyanin pigment intensity. As an initial curriculum assessment, we used free word association to examine students’ cognitive structures before and after the unit and explanations in students’ final research posters with particular focus on variation (Pv = Gv + Ev). Comparison of pre- and postunit word frequency revealed a shift in words and a pattern of co-occurring concepts indicative of change in cognitive structure, with particular focus on “variation” as a proposed threshold concept and primary goal for students’ explanations. Given review of 53 posters, we found ∼50% of students capable of intermediate to high-level explanations combining both Gv and Ev influence on expression of anthocyanin intensity (Pv). While far from “plug and play,” this conceptually rich, inquiry-based unit holds promise for effective integration of quantitative and Mendelian genetics.  相似文献   

18.
With rapid advances in biotechnology and molecular biology, instructors are challenged to not only provide undergraduate students with hands-on experiences in these disciplines but also to engage them in the “real-world” scientific process. Two common topics covered in biotechnology or molecular biology courses are gene-cloning and bioinformatics, but to provide students with a continuous laboratory-based research experience in these techniques is difficult. To meet these challenges, we have partnered with Bio-Rad Laboratories in the development of the “Cloning and Sequencing Explorer Series,” which combines wet-lab experiences (e.g., DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction, ligation, transformation, and restriction digestion) with bioinformatics analysis (e.g., evaluation of DNA sequence quality, sequence editing, Basic Local Alignment Search Tool searches, contig construction, intron identification, and six-frame translation) to produce a sequence publishable in the National Center for Biotechnology Information GenBank. This 6- to 8-wk project-based exercise focuses on a pivotal gene of glycolysis (glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase), in which students isolate, sequence, and characterize the gene from a plant species or cultivar not yet published in GenBank. Student achievement was evaluated using pre-, mid-, and final-test assessments, as well as with a survey to assess student perceptions. Student confidence with basic laboratory techniques and knowledge of bioinformatics tools were significantly increased upon completion of this hands-on exercise.  相似文献   

19.
This feature is designed to point CBE—Life Sciences Education readers to current articles of interest in life sciences education as well as more general and noteworthy publications in education research.This feature is designed to point CBE—Life Sciences Education readers to current articles of interest in life sciences education as well as more general and noteworthy publications in education research. URLs are provided for the abstracts or full text of articles. For articles listed as “Abstract available,” full text may be accessible at the indicated URL for readers whose institutions subscribe to the corresponding journal.1. Bush SD, Pelaez NJ, Rudd JA, Stevens MT, Tanner KD, Williams KS (2013). Widespread distribution and unexpected variation among science faculty with education specialties (SFES) across the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110, 7170–7175.[Available at: www.pnas.org/content/110/18/7170.full.pdf+html?sid=f2823860-1fef-422c-b861-adfe8d82cef5]College and university basic science departments are taking an increasingly active role in innovating and improving science education and are hiring science faculty with education specialties (SFES) to reflect this emphasis. This paper describes a nationwide survey of these faculty at private and public degree-granting institutions. The authors assert that this is the first such analysis undertaken, despite the apparent importance of SFES at many, if not most, higher education institutions. It expands on earlier work summarizing survey results from SFES used in the California state university system (Bush et al., 2011 ).The methods incorporated a nationwide outreach that invited self-identified SFES to complete an anonymous, online survey. SFES are described as those “specifically hired in science departments to specialize in science education beyond typical faculty teaching duties” or “who have transitioned after their initial hire to a role as a faculty member focused on issues in science education beyond typical faculty teaching duties.” Two hundred eighty-nine individuals representing all major types of institutions of higher education completed the 95-question, face-validated instrument. Slightly more than half were female (52.9%), and 95.5% were white. There is extensive supporting information, including the survey instrument, appended to the article.Key findings are multiple. First, but not surprisingly, SFES are a national, widespread, and growing phenomenon. About half were hired since the year 2000 (the survey was completed in 2011). Interestingly, although 72.7% were in tenured or tenure-track positions, most did not have tenure before adopting SFES roles, suggesting that such roles are not, by themselves, an impediment to achieving tenure. A second key finding was that SFES differed significantly more between institutional types than between science disciplines. For example, SFES respondents at PhD-granting institutions were less likely to occupy tenure-track positions than those at MS-granting institutions and primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs). Also, SFES at PhD institutions reported spending more time on teaching and less on research than their non-SFES peers. This may be influenced, of course, by the probability that fewer faculty at MS and PUI institutions have research as a core responsibility. The pattern is complex, however, because all SFES at all types of institutions listed teaching, service, and research as professional activities. SFES did report that they were much more heavily engaged in service activities than their non-SFES peers across all three types of institutions. A significantly higher proportion of SFES respondents at MS-granting institutions had formal science education training (60.9%), as compared with those at PhD-granting institutions (39.3%) or PUIs (34.8%).A third finding dealt with success of SFES in obtaining funding for science education research, with funding success defined as cumulatively obtaining $100,000 or more in their current positions. Interestingly, the factors that most strongly correlated statistically with funding success were 1) occupying a tenure-track position, 2) employment at a PhD-granting institution, and 3) having also obtained funding for basic science research. Not correlated were disciplinary field and, surprisingly, formal science education training.Noting that MS-granting institutions show the highest proportions of SFES who are tenured or tenure-track, who are higher ranked, who are trained in science education, and who have professional expectations aligned with those of their non-SFES peers, the authors suggest that these institutions are in the vanguard of developing science education as an independent discipline, similar to ecology or organic chemistry. They also point out that SFES at PhD institutions appear to be a different subset, occupying primarily non–tenure track, teaching positions. To the extent that more science education research funding is being awarded to these latter SFES, who occupy less enfranchised roles within their departments, the authors suggest the possibility that such funding may not substantially improve science education at these institutions. However, the authors make it clear that the implications of their findings merit more careful examination and discussion.2. Opfer JE, Nehm RH, Ha M (2012). Cognitive foundations for science assessment design: knowing what students know about evolution. J Res Sci Teach 49, 744–777.[Abstract available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21028/abstract]The authors previously published an article (Nehm et al., 2012) documenting a new instrument (more specifically, a short-answer diagnostic test), Assessing Contextual Reasoning about Natural Selection (ACORNS). This article describes how cognitive principles were used in designing the theoretical framework of ACORNS. In particular, the authors attempted to follow up on the premise of a National Research Council (2001) report on educational assessment that use of research-based, cognitive models for student learning could improve the design of items used to measure students’ conceptual understandings.In applying this recommendation to design of the ACORNS, the authors were guided by four principles for assessing the progression from novice to expert in using core concepts of natural selection to explain and discuss the process of evolutionary change. The items in ACORNS are designed to assess whether, in moving toward expertise, individuals 1) use core concepts for facilitation of long-term recall; 2) continue to hold naïve ideas coexistent with more scientifically normative ones; 3) offer explanations centered around mechanistic rather than teleological causes; and 4) can use generalizations (abstract knowledge) to guide reasoning, rather than focusing on specifics or less-relevant surface features. Thus, these items prioritize recall over recognition, detect students’ use of causal features of natural selection, test for coexistence of normative and naïve conceptions, and assess students’ focus on surface features when offering explanations.The paper provides an illustrative set of four sample items, each of which describes an evolutionary change scenario with different surface features (familiar vs. unfamiliar taxa; plants vs. animals) and then prompts respondents to write explanations for how the change occurred. To evaluate the ability of items to detect gradations in expertise, the authors enlisted the participation of 320 students enrolled in an introductory biology sequence. Students’ written explanations for each of the four items were independently coded by two expert scorers for presence of core concepts and cognitive biases (deviations from scientifically normative ideas and causal reasoning). Indices were calculated to determine the frequency, diversity, and coherence of students’ concept usage. The authors also compared the students’ grades in a subsequent evolutionary biology course to determine whether the use of core concepts and cognitive biases in their ACORNS explanations could successfully predict future performance.Evidence from these qualitative and quantitative data analyses argued that the items were consistent with the cognitive model and four guiding principles used in their design, and that the assessment could successfully predict students’ level of academic achievement in subsequent study of evolutionary biology. The authors conclude by offering examples of student explanations to highlight the utility of this cognitive model for designing assessment items that document students’ progress toward expertise.3. Sampson V, Enderle P, Grooms J (2013). Development and initial validation of the Beliefs about Reformed Science Teaching and Learning (BARSTL) questionnaire. School Sci Math 113, 3–15.[Available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2013.00175.x/full]The authors report on the development of a Beliefs about Reformed Science Teaching and Learning (BARSTL) instrument (questionnaire), designed to map teachers’ beliefs along a continuum from traditional to reform-minded. The authors define reformed views of science teaching and learning as being those that are consistent with constructivist philosophies. That is, as quoted from Driver et al. (1994 , p. 5), views that stem from the basic assumption that “knowledge is not transmitted directly from one knower to another, but is actively built up by the learner” by adjusting current understandings (and associated rules and mental models) to accommodate and make sense of new information and experiences.The basic premise for the instrument development posed by the authors is that teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and of the teaching and learning of science serve as a filter for, and thus strongly influence how they enact, reform-based curricula in their classrooms. They cite a study from a high school physics setting (Feldman, 2002 ) to illustrate the impact that teachers’ differing beliefs can have on the ways in which they incorporate the same reform-based curriculum into their courses. They contend that, because educational reform efforts “privilege” constructivist views of teaching and learning, the BARSTL instrument could inform design of teacher education and professional development by monitoring the extent to which the experiences they offer are effective in shifting teachers’ beliefs toward the more constructivist end of the continuum.The BARTSL questionnaire described in the article has four subscales, with eight items per subscale. The four subscales are: a) how people learn about science; b) lesson design and implementation; c) characteristics of teachers and the learning environment; and d) the nature of the science curriculum. In each subscale, four of the items were designed to be aligned with reformed perspectives on science teaching and learning, and four to have a traditional perspective. Respondents indicate the extent to which they agree with the item statements on a 4-point Likert scale. In scoring the responses, strong agreement with a reform-based item is assigned a score of 4 and strong disagreement a score of 1; scores for traditional items were assigned on a reverse scale (e.g., 1 for strong agreement). A more extensive characterization of the subscales is provided in the article, along with all of the instrument items (see Appendix).The article describes the seven-step process and associated analyses used to, in the words of the authors, “assess the degree to which the BARTSL instrument has accurately translated the construct, reformed beliefs about science teaching, into an operationalization.” The steps include: 1) defining the specific constructs (concepts that can be used to explain related phenomena) that the instrument would measure; 2) developing instrument items; 3) evaluating items for clarity and comprehensibility; 4) evaluating construct and content validity of the items and subscales; 5) a first round of evaluation of the instrument; 6) item and instrument revision; and 7) a second evaluation of validity and reliability (the extent to which the instrument yields the same results on repetition). Step 3 was accomplished by science education doctoral students who reviewed the items and provided feedback, and step 4 with assistance from a seven-person panel composed of science education faculty and doctoral students. Administration of the instrument to 104 elementary teacher education majors (ETEs) enrolled in a teaching method course was used to evaluate the first draft of the instrument and identify items for inclusion in the final instrument. The instrument was administered to a separate population of 146 ETEs in step 7.The authors used two estimates of internal consistency, a Spearman-Brown corrected correlation and coefficient alpha, to assess the reliability of the instrument; the resulting values were 0.80 and 0.77, respectively, interpreted as being indicative of satisfactory internal consistency. Content validity, defined by the authors as the degree to which the sample of items measures what the instrument was designed to measure, was assessed by a panel of experts who reviewed the items within each of the four subscales. The experts concluded that items that were designed to be consistent with reformed and traditional perspectives were in fact consistent and were evenly distributed throughout the instrument. To evaluate construct validity (which was defined as the instrument''s “theoretical integrity”), the authors performed a correlation analysis on the four subscales to examine the extent to which each could predict the final overall score on the instrument and thus be viewed as a single construct of reformed beliefs. They found that each of the subscales was a good predictor of overall score. Finally, they performed an exploratory factor analysis and additional follow-up analyses to determine whether the four subscales measure four dimensions of reformed beliefs and to ensure that items were appropriately distributed among the subscales. In general, the authors contend that the results of these analyses indicated good content and construct validity.The authors conclude by pointing out that BARTSL scores could be used for quantitative comparisons of teachers’ beliefs and stances about reform-minded science teaching and learning and for following changes over time. However, they recommend BARTSL scores not be used to infer a given level of reform-mindedness and are best used in combination with other data-collection techniques, such as observations and interviews.4. Meredith DC, Bolker JA (2012). Rounding off the cow: challenges and successes in an interdisciplinary physics course for life sciences students. Am J Phys 80, 913–922.[Abstract available at: http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v80/i10/p913_s1?isAuthorized=no]There is a well-recognized need to rethink and reform the way physics is taught to students in the life sciences, to evaluate those efforts, and to communicate the results to the education community. This paper describes a multiyear effort at the University of New Hampshire by faculties in physics and biological sciences to transform an introductory physics course populated mainly by biology students into an explicitly interdisciplinary course designed to meet students’ needs.The context was that of a large-enrollment (250–320 students), two-semester Introductory Physics for Life Science Students (IPLS) course; students attend one of two lecture sections that meet three times per week and one laboratory session per week. The IPLS course was developed and cotaught by the authors, with a goal of having “students understand how and why physics is important to biology at levels from ecology and evolution through organismal form and function, to instrumentation.” The selection of topics was drastically modified from that of a traditional physics course, with some time-honored topics omitted or de-emphasized (e.g., projectile motion, relativity), and others thought to be more relevant to biology introduced or emphasized (e.g., fluids, dynamics). In addition, several themes not always emphasized in a traditional physics course but important in understanding life processes were woven through the IPLS course: scaling, estimation, and gradient-driven flows.It is well recognized that life sciences students need to strengthen their quantitative reasoning skills. To address their students’ needs in this area, the instructors ensured that online tutorials were available to students, mathematical proofs that the students are not expected use were de-emphasized, and Modeling Instruction labs were incorporated that require students to model their own data with an equation and compose a verbal link between their equations and the physical world.Student learning outcomes were assessed through the use of the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS), which measures students’ personal epistemologies of science by their responses on a Likert-scale survey. These data were supplemented by locally developed, open-ended surveys and Likert-scale surveys to gauge students’ appreciation for the role of physics in biology. Students’ conceptual understanding was evaluated using the Force and Motion Concept Evaluation (FCME) and Test of Understanding Graphs in Kinematics (TUG-K), as well as locally developed, open-ended physics problems that probed students’ understanding in the context of biology-relevant applications and whether their understanding of physics was evident in their use of mathematics.The results broadly supported the efficacy of the authors’ approaches in many respects. More than 80% of the students very strongly or strongly agreed with the statement “I found the biological applications interesting,” and almost 60% of the students very strongly or strongly agreed with the statements “I found the biological applications relevant to my other courses and/or my planned career” and “I found the biological applications helped me understand the physics.” Students were also broadly able to integrate physics into their understanding of living systems. Examples of questions that students addressed include one that asked students to evaluate the forces on animals living in water versus those on land. Ninety-one percent of the students were able to describe at least one key difference between motion in air and water. Gains in the TUG-K score averaged 33.5% across the 4 yr of the course offering and were consistent across items. However, the positive attitudes about biology applications in physics were not associated with gains in areas of conceptual understanding measured by the FCME instrument. These gains were more mixed than those from the TUG-K and dependent on the concept being evaluated, with values as low as 15% for some concepts and an average gain on all items of 24%. Overall, the gains on the two instruments designed to measure physics understanding were described by the authors as being “modest at best,” particularly in the case of the FCME, given that reported national averages for reformed courses for this instrument range from 33 to 93%.The authors summarize by identifying considerations they think are essential to design and implementation of a IPLS-like course: 1) the need to streamline the coverage of course topics to emphasize those that are truly aligned with the needs of life sciences majors; 2) the importance of drawing from the research literature for evidence-based strategies to motivate students and aid in their development of problem-solving skills; 3) taking the time to foster collaborations with biologists who will reinforce the physics principles in their teaching of biology courses; and 4) considering the potential constraints and limitations to teaching across disciplinary boundaries and beginning to strategize ways around them and build models for sustainability. The irony of this last recommendation is that the authors report having suspended the teaching of IPLS at their institution due to resource constraints. They recommend that institutions claiming to value interdisciplinary collaboration need to find innovative ways to reward and acknowledge such collaborations, because “external calls for change resonate with our own conviction that we can do better than the traditional introductory course to help life science students learn and appreciate physics.”I invite readers to suggest current themes or articles of interest in life science education, as well as influential papers published in the more distant past or in the broader field of education research, to be featured in Current Insights. Please send any suggestions to Deborah Allen (ude.ledu@nellaed).  相似文献   

20.
Students’ epistemological views about biology—their ideas about what “counts” as learning and understanding biology—play a role in how they approach their courses and respond to reforms. As introductory biology courses incorporate more physics and quantitative reasoning, student attitudes about the role of equations in biology become especially relevant. However, as documented in research in physics education, students’ epistemologies are not always stable and fixed entities; they can be dynamic and context-dependent. In this paper, we examine an interview with an introductory student in which she discusses the use of equations in her reformed biology course. In one part of the interview, she expresses what sounds like an entrenched negative stance toward the role equations can play in understanding biology. However, later in the interview, when discussing a different biology topic, she takes a more positive stance toward the value of equations. These results highlight how a given student can have diverse ways of thinking about the value of bringing physics and math into biology. By highlighting how attitudes can shift in response to different tasks, instructional environments, and contextual cues, we emphasize the need to attend to these factors, rather than treating students’ beliefs as fixed and stable.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号