1887

CREATE Two-Year/Four-Year Faculty Workshops: A Focus on Practice, Reflection, and Novel Curricular Design Leads to Diverse Gains for Faculty at Two-Year and Four-Year Institutions

    Authors: Sally G. Hoskins1, Alan J. Gottesman1, Kristy L. Kenyon2,*
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Biology Department, City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY, 10031; 2: Biology Department, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, Geneva, New York, 14456
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2017 vol. 18 no. 3 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i3.1365
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • XML
    102.45 Kb
  • HTML
    78.70 Kb
  • PDF
    395.38 Kb

    Abstract:

    Improving STEM education through the propagation of highly effective teaching strategies is a major goal of national reform movements. CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate the hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) is a transformative teaching and learning strategy grounded in evidence-based science pedagogy. CREATE courses promote both cognitive (e.g., critical thinking) and affective (e.g., attitudinal and epistemological) student gains in diverse settings. In this study, we look more deeply into the faculty development workshop used to disseminate CREATE pedagogy to instructors at two-year and four-year institutions. We hypothesized that an immersive experience would positively shift faculty participants’ views on teaching/learning, build their understanding of CREATE pedagogy and develop their confidence for course implementation. Internal and external assessments indicate that faculty participants did achieve gains within the timeframe of the CREATE workshop. We discuss the workshop training outcomes in the context of designing effective dissemination models for innovative practices.

References & Citations

1. Addy TM, Blanchard MR2010The problem with reform from the bottom up: instructional practices and teacher beliefs of graduate teaching assistants following a reform-minded university teacher certificate programmeInter J Sci Educ3281045107110.1080/09500690902948060 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690902948060
2. Golde CM, Dore TM2001At cross purposes: what the experiences of today’s doctoral students reveal about doctoral educationhttp://www.phdcompletion.org/promising/Golde.pdf
3. Tanner K, Allen D2006Approaches to biology teaching and learning: on integrating pedagogical training into the graduate experiences of future science facultyCell Biol Educ51610.1187/cbe.05-12-0132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.05-12-0132
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science2011Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action: a summary of recommendations made at a national conference organized by the American Association for the Advancement of ScienceJuly 15–17, 2009Washington, DC
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science2015Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: chronicling change, inspiring the futureFinal report of a national conference organized by AAAS with support from the National Science FoundationRetrieved from http://visionandchange.org/chronicling-change
6. Coil D, Wenderoth MP, Cunningham M, Dirks C2010Teaching the process of science: faculty perceptions and an effective methodologyCBE Life Sci Educ952453510.1187/cbe.10-01-0005211236992995770 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-01-0005
7. Derting TL, Ebert-May D2010Learner-centered inquiry in undergraduate biology: positive relationships with long-term student achievementCBE Life Sci Educ946247210.1187/cbe.10-02-0011211236932995764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-02-0011
8. Gregg CS, Ales JD, Pomario SM, Wischusen EW, Siebenaller JF2013Scientific teaching targeting faculty from diverse institutionsCBE Life Sci Educ1238339310.1187/cbe.12-05-0061240063873763006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-05-0061
9. Stevens LM, Hoskins SG2014The CREATE strategy for intensive analysis of primary literature can be used effectively by newly trained faculty to produce multiple gains in diverse studentsCBE Life Sci Educ1322424210.1187/cbe.13-12-02394041501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0239
10. Ebert-May D, Derting TL, Hodder J, Momsen JL, Long T, Jardeleza SE2011What we say is not what we do: effective evaluation of faculty professional development programsBioscience6155055810.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9
11. Ebert-May D, Derting TL, Henkel TP, Middlemis Maher J, Momsen JL, Arnold B, Passmore HA2015Breaking the cycle: future faculty begin teaching with learner-centered strategies after professional developmentCBE Life Sci Educ1424ar2210.1187/cbe.14-12-0222 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-12-0222
12. Yager RE2013Exemplary college science teachingNSTA PressArlington VA
13. Connolly M, Millar S2006Using workshops to improve instruction in STEM coursesMetropol Univ17453465
14. Pfund C, Mathieu R, Austin A, Connolly M, Manske B, Moore K2012Advancing STEM undergraduate learning: preparing the nation’s future facultyChange Mag Higher Learn446647210.1080/00091383.2012.728957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2012.728957
15. Handelsman J, Ebert-May D, Beichner R, Bruns P, Chang A, DeHaan R, Gentile J, Lauffer S, Stewart J, Tilghman SM, Wood WB2004Scientific teachingScience304567052152210.1126/science.109602215105480 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1096022
16. Pfund C, Miller S, Brenner K, Bruns P, Chang A, Ebert-May D, Fagen AP, Gentile J, Gossens S, Khan IM, Labov JB, Pribbenow CM, Susman M, Tong L, Wright R, Yuan RT, Wood WB, Handelsman J2009Professional development. Summer institute to improve university science teachingScience324592647047110.1126/science.117001519390031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1170015
17. Henderson C2008promoting instructional change in new faculty: an evaluation of the physics and astronomy new faculty workshopAm J Phys76217918710.1119/1.2820393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.2820393
18. American Association of Physics Teachers2014Workshop for new facultyhttp://www.aapt.org/Conferences/newfaculty/nfw.cfm
19. D’Avanzo C2013Post Vision and Change: do we know how to change?CBE Life Sci Educ1237338210.1187/cbe.13-01-0010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-01-0010
20. Henderson C, Beach A, Finkelstein N2011Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: an analytic review of the literatureJ Res Sci Teach4895298410.1002/tea.20439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439
21. Henderson C, Dancy M, Niewiadomska-Bugaj M2012Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?Phys Rev ST Phys Educ Res802010410.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104
22. Dancy M, Henderson C, Turpen C2016How faculty learn about and implement research-based instructional strategies: the case of peer instructionPhys Rev Phys Educ Res12101011010.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110
23. Stains M, Vickrey T2017Fidelity of implementation: an overlooked yet critical construct to establish effectiveness of evidence-based instructional practicesCBE Life Sci Educ161rm1,11110.1187/cbe.16-03-0113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0113
24. Turpen C, Dancy M, Henderson C2016Perceived affordances and constraints regarding instructors’ use of peer instruction: implications for promoting instructional changePhys Rev Phys Educ Res1201011610.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010116
25. Andrews TC, Lemons PP2015It’s personal: biology instructors prioritize personal evidence over empirical evidence in teaching decisionsCBE Life Sci Educ14ar710.1187/cbe.14-05-0084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-05-0084
26. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM, Nehm RH2007Selective use of the primary literature transforms the classroom into a virtual laboratoryGenetics17631381138910.1534/genetics.107.071183174834261931557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183
27. Vygotsky LS1986Thought and language Kozulin AThe MIT PressCambridge, MA
28. National Research Council2003BIO2010: transforming undergraduate education for future research biologistsThe National Academies PressWashington, DC
29. Bransford J, Brown A, Cocking R1999How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school, Expanded editionThe National Academies PressWashington, DC
30. Springer L, Stanne M, Donovan S1999Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: a meta-analysisRev Educ Res691215210.3102/00346543069001021 http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543069001021
31. Zohar A, Nemet F2002Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human geneticsJ Res Sci Teach39356210.1002/tea.10008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
32. Osborne J, Erduran S, Simons S2004Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school scienceJ Res Sci Teach4110994102010.1002/tea.20035 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
33. Prince M, Felder R2007The many faces of inductive teaching and learningJ Coll Sci Teach3651420
34. Ruiz-Primo MA, Briggs D, Iverson H, Talbot R, Shepard L2011Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learningScience3311269127010.1126/science.119897621393529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1198976
35. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, Wenderoth MP2014Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematicsProc Natl Acad Sci USA1118410841510.1073/pnas.1319030111248217564060654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
36. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM2009Learning our L.I.M.I.T.S.: less is more in teaching scienceAdv Physiol Educ331172010.1152/advan.90184.200819261755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.90184.2008
37. Hoskins SG, Krufka A2015The CREATE strategy benefits students and is a natural fit for facultyMicrobe103108112
38. Gottesman AJ, Hoskins SG2013CREATE cornerstone: introduction to scientific thinking, a new course for STEM-interested freshmen demystifies scientific thinking through analysis of scientific literatureCBE Life Sci Educ12597210.1187/cbe.12-11-0201234632293587857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201
39. Kenyon KL, Onorato M, Gottesman AJ, Hoque J, Hoskins SG2016Testing CREATE at community colleges: an examination of faculty perspectives and diverse student gainsCBE Life Sci Educ151ar810.1187/cbe.15-07-0146269313994803097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-07-0146
40. Hoskins S2010Developing critical reading and analysis skills by analyzing newspaper science using C.R.E.A.T.E.Am Biol Teach 72741542010.1525/abt.2010.72.7.5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/abt.2010.72.7.5
41. Brownell SE, Tanner KD2012Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: lack of training, time, incentives, and…tensions with professional identity?CBE Life Sci Educ1133934610.1187/cbe.12-09-0163232228283516788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163
42. Silverthorn DU, Thorn PM, Svinicki MD2006It’s difficult to change the way we teach: lessons from the integrative themes in physiology curriculum module projectAdv Physiol Educ30420421410.1152/advan.00064.200617108248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00064.2006
43. Seymour E, Wiese DJ, Hunter A-B, Daffinrud SM2000Creating a better mousetrap: on-line student assessment of their learning gainsPresented at the National Meeting of the American Chemical SocietySan Francisco, CAMarch 26–30
44. Bandura A1977Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavior changePsychol Rev8419121510.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191847061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
45. Schraw G, Crippen KJ, Hartley K2006Promoting self-regulation in science education: metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learningRes Sci Educ3611113910.1007/s11165-005-3917-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
46. Anseel F, Lievens F, Schollaert EE2009Reflection as a strategy for enhancing the effect of feedback on task performanceOrg Behav Hum Decis Proc110233510.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003
47. Labov JB2012Changing and evolving relationships between two- and four-year colleges and universities: they’re not your parents’ community colleges anymoreCBE Life Sci Educ1112112810.1187/cbe.12-03-0031226655853366895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0031
48. Dembo MH, Seli HP2004Students’ resistance to change in learning strategies coursesJ Dev Educ27211
49. Seidel SB, Tanner KT2013“What if students revolt?”— considering student resistance: origins, options, and opportunities for investigationCBE Life Sci Educ12458659510.1187/cbe-13-09-0190242972863846509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe-13-09-0190
50. Lundmark C2002The FIRST project for reforming undergraduate science teachingBioScience5255310.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0553:TFPFRU]2.0.CO;2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0553:TFPFRU]2.0.CO;2
51. Kane R, Sandretto S, Heath C2002Telling half the story: a critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academicsRev Ed72177228
52. Beck CW, Blumer LS2016Alternative realities: faculty and student perceptions of instructional practices in laboratory coursesCBE Life Sci Educ154ar52-1ar52-1110.1187/cbe.16-03-0139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0139
53. Derting TL, Ebert-May D, Henkel TP, Maher JM, Arnold B, Passmore HA2016Assessing faculty professional development in STEM higher education: sustainability of outcomesSci Adv23e150142210.1126/sciadv.1501422270349854803486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1501422
54. Khatri R, Henderson C, Cole R, Froyd JE, Friedrichsen D, Stanford C2016Designing for sustained adoption: a model of developing educational innovations for successful propagationPhys Rev PhysEduc Res12101011210.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010112

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v18i3.1365
2017-12-15
2018-07-20

Abstract:

Improving STEM education through the propagation of highly effective teaching strategies is a major goal of national reform movements. CREATE (Consider, Read, Elucidate the hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) is a transformative teaching and learning strategy grounded in evidence-based science pedagogy. CREATE courses promote both cognitive (e.g., critical thinking) and affective (e.g., attitudinal and epistemological) student gains in diverse settings. In this study, we look more deeply into the faculty development workshop used to disseminate CREATE pedagogy to instructors at two-year and four-year institutions. We hypothesized that an immersive experience would positively shift faculty participants’ views on teaching/learning, build their understanding of CREATE pedagogy and develop their confidence for course implementation. Internal and external assessments indicate that faculty participants did achieve gains within the timeframe of the CREATE workshop. We discuss the workshop training outcomes in the context of designing effective dissemination models for innovative practices.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/18/3/jmbe-18-65.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v18i3.1365&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

Shifts in participants’ practices/intentions and beliefs based on categories defined for TBPI survey. A) two-year only, = 30, B) four-year only, = 59, C) all participants. Data were combined for all four workshops. Histogram shows the percentage of respondents who = agreed (score 4 or 5) with category statements at the start or conclusion of the workshop. See Table S1A for full statements and Methods for discussion of how statements were grouped statistically. Significance (Chi-squared) determined via www.medcalc.org/calc/comparison_of_proportions.php; comparison of proportions calculator. * = < 0.02; ** = < 0.01; *** = < 0.001; **** = < 0.0001. TBPI = teachers’ beliefs, practices, and intentions.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2017 vol. 18 no. 3 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i3.1365
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

SALG outcomes from four workshops. Pooled average data in each broad category from SALG respondents (4-year faculty: 55 pre, 46 post; 2-year faculty: 27 pre, 27 post). Each category represents a set of 5 or 6 individual statements, to which faculty responded on a 1 to 5 scale (1 = not at all; 2 = just a little; 3 = somewhat; 4 = a lot; 5 = a great deal). See Table 3 for SALG statements. *** = < 0.000; analysis by non-paired -test (Excel). Effect sizes (Cohen’s d) are 0.9–1.9 (2-year); 1.6–2.6 (4-year). Error bars = standard deviations. We also looked at combined data from the entire cohort; response patterns and effect sizes were very similar (data not shown). As with the TBPI survey ( Fig. 1 ), outcomes for two-year participants and for four-year participants were quite similar. SALG = student assessment of their learning gains; TBPI = teachers’ beliefs, practices, and intentions.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2017 vol. 18 no. 3 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i3.1365
Download as Powerpoint

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error