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
  • PDF
    395.38 Kb
  • HTML
    78.70 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 MR 2010 The problem with reform from the bottom up: instructional practices and teacher beliefs of graduate teaching assistants following a reform-minded university teacher certificate programme Inter J Sci Educ 32 8 1045 1071 10.1080/09500690902948060 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690902948060
2. Golde CM, Dore TM 2001 At cross purposes: what the experiences of today’s doctoral students reveal about doctoral education http://www.phdcompletion.org/promising/Golde.pdf
3. Tanner K, Allen D 2006 Approaches to biology teaching and learning: on integrating pedagogical training into the graduate experiences of future science faculty Cell Biol Educ 5 1 6 10.1187/cbe.05-12-0132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.05-12-0132
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science 2011 Vision 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 Science July 15–17, 2009 Washington, DC
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science 2015 Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: chronicling change, inspiring the future Final report of a national conference organized by AAAS with support from the National Science Foundation Retrieved from http://visionandchange.org/chronicling-change
6. Coil D, Wenderoth MP, Cunningham M, Dirks C 2010 Teaching the process of science: faculty perceptions and an effective methodology CBE Life Sci Educ 9 524 535 10.1187/cbe.10-01-0005 21123699 2995770 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-01-0005
7. Derting TL, Ebert-May D 2010 Learner-centered inquiry in undergraduate biology: positive relationships with long-term student achievement CBE Life Sci Educ 9 462 472 10.1187/cbe.10-02-0011 21123693 2995764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-02-0011
8. Gregg CS, Ales JD, Pomario SM, Wischusen EW, Siebenaller JF 2013 Scientific teaching targeting faculty from diverse institutions CBE Life Sci Educ 12 383 393 10.1187/cbe.12-05-0061 24006387 3763006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-05-0061
9. Stevens LM, Hoskins SG 2014 The CREATE strategy for intensive analysis of primary literature can be used effectively by newly trained faculty to produce multiple gains in diverse students CBE Life Sci Educ 13 224 242 10.1187/cbe.13-12-0239 4041501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0239
10. Ebert-May D, Derting TL, Hodder J, Momsen JL, Long T, Jardeleza SE 2011 What we say is not what we do: effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs Bioscience 61 550 558 10.1525/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 HA 2015 Breaking the cycle: future faculty begin teaching with learner-centered strategies after professional development CBE Life Sci Educ 14 2 4 ar22 10.1187/cbe.14-12-0222 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-12-0222
12. Yager RE 2013 Exemplary college science teaching NSTA Press Arlington VA
13. Connolly M, Millar S 2006 Using workshops to improve instruction in STEM courses Metropol Univ 17 453 465
14. Pfund C, Mathieu R, Austin A, Connolly M, Manske B, Moore K 2012 Advancing STEM undergraduate learning: preparing the nation’s future faculty Change Mag Higher Learn 44 6 64 72 10.1080/00091383.2012.728957 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 WB 2004 Scientific teaching Science 304 5670 521 522 10.1126/science.1096022 15105480 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 J 2009 Professional development. Summer institute to improve university science teaching Science 324 5926 470 471 10.1126/science.1170015 19390031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1170015
17. Henderson C 2008 promoting instructional change in new faculty: an evaluation of the physics and astronomy new faculty workshop Am J Phys 76 2 179 187 10.1119/1.2820393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.2820393
18. American Association of Physics Teachers 2014 Workshop for new faculty http://www.aapt.org/Conferences/newfaculty/nfw.cfm
19. D’Avanzo C 2013 Post Vision and Change: do we know how to change? CBE Life Sci Educ 12 373 382 10.1187/cbe.13-01-0010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-01-0010
20. Henderson C, Beach A, Finkelstein N 2011 Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: an analytic review of the literature J Res Sci Teach 48 952 984 10.1002/tea.20439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439
21. Henderson C, Dancy M, Niewiadomska-Bugaj M 2012 Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Phys Rev ST Phys Educ Res 8 020104 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104
22. Dancy M, Henderson C, Turpen C 2016 How faculty learn about and implement research-based instructional strategies: the case of peer instruction Phys Rev Phys Educ Res 12 1 010110 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110
23. Stains M, Vickrey T 2017 Fidelity of implementation: an overlooked yet critical construct to establish effectiveness of evidence-based instructional practices CBE Life Sci Educ 16 1 rm1,1 11 10.1187/cbe.16-03-0113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0113
24. Turpen C, Dancy M, Henderson C 2016 Perceived affordances and constraints regarding instructors’ use of peer instruction: implications for promoting instructional change Phys Rev Phys Educ Res 12 010116 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010116
25. Andrews TC, Lemons PP 2015 It’s personal: biology instructors prioritize personal evidence over empirical evidence in teaching decisions CBE Life Sci Educ 14 ar7 10.1187/cbe.14-05-0084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-05-0084
26. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM, Nehm RH 2007 Selective use of the primary literature transforms the classroom into a virtual laboratory Genetics 176 3 1381 1389 10.1534/genetics.107.071183 17483426 1931557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183
27. Vygotsky LS 1986 Thought and language Kozulin A The MIT Press Cambridge, MA
28. National Research Council 2003 BIO2010: transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists The National Academies Press Washington, DC
29. Bransford J, Brown A, Cocking R 1999 How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school, Expanded edition The National Academies Press Washington, DC
30. Springer L, Stanne M, Donovan S 1999 Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: a meta-analysis Rev Educ Res 69 1 21 52 10.3102/00346543069001021 http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543069001021
31. Zohar A, Nemet F 2002 Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics J Res Sci Teach 39 35 62 10.1002/tea.10008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
32. Osborne J, Erduran S, Simons S 2004 Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science J Res Sci Teach 41 10 994 1020 10.1002/tea.20035 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
33. Prince M, Felder R 2007 The many faces of inductive teaching and learning J Coll Sci Teach 36 5 14 20
34. Ruiz-Primo MA, Briggs D, Iverson H, Talbot R, Shepard L 2011 Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning Science 331 1269 1270 10.1126/science.1198976 21393529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1198976
35. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, Wenderoth MP 2014 Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111 8410 8415 10.1073/pnas.1319030111 24821756 4060654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
36. Hoskins SG, Stevens LM 2009 Learning our L.I.M.I.T.S.: less is more in teaching science Adv Physiol Educ 33 1 17 20 10.1152/advan.90184.2008 19261755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.90184.2008
37. Hoskins SG, Krufka A 2015 The CREATE strategy benefits students and is a natural fit for faculty Microbe 10 3 108 112
38. Gottesman AJ, Hoskins SG 2013 CREATE cornerstone: introduction to scientific thinking, a new course for STEM-interested freshmen demystifies scientific thinking through analysis of scientific literature CBE Life Sci Educ 12 59 72 10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201 23463229 3587857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201
39. Kenyon KL, Onorato M, Gottesman AJ, Hoque J, Hoskins SG 2016 Testing CREATE at community colleges: an examination of faculty perspectives and diverse student gains CBE Life Sci Educ 15 1 ar8 10.1187/cbe.15-07-0146 26931399 4803097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-07-0146
40. Hoskins S 2010 Developing critical reading and analysis skills by analyzing newspaper science using C.R.E.A.T.E. Am Biol Tea ch 72 7 415 420 10.1525/abt.2010.72.7.5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/abt.2010.72.7.5
41. Brownell SE, Tanner KD 2012 Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: lack of training, time, incentives, and…tensions with professional identity? CBE Life Sci Educ 11 339 346 10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163 23222828 3516788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163
42. Silverthorn DU, Thorn PM, Svinicki MD 2006 It’s difficult to change the way we teach: lessons from the integrative themes in physiology curriculum module project Adv Physiol Educ 30 4 204 214 10.1152/advan.00064.2006 17108248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00064.2006
43. Seymour E, Wiese DJ, Hunter A-B, Daffinrud SM 2000 Creating a better mousetrap: on-line student assessment of their learning gains Presented at the National Meeting of the American Chemical Society San Francisco, CA March 26–30
44. Bandura A 1977 Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavior change Psychol Rev 84 191 215 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 847061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
45. Schraw G, Crippen KJ, Hartley K 2006 Promoting self-regulation in science education: metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning Res Sci Educ 36 111 139 10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
46. Anseel F, Lievens F, Schollaert EE 2009 Reflection as a strategy for enhancing the effect of feedback on task performance Org Behav Hum Decis Proc 110 23 35 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003
47. Labov JB 2012 Changing and evolving relationships between two- and four-year colleges and universities: they’re not your parents’ community colleges anymore CBE Life Sci Educ 11 121 128 10.1187/cbe.12-03-0031 22665585 3366895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0031
48. Dembo MH, Seli HP 2004 Students’ resistance to change in learning strategies courses J Dev Educ 27 2 11
49. Seidel SB, Tanner KT 2013 “What if students revolt?”— considering student resistance: origins, options, and opportunities for investigation CBE Life Sci Educ 12 4 586 595 10.1187/cbe-13-09-0190 24297286 3846509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe-13-09-0190
50. Lundmark C 2002 The FIRST project for reforming undergraduate science teaching BioScience 52 553 10.1641/0006-3568(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 C 2002 Telling half the story: a critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics Rev Ed 72 177 228
52. Beck CW, Blumer LS 2016 Alternative realities: faculty and student perceptions of instructional practices in laboratory courses CBE Life Sci Educ 15 4 ar52-1 ar52-11 10.1187/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 HA 2016 Assessing faculty professional development in STEM higher education: sustainability of outcomes Sci Adv 2 3 e1501422 10.1126/sciadv.1501422 27034985 4803486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1501422
54. Khatri R, Henderson C, Cole R, Froyd JE, Friedrichsen D, Stanford C 2016 Designing for sustained adoption: a model of developing educational innovations for successful propagation Phys Rev PhysEduc Res 12 1 010112 10.1103/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
2019-10-17

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