Characterizing Teaching in Introductory Geology Courses: Measuring Classroom Practices

ABSTRACT Most research about reformed teaching practices in the college science classroom is based on instructor self-report. This research describes what is happening in some introductory geology courses at multiple institutions across the country using external observers. These observations are quantified using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). A scoring rubric created to support consistent application of the 25 items on the RTOP yields very high inter-rater agreement over multiple observations throughout a 3 y period. Using the adapted RTOP instrument, 66 separate observations of introductory physical geology classrooms at 11 different institutions (four associate's colleges, three baccalaureate colleges, a master's university, and three research universities) were collected, and those observations indicate three categories of instruction: (1) teacher-centered, traditional lecture-dominated classrooms (RTOP < 30) with little student talk and minimal student activity beyond listening and note taking; (2) transitional classrooms with some activities involving brief student discussions centered around right/wrong answers; and (3) student-centered classrooms (RTOP ≥ 50) with considerable time devoted to active learning and student communications to promote conceptual understanding. The progression from teacher-centered to transitional and then to student-centered categories is incremental across all subscales of the RTOP instrument except for propositional knowledge (character of the lesson's content and instructor's command of the material), which only increases between teacher-centered and transitional categories. This means there is no single path to an active learning, student-centered introductory geology classroom. Such learning environments are achieved with a holistic approach to all aspects of constructivist teaching as measured by RTOP. If the instructor incorporates small changes in multiple aspects of their teaching from disseminator of knowledge to supporter of student learning, then the transition to a student-centered classroom becomes an approachable process. Faculty can also use the RTOP and rubric to guide course planning, promote self-reflection of their teaching, and assist in the peer evaluation of other's teaching.

[1]  R. Beichner The Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) Project , 2007 .

[2]  Patricia D. Morrell,et al.  Observation of reform teaching in undergraduate level mathematics and science courses , 2004 .

[3]  Dan MacIsaac,et al.  Reforming Physics Instruction Via RTOP , 2002 .

[4]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[5]  Nor Hashidah Abd-Hamid,et al.  Scientific Inquiry in the Genetics Laboratory: Biologists and University Science Teacher Educators Collaborating to Increase Engagement in Science Processes. , 2012 .

[6]  L. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[7]  David Boud,et al.  Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context , 1998 .

[8]  R. A. Bailey Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: a Model Comparison Perspective, 2nd edn , 2005 .

[9]  Melissa H. Dancy,et al.  Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics , 2007 .

[10]  Jessica J. Smay,et al.  Increasing Learning in Introductory Geoscience Courses Using Lecture Tutorials , 2008 .

[11]  Jennifer L. Momsen,et al.  What We Say is Not What We Do: Effective Evaluation of Faculty Professional Development Programs , 2011 .

[12]  Catherine H. Crouch,et al.  Classroom Demonstrations: Learning Tools Or Entertainment? , 2004 .

[13]  D. McConnell,et al.  Affective Domain and Student Learning in the Geosciences , 2011 .

[14]  Thelma J. Roberson Classroom Observation: Issues Regarding Validity and Reliability. , 1998 .

[15]  A. Ahlgren,et al.  Science for all Americans , 1990 .

[16]  최영한,et al.  미국 NCTM의 Principles and Standards for School Mathematics에 나타난 수학과 교수,학습의 이론 , 2002 .

[17]  Darren George,et al.  SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference , 1998 .

[18]  C. Huether,et al.  Genetic Literacy of Undergraduate Non–Science Majors and the Impact of Introductory Biology and Genetics Courses , 2008 .

[19]  J. Ramalho-Santos,et al.  Cronbach's alpha: a tool for assessing the reliability of scales , 1999 .

[20]  R. Hake Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[21]  Marilyn P. Carlson,et al.  Evaluating College Science and Mathematics Instruction: A Reform Effort That Improves Teaching Skills. , 2002 .

[22]  L. Flick,et al.  A Cross Discipline Study of Reformed Teaching by University Science and Mathematics Faculty , 2009 .

[23]  D. R. Paulson Active Learning and Cooperative Learning in the Organic Chemistry Lecture Class. , 1999 .

[24]  The Problem with Reform from the Bottom up: Instructional practises and teacher beliefs of graduate teaching assistants following a reform‐minded university teacher certificate programme , 2010 .

[25]  C. Manduca,et al.  Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Geoscience Courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge Survey of U.S. Faculty , 2005 .

[26]  Scott E. Maxwell,et al.  Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: A Model Comparison Perspective , 1990 .

[27]  Maria T. Oliver-Hoyo,et al.  Effects of an Active Learning Environment: Teaching Innovations at a Research I Institution , 2004 .

[28]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results , 2001 .

[29]  渋江 靖弘,et al.  Science for All Americans , 1990 .

[30]  J. Marshall,et al.  Comparative Analysis of Two Inquiry Observational Protocols: Striving to Better Understand the Quality of Teacher‐Facilitated Inquiry‐Based Instruction , 2011 .

[31]  D. McConnell,et al.  Analysis of Student Responses to Peer-Instruction Conceptual Questions Answered Using an Electronic Response System: Trends by Gender and Ethnicity. , 2009 .

[32]  Susan Wyckoff Changing the Culture of Undergraduate Science Teaching: Shifting from Lecture to Interactive Engagement and Scientific Reasoning. , 2001 .

[33]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Innovation in large lectures—teaching for active learning , 1997 .

[34]  Susan R. Singer,et al.  Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. , 2012 .

[35]  Nor Hashidah Abd-Hamid,et al.  The Student Actions Coding Sheet (SACS): An instrument for illuminating the shifts toward student‐centered science classrooms , 2011 .

[36]  Gary F. Kohut,et al.  Evidence of Effective Teaching: Perceptions of Peer Reviewers , 2002 .

[37]  A. Amrein-Beardsley,et al.  Peer observations among faculty in a college of education: investigating the summative and formative uses of the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) , 2012 .

[38]  D. McConnell,et al.  Not Just “Rocks for Jocks”: Who Are Introductory Geology Students and Why Are They Here? , 2012 .

[39]  J. Fairweather,et al.  Linking Evidence and Promising Practices in Science , Technology , Engineering , and Mathematics ( STEM ) Undergraduate Education A Status Report for The National Academies National Research Council Board of Science Education , 2008 .

[40]  Kent J. Crippen,et al.  Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning , 2006 .

[41]  Eugene Judson,et al.  Reformed undergraduate instruction and its subsequent impact on secondary school teaching practice and student achievement , 2003 .

[42]  P. Morrell,et al.  Helping Preservice Science Teachers Analyze Their Practices as We Study Our Own , 2012 .

[43]  Daiyo Sawada,et al.  Effect of Reformed Courses in Physics and Physical Science on Student Conceptual Understanding. , 2001 .

[44]  J. Postlethwait,et al.  Workshop Biology: Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Active Learning in an Introductory Biology Course , 2002 .

[45]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions , 2009, Science.

[46]  Chandralekha Singh,et al.  Impact of peer interaction on conceptual test performance , 2005, 1602.07661.

[47]  Judith Kuit,et al.  Experiences of Reflective Teaching , 2001 .

[48]  Kerri L. Johnson,et al.  Why the Unskilled are Unaware: Further Explorations of (Absent) Self-Insight Among the Incompetent , 2006, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[49]  Louis Deslauriers,et al.  Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class , 2011, Science.

[50]  Alison Crowe,et al.  Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[51]  A. Su,et al.  The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics , 1932, The Mathematical Gazette.

[52]  Irene Bloom,et al.  Measuring Reform Practices in Science and Mathematics Classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol , 2002 .

[53]  G. Roehrig,et al.  The Role of Teachers' Beliefs and Knowledge in the Adoption of a Reform-Based Curriculum , 2005 .

[54]  William B Wood,et al.  Teaching more by lecturing less. , 2005, Cell biology education.