Comparing Faculty Perceptions of their teaching with classroom observations

1. Comparing Faculty Perceptions of their teaching with classroom observations By Erika Steele, Donna Turner, Dennis Sunal, and Cynthia Sunal Supported by the National Science Foundation Number ESI 0554594

2. Introduction About NSEUS

3. National Study of Education in Undergraduate Science Collaborative Partners: • University of Alabama • San Diego State University • Kansas State University The content of this paper was developed under the National Science Foundation Grant TPC 0554594. However, the content does not necessarily represent the policy of NSF and should not be assumed as an endorsement by the Federal Government.

4. About NSEUS • 5-year project focuses on critical needs in teaching undergraduate science to all diverse majors with emphasis on the preparation and long-term development of pre-service, undergraduate, K-6 teachers of science. • The goal is to investigate the impact on these students of undergraduate, standards-based, reform entry-level science courses developed by faculty that are different from traditional courses.

5. Goals • Investigate the impact of reformed entry level, standards-based science courses on undergraduate students • Characterize levels of reform in undergraduate science coursework • Determine short- and long-term impacts of undergraduate science courses on elementary teachers.

6. Research Sample • Alaska Pacific University • Austin Peay State University • California State Polytechnical University at Pomona • California State University at Chico • Eastern Connecticut State University • Edgewood College • Emporia State University • Fort Hays State University • George Fox University • Guilford College • Hampton University • Indiana University • Jarvis Christian College • Lewis and Clark College • North Carolina Central University • Northern Michigan University • Northwest Nazarene University • Oklahoma State University OK • Portland State University • St. Augustine's College • San Francisco State University • South Carolina State University • Southeastern Oklahoma State University • Southern Connecticut State University • Stephen F Austin State University • University of Alabama • University of Arkansas • University of Incarnate Word • University of Oklahoma OK • University of Texas at Tyler • Wheeling Jesuit University • Winona State University • Research Participant • Pilot Study

7. Carnegie Designation of Sample Institutions

8. Reformed Course Characteristics • Incorporates the following: • Reflects national science standards • Emphasizes student-centered activities • Utilizes inquiry-based pedagogy • Builds on students’ prior knowledge • Incorporates interdisciplinary learning and collaborative approaches

9. Undergraduate Science Teaching Pedagogy in traditional courses Pedagogy in reform courses

10. Undergraduate Science Teaching

11. CoRe and PaPeR • CoRe and PaPeR • Modified by Glenda Ogletree

12. CoRe and PaPeR Modifications to Glenda Ogletree’s rubric for observations of undergraduate science teaching

13. NOVA Faculty Member 210 • Teaching for 19 years at 4 year university. • No courses in education or professional development for improving teaching other than the NOVA workshop when applying for grant and GLOBE workshop. • The NOVA workshop sparked interest in pedagogy and is interested in more professional development to improve teaching. The instructor is the only one in the department using innovative techniques for teaching. • Believes that science is important for all students. • Uses short lectures, and relies more on hands on experience to teach content. • Very passionate about teaching and student learning.

14. CoPa: NOVA Faculty Member (210) NOVA faculty tended to use hands-on activities, used alternative assessment tended to be more aware of pedagogy, and had clear goals for student learning with ideas on how to get them accomplished. • This one works so well, that I am trying to change my other classes to not lecture so much because they get the totally glazed over look. They don’t seem interested at all. And this class is completely different. You are taking people who have no interest in it at all in the first place and at the end of each unit I actually ask them to write a little reflection…This helps me assess what I’m doing to. If I know something is not working by reading these, I can change what I’m doing.(210)

15. Non-NOVA Faculty Member (420) • 16 years teaching at 4 year University. Prior to that, taught for 2 years at the high-school and community college level. • Took education courses in order to be certified as a high school teacher. Has had no professional development for improving but believes that teaching skills were developed while working as a tutor. • Does not like “eduspeak” • Has not really thought about his teaching or student learning. • Believes that science majors are more dedicated to learning • Approach to “covering” subjects is to have extensive lectures. • Instructor does present a very caring and respectful attitude in the classroom.

16. CoPa: Non-NOVA faculty members (420) Non-NOVA faculty tended to use lecture, referred to the textbook as a major resource, used traditional assessment, and were unaware or did not implement pedagogical knowledge in the classroom. • You have to follow a logical sequence like the one in the Campbell textbook that we use. I try to have zeal and to draw the students out. Droning on just puts them to sleep. I try to have a hook to get their attention. Even during lectures, I use examples and reflections on what I am presenting. (420)

17. Summary

18. Year Two Pilot Study DataObservations and Interviews • Qualitatively, Instructors teaching non-NOVA courses at the score significantly lower than instructors teaching NOVA science courses • NOVA undergraduate instructors • Used more active learning strategies • Poised questions to assess student prior knowledge • Lectured less • Relied less on the textbook • Used less “cookbook” labs • Collaborated with others about their teaching more • Were more aware of pedagogical strategies

19. Year Two Pilot Study DataObservations and Interviews • Non-NOVA Undergraduate instructors • Relied heavily on lectures • Students were passive in their learning • Used low-level questioning • To pace lecture • Rhetorically • Considered cook book labs hands on experience • Collaborated less with others about their pedagogy • May have been aware of good teaching practices, but did not implement them in their classrooms • Tended to think students were not interested in science.

20. Year Two Pilot Study DataObservations and Interviews • Both NOVA and Non-NOVA Undergraduate instructors • Had passion for the subject they were teaching in interviews • Wanted students to leave with a better understanding of the nature of science • Cared about their students performance in the class

21. Effect of Reformed Teaching Short term and Long Term

22. Student Interviews Non-NOVA NOVA Material is presented over my head. Purpose of the lesson is unclear. Lesson has no applicability to my future career. Teacher doesn’t explain well. I need help with the problems. I don’t like science and this course does not make me like science. Material is only presented one way. I didn’t like science before, but I like science now. Class material is presented in a way I can understand. Lesson can be used when I teach elementary school, even if I have to modify some of the material. I can learn the material. I can teach science.. Material is presented in several ways.

23. Student Interviews: Common Themes • Hands-on is the best way to present material. • Make the content relevant. • Make the content practical and connect to students’ lives. • Experiences in elementary and high school were generally dismal: read the book and answer the questions at the back of the book; know the definitions. • I’m not a math person.

24. Short Term Effects: Draw AScientist Test A B • Student 1005 Pre-Instruction • Student 1005 Post-Instruction • Student 1003 Pre-Instruction • Student 1003 Post-Instruction • Pre-Instruction both students a stereotypical drawing of nerdy white men in a lab coat • After instruction both students showed less stereotypical drawings. Student 1005 developed the idea that science can occur anywhere. Student 1003 indicated that anyone can do science. C D

25. Draw a Scientist Test

26. Long term effects: RTOP In-Service teachers Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) discriminated elementary science classroom lessons of teachers who graduated from reform & traditional courses.

27. Future Directions

28. Future Direction: Year 3 Activities • Finalize site visits to collect data for a sample of up to 15 national institutions, 30 undergraduate science courses, 30 faculty, and 90 elementary inservice teachers. • Analyze data collected and provide interim summaries of progress. • Analyze data collecting and processing protocols to optimize data collection and analyses.

29. Future Directions: Year 3 Preliminary Results • Professional development targeted specifically for the teaching of science • Actual activities that can be implemented • Role modeling science teaching-undergraduate courses • Site-based conversations