Cargando…
Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs?
Evidence-based teaching practices (EBTP)—like inquiry-based learning, inclusive teaching, and active learning (AL)—have been shown to benefit all students, especially women, first-generation, and traditionally minoritized students in science fields. However, little research has focused on how best t...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Society of Microbiology
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7861211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33584947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2473 |
_version_ | 1783647035939880960 |
---|---|
author | Patrick, Lorelei E. Barron, Hillary A. Brown, Julie C. Cotner, Sehoya |
author_facet | Patrick, Lorelei E. Barron, Hillary A. Brown, Julie C. Cotner, Sehoya |
author_sort | Patrick, Lorelei E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Evidence-based teaching practices (EBTP)—like inquiry-based learning, inclusive teaching, and active learning (AL)—have been shown to benefit all students, especially women, first-generation, and traditionally minoritized students in science fields. However, little research has focused on how best to train teaching assistants (TAs) to use EBTP or on which components of professional development are most important. We designed and experimentally manipulated a series of presemester workshops on AL, dividing subjects into two groups. The Activity group worked in teams to learn an AL technique with a workshop facilitator. These teams then modeled the activity, with their peers acting as students. In the Evidence group, facilitators modeled the activities with all TAs acting as students. We used a mixed-methods research design (specifically, concurrent triangulation) to interpret pre- and postworkshop and postsemester survey responses. We found that Evidence group participants reported greater knowledge of AL after the workshop than Activity group participants. Activity group participants, on the other hand, found all of the AL techniques more useful than Evidence group participants. These results suggest that actually modeling AL techniques made them more useful to TAs than simply experiencing the same techniques as students—even with the accompanying evidence. This outcome has broad implications for how we provide professional development sessions to TAs and potentially to faculty. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7861211 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | American Society of Microbiology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78612112021-02-11 Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? Patrick, Lorelei E. Barron, Hillary A. Brown, Julie C. Cotner, Sehoya J Microbiol Biol Educ Research Evidence-based teaching practices (EBTP)—like inquiry-based learning, inclusive teaching, and active learning (AL)—have been shown to benefit all students, especially women, first-generation, and traditionally minoritized students in science fields. However, little research has focused on how best to train teaching assistants (TAs) to use EBTP or on which components of professional development are most important. We designed and experimentally manipulated a series of presemester workshops on AL, dividing subjects into two groups. The Activity group worked in teams to learn an AL technique with a workshop facilitator. These teams then modeled the activity, with their peers acting as students. In the Evidence group, facilitators modeled the activities with all TAs acting as students. We used a mixed-methods research design (specifically, concurrent triangulation) to interpret pre- and postworkshop and postsemester survey responses. We found that Evidence group participants reported greater knowledge of AL after the workshop than Activity group participants. Activity group participants, on the other hand, found all of the AL techniques more useful than Evidence group participants. These results suggest that actually modeling AL techniques made them more useful to TAs than simply experiencing the same techniques as students—even with the accompanying evidence. This outcome has broad implications for how we provide professional development sessions to TAs and potentially to faculty. American Society of Microbiology 2021-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7861211/ /pubmed/33584947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2473 Text en ©2021 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work. |
spellingShingle | Research Patrick, Lorelei E. Barron, Hillary A. Brown, Julie C. Cotner, Sehoya Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title | Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title_full | Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title_fullStr | Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title_full_unstemmed | Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title_short | Building Excellence in Scientific Teaching: How Important Is the Evidence for Evidence-Based Teaching when Training STEM TAs? |
title_sort | building excellence in scientific teaching: how important is the evidence for evidence-based teaching when training stem tas? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7861211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33584947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2473 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patrickloreleie buildingexcellenceinscientificteachinghowimportantistheevidenceforevidencebasedteachingwhentrainingstemtas AT barronhillarya buildingexcellenceinscientificteachinghowimportantistheevidenceforevidencebasedteachingwhentrainingstemtas AT brownjuliec buildingexcellenceinscientificteachinghowimportantistheevidenceforevidencebasedteachingwhentrainingstemtas AT cotnersehoya buildingexcellenceinscientificteachinghowimportantistheevidenceforevidencebasedteachingwhentrainingstemtas |