Teacher Knowledge for Active-Learning Instruction: Expert-Novice Comparison Reveals Differences

被引:36
作者
Auerbach, A. J. [1 ]
Higgins, M. [1 ]
Brickman, P. [2 ]
Andrews, T. C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Georgia, Dept Genet, Athens, GA 30602 USA
[2] Univ Georgia, Dept Plant Biol, Athens, GA 30602 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
MATHEMATICS; FRAMEWORK; INVENTORY; COLLEGE; NOTICE; IMPACT; VIDEOS; TOOL;
D O I
10.1187/cbe.17-07-0149
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Active-learning strategies can improve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduates' abilities to learn fundamental concepts and skills. However, the results instructors achieve vary substantially. One explanation for this is that instructors commonly implement active learning differently than intended. An important factor affecting how instructors implement active learning is knowledge of teaching and learning. We aimed to discover knowledge that is important to effective active learning in large undergraduate courses. We developed a lesson-analysis instrument to elicit teacher knowledge, drawing on the theoretical construct of teacher noticing. We compared the knowledge used by expert (n = 14) and novice (n = 29) active-learning instructors as they analyzed lessons. Experts and novices differed in what they noticed, with experts more commonly considering how instructors hold students accountable, topic-specific student difficulties, whether the instructor elicited and responded to student thinking, and opportunities students had to generate their own ideas and work. Experts were also better able to support their lesson analyses with reasoning. This work provides foundational knowledge for the future design of preparation and support for instructors adopting active learning. Improving teacher knowledge will improve the implementation of active learning, which will be necessary to widely realize the potential benefits of active learning in undergraduate STEM.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 65 条
[1]   Declarative and Dynamic Pedagogical Content Knowledge as Elicited Through Two Video-Based Interview Methods [J].
Alonzo, Alicia C. ;
Kim, Jiwon .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, 2016, 53 (08) :1259-1286
[2]  
Ambrose S.A., 2010, HOW LEARNING WORKS
[3]   Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection [J].
Anderson, DL ;
Fisher, KM ;
Norman, GJ .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, 2002, 39 (10) :952-978
[4]   Colleagues as Change Agents: How Department Networks and Opinion Leaders Influence Teaching at a Single Research University [J].
Andrews, T. C. ;
Conaway, E. P. ;
Zhao, J. ;
Dolan, E. L. .
CBE-LIFE SCIENCES EDUCATION, 2016, 15 (02)
[5]   Active Learning Not Associated with Student Learning in a Random Sample of College Biology Courses [J].
Andrews, T. M. ;
Leonard, M. J. ;
Colgrove, C. A. ;
Kalinowski, S. T. .
CBE-LIFE SCIENCES EDUCATION, 2011, 10 (04) :394-405
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2003, Diffusion of Innovations
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1999, PERSPECTIVES ACTIVIT
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering
[9]  
Bauerle C., 2011, Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education. A call to action
[10]  
Black P., 1998, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, V5, P7, DOI [10.1080/0969595980050102, DOI 10.1080/0969595980050102]