Joinfeature
Introductory Biology Students’ Opinions on the Pivot to Crisis Distance Education in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By J. Phil Gibson and Kristen Shelton
The COVID-19 pandemic forced higher-education institutions to close campuses and pivot all face-to-face (F2F) instruction online. This transition to Crisis Distance Education (CDE) was unprecedented in scope and speed as it was implemented globally. We surveyed students in a large, introductory-level biology course to understand their opinions about the curricular changes we implemented, usefulness of resources we provided, and the extent to which they felt supported by course personnel during the transition to CDE. The survey included both Likert-scale and open-ended questions. In general, students had a positive opinion of the transition, particularly the option for synchronous or asynchronous participation in the remainder of the course. Students valued opportunities to communicate with course personnel, but gave mixed responses for whether more or less communication was desired. Students reported high use of graded resources, but low use of ungraded resources. Our results suggest that when faced with an unexpected transition to CDE, it is important to maintain regular, supportive, and synchronous communication, but also remain flexible for asynchronous participation. Grades and immediate point rewards were important factors motivating student use of e-resources and maintaining student engagement. These factors are important considerations when shifting instruction to CDE for a limited or extended time.
The COVID-19 pandemic forced higher-education institutions to close campuses and pivot all face-to-face (F2F) instruction online. This transition to Crisis Distance Education (CDE) was unprecedented in scope and speed as it was implemented globally. We surveyed students in a large, introductory-level biology course to understand their opinions about the curricular changes we implemented, usefulness of resources we provided, and the extent to which they felt supported by course personnel during the transition to CDE. The survey included both Likert-scale and open-ended questions.
The COVID-19 pandemic forced higher-education institutions to close campuses and pivot all face-to-face (F2F) instruction online. This transition to Crisis Distance Education (CDE) was unprecedented in scope and speed as it was implemented globally. We surveyed students in a large, introductory-level biology course to understand their opinions about the curricular changes we implemented, usefulness of resources we provided, and the extent to which they felt supported by course personnel during the transition to CDE. The survey included both Likert-scale and open-ended questions.
feature
Faculty Learning Communities Facilitated the Rapid Pivot to Online Teaching and Learning
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By Becky Talyn, Sara J. Callori, Karen Cerwin, Mike Chao, Kimberley R. Cousins, Carol Hood, Sally F. McGill, Anthony E. Metcalf, and Laura Woodney
Faculty learning communities (FLCs), established prepandemic to disseminate and discuss evidence-based teaching practices as part of an NSF-funded project, Investigating Student Success Using Evidence-Based Strategies-eXpanded (ISSUES-X), proved effective at facilitating learning during a pandemic. As our university made the decision to operate primarily online for the 2020–2021 academic year in response to COVID-19, the nine-facilitator ISSUES-X team supported faculty and their online teaching by offering weekly synchronous open-house video conferences and providing a one-week summer institute. The institute focused on applying principles of How People Learn (NRC, 1999) to the online environment, and intentionally modeled these pedagogical practices. Practices included: online approaches and tools to developing rapport with students; asynchronous reading and assignments sandwiched around synchronous active learning exercises over video conferencing; office hours and other support outside of regular meeting times; and routines for metacognitive reflection. Our pre-existing FLC structure allowed us to support many faculty during a time of crisis, illustrating the value of FLCs as a normative practice in academia.
Faculty learning communities (FLCs), established prepandemic to disseminate and discuss evidence-based teaching practices as part of an NSF-funded project, Investigating Student Success Using Evidence-Based Strategies-eXpanded (ISSUES-X), proved effective at facilitating learning during a pandemic.
Faculty learning communities (FLCs), established prepandemic to disseminate and discuss evidence-based teaching practices as part of an NSF-funded project, Investigating Student Success Using Evidence-Based Strategies-eXpanded (ISSUES-X), proved effective at facilitating learning during a pandemic.
Research and Teaching
Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Performance Following the Transition to Remote Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By Christine Broussard, Margaret Gough Courtney, Sarah Dunn, K. Godde, and Vanessa Preisler
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an alternative pedagogical approach to the apprenticeship model for high-impact research immersion experiences. A W.M. Keck-funded Research Immersion Program at a Hispanic-serving institution in Southern California proposed to expand the benefits of the CURE model by developing lower- and upper- division CUREs across a variety of STEM (biology, computer science, mathematics, and physics) and associated disciplines (anthropology, kinesiology, sociology, rhetoric, and communications). A subset of these courses moved completely online mid-semester of spring 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of the study presented here is to understand the overall experiences of students and faculty members in the CURE courses in light of the transition to online learning. We present data here that show gains in skills development and understanding research design and stability in science opinions and self-perception in the spring 2020 semester, despite the transition to remote learning. We also report faculty perceptions regarding the challenges, supports, and successes of transitioning and implementing their CUREs in a remote learning environment.
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an alternative pedagogical approach to the apprenticeship model for high-impact research immersion experiences. A W.M. Keck-funded Research Immersion Program at a Hispanic-serving institution in Southern California proposed to expand the benefits of the CURE model by developing lower- and upper- division CUREs across a variety of STEM (biology, computer science, mathematics, and physics) and associated disciplines (anthropology, kinesiology, sociology, rhetoric, and communications).
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an alternative pedagogical approach to the apprenticeship model for high-impact research immersion experiences. A W.M. Keck-funded Research Immersion Program at a Hispanic-serving institution in Southern California proposed to expand the benefits of the CURE model by developing lower- and upper- division CUREs across a variety of STEM (biology, computer science, mathematics, and physics) and associated disciplines (anthropology, kinesiology, sociology, rhetoric, and communications).
Research and Teaching
Pandemic-Inspired Insights
What College Instructors Learned From Teaching When COVID-19 Began
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By Tessa Andrews and Kathryn Green
College instructors faced a rapid transition to remote instruction in spring 2020, and with it a host of new teaching challenges. This qualitative study investigates what 26 college biology instructors learned about students and teaching during this time. We used semi-structured interviews and content analysis to identify instructor learning that is relevant beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants described two related insights about students: They became more aware that students’ lives outside the classroom are complex, and they realized that their campus can act as a neutralizing space for students. Participants also reconsidered how they assess student learning. New realizations about students and teaching have the potential to impact teaching practices when in-person instruction resumes. Especially promising is an increased focus on students as individuals and the recognition that not all students experience life and courses in the same way. We relate findings to existing research and propose self-reflection questions that these findings raised for us.
College instructors faced a rapid transition to remote instruction in spring 2020, and with it a host of new teaching challenges. This qualitative study investigates what 26 college biology instructors learned about students and teaching during this time. We used semi-structured interviews and content analysis to identify instructor learning that is relevant beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
College instructors faced a rapid transition to remote instruction in spring 2020, and with it a host of new teaching challenges. This qualitative study investigates what 26 college biology instructors learned about students and teaching during this time. We used semi-structured interviews and content analysis to identify instructor learning that is relevant beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
Research and Teaching
STEM Scholars’ Sense of Community During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By Jennifer McGee and Rahman Tashakkori
The purpose of this study was to investigate sense of community (SOC) within a STEM learning community during the COVID-19 pandemic. The STEM learning community that was the setting for this study is funded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) S-STEM grant. A mixed methods design was used to investigate levels of SOC and changes in SOC from December 2019 to December 2020. Scholars completed the Sense of Community Index (SCI-2) (Chavis et al., 1986) during this time along with answering questions about their experience in the program. Data showed evidence of a slight increase in SOC, when compared to prepandemic SOC. Three themes emerged from the qualitative data to support this finding: community as access, community as sanctuary, and community as sacred. When data were coded for the presence of these themes across time, a slight decrease in the focus on community as access appeared from December 2019 to December 2020, but there were increases in the focus on sanctuary and sacredness of the community. Triangulation of the data provides evidence for this STEM learning community as an important support system for students during this time of unprecedented uncertainty in higher education.
The purpose of this study was to investigate sense of community (SOC) within a STEM learning community during the COVID-19 pandemic. The STEM learning community that was the setting for this study is funded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) S-STEM grant. A mixed methods design was used to investigate levels of SOC and changes in SOC from December 2019 to December 2020. Scholars completed the Sense of Community Index (SCI-2) (Chavis et al., 1986) during this time along with answering questions about their experience in the program.
The purpose of this study was to investigate sense of community (SOC) within a STEM learning community during the COVID-19 pandemic. The STEM learning community that was the setting for this study is funded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) S-STEM grant. A mixed methods design was used to investigate levels of SOC and changes in SOC from December 2019 to December 2020. Scholars completed the Sense of Community Index (SCI-2) (Chavis et al., 1986) during this time along with answering questions about their experience in the program.
Research and Teaching
Comparison of Student Outcomes and Evaluations in Hybrid Versus Face-to-Face Anatomy and Physiology I Courses
Journal of College Science Teaching—September/October 2021 (Volume 51, Issue 1)
By Sanjeeda Jafar and Viji Sitther
In this study, two sections of undergraduate Introductory Anatomy and Physiology taught in the traditional face-to-face format (n = 58) was compared to two hybrid classes (n = 38) using the flipped-classroom model taught by the same instructor. Formative and summative examination scores were compared to determine the effect of the different learning methods. Our results revealed no significant difference between the mean scores of summative examinations and between the traditional and hybrid classes (p > 0.05). Of five quizzes administered, students taught in the traditional format scored significantly higher in only one of five quizzes. In addition, comparison of in-class laboratory examination scores showed no difference (P > 0.05) in three out of four. However, student evaluations of the hybrid classes were more positive as determined by end-of-course evaluations (4.54 versus 2.9 on a 1–5 Likert scale). This is the first study that compares a hybrid versus a traditional science course at a historically black college or university. We conclude that comparison of student outcomes in traditional versus hybrid Anatomy and Physiology I classes were similar. At a time when all institutions of higher learning have adopted online learning and distance learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this is a timely comparison.
In this study, two sections of undergraduate Introductory Anatomy and Physiology taught in the traditional face-to-face format (n = 58) was compared to two hybrid classes (n = 38) using the flipped-classroom model taught by the same instructor. Formative and summative examination scores were compared to determine the effect of the different learning methods. Our results revealed no significant difference between the mean scores of summative examinations and between the traditional and hybrid classes (p > 0.05).
In this study, two sections of undergraduate Introductory Anatomy and Physiology taught in the traditional face-to-face format (n = 58) was compared to two hybrid classes (n = 38) using the flipped-classroom model taught by the same instructor. Formative and summative examination scores were compared to determine the effect of the different learning methods. Our results revealed no significant difference between the mean scores of summative examinations and between the traditional and hybrid classes (p > 0.05).
cross-curricular connections
Science and Language Shifts in a Diverse Fourth-Grade Classroom
Science and Children—September/October 2021 (Volume 59, Issue 1)
By Alison Haas, Jennifer Whitten, and Carol Biskupic Knight
engineering encounters
A Thrilling Roller-coaster Ride
The Ups and Downs of Learning Force and Motion: A Fifth-Grade Learning Progression
Science and Children—September/October 2021 (Volume 59, Issue 1)
By Dena Harshbarger and Joseph Wiechman
start with phenomena
Learning the Temperature Dependency of Matter by Making Ice Cream
Science and Children—September/October 2021 (Volume 59, Issue 1)
By Patrick Brown
Teaching Teachers
Not Your Average Parachute
How we transformed our parachutes investigation to capture the vision of the Next Generation Science Standards
Science and Children—September/October 2021 (Volume 59, Issue 1)
By Kelsey Lipsitz, Fred Stein, Lynn Rankin, Barry Kluger-Bell, and Rachel Jordan