Pixel International Conferences

Joan M. Esson, Kathryn Plank, Anna Young, Paul Wendel

Otterbein University

United States of America

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

This paper describes reasons to support and scaffold faculty development based on results of a study of STEM teaching and learning at a comprehensive university in the United States. A survey was administered to faculty that probed their awareness and adoption of evidence-based practices, instructional goals, and satisfaction reaching those goals. Faculty interviews and focus groups were also conducted. Awareness and use of evidence-based practices was found to vary by faculty status and gender. Reasons for adopting different teaching practices also varied by gender. Although awareness of practices did not vary by discipline, both the survey and focus groups revealed that the use of teaching practices differs by discipline, as does departmental culture and support.  With respect to goals, while problem-solving and conceptual understanding were highly important, only 4% of faculty were very satisfied that these goals were met, and choice of teaching methods did not align with these goals.

Additionally, extensive classroom observations of over 180 courses using the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) were completed, and revealed a moderate level of student interaction (faculty lectured an average of 59% of the two-minute time intervals sampled, while students listened/took notes and worked in groups 83% and 14%, respectively).  Additionally, the classroom observations further supported the differences found between genders with female faculty having students work in groups more (14.7% versus 7.3% for males), move through these groups more (18.0% compared to 8.6%), and had students listen/take notes less (74.5% compared to 84.7%).  Further, faculty varied in their ability to accurately self-report their use of certain methods. For example, 70% of faculty correctly self-reported use of group learning strategies, but only 15% of faculty accurately reported use of simulations and demonstrations.  Additionally, examination of classroom observations and faculty interviews revealed that faculty are better able to describe their own behaviors than those of their students.

Based on these findings, faculty development can be designed to consider faculty differences, the student’s perspective, and alignment with instructional goals.  Supported by NSF #1347234.