1 / 35

Strategies for Engaging Learners in Biology Course

Explore diverse approaches to learning in a large-enrollment biology course, focusing on students' motivations, challenges, and learning gains.

jrodrigues
Download Presentation

Strategies for Engaging Learners in Biology Course

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Strategies for engaging learners in a large-enrollment biology course: addressing diverse approaches to learning Kristen Short Assistant Professor of Biology Manchester University

  2. Overview • Background information and rationale • Defining and measuring diversity • Results of data collected in my classroom • Implications for pedagogy • Conclusions

  3. What is diversity? • Age (traditional vs. non-traditional) • Race/ethnicity • Gender • First generation college students • Learning modalities • Approach to learning, motivation

  4. Motivations for learning(Martin & Saljo 1976, Ramsden 1988, Biggs 1987 & 1993, Entwistle 1981) • Deep learners: learn for the sake of learning • Intrinsically motivated • Tend to embrace and enjoy challenge • Surface learners: avoid failure • Extrinsically motivated • Avoid challenge at all cost • Strategic learners: earn good grades • Extrinsically motivated • Organized form of surface learning • Tend to avoid challenge, especially if it is incompatible with good grades

  5. Connects concepts within/between courses Relates learning to everyday experiences Finds meaning in learning Sees concepts as isolated pieces of information Does not relate learning to experience Memorizes meaningless information A deep learner… A surface learner…

  6. Deep vs. surface learning • Not really a learner attribute • Approach to learning • May be driven by • Learner preferences • Past learning experiences • Classroom environment • Pedagogy

  7. Why I care… • AAAS in Vision and Change has called for more deep learning in science courses • Deficiencies of surface approaches recognized in medical, pharmacy, law school • PBL and case studies now promote deep learning in those contexts • Does a student’s approach to learning affect how he/she responds to my teaching methods?

  8. Main questions • Is there a relationship between approach to learning and learning gains? • Is there a relationship between approach to learning and response to teaching strategies?

  9. My molecular biology class profile: 52 students All science majors

  10. Assessing approach to learning • Study process questionnaire sometimes used (Biggs 1987, 2001) • My assessment for this course: 6 questions • Students rated: • Learning in this course • Response to challenge • Questioning techniques • Views of learning • Students given score 8-24 points • Lower third = surface; upper third = deep

  11. How would you describe your learning in this course? • I have memorized information that never really made sense and was meaningless to me • I have memorized information that made sense at the time, but have quickly forgotten it • I have understood information, but could never apply it to new situations • I have understood and been able to apply my knowledge to new situations

  12. In this course I • Asked lots of questions that helped me to see connections between real life and course content • Asked lots of questions to try to further understand course content • Asked lots of questions about what would be on the test • Did not ask questions

  13. My view of learning is • I love learning just for the sake of learning • I learn enough to get the grade I want to earn • I learn the bare minimum to scrape by

  14. When I encountered challenge in this course, I typically • Felt invigorated; this motivates me to learn • Felt excited but also nervous about how it would affect my grades • Felt annoyed; I would rather not deal with it • Felt defeated; challenge shakes my confidence and makes me less motivated to learn

  15. Classifying learners • Approach to learning: • Deep N = 11 • Strategic N = 32 • Surface N = 4 • Effort: • 3 questions about hours spent preparing, effort during class, and studying for tests • deeper learners are harder workers, with some exceptions (Spearman r = 0.43, P = 0.0012) • Confidence: • 2 questions about confidence in biology, and confidence in this course

  16. Assessing Learning Gains • 38 content questions • Multiple choice • Answer choices equally represented • Tested low to high levels of thinking • Asked on first and last day of class • No studying

  17. Results: learning gains • On both pre- and post-tests, students knew significantly more than expected by random guessing (9.5) • Pre-test mean = 13.5 (t51 = 10.5; P < 0.001) • Post-test mean = 22 (t48= 13.9; P < 0.001) • Significant increase in content knowledge over time (t48 = 9.36; P <0.001)

  18. Were learning gains correlated with other factors? • Learner approach score not correlated with learning gains (change pre-post), despite correlation with content knowledge at both time points individually (Pre: Spearman r = 0.29, P = 0.04; Post: Spearman r = 0.33, P = 0.02)

  19. Were learning gains correlated with other factors? • Effort? No (Spearman r = -0.03) • Confidence at the end of the course? Yes (Spearman r = 0.38, P = 0.007) • Lower confidence, lower learning gains

  20. Results: confidence Significant decrease over time (t51 = -4.29; P<0.0001) Significant correlation between learner approach score and change in confidence (Spearman r = 0.43; P = 0.0014) Significant correlation between learner approach score and confidence at end of course (Spearman r = 0.47, P = 0.0004)

  21. Teaching strategies • Does a student’s approach to learning affect how he/she responds to teaching methods? • Do surface/strategic learners prefer passive learning? • Are some methods better than others for engaging surface/strategic learners?

  22. Active learning: Student-centered Students are talking Students construct knowledge Passive learning: Teacher-centered Teacher is talking Students receive knowledge Active versus passive learning

  23. The learning activity that… • Deep learners had relatively even distribution for both • Strategic learners showed large shift from lecture (45%) to more even distribution, with case studies being slightly preferred (32%) • Surface learners showed no difference (preferred lecture for both)

  24. When we did XXX in class, I • Really enjoyed this because it gave me the chance to engage in my own learning • Enjoyed this but would have been just as happy to have Dr. Short do it for us/hear a lecture • Did not see the relevance of this activity

  25. Concept mapping • Construct a concept map using the following terms: • Helicase • Telomerase • Primase • Hydrogen bonds • Phosphodiester bonds • …

  26. Concept Mapping • 50% of students enjoyed increased engagement • Correlation with learner approach (Spearman r = 0.53, P = 0.0002)

  27. Case Studies • A form of PBL • Collection of cases: http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/about/ • Used DNP case study to teach cellular respiration

  28. Case Studies • 51% of students enjoyed increased engagement • No correlation with learner approach

  29. Peer Discussion

  30. Peer Discussion • 69% of students enjoyed increased engagement • No correlation with learner approach

  31. Clickers • Real-time assessment • Low-stakes opportunity for engagement • Practice questions

  32. Clickers • 89% of students enjoyed increased engagement • Correlation with learner approach (Spearman r = 0.30, P = 0.04)

  33. Active/passive score correlated with learner approach: deep learners more receptive to active learning (Spearman r = 0.40, P = 0.0058)

  34. Conclusions: student diversity • Surface/strategic learners are losing confidence • More confidence-building activities • More formative assessment • Deeper learners are more receptive to active learning, but most realize some benefit • More case studies, PBL • More explicit teaching philosophy • Of methods I tested, clickers were highly successful with all groups

  35. Remaining questions • Learning retention differences? • Approach to learning • Teaching strategies • Do approaches to learning change from first day to last day? • Are changes in approach to learning influenced by grouping strategies?

More Related