Search

Abstract Background It is well established in the literature that active learning instruction in introductory STEM courses results in many desired student outcomes. Yet, regular use of high-quality active learning is not the norm in many STEM departments. Using results of a national survey, we identified 16 departments where multiple instructors reported using high levels of active learning in their introductory chemistry, mathematics, or physics courses. We conducted interviews with 27 instructors in these 16 departments to better understand the characteristics of such departments. Results Using grounded theory methodology, we developed a model that highlights relevant characteristics of departments with high use of active learning instruction in their introductory courses. According to this model, there are four main, interconnected characteristics of such departments: motivated people, knowledge about active learning, opportunities, and cultures and structures that support active learning. These departments have one or more people who are motivated to promote the use of active learning. These motivated people have knowledge about active learning as well as access to opportunities to promote the use of active learning. Finally, these departments have cultures and structures that support the use of active learning. In these departments, there is a positive feedback loop that works iteratively over time, where motivated people shape cultures/structures and these cultures/structures in turn increase the number and level of commitment of the motivated people. A second positive feedback loop was found between the positive outcome of using active learning instruction and the strengthening of cultures/structures supportive of active learning. Conclusions According to the model, there are two main take-away messages for those interested in promoting the use of active learning. The first is that all four components of the model are important. A weak or missing component may limit the desired outcome. The second is that desired outcomes are obtained and strengthened over time through two positive feedback loops. Thus, there is a temporal aspect to change. In all of the departments that were part of our study, the changes took at minimum several years to enact. While our model was developed using only high-use of active learning departments and future work is needed to develop the model into a full change theory, our results do suggest that change efforts may be made more effective by increasing the robustness of the four components and the connections between them.

Abstract Background We present an analysis of interviews with 27 self-identified progressive white-male physics faculty and graduate students discussing race and gender in physics. White cis men dominate most STEM fields and are particularly overrepresented in positions of status and influence (i.e., full professors, chairs, deans, etc.), positioning them as a potentially powerful demographic for enacting systemic reform. Despite their proclaimed outrage at and interest in addressing inequity, they frequently engage in patterns of belief, speech and (in)action that ultimately support the status quo of white male privilege in opposition to their intentions. Results The white male physicists we interviewed used numerous discourses which support racist and sexist norms and position them as powerless to disrupt their own privilege. We present and discuss three overarching themes, seen in our data, demonstrating how highly educated, well-intentioned people of privilege maintain their power and privilege despite their own intentions: (1) denying inequity is physically near them; (2) locating causes of inequity in large societal systems over which they have little influence; and (3) justifying inaction. Conclusions Despite being progressively minded and highly educated, these men are frequently complicit in racism and sexism. We end with recommendations for helping cis men engage the power they hold to better work with marginalized people to disrupt inequity.

Abstract Background Repeated calls to diversify the population of students earning undergraduate degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields have noted the greater diversity of community college students and their potential to thus have an impact on the racial/ethnic composition of 4-year degree earners. In this paper, we investigate barriers and supports to Black women’s success in STEM, using longitudinal interview data with seven Black women who were enrolled at community colleges and stated an interest in majoring in STEM at 4-year institutions. Results Our findings highlight a contrast between community colleges and universities. At community colleges, Black women were able to form supportive relationships with professors and peers, downplayed the potential of racism and sexism to derail their STEM ambitions, and saw little to no impact of bias on their educational experiences. Those students who transferred characterized university climates very differently, as they struggled to form supportive relationships and experienced racism and sexism from professors and peers. Conclusions We conclude using Patricia Hill Collins’ Domains of Power framework to categorize students’ experiences, then end with recommendations for change that will result in less alienating experiences for Black women, among other minoritized students.

Abstract Background Adoption and use of effective, research-based instructional strategies (RBISs) for STEM education is less widespread than hoped. To promote further use of RBISs, the propagation paradigm suggests that developers work with potential adopters during the development process, and provide ongoing support after adoption. This article investigates the impact of a faculty online learning community (FOLC) as a professional development mechanism for supporting faculty adopting a research-based curriculum. A FOLC uses video conference technology and online platforms to connect geographically dispersed faculty with similar backgrounds (e.g., physics faculty) and supports their teaching development. In the context of a specific FOLC, this article seeks to determine the outcomes the FOLC achieves, and how. Results Analysis of a FOLC meeting identified opportunities for rich, complex social interaction centered on the research-based curriculum. By functioning as a sounding board for ideas, a space to share experiences, a source of affective support, and a venue for troubleshooting, the FOLC mediates the achievement of a range of outcomes related to implementation of the curriculum. Survey results indicate that members feel a sense of community in the FOLC and that it provides encouragement through teaching challenges. Further results indicate participants’ increased confidence in using the curriculum; familiarity with the curriculum structure and content; increased knowledge of pedagogical techniques; reflection on teaching practices in the curriculum; and use of pedagogical techniques aligned with the curriculum’s core principles. Emerging evidence supports more distal outcomes, including student learning, persistence in using the curriculum, reflection in teaching practice across courses taught, and use of research-based pedagogy in other courses. Conclusions The propagation paradigm emphasizes the need for ongoing support for adopters of RBISs. The FOLC model provides participating faculty with ongoing support through participation in a community and is an effective support mechanism for adopters of a research-based curriculum. In this study, FOLC members are increasing their knowledge and use of pedagogical techniques in the curriculum-specific course and beyond. This is facilitated by the opportunities in the FOLC for troubleshooting, idea sharing, and receiving encouragement through challenges. This model has the potential to support adopters of additional educational innovations.

Abstract Background It is well-documented that experiences in STEM courses for women and students of color are different from the experiences of White men. As part of a larger interview study, 183 college seniors from diverse gender and race backgrounds were asked their thoughts on whether the experience of being a STEM major was different for people of different races and genders. We use a framework of “science as White property”, derived from critical race theory, to frame this study and results. Results White men were largely unaware of any impact of race or gender. In contrast, women of color overwhelmingly report, consistent with results from a large body of prior research, that both race and gender impact their experiences as STEM majors. Students who acknowledged race and gender impacts did not always attribute these impacts to cultural or systemic factors (i.e., some reported women are underrepresented because they are less interested in STEM rather than a structural reason). Impacts identified that were attributable to systemic factors included impacts related to being a demographic minority (i.e., intimidation, feeling out of place, feeling pressure to work harder) and/or discrimination (i.e., job discrimination, bias against women or people of color and cultural assumptions implying the superiority of White people and men). A small number of students (mostly White women) stated that women or people of color benefit from their underrepresented status, often attributing this benefit to a perception of extra encouragement and opportunities. A common theme across categorizations was that women and students of color work harder than men and White people either because they are perceived to be harder workers or as a response to the sexism and racism they encounter. Conclusions We found that White men are largely unaware of the impacts of race or gender on the pursuit of a STEM degree. Additionally, with the exception of women of color, students are less likely to perceive race as having an impact on the experiences of students than gender. We conclude with a discussion of implications for future work related to gender and race representation in STEM.

Abstract Background Women and students of color are widely underrepresented in the majority of STEM fields. In order to investigate this underrepresentation, we interviewed over 200 male and female college seniors, primarily women and people of color, who either majored in STEM or started but dropped a STEM major. Here, we focus on one section of the longer interview that focused on students’ perceptions of professor care as well as perceived and preferred instruction style. Additionally, we look at correlations between professor care, course interactivity, and sense of belonging. In our analysis, we examine student responses through the lens of gender, race, and their intersections. Results We found that white women perceived their STEM professors cared about them and their learning the most while women of color reported the least perceived care. Notably, men, regardless of race, reported similar perceptions of professor care. We found that students commonly report their STEM courses were lecture-based but say they would prefer more active approaches. In particular, we found that women who left STEM majors reported more lecture-based instruction while stating the highest preference for active learning environments. We found that perceiving their professors cared was related to a greater sense of belonging in STEM. Additionally, we found that students who reported active classrooms also reported more professor care in their STEM field. Conclusions Our findings indicate that active teaching environments may positively impact students’ sense of belonging and desire to continue in STEM and that this impact may be higher for underrepresented students.

Six common beliefs about the usage of active learning in introductory STEM courses are investigated using survey data from 3769 instructors. Three beliefs focus on contextual factors: class size, classroom setup, and teaching evaluations; three focus on individual factors: security of employment, research activity, and prior exposure. The analysis indicates that instructors in all situations can and do employ active learning in their courses. However, with the exception of security of employment, trends in the data are consistent with beliefs about the impact of these factors on usage of active learning. We discuss implications of these results for institutional and departmental policies to facilitate the use of active learning.

Abstract Background Women and students of color are widely underrepresented in most STEM fields. In order to investigate this underrepresentation, we interviewed 201 college seniors, primarily women and people of color, who either majored in STEM or started but dropped a STEM major. Here we discuss one section of the longer interview that focused on students’ sense of belonging, which has been found to be related to retention. In our analysis, we examine the intersections of race and gender with students’ sense of belonging, a topic largely absent from the current literature. Results We found that white men were most likely to report a sense of belonging whereas women of color were the least likely. Further, we found that representation within one’s STEM sub-discipline, namely biology versus the physical sciences, impacts sense of belonging for women. Four key factors were found to contribute to sense of belonging for all students interviewed: interpersonal relationships, perceived competence, personal interest, and science identity. Conclusions Our findings indicate that students who remain in STEM majors report a greater sense of belonging than those who leave STEM. Additionally, we found that students from underrepresented groups are less likely to feel they belong. These findings highlight structural and cultural features of universities, as well as STEM curricula and pedagogy, that continue to privilege white males.

A survey of 722 physics faculty conducted in 2008 found that many physics instructors had knowledge of research-based instructional strategies (RBISs), were interested in using more, but often discontinued use after trying. Considerable effort has been made during the decade following 2008 to develop and disseminate RBISs in physics as well as change the culture within the physics community to value RBIS use and other forms of student-centered instruction. This paper uses data from a 2019 survey of 1176 physics instructors to understand the current state of RBIS use in college-level introductory physics, thus allowing us to better understand some of the impacts of these efforts on physics instruction. Results show that self-reported knowledge and use of RBISs has increased considerably and discontinuation is now relatively low. However, although the percentage of time lecturing is less than 10 years ago, many instructors still engage in substantial lecturing (i.e., more than one-third of class time). Relatedly, we find that the majority of RBIS use centers on pedagogies designed to supplement a primarily lecture-based classroom rather than pedagogies designed to support a primarily active learning classroom. This suggests that the physics education research community and beyond has done well promoting knowledge about RBISs and inspiring instructors to try RBISs in their courses. But, there is still room to improve. Based on available evidence about effective instructional practices, we recommend that change agents focus on supporting instructors to increase the percent of class time in active learning and to implement higher impact strategies.

Many physics faculty are aware of and interested in using research-based instructional strategies. However, knowledge and motivation are not sufficient to support successful and sustained adoption. To address this problem, we present a faculty online learning community (FOLC) model for educational change and describe its application (the New Faculty Workshop FOLC, NFW-FOLC) to provide a year of support to new faculty following attendance at the Physics and Astronomy New Faculty Workshop. FOLCs are an extension of the faculty learning community model. Here we present the theoretical underpinnings of the general FOLC model, the design principles of our particular NFW-FOLCs, and the learning objectives for NFW-FOLC participants. We demonstrate the efficacy of our NFW-FOLCs by analyzing postexperience interviews with participants from the first four NFW-FOLC cohorts. The primary motivation given by faculty for joining our FOLCs is to improve their teaching as they learn more about teaching strategies, get implementation help, and connect to a broader community. These motivations align with our NFW-FOLC design principles. Participants overwhelmingly report the experience was valuable and impacted them positively with the most commonly reported impacts of NFW-FOLC membership being changes in their implementation of teaching strategies, increased reflection about teaching, increased confidence as teachers, increased knowledge about teaching, benefits to their students, time saved, and gaining a resource. The reported impacts provide evidence that the NFW-FOLC is successfully meeting its goals. We argue that the reported impacts are uniquely supported by the FOLC model of professional development. We advance FOLCs as a generalizable model of professional development offering a number of advantages over traditional reform efforts as well as traditional Faculty Learning Communities.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] The lack of knowledge about how to effectively spread and sustain the use of research-based instructional strategies is currently a significant barrier to the improvement of undergraduate physics education. In this paper we address this lack of knowledge by reporting on an interview study of 35 physics faculty, of varying institution types, who were self-reported users of, former users of, or knowledgeable nonusers of the research-based instructional strategy Peer Instruction. Interview questions included in this analysis focused on the faculty’s experiences, knowledge, and use of Peer Instruction, along with general questions about current and past teaching methods used by the interviewee. The primary findings include the following: (i) Faculty self-reported user status is an unreliable measure of their actual practice. (ii) Faculty generally modify specific instructional strategies and may modify out essential components. (iii) Faculty are often unaware of the essential features of an instructional strategy they claim to know about or use. (iv) Informal social interactions provide a significant communication channel in the dissemination process, in contrast to the formal avenues of workshops, papers, websites, etc., often promoted by change agents, and (v) experience with research-based strategies as a graduate student or through curriculum development work may be highly impactful. These findings indicate that educational transformation can be better facilitated by improving communication with faculty, supporting effective modification by faculty during implementation, and acknowledging and understanding the large impact of informal social interactions as a mode of dissemination.

While many innovative teaching strategies exist, integration into undergraduate science teaching has been frustratingly slow. This study aims to understand the low uptake of research-based instructional innovations by studying 21 successful implementations of the Student Centered Active Learning with Upside-down Pedagogies (SCALE-UP) instructional reform. SCALE-UP significantly restructures the classroom environment and pedagogy to promote highly active and interactive instruction. Although originally designed for university introductory physics courses, SCALE-UP has spread to many other disciplines at hundreds of departments around the world. This study reports findings from in-depth, open-ended interviews with 21 key contact people involved with successful secondary implementations of SCALE-UP throughout the United States. We defined successful implementations as those who restructured their pedagogy and classroom and sustained and/or spread the change. Interviews were coded to identify the most common enabling and challenging factors during reform implementation and compared to the theoretical framework of Kotter’s 8-step Change Model. The most common enabling influences that emerged are documenting and leveraging evidence of local success, administrative support, interaction with outside SCALE-UP user(s), and funding. Many challenges are linked to the lack of these enabling factors including difficulty finding funding, space, and administrative and/or faculty support for reform. Our focus on successful secondary implementations meant that most interviewees were able to overcome challenges. Presentation of results is illuminated with case studies, quotes, and examples that can help secondary implementers with SCALE-UP reform efforts specifically. We also discuss the implications for policy makers, researchers, and the higher education community concerned with initiating structural change.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] In order to promote sustained and impactful educational transformation, it is essential for change agents to understand more about faculty perceptions associated with either adopting or not adopting a research-based instructional strategy (RBIS). In this paper, we use interviews with 35 physics faculty to examine barriers and affordances to the use of the research-based instructional strategy of Peer Instruction. We found that the most common reasons faculty give for aligning their instruction with Peer Instruction is that it is not lecture and they have had positive experiences with Peer Instruction. The most common reasons faculty give for not using Peer Instruction are concerns about the time it will take, the loss of content coverage, and having had bad experiences with it. Additionally, we found the perceived barriers to be very different depending on whether the interviewee was a user of Peer Instruction or not, with nonusers being more concerned with time and users being more concerned with implementation difficulties. It is important for change agents to understand and address concerns faculty have about implementing research-based instructional strategies. Based on these results we offer four recommendations for those interested in promoting educational transformation toward research-based instructional strategies: (1) do not waste a lot of time criticizing lecture-based instruction and convincing faculty of the value of research-based strategies (they are already dissatisfied with lecture), (2) understand and address concerns faculty have about implementing active learning techniques, (3) focus on supporting and encouraging faculty experiences with RBIS, (4) address concerns faculty new to RBIS have about the time and energy needed to change.

We present and describe the development of a framework for assessing or categorizing instructional practices and related conceptions in the context of introductory physics instruction. The purpose of the framework is for articulating practices and conceptions of individual instructors or of curricula. It was developed based on the research literature and interviews with physics faculty and contains ideas with widespread acceptance as well as some outside mainstream rhetoric. We provide an example of how this framework can be applied by using it to categorize aspects of three well-known research-based curricula. The results of this categorization highlight areas that are common in research-based curricular designs and other areas that are less embraced but worthy of consideration.

Ideally, instructors and their institutions would have a shared set of metrics by which they determine teaching effectiveness. And, ideally, these metrics would overlap with research findings on measuring teaching effectiveness. Unfortunately, the current situation at most institutions is far from this ideal. As part of a larger interview study, 72 physics instructors were asked to describe how they and their institutions assess teaching effectiveness. Results suggest that institutions typically base most or all of their assessment of teaching effectiveness on student evaluations of teaching. Instructors, on the other hand, base most or all of their assessment of teaching effectiveness on student exam performance and nonsystematic formative assessments. Few institutions and instructors use assessment practices suggested by the research literature. In general, instructors are much more positive about the methods they use to evaluate their teaching than the methods their institutions use to evaluate their teaching. Both instructors and institutions could benefit from broadening the assessment sources they use to evaluate teaching effectiveness through increased use of standardized measures based on student learning and greater reliance on systematic formative assessment.

During the fall of 2008 a web survey, designed to collect information about pedagogical knowledge and practices, was completed by a representative sample of 722 physics faculty across the United States (50.3% response rate). This paper presents partial results to describe how 20 potential predictor variables correlate with faculty knowledge about and use of research-based instructional strategies (RBIS). The innovation-decision process was conceived of in terms of four stages: knowledge versus no knowledge, trial versus no trial, continuation versus discontinuation, and high versus low use. The largest losses occur at the continuation stage, with approximately 1/3 of faculty discontinuing use of all RBIS after trying one or more of these strategies. Nine of the predictor variables were statistically significant for at least one of these stages when controlling for other variables. Knowledge and/or use of RBIS are significantly correlated with reading teaching-related journals, attending talks and workshops related to teaching, attending the physics and astronomy new faculty workshop, having an interest in using more RBIS, being female, being satisfied with meeting instructional goals, and having a permanent, full-time position. The types of variables that are significant at each stage vary substantially. These results suggest that common dissemination strategies are good at creating knowledge about RBIS and motivation to try a RBIS, but more work is needed to support faculty during implementation and continued use of RBIS. Also, contrary to common assumptions, faculty age, institutional type, and percentage of job related to teaching were not found to be barriers to knowledge or use at any stage. High research productivity and large class sizes were not found to be barriers to use of at least some RBIS.