Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research

Mahsa Kazempour; Aidin Amirshokoohi; Lara Goudsouzian

doi:10.29333/ijese/14339

Full Text (PDF)

Mahsa Kazempour ¹ ^* , Aidin Amirshokoohi ² , Lara Goudsouzian ²

More Detail

¹ Penn State University-Berks, Reading, PA, USA² DeSales University, Center Valley, PA, USA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Over the past few decades, we have witnessed an increasing emphasis on the significance of restructuring and revolutionizing undergraduate science education in achieving the goal of preparing a scientifically literate population and safeguarding our democracy and the future of STEM workforce. This paper reports on a collaborative action research conducted to reform and modify an introductory undergraduate biology course taught by the third author with professional support and feedback provided by the other authors. The findings will be discussed in the form of a case study focusing on the initial features of the course, continual feedback and professional growth, modifications to the course, and future plans for further revising the course.

Keywords

college science course
college science teaching
biology education
action research
course revision

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED, 2024, Volume 20, Issue 1, Article No: e2403

https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

Publication date: 08 Mar 2024

Article Views: 224

Article Downloads: 144

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

AAAS. (2009). Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: A call to action. American Association for the Advancement of Science. http://www.visionandchange.org
Arthurs, L. A., & Kreager, B. Z. (2017). An integrative review of in-class activities that enable active learning in college science classroom settings. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 2073-2091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1363925
Baldwin, R. G. (2009). The climate for undergraduate teaching and learning in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2009(117), 9-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.340
Ballen, C. J., Wieman, C., Salehi, S., Searle, J. B., & Zamudio, K. R. (2017). Enhancing diversity in undergraduate science: Self-efficacy drives performance gains with active learning. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 16(4), ar56. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-12-0344
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 13-25.
Beichner, R. J., Saul, J. M., Abbott, D. S., Morse, J. J., Deardorff, D. L., Allain, R. J., Bonham, S., Dancy, M. H., & Risley, J. S. (2007). Student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (SCALE-UP) project. In E. F. Redish, & P. J. Cooney (Eds.), Reviews in physics education research (PER): Research-based reform in university physics. American Association of Physics Teachers.
Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. State University of New York at Stony Brook for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED424840
Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives, and tensions with professional identity? CBE–Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339-346. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163
Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Heinemann Publications.
Capobianco, B. M. (2007). Science teachers’ attempts at integrating feminist pedagogy through collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20120
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education knowledge and action research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203496626
Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249
Dancy, M., Henderson, C., & Turpen, C. (2016). How faculty learn about and implement research-based instructional strategies: The case of peer instruction. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12, 010110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110
Donovan, M. S., & Bransford, J. D. (2005). How students learn–Science in the classroom. National Academy Press.
Eddy, S. L., & Hogan, K. A. (2014). Getting under the hood: how and for whom does increasing course structure work? CBE–Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 453-468. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050
Feldman, A., & Minstrell, J. M. (2000). Action research as a research methodology for the study of the teaching and learning of science. https://people.umass.edu/~afeldman/ActionResearchPapers/FeldmanMinstrell2000.PDF
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. PNAS, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332(6034), 1213-1216. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820
Hanson, S. C., & Moser, S. C. (2003). Reflections on a dscipline-wide Project: Developing active learning modules on the human dimensions of global change. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27(1), 17-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309826032000062441
Hativa, N. (1995). What is taught in an undergraduate lecture? Differences between a matched pair of pure and applied disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1995(64), 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219956405
Kazempour, M., & Amirshokoohi, A. (2013). Reforming an undergraduate environmental science course for nonscience majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(2), 54-59. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43631072
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin Press.
Luft, J. A., Kurdziel, J. P., Roehrig, G. H., & Turner, J. (2004). Growing a garden without water: Graduate teaching assistants in introductory science laboratories at a doctoral/research university. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(3), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20004
National Science Foundation. (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A report on its review of undergraduate education by the Advisory Committee to the National Science Foundation, Directorate for Education and Human Resources. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98128/contents.pdf
NRC. (1996). From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9128Top of FormBottom of Form
NRC. (1997). Science teacher preparation in an era of standards-based reform. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9078
NRC. (2003). BIO2010: Transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10497
Olson, S., & Riordan, D. G. (2012). Engage to Excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Report to the President. Executive Office of the President. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf
Seymour, E. (2002). Tracking the processes of change in US undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Science Education, 86(1), 79-105. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1044
Siebert E. D., & McIntosh W. J. (2001). College pathways to the science education standards. NSTA Press.
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. L., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165919
Stains, M., & Vickrey, T. (2017). Fidelity of implementation: An overlooked yet critical construct to establish effectiveness of evidence-based instructional practices. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 16(1), rm1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0113
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., Lowe, A., …, & Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. PNAS, 117(12), 6476-6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
Understanding Science. (2022). University of California Museum of Paleontology. http://www.understandingscience.org
van Zee, E., Lay, D., & Roberts, D. (2003). Fostering collaborative inquiries by prospective and practicing elementary and middle school teachers. Science Education, 87(4), 588-612. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10070
Yarnall, L., Toyama, Y., Gong, B., Ayers, C., & Ostrander, J. (2007). Adapting scenario-based curriculum materials to community college technical courses. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 31(7), 583-601. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920701428881

How to cite this article

APA

Kazempour, M., Amirshokoohi, A., & Goudsouzian, L. (2024). Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 20(1), e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

Vancouver

Kazempour M, Amirshokoohi A, Goudsouzian L. Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2024;20(1):e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

AMA

Kazempour M, Amirshokoohi A, Goudsouzian L. Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2024;20(1), e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

Chicago

Kazempour, Mahsa, Aidin Amirshokoohi, and Lara Goudsouzian. "Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2024 20 no. 1 (2024): e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

Harvard

Kazempour, M., Amirshokoohi, A., and Goudsouzian, L. (2024). Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 20(1), e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339

MLA

Kazempour, Mahsa et al. "Evolution of an introductory undergraduate biology course through collaborative action research". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 20, no. 1, 2024, e2403. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/14339