1 / 40

Evidence-based teaching outcomes

Evidence-based teaching outcomes. Andis Klegeris Biology , UBCO andis.klegeris@ubc.ca. Objectives:. Flexible teaching vs. flexible learning Innovation in teaching: why is it needed? Student skills Move from innovation to scholarship Describe strategies for assessing student: perception

swann
Télécharger la présentation

Evidence-based teaching outcomes

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. Evidence-based teaching outcomes Andis Klegeris Biology, UBCO andis.klegeris@ubc.ca

  2. Objectives: • Flexible teaching vs. flexible learning • Innovation in teaching: why is it needed? • Student skills • Move from innovation to scholarship • Describe strategies for assessing student: • perception • problem-solving skills • learning of course concepts and content • Future directions

  3. Flexible teaching vs. flexible learning

  4. Innovation in teaching: why is it needed? • The goal of flexible learning is to enhance the educational experience of our students through imaginative use of new educational technologies in ways which permit more active learning by students, while freeing time in medium and large classes to be used for purposes other than content delivery. • Common types of flexible learning environments include online, flipped, and blended…

  5. Potentially measurable outcomes of teaching innovation • Higher TEQ scores • Increased student satisfaction/perception • Improved learning of course contents • Improved student skills • Free up time to do other things

  6. Perception vs. effectiveness

  7. Potentially measurable outcomes of teaching innovation • Higher TEQ scores • Increased student satisfaction/perception • Improved learning of course contents • Improved student skills • Free up time to do other things

  8. Student skills • Program-specific skills

  9. Student skills • Generic competencies (Tuning methodology) • Systemic • abilities and skills concerning whole systems (combination of understanding, sensibility and knowledge) • Interpersonal • social interaction and co-operation • Instrumental • problem solving, cognitive and methodological abilities

  10. Student skills (BIOC 308) Pearson’s correlations of students’ marks obtained by various assessment techniques ; BIOC 308, 2010, N = 42 * Correlation significant at P<0.05 level; ** Correlation significant at P<0.01 level Klegeris, A., Bahniwal, M., Hurren, H. (2012) Lack of correlation between distinct university student skill sets identified by using a panel of assessments: a two year study. Int. J. Arts Sci. 5:479-498.

  11. Move from innovation to scholarship • Assess impact of educational interventions (innovations) • Qualitative data • Quantitative data

  12. Assessing student: Perception (satisfaction) Specific skills (e.g., problem solving skills) Learning of course content

  13. Why such a study is needed? • Problem-based learning (PBL) in a small group setting has a robust positive effect on student learning and skills as well as their engagement and satisfaction with the process. • Very little research has been done on the educational benefits of PBL in a large classroom setting. • Several studies have suggested that PBL may not be superior to conventional educational approaches in all aspects of learning.

  14. Why such a studies are needed? • It cannot be assumed that introducing the PBL technique (or any other new teaching method) to a large undergraduate class setting will automatically lead to enhanced student learning as well as satisfaction. • The superiority, or at least the non-inferiority, of PBL over the standard course delivery techniques must be proven for each individual PBL delivery method. • DO NO HARM!!!

  15. Assessing student: Perception (satisfaction) Problem solving skills Learning of course content

  16. Perception of PBL process: anecdotal evidence (informal surveys) • Question: Would you like to continue with PBL, studying another case this term? Why? YES = 41 out of 44 students • Summary of positive comments: Process fun/enjoyable/interesting (28) Process makes you think (17) Retain/learn the information better (15) Enjoy group interactions (13) Learn practical information(11) Enjoy researching (10) Prefer this method of learning over others (8)

  17. Perception of PBL process: anecdotal evidence (informal surveys) • Question: Would you like to continue with PBL, studying another case this term? Why? NO = 10 out of 44 students • Summary of negative comments: Discomfort with the unknown (student hypotheses & research rather than the professor providing with the answers) (6) Exam discomfort (4) The extent of the information that needs to be researched is overwhelming (2)

  18. Perception of PBL process:formal surveys (moving from anecdote to evidence) • Formal study conducted with BIOC 308/309 students during 2010/2011 academic year • Study approved by UBCO Human Research Ethics Board • Students were asked to complete a survey posted on WebCT Vista • 44 out of 59 students participated in the study during the first term • 28 out of 45 students participated in the study during the second term

  19. Perception1 - stronglydisagree2 – disagree3 - neitheragreeordisagree4 – agree5 - stronglyagree Klegeris, A., Hurren H. (2011) Impact of problem-based learning in a large classroom setting: Student perception and problem-solving skills. Adv. Physiol. Edu. 35:408-415

  20. Perception of PBL process: anecdotal evidence • How many PBL cases would you like to see next term? Dec 2009 Dec 2010 (42 respondents) (38 respondents) 0 (no PBL) 4% 5% (2 students) 1 19% 16% 2 37% 53% 3 39% 26%

  21. Perception of PBL process:student participation Term 1 (60 students)

  22. Perception of PBL process:student participation Term 1 Term 2 (60 students) (44 students)

  23. Assessing student: Perception (satisfaction) Problem solving skills Learning of course content

  24. Subject-specific problem-solving skills • At the beginning of the Fall 2010/11 term students were asked to complete a pharmacology-related problem-solving exercise not related to the course material they were about to study • They were informed that they would be asked to complete a similar exercise in December • After two PBL cases were conducted during the term, students were actually asked to solve not a similar problem, but the same problem they were given at the beginning of the term • The results were marked by an undergraduate TA and also by a contents expert in a blinded manner

  25. Problem-solving skills:assessed by a TA

  26. Problem-Solving Skills:Assessed by a course content expert

  27. Problems with the problem-solving skills exercise: • Students were writing the same test twice • This approach was used to allow pre- and post-exposure comparison by Student’s t-test for paired observations • There was no control group • Class could be randomly split with one half having PBL exercises included, but the other half exposed to lectures only with instructor crossover – additional funding (or a volunteer to teach a course for free) is needed! • Content interference • Problems were related to the subject of the course • Bias in marking • Undergraduate Teaching Assistant (TA) was marking the tests as they became available; instructor was marking blinded

  28. Generic problem-solving tests: • Test general problem solving skills not related to pharmacological or biological topics • In this case a different group of students taking other course could be used as controls • Crossover design by using two comparable problem sets

  29. Generic problem-solving tests:Controlled, blinded studies, crossover design, 2 tests Test A Test A Test B Test B vs. PBL 1 PBL 2 Test B Test A Test B Test A Klegeris, A., Bahniwal, M., Hurren, H. Improvement in generic problem-solving abilities of students by use of tutor-less problem based learning in a large classroom setting. CBE Life Sci. Educ. (in press )

  30. Generic problem-solving tests:Controlled, blinded studies, crossover design, 2 tests Test A Test B PBL 1 PBL 2 Test B Test A Klegeris, A., Bahniwal, M., Hurren, H. Improvement in generic problem-solving abilities of students by use of tutor-less problem based learning in a large classroom setting. CBE Life Sci. Educ. (in press )

  31. Generic problem-solving tests:Controlled, blinded studies, crossover design, 2 tests Test A Test B PBL 1 PBL 2 Test B Test A Klegeris, A., Bahniwal, M., Hurren, H. Improvement in generic problem-solving abilities of students by use of tutor-less problem based learning in a large classroom setting. CBE Life Sci. Educ. (in press )

  32. Generic problem-solving tests:Studies with internal control, crossover design, 3 tests Test A Test C Test B Test B Test A Test C PBL x 2 Test C Test A Test B

  33. Generic problem-solving tests:Studies with internal control, crossover design, 3 tests P = 0.06; N = 53 Test A Test C Test B Test B Test A Test C PBL x 2 Test C Test A Test B PBL interventions

  34. Generic problem-solving tests:Studies with internal control, crossover design, 3 tests P = 0.06; N = 53 Test A Test C Test B Test B Test A Test C PBL x 2 Test C Test A Test B 13% increase in previous study 5.7% increase in this study ½ term  shorter exposure time? PBL interventions

  35. Assessing student: Perception (satisfaction) Problem solving skills Learning of course content

  36. Learning of course content Large 1st year biology class with 2 sections instructed by different professors using mainly didactic lectures (232 and 268 students) PBL Midterm exam (3 identical questions) PBL Final exam (3 identical questions)

  37. Learning of course content

  38. Future plans Identify other courses/techniques that help improve student problem-solving skills We have an original assessment tool available for anybody interested Assessment of specific courses dealing with various problems (math, genetics) Campus –wide assessment Could be looking for collaborators from all faculties at UBC Okanagan

  39. Acknowledgements • UBCO BIOC 308, BIOC 309 and other students participating in these studies • H. Hurren, M. Bahniwal, L. Spielman • Drs. J. Pither, J. Loeppky, R. Lekivetz • Dr. P. Arthur, J. Hirtz (UBCO Centre for Teaching and Learning) • Drs. J. Boon and J. Kluftinger (UBCO Biology) • UBCO I.K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences Curricular Innovation Award • UBCO Grant for Integration of Teaching and Research in Undergraduate Education

  40. andis.klegeris@ubc.cahttps://people.ok.ubc.ca/andislab/teaching/index.phpandis.klegeris@ubc.cahttps://people.ok.ubc.ca/andislab/teaching/index.php

More Related