1 / 12

Introductory Course Reform at Oregon State: promoting sustainable reform

Introductory Course Reform at Oregon State: promoting sustainable reform. Dedra Demaree , Oregon State University Sissi Li, Oregon State University And the OSUPER group Presented at AAPT, July 2009. What we’re doing:. Department-wide, team-based curricular reform at lower-division level

tova
Télécharger la présentation

Introductory Course Reform at Oregon State: promoting sustainable reform

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. Introductory Course Reform at Oregon State: promoting sustainable reform Dedra Demaree, Oregon State University Sissi Li, Oregon State University And the OSUPER group Presented at AAPT, July 2009

  2. What we’re doing: • Department-wide, team-based curricular reform at lower-division level • Starting with introductory calculus-based physics (~1000 students per year take the sequence) • Building on expertise and departmental culture established by Paradigms in Physics |P><P| reform • Re-visiting content and specifying course goals • New structure, text, online homework… • New classroom space and remodeled lecture hall • Mixed-methods assessment 2

  3. Specific goals and influences: • Goals: • Conceptual understanding, Problem solving skills, Scaffolding topics known to be difficult for our students, Epistemological development and positive attitudes, Appreciation and curiosity for physics • Influences/resources: • Investigative Science Learning Environment (ISLE), Matter and Interactions (M&I), Peer Instruction, Knight textbook and MasteringPhysics, SCALE-UP, Innovations such as nano-lab extension to ISLE resistance design-activity 3

  4. How we’re doing it: people • Curriculum development teams including faculty and instructors • 3 teams, each taking on a few-week ‘bite’ of curriculum • 2 members are on all three teams for coherence • Members range from experienced to new faculty that ‘specialize’ in both upper and lower division instruction • One ‘service course’ committee to bind it • Surveying other departments, choosing baseline assessments, choosing textbook change, studying what other universities have accomplished… 4

  5. How we’re doing it: structure • Original: • 3 1-hour lectures per week, 1 3-hour lab, 1 1-hour optional recitation • One instructor/faculty responsible for all lectures and supervising a TA team to do labs/recitation • New structure: • 2 1-hour lectures per week, 1 2-hour SCALE-UP, 1 2-hour lab • Possible ‘7th’ hour for people with extra interest (computational focus), or with extra need (remedial math) • Head instructor (and coordinator) with rotating lecturers, Head TA to help lead SCALE-UP sessions, other TAs and LAs 5

  6. 6

  7. Sustainability: • Need faculty buy-in for the big picture • Department hired PER-faculty to lead this • Team-based, department-wide involvement • Commitment to and understanding of choices • Bite-size curricular committees for ‘all’ faculty • Choices driven by concrete information (surveys, research at other institutions…) • Need intro courses more ‘approachable’ for faculty • Can lecture a ‘bite-sized’ chunk without the administrative hassle of 500+ students 7

  8. Model driving reform choices: Scaffolding/ Math Conceptual Understanding Contributes to success in Quality choices help improve (new nanolab) Problem Solving Appreciation/ Curiosity Leads back to More productive participation Success contributes to productive Epistemologies/ Attitudes 8

  9. Model driving assessment choices: Scaffolding/ Math Conceptual Understanding Committee choices, teacher implementation, student engagement FCI, CSEM… Student feedback, engagement Problem Solving Productive attitudes enable more participation and engagement in the community of practice Appreciation/ Curiosity ISLE Rubrics CLASS, qualitative studies Epistemologies/ Attitudes 9

  10. Why a communities of practice conceptual framework: • Think about how students take ownership of learning/knowledge (deeper than epistemology) • Classroom norms and practices • How they think about physics, deal with difficulties • Also considers factors from outside the classroom • Participation • Engaging with the classroom activities, with fellow students, and with instructor • Productive participation produces meaningful experiences that build competence (knowledge) and feeds back to enable more productive participation and learning 10

  11. Accomplishments to date: • Site visits conducted at model institutions • Lecture hall remodeled to facilitate active-engagement • Service course committee implemented baseline assessment and new text Au08 • Some new activities/goals tested • Survey given to determine content/goals • FCI normalized gain of 0.4 achieved in 200+ person lecture course Au08 • Qualitative and quantitative research underway 11

  12. Future work: • Committee meetings are ongoing • SCALE-UP room under construction this summer with internal grant funding and private donations • Internal grant awarded to test curriculum with subset of students in the fall • CCLI phase 1 grant submitted, and hopefully will have full support for taking data by winter 2010 • Development for other quarters of the sequence will trail by one term • Full implementation slated for spring 2010 • Grant (fingers crossed) will also support collaboration with local Community Colleges 12

More Related