| Media
Contacts:
Dr. Bob Beichner,
919/515-7226
Mick Kulikowski,
News Services, 919/515-3470
April
22, 2004
College
Intro Science Courses Need Overhaul, Scientists Say
FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Introductory college science courses
– traditionally composed of impersonal “transmission-of-information”
lectures and “cookbook” lab sessions –
need to be completely overhauled.
That’s
the recommendation of Dr. Robert Beichner, professor
of physics
at North Carolina State University, and a team of university
researchers and administrators pressing for changes
in the way science is taught at the college level.
Eschewing traditional, more passive
class formats, the researchers call for institutions
of higher learning to implement inquiry-based, problem-solving,
and active-learning strategies in introductory science
courses. That means requiring students to “develop
hypotheses, design and conduct experiments, collect
and interpret data, and write about the results,”
the paper states.
Revolutionary courses utilizing these
new methods have been implemented and assessed at a
handful of institutions of higher learning across the
United States, including NC State, and have proven to
spark student interest in science, help students –
especially women and underrepresented minorities –
learn more and get better grades, and lead students
to enroll in advanced science courses, the scientists
say.
The
views are expressed in a Policy Forum paper published
in the April 23 edition of Science.
The paper calls for research universities
to take the lead in changing the culture of introductory
science courses, both for science majors and non-majors.
Support from administrators, both in terms of vision
and financial resources, is key, the paper states. Further,
the paper recommends that funding agencies require that
graduate students supported on training grants acquire
training in teaching methods that support inquiry-based
learning, just as some funding agencies require training
in ethics.
Beichner and his colleagues also call for rewards for
faculty who utilize new teaching methods successfully.
Tenure, awards and sabbaticals could all be tied to
successfully incorporating or supporting innovative
teaching methods, they say.
The paper refers specifically to Beichner’s
SCALE-UP design – or Student-Centered Activities
for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs –
as one example of inquiry-based learning that can serve
as a model for reinvigorating scientific teaching and
learning.
In place of traditional approaches,
the SCALE-UP method combines lecture and lab components
to create a new classroom paradigm in NC State physics
and chemistry classes. It breaks up large classes of
about 100 students into groups of nine students at a
table. Each table is split into teams of three students,
and each three-member group has its own laptop computer
for problem solving and research.
These teams of students collectively come up with solutions
to problems posed by roving instructors. Thought-provoking
problems are based on real-world quandaries, forcing
students to collaborate and think critically. In this
classroom, students interact with physical phenomena
every day.
Research has shown that students who
work collaboratively in small groups and take an active
role in class learn more and get better grades. Beichner
has used the method in his classes since 1997, and has
found that the overall failure rates are one-half of
what they are in traditional classes. For women, the
failure rate is one-fifth that of their peers in regular
classes, while minority failure rates are reduced by
a factor of four.
“The basic premise is that we
are taking research-based pedagogies – like active
learning and cooperative groups – and finding
ways to apply them in larger classes,” Beichner
said.
The general public also benefits from
SCALE-UP efforts, Beichner says. “Our scientists
and engineers are learning problem-solving techniques,
and picking up critical thinking and team-building skills.
This means that our graduates will be better prepared
to solve the problems facing all of us.”
-
kulikowski -
Note to editors: An abstract of the
Policy Forum paper follows.
“Scientific
Teaching”
Authors: Jo Handelsmann, University of Wisconsin-Madison;
Robert Beichner, North Carolina State University; et
al.
Published: April 23, 2004, in Science
Abstract:
For more than a decade, reports from expert panels have
called for improvement in science education. There is
general agreement that science courses consisting of
traditional lectures and cookbook labs need to be changed.
What is required instead is “scientific teaching,”
teaching that mirrors science at its best – experimental,
rigorous, and based on evidence. This policy forum explores
the reasons for the slow pace of change in the way science
is taught at research universities and offers recommendations
for faculty, staff, and administrators at research universities,
funding agencies, and professional organizations to
accelerate the reform of science education. To help
faculty initiate change in their own classrooms, the
forum includes extensive resources to guide the transition
to tested, effective instructional methods, which include
group learning in lectures, inquiry-based laboratories,
and interactive computer modules.
|