Point of View: Taking a Cue From Neuroscience

Journal of College Science Teaching, 2004

Góndola, enseñanza y aprendizaje de las ciencias, 2019

In the past 20 years the educational community has accumulated enough data to say with conviction that interactive engagement methods lead to better student learning gains than traditional transmission-mode methods (MICHAEL, 2006; FREEMAN et al., 2014). As MITCHELL WALDROP (2015) said “At this point it is unethical to teach in any other way.” But what is this way? There are many models of interactive engagement methods. One popular approach is the “flipped classroom” (FULTON, 2012). In the flipped classroom students read the textbook (or watch a video with the instructor explaining the material), then come to class and discuss what they read through answering questions posed by the instructor. They often work in pairs and participate in voting for the best answer. An example of a flipped classroom in physics education is the method of Peer Instruction (MAZUR, 1997). While the students in these classrooms work collaboratively answering questions and the professor limits lecturing to a minimum, the knowledge that students begin with comes from authority. Students get acquainted with physics concepts by reading the book or watching a video with an authority figure on the screen. While such methods lead to more learning than traditional lecturing, what message about physics are they sending to the students? One answer is that science is an area of study that can be learned by reading the book and discussing what you read in class. Is this the message we want our students to get from our science classes?

Review of Research in Education, 2016

Advances in technology, science, and learning sciences research over the past 100 years have reshaped science education. This chapter focuses on how investigators from varied fields of inquiry who initially worked separately began to interact, eventually formed partnerships, and recently integrated their perspectives to strengthen science education. Advances depended on the broadening of the participants in science education research, starting with psychologists, science discipline experts, and science educators; adding science teachers, psychometricians, computer scientists, and sociologists; and eventually including leaders in cultural studies, linguistics, and neuroscience. This process depended on renegotiating power structures, deliberate funding decisions by the National Science Foundation and others, and sustained, creative teamwork. It reflects a growing commitment to ensure that all learners are respected and that all students learn to address the complex scientific dilemma...

NARST Annual …, 2000

In her recent study of college science instruction, Sheila Tobias [19] defines two tiers of entering college students, the first consisting of those who go on to earn science degrees and the second those who have the initial intention and the ability to do so but instead switch to nonscientific fields. The number of students in the second category might in fact be enough to prevent the shortfall of American scientists and engineers that has been widely forecast for the coming decade.

Journal of College Science Teaching, 2015

1980

Science Education, 2002

This study examined the perceptions and self-reported practices of 18 scientists participating in a yearlong seminar series designed to explore issues of gender and ethnicity in science. Scientists and seminar were part of the Promoting Women and Scientific Literacy project, a curriculum transformation and professional development initiative undertaken by science, science education, and women's studies faculty at their university. Researchers treated participating scientists as critical friends able to bring clarity to and raise questions about conceptions of inclusion in science education. Through questionnaires and semistructured interviews, we explored their (a) rationales for differential student success in undergraduate science education; (b) self-reports of ways they structure, teach, and assess courses to promote inclusion; and (c) views of androcentric and ethnocentric bias in science. Statistical analysis of questionnaires yielded few differences in scientists' views and reported practices by sex or across time. Qualitative analysis of interviews offered insight into how scientists can help address the problem of women and ethnic minorities in science education; constraints encountered in attempts to implement pedagogical and curricular innovations; and areas of consensus and debate across scientists and science studies scholars' descriptions of science. From our findings, we provided recommendations for other professional developers working with scientists to promote excellence and equity in undergraduate science education.