Loading…

Log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Monday, March 1
 

11:00am CST

Welcome and Keynote 1: Nicole Becker
Welcome Video by Chancellor Ronnie Green, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Welcome Remarks by Brian Couch and Grace Panther, UNL, X-DBER Organizing Committee

Keynote Talk by Dr. Nicole Becker: "Modeling the varied population schema as a coordination class: A knowledge-in-pieces approach to analyzing students’ interpretation and use of graphical representations"

Interpreting and using graphical representations is a critical competency across science disciplines; however, some graphical representations, such as distribution graphs, are intended to be “read” differently and require an alternative set of strategies for eliciting relevant information and drawing inferences. In this study, we focused on eliciting students’ reasoning related to the varied population schema, the idea that for a given system, molecules vary with respect to different parameters. We conducted semi-structured interviews with twelve general chemistry students, which involved students’ interpretation of frequency distribution graphs (number of molecules vs. speed, number of molecules vs. kinetic energy). Analysis emphasized students’ conception of the varied population schema and how students used the graphs to make predictions. The design and analysis of this study was informed by coordination class theory, a model within the knowledge-in-pieces perspective of cognition that defines a concept as a combination of approaches for obtaining information (extraction strategies) and a cluster of knowledge elements used to draw conclusions (inferential net). Findings highlight the interaction between features students attended to in distribution graphs and the ideas they discussed.

Moderators
BC

Brian Couch

Associate Professor, SBS; X-DBER Organizing Committee, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Speakers
avatar for Nicole Becker

Nicole Becker

Assistant Professor, Chemistry, University of Iowa
Research in the Becker group explores how undergraduate chemistry students develop expertise in using models to predict and explain chemical behavior. Using qualitative and quantitative research methods, we explore the impact of instructional strategies on scaffolding students... Read More →
GP

Grace Panther

University of Nebraska-Lincoln


Monday March 1, 2021 11:00am - 12:00pm CST
Zoom

12:15pm CST

Talk Session 1: Argumentation development within introductory science labs
Argumentation plays a central role in the process of science and student learning. Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) is an instructional model developed to give a more central place to argumentation, while engaging students in scientific practices within laboratory courses. Each ADI investigation takes place over three weeks. Within the second week, students form and revise an argument pertaining to a specific guiding question. Student groups participate in an argumentation session in which they discuss the claim, evidence, and justification pieces of their argument with other groups and revise their argument when necessary. The introductory biology, chemistry, and physics laboratories at East Carolina University have been transformed to an ADI-based curriculum over the past three years. Student argumentation sessions within these labs were scored in all three disciplines using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom Observational Protocol. This protocol captures the cognitive, epistemic, and social aspects of argumentation. Argumentation development over time will be discussed as well as aspects of laboratory activities that facilitate or inhibit quality argumentation.

Speakers
avatar for Kathryn Hosbein

Kathryn Hosbein

Postdoctoral Scholar, East Carolina University


Monday March 1, 2021 12:15pm - 12:30pm CST
Zoom

12:15pm CST

Talk Session 1: Skill-building outside of lecture: Giving students opportunities to practice graphing
Over the past few years, there has been an overwhelming interest in exposing students to data and graphing. Our work adds to this body of literature because we provide a set of tested homework assessments for gradually implementing these skills in a large introductory biology lecture course, without sacrificing time away from content. The aim of this research is to understand how repeated exposure to data and practice with graphing affects student quantitative literacy and perception of graphing over the course of the semester. In our talk we will elaborate on creation and implementation of these graphical skill building exercises. Using freely available HHMI BioInteractive modules we adapted four modules to include a portion on biology content knowledge and graphing and piloted them in an introductory lecture course in Fall 2019 as homework assignments. Preliminary findings reveal significant (p<.05) student improvement over the semester in the categories of writing a research question, hypothesis, making an appropriate graph, providing appropriate reasoning for graph choice, and in providing the take-home message. End-of-the-semester student reflections were positive, and, overall, students felt the assignments improved their overall graphing abilities. This work has implications for instructors teaching high school biology or introductory biology. A future area of research will focus on giving students opportunities to create informative graphs using graphing software.

Speakers
AA

Aakanksha Angra

Academic Professional-Curriculum &amp; Assessment, Georgia State University


Monday March 1, 2021 12:15pm - 12:30pm CST
Zoom

12:15pm CST

Talk Session 1: Feedback loops as a potential nexus for X-DBER investigation
To establish a viable community of practice, X-DBER researchers need to identify and collaborate on avenues of research in which a cross-disciplinary approach can yield insights that would not arise from a single discipline. We propose that feedback loops (FLs) are one such area of research. Feedback loops are systems in which an initial action triggers a chain of influences that either amplifies or counteracts the initial action. FLs have explanatory, predictive, and solution-shaping power across multiple domains, including climate, ecology, epidemiology, physiology, marketing, sociology, and engineering. Our research suggests that reasoning about FLs in multiple disciplinary contexts helps build the general FL concept through the process of mutual alignment analogy more effectively than learning about a single FL in a single discipline. FL systems that span disciplinary boundaries can support interdisciplinary collaboration, insofar as what person A cares about is both the cause and the consequence of what person B cares about. FLs pose interesting cognitive challenges, requiring the reasoner to accept that causality can loop backward, even though time cannot. A collaborative, cross-disciplinary research push to understand how learners and experts comprehend and reason with feedback loops could help build a populace able to (a) recognize FLs when they encounter them in unfamiliar contexts, (b) deploy FL understanding to explain and anticipate behaviors of growth, decay or stability, and (c) leverage FLs in designing solutions to some of humanity’s knottiest problems. Please reach out to us if this is a research direction you would like to pursue.

Speakers
avatar for Kim Kastens

Kim Kastens

Special Research Scientist, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
I work in Geoscience Education Research.  My current work in is in systems thinking, in particular how do students understand and reason with feedback loops.  Other topics I have worked on in the past in include spatial thinking, communities of practice,  making meaning from data... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 12:15pm - 12:30pm CST
Zoom

12:35pm CST

Talk Session 1: Developing student representational competence
Co-author: Trevor Volkwyn, University of the Western Cape, South Africa

In order to make disciplinary meanings, science students need to coordinate a large number of semiotic systems such as graphs, diagrams, spoken and written language, gesture, mathematics, etc. In this respect, it has been suggested that there is a critical constellation of semiotic resources that is necessary for holistic construction of each scientific concept (Airey, 2009). Other actors have discussed this problem in terms of building students’ representational competence (Kozma & Russell, 2005; Kohl & Finkelstein, 2005; De Cock, 2012; Linder et al., 2014). Combining this work, Volkwyn et al. (2020:91) define representational competence as: “The ability to appropriately interpret and produce a set of disciplinary-accepted representations of real-world phenomena and link these to formalized scientific concepts.” In this talk, we first put forward a theoretical proposal for how such student representational competence may be developed, before empirically demonstrating the usefulness of this proposal for a particular representational system (graphs) in a particular area of physics (1-D kinematics). By coordinating kinematics concepts, the three graphs, and real-world movement, we show how the students begin to practice their representational competence. We also point out the complexity of this apparently simple system in representational terms.

Speakers
avatar for John Airey

John Airey

Associate Professor, Stockholm University, Sweden
Dr John Airey is an associate Professor in University Physics Education at Stockholm University and a Reader in Physics Education Research at Uppsala University. My work is in social semiotics looking at how students learn to interpret and use disciplinary representations (including... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 12:35pm - 12:50pm CST
Zoom

12:35pm CST

Talk Session 1: Statistics education across the university: a systematic review
The reform movement in statistics education has led to a revitalization of the undergraduate introductory statistics course. However, many students satisfy their degree requirements by taking statistics courses in “client departments” such as business, the social sciences, and the lab sciences, typically taught by non-statisticians. This talk will present the findings of a metasynthesis of the existing literature on teaching statistics in these client disciplines to learn (a) what is currently being taught and how and (b) the most important challenges for statistics teachers in other departments. Articles were reviewed using qualitative axial coding and quantitative text analysis to identify common research themes and ideas in the literature for each discipline. Research themes, attitudes toward statistics instruction, and pedagogical techniques were found to vary from discipline to discipline. Collaboration with instructors in other disciplines is a needed first step toward improving statistics instruction across the university.

This talk in particular will highlight the need for greater collaboration in education research across disciplines. Statistics is somewhat unique in that many disciplines offer their own “flavor,” but there are implications for DBER in other fields. For example, as data science becomes more integrated into the STEM disciplines, there are lessons that can be shared across fields.

Speakers
avatar for Aimee Schwab-McCoy

Aimee Schwab-McCoy

Creighton University


Monday March 1, 2021 12:35pm - 12:50pm CST
Zoom

12:35pm CST

Talk Session 1: Leveraging dual-process theories to examine and support student reasoning in physics
Co-authors: Mikayla N. Mays, University of Maine; J. Caleb Speirs, University of New England; Beth A. Lindsey, Penn State Greater Allegheny; and Mila Kryjevskaia, North Dakota State University

For over 30 years, research-based materials developed by the physics education research community have helped transform introductory physics instruction. Many of these materials focus on the development of student conceptual understanding and place considerable emphasis on qualitative inferential reasoning. An emerging body of research, however, suggests that poor student performance on certain physics tasks—even after research-based instruction—may stem more from the nature of student reasoning itself than from specific conceptual difficulties. Analysis of student reasoning patterns through the lens of dual-process theories of reasoning (DPToR) suggests that students may struggle to engage analytical processing productively when responding to a physics question that contains salient distracting features. As part of a larger, multi-institutional effort to examine and support student reasoning in physics by leveraging DPToR, we have developed and implemented reasoning chain construction tasks in which students are provided with correct reasoning elements (i.e., true statements about the physical situation as well as correct concepts and mathematical relationships) and are asked to assemble them into an argument in order to answer a physics question. In this talk, we will present results from DPToR-aligned interventions that incorporate these “chaining” tasks, discuss insights into the role that the nature of human reasoning may play when working on physics questions, and reflect on implications for research-based curriculum development in STEM more broadly.

*This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Nos. DUE-1821390, DUE-1821123, DUE-1821400, DUE-1821511, DUE- 1821561, DUE-1431940, DUE-1431541, DUE-1431857, DUE-1432052, and DUE-1432765.

Speakers
avatar for MacKenzie Stetzer

MacKenzie Stetzer

Associate Professor of Physics, University of Maine
I am an Associate Professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Maine and a member of the Maine Center for Research in STEM Education.  Much of my research in physics education focuses on student reasoning and metacognition in physics – particularly... Read More →



Monday March 1, 2021 12:35pm - 12:50pm CST
Zoom

12:55pm CST

Small Group Discussion: Session 1
Directions for breakout discussion rooms
The session keynote and concurrent talks were selected to stimulate cross-disciplinary thinking. The group discussions following each session are intended to help you:
  • Integrate threads across the various talks
  • Share your own interests and research related to the session theme
  • Consider strategies for addressing the theme within your teaching
  • Make connections to people in other disciplines
  • Conceptualize emerging areas for future research or programming
Group facilitators
We ask that participants engage in respectful dialogue and take care to allow everyone a chance to participate. To facilitate this process, we have identified a number of “facilitators” who will help guide the discussion. If you are in a room without a designated facilitator, please select one based on whoever has a first name starting with the earliest letter in the alphabet (and who has not previously been a facilitator). The facilitator and participants may wish to select from the following prompts as starting points for their discussions.

Potential discussion prompts
What was the most interesting perspective that could be applied to a different discipline?
What can we take from these talks that would advance theory? What were the major research insights?
How might instructors in your discipline (or a different discipline) apply this research in the classroom?
What was a new methodology that could be applied to a different discipline?
Were consistent themes apparent across talks? How did the talks compare or contrast in terms of their approaches and findings?
What other research efforts exist that might help inform this theme?
What are the most pressing areas in need of research related to the session theme?
What challenges and opportunities exist for conducting cross-disciplinary research related to the session theme?

Monday March 1, 2021 12:55pm - 1:15pm CST
Zoom

1:30pm CST

Keynote 2: Joanne Lobato
Dialogic Online Videos in STEM Learning 

Despite the tremendous growth in online mathematics and science videos, the dominant model is still a talking head or hand presenting a lecture or solving tasks. In contrast, alternatives have begun to emerge that feature dialogue, often between a tutor and an undergraduate, in biology, physics, and computer literacy. We were inspired by such work to create a model for dialogically-intensive, conceptually-oriented math videos for secondary school students (available at https://mathtalk.sdsu.edu/wordpress/). Each video features the unscripted dialogue of a pair of secondary school students as they convey sources of confusion and resolve their own dilemmas by arguing for and against particular ways of reasoning. Other students who learn by viewing and engaging with the videos are called vicarious learners (because they are participating in the original dialogue indirectly). This talk highlights research studies on vicarious learning – from our project and from other STEM disciplines. I also discuss theory regarding the foundations, benefits, and constraints of vicarious learning.

Speakers
avatar for Joanne Lobato

Joanne Lobato

Professor, Dept. of Mathematics & Statistics, San Diego State University
Dr. Lobato’s research has involved developing the actor-oriented transfer perspective, which led to an interest in “noticing” from both psychological and socio-cultural perspectives. More recently, Dr. Lobato has been motivated by the need for alternative models of videos to... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 1:30pm - 2:15pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 2: 'The DNA Landscape': a novel framework for teaching and learning molecular genetics concepts
Part of the struggle learners face when confronting concepts in molecular genetics comes from the very nature of molecular cell biology (MCB) knowledge itself. Molecular mechanisms rely on multi-level reasoning, which is very difficult for beginners. Concepts and processes of MCB are “un-seeable” and rely on the ability to create and correctly interpret visual representations. Undergraduate students must develop skills of visual literacy, but to date there is no unified framework that describes common visual representations of MCB. We developed a 3x3 matrix, “the DNA Landscape,” based on examination of diagrams in undergraduate textbooks. The DNA Landscape is both a research and teaching tool that recognizes two dimensions of representations for any diagram involving DNA: scale (nucleotide through chromosomal levels) and abstraction (how closely it resembles the actual shape of the molecule). We tested the robustness of the Matrix by coding >2000 figures from 12 textbooks. Many figures contained multiple representations, but all were able to be coded using this new framework. Different MCB topics tended to use specific types of representations. For example, Mendelian genetics uses allele names, scale maps, and chromosomes quite often, but gene expression tends toward box and line structures and chromatin “string.” Preliminary results suggest that experts move easily around the landscape, but students have difficulty making connections between different representations of the same phenomena. To help learners develop an integrated knowledge base, educators need to go beyond assessing individual points within the matrix and instead teach and assess the connections between points.

Speakers
avatar for Dina Newman

Dina Newman

Associate Professor, Rochester Institute of Technology


Monday March 1, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 2: Developing expertise in 1H NMR spectral interpretation
Advancements in organic chemistry depend upon chemists’ ability to interpret NMR spectra, though research demonstrates that cultivating such proficiency requires years of graduate-level study. The organic chemistry community thus needs insight into how this expertise develops to expedite learning among its newest members. This study investigated undergraduate and doctoral chemistry students’ understanding and information processing during the interpretation of 1H NMR spectra and complementary IR spectra. Eye movements were measured to identify differences in cognitive processes between undergraduate and doctoral participants, and interviews were conducted to elucidate the assumptions that guided participants’ reasoning. Results suggest five areas of understanding are necessary for interpreting spectra, and progress in understanding corresponds to increasing knowledge of experimental and implicit chemical variables. Undergraduate participants exhibited uninformed bidirectional processing of all information, whereas doctoral participants exhibited informed unidirectional processing of relevant information. These findings imply the community can support novices’ development of expertise by cultivating relevant understanding and encouraging use of informed interpretation strategies, including preliminary evaluation of relevant variables, prediction of expected spectral features, and search for complementary data across spectra. These findings also provide insight into the potential relationship between conceptual understanding and information possessing across scientific representations.

Speakers
avatar for Megan Connor

Megan Connor

Graduate Student, University of Michigan
I'm a graduate student in the Shultz Group at the University of Michigan, where I investigate the teaching and learning of spectroscopy in organic chemistry. My research interests include students' reasoning, eye tracking, and instrument development.


Monday March 1, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 2: The Impact of IPLS in a senior biology capstone course
Life science and medical professionals have called for undergraduate life science and pre-medical students to gain a stronger grounding in the content and methods of the physical sciences. In response, a community of physics educators have developed reformed Introductory Physics for the Life Sciences (IPLS) courses. While these courses have demonstrated success in increasing student appreciation of the value of physics for the life sciences, little work has been done to determine whether IPLS courses better prepare life science students to use and apply physical reasoning in later life science contexts. We report findings from a longitudinal interdisciplinary study in which we compare reasoning exhibited by students with and without IPLS on tasks administered in a biology senior capstone course. In particular, we observe differences in student work on a diffusion task that are correlated with prior or concurrent enrollment in IPLS. We find that IPLS students are more likely than non-IPLS students to reason quantitatively about diffusive phenomena and to successfully coordinate between multiple representations of diffusive processes, even up to two years after taking the IPLS course. These skills reflect competencies developed in the IPLS curriculum. We position these findings within the broader context of our longitudinal study of the impact of IPLS on student work in later biology and chemistry environments.

Speakers
avatar for Benjamin Geller

Benjamin Geller

Assistant Professor of Physics, Swarthmore College
I am interested broadly in the relationship between physics and the life sciences, and in how curricula can be made coherent across these disciplines. I have a background in Physics Education Research (PER), where my work has focused on understanding how students navigate the disciplinary... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 2: Teaching mathematical logic in context
A fundamental conundrum of teaching and studying logic is that logic refers to content-general understandings while student reasoning is usually highly content-specific. When mathematics courses teach logic in de-contextualized ways, students may often fail to see how it segues with their reasoning about particular topics. In a series of teaching experiments with undergraduate students we have found a productive way to help students reinvent basic principles of logic by comparing mathematical statements across contexts. This process allows us to observe how students create content-general ways of thinking from their content-specific reasoning. The design of the activities draws heavily on the Realistic Mathematics Education tradition of guided reinvention and emergent models. I shall share in the talk some brief insights about how I have learned to revise the formulation of the logic we teach to be more compatible with and responsive to students’ ways of reasoning about mathematical language and categories. In particular, mathematical statements of the form “if then” are essentially always universally quantified (“for all”), though that language is often suppressed in mathematical text. Helping students reason specifically about sets of objects has proven challenging and yet highly productive. I shall also reflect on the importance of helping students construct productive ways of reasoning about negative categories (“not a rectangle” or “not a multiple of 6”).

Speakers
avatar for Paul Dawkins

Paul Dawkins

Associate Professor of Mathematics, Texas State University
Mathematics educator with focus on proof-based mathematics, specifically the teaching and learning of logic.


Monday March 1, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 2: Undergraduate development of metacognition and conceptual understanding
The biological field is increasingly interdisciplinary and requires students to build individual concepts into complex understanding. It is important to understand how best to support students in this process and provide them with the tools necessary to succeed. One way for students to consider their own understanding, and determine what steps to take next, is by engaging in metacognition. Students engaging in metacognition have better learning outcomes, and past work has shown students can be supported to become more metacognitive. However, development of more advanced and targeted supports depends on a greater understanding of how metacognition develops as students learn increasingly complex material. In the current study, we examined students’ development of metacognition and conceptual understanding from their first introductory biology course through each of the five required core courses for the biology major. Data collection consisted of surveys, semester grades, and interviews with a subset of students. We performed statistical analysis on the metacognitive score generated from each survey and grades collected at the end of each semester. We performed qualitative trend and case study analysis on the open-ended survey questions and on the transcripts from the semi-structured interviews. We found stark differences in metacognition engagement between introductory students and seniors. We also found interesting patterns of development among those students we followed through multiple semesters. Results from this study will help to structure how future scaffolds and instructional tools are created and utilized to best support students in learning and understanding scientific concepts across disciplines.

Speakers
avatar for Jaime Sabel

Jaime Sabel

Assistant Professor, University of Memphis


Monday March 1, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 2: A novel approach to cultivating responsive, student-centered instructional practice
Despite evidence that student-centered pedagogy benefits engineering students, studies show that instructors are slow to incorporate these practices into their teaching. The biomedical engineering (BME) instructional incubator (I2) is a two-semester course sequence that engages students, faculty, and postdocs in a course that demonstrates effective instruction and asks teams of student-instructors to develop a 1-credit module for early career BME students. Student-instructors then have the opportunity to teach the module with guidance from an engineering education faculty member the following semester. The I2 employs principles of situated learning to develop a community of practice that values responsive, student-centered instruction. Our study examined how I2 participants demonstrated responsive, student-centered instruction in their modules by analyzing reflective responses to a post-I2 experience survey. We coded responses for “implemented” and “proposed” changes to the modules and the corresponding “reasons for change.” After an inductive round of coding, themes emerged consistent with the curricular elements in Lattuca and Stark’s (2009) academic plan, which conceptualizes curriculum development as a process of shaping the educational environment based on institutional, departmental, and external influences. Our findings suggest that the I2 supports a community of educators developing and executing student-centered, responsive instructional practice. Implications for how this might transfer to other contexts are discussed.

Speakers
avatar for Cassandra Woodcock

Cassandra Woodcock

Graduate Student, University of Michigan
I am a PhD Candidate at the University of Michigan  pursuing a PhD in Biomedical Engineering (BME) with an Emphasis in Engineering Education. My research interests involve experiential engineering out-of-class experiences and the professional, personal, and academic outcomes of students... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 2: Deducing reasoning patterns from students solving scaffolded contrasting cases
In organic chemistry, learners often find it difficult to derive implicit properties of functional groups involved in mechanisms. This is necessary, for example, to make appropriate predictions about the kinetics of a reaction. Linking explicit and implicit information or deriving causal relationships poses significant challenges to students and requires specific instructions to help them solve mechanistic problems. Yet, evidence-based instructional practices to promote mechanistic reasoning in organic chemistry are limited. Scaffolded case comparisons used in interview studies have been shown to foster students’ reasoning and to facilitate the processing of case comparisons in organic chemistry. However, it is still unknown if students with a differing level of concept knowledge equally profit from such a scaffold. To address this, we conducted a study with 18 participants in an Organic Chemistry II course who were asked to solve a scaffolded case comparison individually. Prior to this task, each learner completed a concept knowledge test and a cognitive ability test in paper-pencil format, as well as a second concept knowledge test after the task. Students’ working sheets were analyzed qualitatively, to determine the reasoning patterns that emerged in students’ usage of the scaffold, and quantitatively, to relate these patterns to students’ level of concept knowledge. Every student of the cohort could be assigned to one of five reasoning patterns, which differ in aspects of multivariate and causal reasoning. We illustrate how these reasoning patterns allow to diagnose students’ understanding, as well as design adaptive tasks.

Speakers
avatar for David Kranz

David Kranz

PhD Student, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen


Monday March 1, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 2: Using reasoning chain construction tasks to inform research and instruction in general chemistry
Co-author: Megan Nagel, Associate Professor of Chemistry, Penn State Greater Allegheny

Researchers in physics education have recently been applying dual-process theories of reasoning and decision-making (DPToR) as a guide to inform the development of research-based instructional materials. This approach is particularly well-suited for tasks and topics for which a strong incorrect intuitive model interferes with a student’s ability to successfully apply their conceptual understanding. In this talk, we will describe an interdiscipinary research project designed to identify topics and questions in the general chemistry curriculum for which we expect that an intervention approach rooted in DPToR would help students to improve their reasoning. This project adapts a novel tool from the physics education research literature known as the reasoning chain construction task. In this tool, students are provided with a limited number of true statements from which they must generate a reasoning chain to support their answer to a question. We will illustrate our approach and the utility of this tool with results from a task on the ideal gas law.

* This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Nos. DUE-1821390, DUE-1821123, DUE-1821400, DUE-1821511, and DUE-1821561.


Speakers
avatar for Beth Lindsey

Beth Lindsey

Associate Professor of Physics, Penn State Greater Allegheny
avatar for Megan Nagel

Megan Nagel

Associate Professor of Chemistry, Penn State Greater Allegheny


Monday March 1, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 2: What gaze tells us about novice code reading behavior
Code reading is an important skill in programming. Inspired by the linearity that people exhibit while natural language text reading, we designed local and global gaze-based measures to characterize linearity (left-to-right and top-to-bottom) in reading source code. Unlike natural language text, source code is executable and requires a specific reading approach. To validate these measures, we compared the eye movements of novice and expert programmers who were asked to read and comprehend short snippets of natural language text and Java programs. Our results show that novices read source code less linearly than natural language text. Moreover, experts read code less linearly than novices. These findings indicate that there are specific differences between reading natural language and source code, and suggest that non-linear reading skills increase with expertise.

Reading skills are often a precursor to problem-solving skills. Unlike natural language text, source code is executable and requires a specific reading approach. It has been shown that one of the effective ways to improve skill acquisition is to cue visual attention of novices to the locations that experts attend while performing a task. If such intervention should be adopted in teaching program comprehension skills, knowledge about the expert behavior and significant differences between expert and novice programmers is very helpful, so that interventions can concentrate on these differences. Instructors could use tools like these to investigate the effectiveness of new pedagogies. Novice programmers could monitor their own progress and judge whether they have achieved personalized learning goals.

Speakers
avatar for Bonita Sharif

Bonita Sharif

Associate Professor, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Bonita Sharif, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska USA. She received her Ph.D. in 2010 and MS in 2003 in Computer Science from Kent State University, U.S.A and B.S. in Computer... Read More →


Monday March 1, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:30pm CST

Small Group Discussion: Session 2
Directions for breakout discussion rooms
The session keynote and concurrent talks were selected to stimulate cross-disciplinary thinking. The group discussions following each session are intended to help you:
  • Integrate threads across the various talks
  • Share your own interests and research related to the session theme
  • Consider strategies for addressing the theme within your teaching
  • Make connections to people in other disciplines
  • Conceptualize emerging areas for future research or programming
Group facilitators
We ask that participants engage in respectful dialogue and take care to allow everyone a chance to participate. To facilitate this process, we have identified a number of “facilitators” who will help guide the discussion. If you are in a room without a designated facilitator, please select one based on whoever has a first name starting with the earliest letter in the alphabet (and who has not previously been a facilitator). The facilitator and participants may wish to select from the following prompts as starting points for their discussions.

Potential discussion prompts
What was the most interesting perspective that could be applied to a different discipline?
What can we take from these talks that would advance theory? What were the major research insights?
How might instructors in your discipline (or a different discipline) apply this research in the classroom?
What was a new methodology that could be applied to a different discipline?
Were consistent themes apparent across talks? How did the talks compare or contrast in terms of their approaches and findings?
What other research efforts exist that might help inform this theme?
What are the most pressing areas in need of research related to the session theme?
What challenges and opportunities exist for conducting cross-disciplinary research related to the session theme?

Monday March 1, 2021 3:30pm - 3:50pm CST
Zoom
 
Tuesday, March 2
 

11:00am CST

Keynote 3: Alex Mejia
Broadening the Participation of Latinx Students in Engineering Education through Asset-Based Practices

Research has revealed that the language used to describe Latinx students and other minoritized groups in STEM has focused on highlighting their “deficiencies” first rather than challenging deficit models or the structural conditions these students constantly face. The legitimization of certain forms of knowing in STEM, particularly in engineering, has led to the perceived notion that students of color have particular “needs” that need to be “fixed” in order for them to be functional or successful in those spaces. This narrow conceptualization of what knowledge is and how it is generated fails to recognize these students and their communities as holders and creators of knowledge. Scholars have asserted that asset-based approaches, such as funds of knowledge, can be used as a multilayered counter-discourse to the damaging mainstream conceptualizations of minoritized children, their families, households and communities. This talk will focus on the significance of acknowledging various forms of knowledge and knowledge construction to provide better opportunities for participation and inclusion for marginalized students, particularly Latinx students. These asset-based approaches seek to bring more culturally responsive engineering education, greater participation in STEM, and better initiatives to achieve equitable access to engineering.

Biography:
Dr. Joel Alejandro (Alex) Mejia is an assistant professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. His research has contributed to the integration of critical theoretical frameworks and Chicano Cultural Studies to investigate and analyze existing deficit models in engineering education. Dr. Mejia’s work also examines how asset-based models impact the validation and recognition of students and communities of color as holders and creators of knowledge. His current work seeks to analyze and describe the tensions, contradictions, and cultural collisions many Latinx students experience in engineering through testimonios. He is particularly interested in approaches that contribute to a more expansive understanding of engineering in sociocultural contexts, the impact of critical consciousness in engineering practice, and development and implementation of culturally responsive pedagogies in engineering education.

Speakers
avatar for Alex Mejia

Alex Mejia

Assistant Professor, Integrated Engineering, University of San Diego
Dr. Joel Alejandro (Alex) Mejia is an assistant professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. His research has contributed to the integration of critical theoretical frameworks and Chicano Cultural Studies to investigate and analyze existing... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 11:00am - 11:45am CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 3: Creating compassionate environments in engineering education through contemplative practices: A story of one Physics Foundation experience for engineers
Student learning, persistence, and well-being are promoted by supportive and compassionate learning environments that allow students to explore and be their whole selves. Contemplative pedagogies, which integrate body and mind as well as experience and knowledge, help accomplish this by creating an atmosphere of trust and belonging where all students’ diverse ways of being and knowing are seen and accepted. To this end, we embedded contemplative practices (e.g., sensory meditation, deep listening, beholding, contemplative movement, critical reflection) in a Physics Foundation course to increase student awareness of how physics, specifically, as well as science and engineering, more generally, apply to human experiences as embodied beings in the physical universe. This pedagogical practice also allowed students to reflect on themselves as learners with unique ways of knowing and develop self-directed learning skills, including curiosity, empathy, and communication. Analyses of students’ weekly reflective assignments demonstrate that this learning environment provided them with a scaffolded opportunity for self-discovery, personal growth, and re-examining science/engineering through their diverse ways of being and knowing. In their assignments, students reflected that this type of experience was personally and professionally valuable, but otherwise absent in their engineering education.

Speakers
avatar for Madhvi Venkatesh

Madhvi Venkatesh

Lecturer & Associate Director of Graduate Education, Harvard Medical School
Madhvi Venkatesh is a Lecturer and Associate Director of Graduate Education in the Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology (BCMP) at Harvard Medical School (HMS) and a Visiting Scholar-in-Residence at Olin College of Engineering. At HMS, she works closely with... Read More →
avatar for Yevgeniya Zastavker

Yevgeniya Zastavker

Professor of Physics and Education, Olin College of Engineering


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 3: Queer in STEM: Findings from a nationwide mixed-methods study
The Queer in STEM study provides an unprecedented look at the personal stories and workplace experiences of LGBTQ-identified STEM professionals. Quantitative analysis of 1,427 participant responses to an online survey allowed us to describe the diversity of LGBTQ identities and STEM fields represented by survey participants, and to examine the relationship between workplace climate and openness about LGBTQ identities in professional settings. Qualitative analysis of 151 open-response questionnaires and transcripts of 54 semi-structured interviews identified common themes among participants’ diverse personal experiences. A grounded theory framework allowed us to develop a model of queer STEM identity with three main stages: (1) defining individual queer identity, (2) forming a personal STEM identity, and (3) navigating queer identity at work. A truly inclusive DBER program must take into account the unique experiences of queer individuals in STEM to make the products of our academic endeavors work in the benefit of as many individuals as possible.

Speakers
avatar for Daniel Cruz-Ramirez de Arellano

Daniel Cruz-Ramirez de Arellano

Senior Instructor of Chemistry, University of South Florida


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 3: The impact of faculty’s epistemological beliefs on STEM instruction at HSIs
The growing diversity of student populations in postsecondary education has led to an increasing need for culturally relevant pedagogy. Researchers have found evidence that beliefs about the nature of knowledge predict pedagogical practices (e.g., Martínez-Sierra et al., 2020; Raymond, 1997). If STEM practitioners believe that their disciplines are culture-free, they may not enact culturally relevant pedagogies in their courses. We agree with Ladson-Billings (1997) that “[Culture] informs all human thought and activity and cannot be suspended as human beings interact with particular subject matters or domains of learning” (p. 700). The sample for this study includes 22 faculty from mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology departments at Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). We seek to understand whether or how epistemological beliefs about the nature of their discipline, combined with their institutional context of teaching at an HSI, have impacted their instruction.

We found that instructors can express and even laud their disciplines’ separation from culture, while simultaneously expressing openness to using culturally relevant pedagogy. Though never asked directly, six instructors made statements reflecting a “culture-free” belief about knowledge in their discipline such as,“To me, mathematics has no color.” All six of those instructors also described trying to interact with their students in a culturally responsive way. Instructors’ ability to hold these two contradictory views may indicate that professional development does not have to change instructor’s epistemological beliefs about their discipline, but rather just needs to convince them of the value of using culturally relevant pedagogies.

Speakers
avatar for Mollee Shultz

Mollee Shultz

Postdoc, Texas State University
I'm a mathematics education researcher interested in instructor decision-making and inquiry-oriented instruction. I'm also a new mother of 2, so happy to chat about work-life balance (or lack thereof) in academia.


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 3: Equity in introductory physics, chemistry, and biology courses
Professional societies call on their members to support diversity, equity, and inclusion. To meet this goal, introductory college courses need to repay the educational debts society owes due to racism and sexism. We investigated the size of and changes in society’s educational debts in conceptual knowledge in introductory chemistry, biology, and physics courses for majors using a critical quantitative framework. The varying gender and racial representation across these disciplines provided context for interpreting the relationship between society’s educational debts and representation across disciplines. We analyzed data from 17,430 students in 257 courses at 33 institutions students collected with the LASSO platform using Bayesian hierarchical linear models. The models identified many similar educational debts due to racism and sexism were maintained in all three disciplines. Time will be made for the audience to discuss and offer insights into the findings.

Speakers
avatar for Ben Van Dusen

Ben Van Dusen

Assistant Professor, Iowa State University
My work focusses on social justice in STEM education. In addition to investigating equity in student outcomes, I have been developing a Quantitative Critical perspective which interogates the often unexamined impacts of quantiative methodological choices on DBER investigations of... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 3: Mental health challenges and experiences for underrepresented minority students in STEM doctoral programs
This longitudinal, qualitative study explored and critically interrogated how the culture, climate, and structure of graduate education impacted the mental health of underrepresented minority (URM) graduate students as they completed doctoral degrees at primarily White institutions (PWIs). Recent research has shown that graduate students are substantially more likely to have mental health challenges than the U.S. population as a whole. URM students face many challenges on the path to degree completion and are likely to be at risk for a higher incidence of mental health challenges. This research project followed 17 URM graduate students at three different Midwestern PWIs to understand their experiences with mental health as they progressed through their STEM doctoral programs. Using critical race theory and constructivist grounded theory analysis perspectives, we explored the incidence, timing, and factors that impacted students’ experiences of mental health issues, with a critical focus on departmental/program structure and power dynamics. It is clear that ongoing research into the experiences of graduate student with mental health issues is urgently needed in order to support graduate students, provide appropriate resources, and more critically, to identify and address the cultural and institutional environments that exacerbate and perpetuate the experience of mental health challenges for graduate students. Initial findings indicate that mental health challenges are exacerbated by a lack of social support, solo status, and aversion to seeking out professional help due to cultural stigma or lack of diverse counselors. This work takes important first steps toward understanding mental health among URM doctoral students at PWIs.

Speakers
MK

Megan Kowalske

Department Chair, Western Michigan University
Qualitative researcher focused on diversty, equity, and inclusion in STEM from a critical and feminist perspective. Department of Chemistry Chairperson and Associate Professor of Chemsitry and the Mallinson Institute for Science Education at Western Michigan University.PI on an NSF... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 3: Instructor conceptions of diversity in the classroom
With calls for equity and inclusion in STEM fields, diversity is at the forefront of national conversations, particularly in the higher education context. Yet, research has documented the pervasive problem of instructor biases, affecting how they perceive student behavior and position students in the classroom. Using interview data from 30 instructors, we identified five aspects through which they conceptualize diversity as a phenomenon: student characteristics, intelligence mindset, learning environment, instructor actions, and legitimized membership. The variation among these experiences revealed three distinct conceptions: essentialist, functionalist, and existentialist. In the essentialist conception, an instructor perceives student attributes as fixed, utilizes approaches based on equality, and views students as outsiders. In the functionalist conception, an instructor focuses on student features that assist or hinder achievement, finds ways to accommodate student deficits, and considers students as guests that need faculty guidance. In the existentialist conception, an instructor attends to the lived experiences of the students, leverages these experiences as learning opportunities in the classroom, and views students as rightfully present in higher education. Conclusions from this study provide an evidence base to inform professional development programs and bring certain features of diversity into instructors’ awareness to create more inclusive learning environments.

Speakers
avatar for Nicole Suarez

Nicole Suarez

Graduate Student, University of California San Diego & San Diego State University


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 3: Enhancing equity and inclusion by attending to the affective domain: Measuring self-efficacy and sense of belonging across active-learning introductory science courses
Co-authors: Jared B. Stang, University of Calgary; Yulia Egorova, University of British Columbia; Christine Goedhart, University of British Columbia; and Karen M. Smith, University of British Columbia

Research shows that the social identities of students in STEM programs play a role in how they experience the classroom and consequently their intentions to persist in a discipline (e.g., [1]). Specifically, active-learning pedagogies rely on effective peer-to-peer communication and a supportive classroom climate. Our project aims to enhance equity across first-year biology, chemistry, and physics courses by investigating students’ affective experiences, identifying existing inequalities in our context, and finding how the classroom climate impacts these experiences. We are using a mixed-methods approach to explore students’ sense of belonging, self-efficacy, and perceptions of classroom climate in our disciplinary contexts to identify inclusive instructional practices. Our contributions to researching equity across STEM disciplines include a validated classroom climate assessment tool, a course affective outcome questionnaire, and a carefully designed demographic questionnaire. Our goal is to help STEM educators understand their student populations with respect to academic identities and explore how equity, diversity, and inclusion practices in the literature might translate into inclusive practices in their classrooms. In this talk, we share preliminary measurements of student self-efficacy and sense of belonging, and changes in these, over the course of a semester in different introductory science disciplines. This project is made possible by the UBC Equity and Inclusion Scholars Program and the UBC Faculty of Science Student Diversity Initiative.

[1] Eddy, S. L., & Brownell, S. E. (2016). Beneath the numbers: A review of gender disparities in undergraduate education across science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12.2, 020106.

Speakers
avatar for Jaclyn Stewart

Jaclyn Stewart

Associate Professor of Teaching, University of British Columbia
Jaclyn (Jackie) Stewart is an Associate Professor of Teaching in the Department of Chemistry and the Deputy Academic Director of the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology at The University of British Columbia in Vancouver. From 2010-2017, she was the Chemistry departmental... Read More →
avatar for Jared Stang

Jared Stang

Instructor, University of Calgary
Jared Stang is an Instructor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Calgary and a former member of the Department of Physics and Astronomy and the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative at the University of British Columbia. Before focusing on physics education... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 3: The Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women’s experiences in a biology Ph.D. program
Graduate school is the primary location where students are socialized into the norms, behaviors, and attitudes of their selected discipline, and this socialization has been hypothesized to be a gendered process. Women are likely to experience challenges related to gender in masculine-normed fields, such as physics and computer science; however, research on fields that are considered gender-equal is limited. Despite nearly equal numbers of women enrolled in biological sciences programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels, studies have reported persistent gender gaps in academic achievement, sense of belonging, publishing, and grant funding. The gendered nature of STEM academic disciplines is largely driven by gendered structures within the organization itself. Therefore, this study examined the institutional practices of graduate STEM education from the standpoint of women graduate students in the biological sciences. Data collection and analysis focused on describing the day-to-day work of six women graduate students in biological sciences at a Southern research university and examined if and how those day-to-day experiences informed the socialization of women into scientists. Preliminary analyses point to internal and external challenges experienced by women related to their graduate education. Internal challenges included themes of time management and anxiety, whereas external challenges were related to a lack of clear expectations for graduate students and the transition to remote work and isolation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This presentation will discuss women’s experiences and challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Speakers
avatar for Ariel Steele

Ariel Steele

Doctoral Candidate, Higher Education, Auburn University


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 3: A teams-based approach to building inclusive and equitable STEM learning environments at a Hispanic Serving Institution
Higher education has been at the forefront of promoting diverse, inclusive, and equitable learning environments. In this context, Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) are striving to not only graduate students, but also provide culturally enhancing educational experiences to minoritized learners. Our STEM Communities project aims to support sustainable student-centered instructional changes in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses at Texas State University, an HSI, over a period of five years. STEM faculty are provided with opportunities to engage in professional development events, to assess and review historical student outcomes, and to participate in the redesign of target courses by incorporating culturally relevant instructional practices. The current phase of the project involves analyzing course-level student outcome data to reveal potential inequities across various student demographics. Over a series of meetings, the participating STEM faculty teams are encouraged to ask questions about students’ course experiences and discuss the findings through a lens of equity mindset in preparation for the course redesign process. We are recording and analyzing faculty’s initial reactions and discussions about the course-level data for two reasons: (1) to gain insights into the processes that produce individual and collective learning that bring about equity thinking, and (2) to support faculty’s efforts to create an inclusive learning environment. In this presentation, we will discuss the current project progress as well as some preliminary results on how different STEM faculty view inequitable student outcomes.

Speakers
MR

Mavreen Rose Tuvilla

Postdoctoral Research, Texas State University
JA

Jiwoo An

Postdoctoral Researcher, Texas State University


Tuesday March 2, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

1:00pm CST

Small Group Discussion: Session 3
Directions for breakout discussion rooms
The session keynote and concurrent talks were selected to stimulate cross-disciplinary thinking. The group discussions following each session are intended to help you:
  • Integrate threads across the various talks
  • Share your own interests and research related to the session theme
  • Consider strategies for addressing the theme within your teaching
  • Make connections to people in other disciplines
  • Conceptualize emerging areas for future research or programming
Group facilitators
We ask that participants engage in respectful dialogue and take care to allow everyone a chance to participate. To facilitate this process, we have identified a number of “facilitators” who will help guide the discussion. If you are in a room without a designated facilitator, please select one based on whoever has a first name starting with the earliest letter in the alphabet (and who has not previously been a facilitator). The facilitator and participants may wish to select from the following prompts as starting points for their discussions.

Potential discussion prompts
What was the most interesting perspective that could be applied to a different discipline?
What can we take from these talks that would advance theory? What were the major research insights?
How might instructors in your discipline (or a different discipline) apply this research in the classroom?
What was a new methodology that could be applied to a different discipline?
Were consistent themes apparent across talks? How did the talks compare or contrast in terms of their approaches and findings?
What other research efforts exist that might help inform this theme?
What are the most pressing areas in need of research related to the session theme?
What challenges and opportunities exist for conducting cross-disciplinary research related to the session theme?

Tuesday March 2, 2021 1:00pm - 1:20pm CST
Zoom

1:30pm CST

Keynote 4: Elisabeth Schussler
Emotion as the hidden curriculum: The case of student anxiety

Factors that influence the persistence of students in undergraduate science have been the focus of many recent reform efforts, yet emotion is often an understudied variable. Emotion has a powerful influence on student cognition, motivation, and achievement. We suggest that instructors not attending to the “hidden curriculum” of emotion in their classroom are missing opportunities to support student success. We use research on the emotion of student anxiety at our institution to consider ways that emotion shapes student perceptions and outcomes, and instructor practices can in turn shape the emotional experience of their students. We focus on the construct of instructor support as one approach instructors may use to explicitly integrate emotion into their curriculum.

Speakers
avatar for Elisabeth Schussler

Elisabeth Schussler

Professor, Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee Knoxville
The primary research focus of Dr. Schussler’s lab is the shaping of undergraduate learning environments to foster meaningful student learning. Although learning environments are organized around specific curricula, the effectiveness of the curriculum is often impacted by the instructor... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 1:30pm - 2:15pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 4: Exploring graduate student identity and the intersection of multiple sub-identities
Graduate education follows an apprenticeship model, primarily aimed at preparing students for academic careers; however, the inclusion of teaching within this apprenticeship is not always clear as faculty, students, and other stakeholders do not agree on the need for instructional training. Despite the variability in training available to graduate students, over half will be graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) at some point in their education. This number increases to 91% for chemistry graduate students. This discrepancy between hiring graduate students as GTAs and inconsistent inclusion of instructional training indicates a misalignment between the needs of graduate students and the support programs offer. This discrepancy also speaks to the imbalance in graduate student professionalization that is prevalent in the lack of preparedness of new faculty to teach. To better support graduate students, we must first understand how graduate student identities develop. The foci of studies are generally placed either on teaching or research identity, but not both simultaneously. Graduate student identity also has been introduced as a lens for encompassing multiple sub-identities; however, teaching identity is not emphasized. Through the collection of interviews from 19 chemistry graduate students across two institutions and analysis via qualitative methods, this work expands upon the conceptualization of graduate student identity. Sociocultural and identity theories were employed to understand graduate student identity development. Preliminary analyses show an emerging dichotomy between newer and older graduate students and the extent to which each group develops sub-identities beyond a science identity.

Speakers
avatar for Adriana Corrales

Adriana Corrales

Graduate Student Researcher, San Diego State University


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 4: Measuring mindset: Developing the undergraduate lay theories of abilities (ULTrA) survey
Students’ academic success is influenced by how they think about intelligence (termed “mindset”). Students who view intelligence as something they can improve tend to persist through challenges and realize better academic outcomes than students who view intelligence as an unchangeable trait. Although mindset beliefs are important for understanding student success, there is currently no high-quality survey to measure undergraduates’ mindset beliefs. The existing survey for measuring mindset was designed for use with elementary school children, and subsequently used with students of all ages, without rigorous validation. Our prior work suggests that this scale does not work well with undergraduates because it includes vague language. We are developing a new survey to measure mindset in undergraduate STEM students. First we interviewed a diverse, national sample of STEM students to identify language about intelligence that STEM undergraduates would interpret consistently. Based on these results, we drafted a set of items. Then, we collected revised the items based on feedback from STEM undergraduates and experts in mindset theory and survey design. We are currently collecting responses to the item set from a large, diverse national sample of STEM undergraduates to further evaluate and refine the survey. This new survey will be useful to instructors in understanding and responding to their students’ mindsets and to education researchers in studying mindset interventions. This work will have broad appeal to DBERs in any discipline because students’ mindset beliefs are relevant in all their fields of study.

Speakers
avatar for Lisa Limeri

Lisa Limeri

Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Georgia
Lisa Limeri is a Postdoctoral Research and Teaching Associate at the University of Georgia. She earned her Ph.D. in 2017 from the University of Pittsburgh studying evolutionary biology and behavioral ecology by investigating butterfly wing color patterns and mating preferences. After... Read More →
avatar for Franchesca Lyra

Franchesca Lyra

Undergraduate Scholar, University of Texas at Austin
Franchesca Lyra is an undergraduate biology student and Ronald E. McNair Scholar at the University of Texas at Austin. Alongside biology, she is completing her secondary teaching certification and is a full-time high school anatomy teacher. She was previously an Undergraduate Biology... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:30pm CST

Talk Session 4: Academic dishonesty in the age of COVID-19: Student perceptions of cheating reveal assessment problems
Academic integrity builds character that transfers over into the job force, establishing a code of ethics critical for STEM careers. A student’s perception of cheating is influenced by both internal and external factors that develop and change through time. For students, the COVID-19 pandemic shrank their academic and social environments onto a computer screen. In a Spring 2020 survey, we asked 299 biology and chemistry students from 31 different institutions if they believed cheating occurred more frequently online than in-person, and if so, why and how. Although only a handful of students described real cases of cheating, more than 80% of students indicated that they believed cheating occurred more frequently online than in-person. When explaining why this was the case, students touched on proctoring, pressure to cheat, and extenuating circumstances due to COVID-19. Students also described methods of cheating including surreptitious behavior by their peers. Interestingly, we found that students in anatomy and physiology courses had less of a change in perception of cheating than students in genetics, introductory biology, and organic chemistry courses (all Kruskal-Wallis p < 0.030). Our results can aid all STEM departments in their efforts to tackle cheating and improve online assessments during emergencies. Student responses suggest that directly addressing the importance of academic integrity, implementing alternatives to the standard closed-book exam, and reducing the weight of individual assignments can mitigate student concerns that their peers are cheating. Our results suggest such interventions are especially important in pre-requisite courses.

Speakers
avatar for Lisa Walsh

Lisa Walsh

Postdoctoral Researcher, Donald Danforth Plant Science Center
Professional Development, Emergency Remote Teaching, and Opossums


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:30pm - 2:45pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 4: A new (under)graduate education: future time perspectives
Discourses of scientific facticity as a ready-made set of conceptual and epistemic practices dominates the presentation of science in undergraduate education. Undergraduate students emerge from their academic experiences with an internalized discourse of science that dictates their perceptions of scientific productivity within research communities. By contrast, the discursive reality of science-in-the-making within epistemic communities of practice, as exemplified in works in the sociology of science, highlight science as interactionally accomplished within a constantly evolving epistemic culture in a community of practice. The contrasting discourses of scientific facticity and science-in-the-making intersect at the critical stage of graduate student entry into research spaces, as newcomers into these communities negotiate their membership and participation within the community. The research presented in the talk problematizes graduate student participation in research communities as resulting from the two contrasting discourses of science and indicates a need to critically evaluate foundations of upper-level undergraduate science education across disciplines, to consider undergraduate students as future participants in communities of practice. The research is aimed toward both addressing rates of attrition from Ph.D. programs in the sciences and the development of robust undergraduate science experiences to facilitate graduate student research in a future time perspective.

Speakers
AM

Ashwin Mohan

The Pennsylvania State University


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 4: Equity analysis of an augmented reality mediated collaborative learning activity in college biochemistry classroom
The use of 2D images to teach students about 3D molecules continues to be a prevalent issue in many classrooms. As affordable visualization technologies continue to advance, there has been an increasing interest to utilize novel technology, such as augmented reality (AR), in the development of molecular visualization tools (Sirakaya & Alsancak, 2018). Existing evaluations of the implementation of these visual-spatial learning tools focus primarily on student performance and attitude, with little attention toward equitable implementation. Our study adds to the current literature on implementing molecular visualization technology in biochemistry classrooms by examining the different situations of equity and inequity in a group activity mediated by AR technology. Adapting the participatory equity framework to our specific context, we view equity in terms of access to the technological conversational floor, a social space created when people enter into technology mediated joint endeavors (Shah & Lewis, 2019). We explore two questions: What are the different ways students interact with an augmented reality model of the KcsA channel? What are some patterns of interaction that may signify inequity in accessing the learning opportunities afforded by the technology?

Cameras and microphones were placed across the classroom to record video and audio data. In the first stage of data analysis, classroom video recordings were coded using an inductive coding method inspired by grounded theory. In open coding, analytical memos and preliminary codes were constructed for how each student interacted with the AR activity (Corbin & Strauss, 1990; Strauss, 1987). In axial coding, analytical memos and preliminary codes were compared and grouped into categories of different types of interaction that students had with the AR activity. Using the constant comparative method, descriptions and definitions for each category were compared with those from previously analyzed video excerpts to confirm or disconfirm conjectures (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). In the second stage of data analysis, types of interactions identified in the first stage were used as discourse dimensions to quantify students’ participation in the AR activity. Quantified participatory analysis was compared both within group and across group to gain insight into the participatory patterns in AR technology mediated group work. Our findings highlight the implications that participatory patterns have for equitable access to learning opportunities in the context of technology mediated group work activity. These insights can inform educators who are interested in implementing visualization technology in their classroom about the potential inequities that may arise.

Speakers
ST

Song (Ted) Wang

UC San Diego & San Diego State University
I am currently a PhD student at the Math and Science Education program specializing in chemical education.


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

2:50pm CST

Talk Session 4: Student struggle in biological sciences
Undergraduate student struggle in biology courses can be driven by a number of internal (e.g., academic preparation, anxiety) and external (e.g., paid work hours, extracurricular activities) factors. In this mixed-methods study, we explored the relative impacts of these forces across two semesters in large, introductory biology classes. Our study was unusual because we compared student experiences in a traditional (pre-COVID) semester to the semester defined by the pandemic and the emergency transition to remote instruction. First, we asked students whether they experienced struggle, and if so, if they overcame that struggle and how. Using thematic coding we categorized responses into (1) internal or external attribution and (2) applied categories for the causes of their struggle and means of overcoming it. We observed external factors in the classroom are often identified as the source of struggle, and internal factors are identified as driving the student’s ability to overcome. Second, using regression analysis, we examined which factors predicted student struggle, and of those who encountered struggle, whether they overcame it. We found that Anxiety Score, Semester (Spring 2020 vs. Fall 2019), and Average Exam Score predicted student struggle across these semesters and we found that Anxiety Score and Average Exam Score predicted whether they overcame struggle. These results show that anxiety may play a large role in how students encounter and overcome struggle in a course, and can provide guidance to instructors about factors that may or may not influence struggle in introductory biology courses.

Speakers
avatar for Claire Tracy

Claire Tracy

PhD Student; Research Fellow, Auburn University
avatar for Jenna Pruett

Jenna Pruett

Auburn University
I am a PhD candidate in the Warner Lab at Auburn University. I am an evolutionary ecologist broadly interested in maternal effects and developmental plasticity. My current work is on reptile systems with a particular focus on how female nest choice affects development and fitness... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 2:50pm - 3:05pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 4: An interplay of problem-solving modes and authority: Framework for equitable collaboration in undergraduate physics labs
We studied student behavior in collaborative physics problem-solving laboratory environments. Using the adaptation-innovation theory and concept of authority from the influence framework, we interpret students’ approaches through two problem-solving modes (adaptor and innovator) and observe bids for intellectual and directive authority. We observe behaviors that utilize structure and work within a defined system (adaptor) and behaviors that work outside the system, often engaging directly with equipment (innovator). We find adaptors exhibit high authority by asserting their experimental understanding, whereas innovators are attributed with high authority through their frequent direct handling of the equipment. Students, therefore, can have full access to and full participation in problem-solving collaboration when they (a) access the experimental or conversational floor adaptively or innovatively while being (b) acknowledged in their authority by their group. These results and the theoretical framework should be generalizable to student group lab interactions in STEM disciplines beyond physics.

Speakers
avatar for Sophia Jeon

Sophia Jeon

Cornell University
I'm an undergraduate student and a physics education researcher at Cornell University. My research interests are studying the social dynamics and equity of group work in undergraduate STEM classes. I observe videos of students in physics labs to characterize equity and analyze surveys... Read More →


Tuesday March 2, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 4: What advice do students give for high structure course success?
High structure courses are designed to have students be active participants in the learning process with pre-class content acquisition through reading or videos, in-class practice with active learning exercises, and after-class review assignments. While faculty may suggest certain strategies for success in high structure courses, it is unknown what study methods and general strategies students perceive as most helpful and therefore what kinds of advice they would give future students. The goal of the study was therefore to survey students from various high structure biological sciences and engineering courses about advice they would give to future students of the same course. Students ranging from freshman to seniors (n = 840) in eight different STEM courses from two different universities gave advice to future students by writing advice on a notecard on the last day of class. The advice comments were coded using an iterative qualitative methodology and five large categories and 18 total sub-categories were identified as types of advice that students gave. The most common types of advice, in order of prevalence, were general study tips, course expectations, and not procrastinating. Differences were observed in frequencies of types of advice between universities and course types. This student advice can now be built into these and other similar courses to provide suggestions for how students can succeed.

Speakers
avatar for Justin Shaffer

Justin Shaffer

Teaching Associate Professor, Colorado School of Mines


Tuesday March 2, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:10pm CST

Talk Session 4: Managing students’ anxiety in online active learning classrooms
Active learning classrooms are a rising trend in academia, especially to teach STEM subjects. However, active learning is traditionally campus-based, which means that students and instructors only interact in physical environments such as classrooms. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, schools worldwide rapidly moved to offer online-only classes to practice social distancing. For universities that had adopted active learning, this often meant moving to video-conferencing platforms such as Zoom—a sudden change potentially impacting students’ anxiety and engagement in the classroom. Although significant research describes factors that contribute to students’ experiences in lecture-based classrooms, understanding anxiety and communication apprehension in online or traditional active-learning classrooms is more limited. Online active-learning classrooms (OALC), in particular, may present unique challenges.

This significant shift from campus-based to online higher-education must prompt further research and dialogue to investigate student anxiety and engagement in OALC and support professors and students during this transition. This presentation maps probable factors influencing student anxiety in OALC using experiences from the Minerva Schools at KGI, a four-year university employing online active learning pedagogy for all courses. Insights from student surveys and course evaluations, coupled with the firsthand experience, provide a basis to explore guidelines for professors or universities that want to move their active-learning curriculum online in a manner that aims to mitigate students’ anxiety.

Speakers
avatar for Linh Doan

Linh Doan

Minerva Schools at KGI
I am a senior student majoring in Social Sciences and Business. I was a research assistant for different universities, including Harvard University, the University of Chicago, Minerva Schools, and Duksung Women's University (Korea). My research focuses on the connection between students... Read More →
avatar for Katie McAllister

Katie McAllister

Associate Professor and Head of the College of Social Sciences, Minerva
I am the Head of the College of Social Sciences and an associate professor of complex systems and cognitive neuroscience at the Minerva Schools at KGI. My recent book is Beyond the Lecture: Interacting with Students and Shaping the Classroom Dynamic.


Tuesday March 2, 2021 3:10pm - 3:25pm CST
Zoom

3:30pm CST

Small Group Discussion: Session 4
Directions for breakout discussion rooms
The session keynote and concurrent talks were selected to stimulate cross-disciplinary thinking. The group discussions following each session are intended to help you:
  • Integrate threads across the various talks
  • Share your own interests and research related to the session theme
  • Consider strategies for addressing the theme within your teaching
  • Make connections to people in other disciplines
  • Conceptualize emerging areas for future research or programming
Group facilitators
We ask that participants engage in respectful dialogue and take care to allow everyone a chance to participate. To facilitate this process, we have identified a number of “facilitators” who will help guide the discussion. If you are in a room without a designated facilitator, please select one based on whoever has a first name starting with the earliest letter in the alphabet (and who has not previously been a facilitator). The facilitator and participants may wish to select from the following prompts as starting points for their discussions.

Potential discussion prompts
What was the most interesting perspective that could be applied to a different discipline?
What can we take from these talks that would advance theory? What were the major research insights?
How might instructors in your discipline (or a different discipline) apply this research in the classroom?
What was a new methodology that could be applied to a different discipline?
Were consistent themes apparent across talks? How did the talks compare or contrast in terms of their approaches and findings?
What other research efforts exist that might help inform this theme?
What are the most pressing areas in need of research related to the session theme?
What challenges and opportunities exist for conducting cross-disciplinary research related to the session theme?

Tuesday March 2, 2021 3:30pm - 3:50pm CST
Zoom
 
Wednesday, March 3
 

11:00am CST

Keynote 5: Kathy Perkins
Next Generation PhET Simulations: New Opportunities for Education Research in Science and Math

For nearly 20 years, the PhET Interactive Simulations group at the University of Colorado Boulder has focused on creating research-based, student-tested simulations (sims) for teaching and learning science and mathematics. Whether the topic is circuits, molecule polarity, natural selection, or linear regression, PhET’s collection of 150+ simulations create interactive, game-like environments in which students learn central concepts and engage in STEM practices through exploration and experimentation. Motivated by the emergence of new educational platforms, potential for interoperability among educational technologies, and advances in data analytics, PhET launched a new initiative to create next generation PhET simulations – simulations that are built on state-of-the-art HTML5 technologies, support customization, integration, and back-end data delivery, and are increasingly accessible for students with disabilities. With these highly flexible capabilities, education researchers and learning scientists can ask and answer new questions around pedagogy, learning, and assessment. They can now “see” students thinking at work. Imagine assessments, for instance, that can better measure the full range of desired STEM education outcomes from conceptual understanding to practices to persistence. In this talk, I will highlight examples from our research on student learning with PhET simulations, present work by our collaborators on learning and assessment, share the new enhanced capabilities, and look at the future frontiers and challenges on the horizon.



Speakers
avatar for Kathy Perkins

Kathy Perkins

Associate Professor, Physics, University of Colorado Boulder
Dr. Perkins is Director of the PhET Interactive Simulations Project and Director of CU’s Science Education Initiative. She is also an Associate Professor Attendant Rank in Physics, specializing in physics education research. Her work in science education research has focused on... Read More →


Wednesday March 3, 2021 11:00am - 11:45am CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 5: ComPAIR: a flexible, open source, teaching technology for facilitating peer learning through comparisons
We will talk about using comparisons to facilitate learning using ComPAIR [1], open source, peer feedback and teaching technology developed at the University of British Columbia. ComPAIR is currently being used in over 60 courses across all disciplines and faculties at the University of British Columbia and at six institutions outside of the University of British Columbia. ComPAIR makes use of students’ inherent ability and desire to compare: according to the psychological principle of comparative judgement [2], novices are much better at choosing the “better” of two answers than they are at giving those answers an absolute score. By scaffolding peer feedback through comparisons, ComPAIR provides an engaging, simple, and safe environment that supports two distinct outcomes: (a) students learn how to assess their own work and that of others in a way that (b) facilitates the learning of subtle aspects of course content through the act of comparing.

In this session I’ll discuss why comparisons facilitate learning [3], and I’ll do a demonstration of what students see when they use ComPAIR. I’ll also give a specific example of using ComPAIR in a third-year course on the Physics of Climate and Energy where we do four-week-long “ big picture questions” that have students tackle vaguely defined problems as a class but submit papers individually to ComPAIR.

To explore ComPAIR check out our sandbox site: https://compairdemo.ctlt.ubc.ca. Details on how to set up ComPAIR at your own institution can be found here: https://lthub.ubc.ca/guides/compair.

[1] Potter, Tiffany et al. (2017, September). ComPAIR: A new online tool using adaptive comparative judgement to support learning with peer feedback. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, [S.l.], 5(2), 89–113.
[2] Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.
[3] Bransford, J., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: a simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.

Speakers
avatar for James Charbonneau

James Charbonneau

Assistant Professor of Teaching, University of British Columbia
I'm an Instructor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at UBC and the Associate Director the Science Gateway Programs, which includes Science One and the Coordinated Science Program. I spend most of my time either teaching or thinking about teaching.


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 5: Using an AR application to teach concepts related to 1H NMR
An augmented reality application (H NMR MoleculAR) and worksheet have been developed as part of a first-semester Organic Chemistry II laboratory to help students visualize the concepts involved when problem solving with 1H NMR spectroscopy. This activity was designed to encourage conceptual problem-solving and prevent memorization by eliminating the use of chemical shift tables. The augmented reality models aid students in visualizing 3D structures, molecular orbitals, and electrostatic potential maps. The worksheet uses the compare-predict-observe-explain (CPOE) framework so students can abstract principles about how proton equivalency, electronegativity, and anisotropy impact the number, intensity, splitting, and shift of signals on a spectrum. Student user experience and classroom observations will be discussed to evaluate the application.

Speakers
avatar for Lyniesha Ward

Lyniesha Ward

Postdoctoral Fellow, University of North Carolina at Greensboro


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:00pm CST

Talk Session 5: Comparing accuracy of automated scoring models for constructed response assessment across institutional types
Constructed response (CR) questions on core concepts can elicit multiple student ideas and reveal mixed thinking; however, they are infrequently used due to the time and effort required for evaluation. Computer scoring models (CSMs) have been used across disciplines, including biology, chemistry, physics, and statistics, to examine CRs and overcome these burdens, making CR usage more accessible. Previous research revealed CSMs for CRs can perform unequally across different institutions. As most responses used to develop CSMs (training set) are from research-intensive colleges and universities (RICUs), we examined the effectiveness of seven CSMs on CRs from RICUs, two-year colleges (TYCs), and primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs). A human scorer and the CSMs categorized 444 new CRs (testing set) for seven ideas relating to the transformation of matter and energy during human weight loss. Five CSMs maintained high agreement with human scores (Cohen’s Kappa>0.80), while two had reduced agreement (Cohen’s Kappa<0.65). Qualitative examination of miscodes from these two CSMs revealed rare and vague language contributed to the majority of incorrectly categorized CRs. Comparing amongst institutional types, CRs from RICUs had more miscodes overall; however, these CRs also contained more ideas, predisposing them to increased error. Therefore, there was no significant differences in the number of miscodes for individual CSMs or overall (p>0.23). These data support the utility of CSMs across institutional types and diverse responses. Further it provides insight into potential sources of reduced performance in CSMs, which will facilitate development of CSMs for complex topics across STEM core concepts.

Speakers
MS

Megan Shiroda

Michigan State University


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:00pm - 12:15pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 5: Investigating Instructor Tone and Its Effect On Student Engagement Using Machine Learning
How should professors provide feedback, verbally or in writing, to enhance learning? Our research focused specifically on judgment: what is the effect of normative judgment versus informational feedback on student motivation, engagement, and performance? Based on a review of the relevant literature on the subject, we hypothesized that certain forms of normative judgments, be they positive or negative, could be ultimately harmful to students (compared to a neutral, task-focused form of feedback). Negative judgments and criticism can increase student anxiety and harm instructor immediacy, both of which have been shown to decrease engagement and performance in class (England, Brigati, Schussler, & Chen, 2019; Rocca, 2004). Positive feedback may decrease student intrinsic motivation through the undermining effect and may reinforce fixed mindsets/brilliance beliefs (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Dweck, 2007). Finally, judgmental comments directed at a student’s personality traits seem to be an ineffective (and potentially harmful) use of a feedback intervention; feedback should be task-based instead (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). To test this hypothesis, our team used modern machine learning techniques to (a) transcribe 80 online seminar-style classes and (b) use sentiment analysis to gauge the tone expressed in each comment. We then used statistical techniques such as linear regression, chi-squared, and genetic matching to predict the effect of employing judgmental tone on the number of hand-raises and emojis, as well as the average student talk time in class. Our results seem to indicate that judgmental, emotionally charged language seems to actually increase overall engagement, but skew participation toward certain students. In our talk, we call into question the adequacy of the methods to address the hypotheses, but show that with refinement, these novel applications of machine learning are quite promising.

Reference: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-jlHz52_5pm5tKC-IT-DmvA_ARV7mRXjTdpx8GZJ9bo/edit?usp=sharing

Speakers
avatar for Pedro Martins de Bastos

Pedro Martins de Bastos

Research Assistant, Minerva Schools at KGI
I'm a senior undergrad student at the Minerva Schools at KGI. I'm Brazilian, I've lived in 6 cities around the world, and I am super excited about data science and its applications to education! Talk to me about education, science, technology, machine learning, novel ways to use data... Read More →
avatar for Katie McAllister

Katie McAllister

Associate Professor and Head of the College of Social Sciences, Minerva
I am the Head of the College of Social Sciences and an associate professor of complex systems and cognitive neuroscience at the Minerva Schools at KGI. My recent book is Beyond the Lecture: Interacting with Students and Shaping the Classroom Dynamic.


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 5: Augmented reality for conceptual understanding of 3D physics concepts
Many undergraduate students find it difficult to visualize 3D concepts in physics and engineering courses. There is a need for context-specific spatial visualization activities to help students connect 2D representations to 3D models. We have assembled an interdisciplinary team of undergraduate physics and computer science research students and faculty to create 3D augmented reality (AR) models of physics concepts including centripetal force, torque, electric and magnetic fields and forces, and electromagnetic induction. Utilizing software including Unity, Vuforia, and Merge SDK, research students create the 3D physics models. Once developed, researchers upload the AR apps to the Apple and Android stores, making them publicly available. To use, students download the apps to their smartphone or tablet and view the Merge cube through their device, the 3D physics model appears on the Merge cube. By rotating the Merge cube, the students can view the 3D model from different perspectives. This provides an opportunity for students to envision many 2D representations of the same 3D concept. Students and instructors can utilize these AR apps in a variety of situations including for use within lectures, problem-solving sessions, or labs, either within in-person or remote instruction. Augmented reality 3D models have applications in STEM disciplines including mathematics and chemistry where strong spatial visualization improves student performance in STEM.

Speakers
avatar for Michele McColgan

Michele McColgan

Associate Professor, Siena College
Dr. Michele McColgan is an Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Siena College. She is the founder of Siena's Informal STEM Program and summer STEM Camps, as well as the Director of the Urban Scholars program where hands-on, project-based activities and gaming teach real-world... Read More →


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:20pm CST

Talk Session 5: Development of a model to evaluate higher education professional development programs
Academic institutions and national organizations have integrated professional development (PD) programs to their offerings, with the overarching goal of supporting a more diverse, inclusive, and equitable STEM education ecosystem. In the report Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century, the authors point at the absence of evaluation mechanisms of PD programs and at how valuable the information could be for engaging advocates in the STEM education ecosystem. To address this concern, we developed an evidence-driven model, grounded in implementation science, to evaluate PD programs targeting students in higher education. Here, we present the model and the elements guiding its development, all in the context of American Chemical Society PD programs for students who self-identify as part of a traditionally underrepresented population. The model uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods to yield information about the program’s implementation and outcomes. Adopting this evaluation model could help organizations sustain claims associated to the impact of their PD programs and help identify key aspects influencing said impact. As a long-term outcome for this project, entities concerned with the professional development of STEM students in higher education can adopt the model to evaluate their programs and make informed decisions about future implementations of their programs.

Speakers
avatar for Stephanie Santos-Díaz

Stephanie Santos-Díaz

Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Wisconsin - Madison


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:20pm - 12:35pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 5: Tools for identifying effective introductory STEM courses
DBER often uses research-based assessments to measure the efficacy of courses and interventions to improve student outcomes. One challenge for using these assessments, however, is a lack of comparative data, particularly given research literatures’ skew toward courses for disciplinary majors at selective institutions. We will present on and share a large-scale dataset and tools to inform the efficacy of introductory physics courses in supporting student outcomes. We will also discuss large-scale datasets available through the LASSO platform that DBER scholars can use to build similar tools for other STEM disciplines. LASSO is an online platform that hosts, administers, scores, and analyzes 47 research-based assessments from astronomy, biology, chemistry, engineering, mathematics, and physics. The data set of 501 introductory physics courses comes from the LASSO platform and the scientific literature. Results indicated the LASSO data represented different courses than those represented in the scientific literature. The tools include plots of pretest and posttest scores and distributions of effect sizes. These visualizations show how courses compare to the larger database before and after instruction. The results show that common rules of thumb for effect size are not useful for interpreting effect sizes on research-based assessments. We will discuss how researchers can use the anonymized LASSO database to provide context for interpreting research-based assessment scores in other courses and STEM disciplines.

Speakers
avatar for Jayson Nissen

Jayson Nissen

Nissen Education Research and Design
I have my own research company and am occasionally a physics instructor at Oregon State University. I have worked with Learning Assistants (LAs) and conducted research on the efficacy and impacts of the LA model nationally. I use quantitative methods and a critical framework to investigate... Read More →


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 5: Scaffolding problem-based learning in undergraduate laboratories
Problem-based learning (PBL) advocates self-directed learning by students, needing them to generate laboratory procedure by themselves. Students in the learning phase need support, especially when they are transitioning to the inquiry-based labs such as PBL. This talk will be based on the strategies for developing scaffolds to help students carry out a meaningful laboratory investigation. Multiple scaffolding strategy should be used for a more effective outcome, and these scaffolds should be distributed across the entire task, i.e., the pre-lab, lab, and the post-lab work. The talk will include the strategies for use of a combination of soft and hard scaffolds so that the laboratory investigation in a PBL environment is accomplished as intended. Without appropriate support, the cognitively complex of the task may lead students to frustration. I will give examples of the PBL module on indigo dyeing wastewater treatment in undergraduate chemistry laboratory and the scaffolds that were introduced for this task.

Speakers
avatar for Sujatha Varadarajan

Sujatha Varadarajan

Graduate Student, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, India
I have 15 years of experience in teaching middle-school, high school and undergraduate students. My strength is pedagogy and I have had the opportunity to get trained in different pedagogical approaches to science education such as, Activity-based learning, Inquiry-based learning... Read More →



Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

12:40pm CST

Talk Session 5: The development of the Biotic Impacts of Climate Change Core Concepts (BIC4)
Climate change is an existential threat to all life on earth; the documented impacts of climate change are extensive and of a devastating scale. National education recommendations (Vision and Change, AAAS 2010; 4DEE, Klemow et al., 2019) encourage undergraduate students and their educators to better understand and address this global issue. However, guidance for faculty instruction in climate change is lacking at all levels and within these existing frameworks. To better serve our students, educators need guidance in identifying major conceptual areas of how climate change impacts ecological systems. We introduce the Biotic Impacts of Climate Change Core Concepts (or BIC4, BICC Core Concepts), a guide to instructors to develop curriculum and to education researchers studying students’ understanding of climate change.

In our talk, we will present the BIC4 and discuss its development. We will present the results of expert review and preliminary interviews in the development of the BIC4. We will also discuss how the BIC4 connects to other ecological education frameworks (4DEE). We will then discuss student and expert responses to interview questions framed by the BIC4. These questions are intended to illuminate differences between student and expert understanding in how living things are affected by climate change, and we will discuss the differences observed in our data.

Author List: Ryan D.P. Dunk, Julie Sexton, Krystal Hinerman, and Emily A. Holt

Speakers
avatar for Ryan Dunk

Ryan Dunk

Postdoctoral Scholar, University of Northern Colorado
EH

Emily Holt

Associate Professor, University of Northern Colorado
POSTER TITLE: Coverage of climate change in ecology textbooksTHEME: Integrating disciplinary practices


Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:40pm - 12:55pm CST
Zoom

1:00pm CST

Small Group Discussion: Session 5
Directions for breakout discussion rooms
The session keynote and concurrent talks were selected to stimulate cross-disciplinary thinking. The group discussions following each session are intended to help you:
  • Integrate threads across the various talks
  • Share your own interests and research related to the session theme
  • Consider strategies for addressing the theme within your teaching
  • Make connections to people in other disciplines
  • Conceptualize emerging areas for future research or programming
Group facilitators
We ask that participants engage in respectful dialogue and take care to allow everyone a chance to participate. To facilitate this process, we have identified a number of “facilitators” who will help guide the discussion. If you are in a room without a designated facilitator, please select one based on whoever has a first name starting with the earliest letter in the alphabet (and who has not previously been a facilitator). The facilitator and participants may wish to select from the following prompts as starting points for their discussions.

Potential discussion prompts
What was the most interesting perspective that could be applied to a different discipline?
What can we take from these talks that would advance theory? What were the major research insights?
How might instructors in your discipline (or a different discipline) apply this research in the classroom?
What was a new methodology that could be applied to a different discipline?
Were consistent themes apparent across talks? How did the talks compare or contrast in terms of their approaches and findings?
What other research efforts exist that might help inform this theme?
What are the most pressing areas in need of research related to the session theme?
What challenges and opportunities exist for conducting cross-disciplinary research related to the session theme?

Wednesday March 3, 2021 1:00pm - 1:20pm CST
Zoom

1:30pm CST

Poster Session
List of presenters’ Zoom meeting rooms: https://tinyurl.com/65azmtma
or
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C3rIgPvIX-UGkv8az7GKBB9iLJpsNOR7/edit#gid=1451005723

NOTE: Some people's posters are in the main Zoom for the conference. Join it and click on Breakout Rooms at the bottom to see the names of the presenters at our UNL account.

Padlet to view all posters and presenter intro videos: https://tinyurl.com/yprfluxr
or
https://padlet.com/stephanielvendetti/jdneykglmzv10ypk

We are honored to have 151 poster presenters in our poster session. Please view this Padlet before the conference if possible, to start browsing the posters and also to watch the presenters’ introductory videos.

The day of the poster session, Wednesday, March 3, presenters will host Zoom meeting rooms to present their individual poster PDFs from 1:30-2:50 p.m. US Central time. Conference participants will be able to join poster session rooms via the links in the Padlet, or at the link above, and will be able to join and move around to various posters throughout the time. If you have any trouble during the poster session, please visit us in Zoom Meeting Room A, https://unl.zoom.us/j/99129531140.

The posters are organized by theme, then alphabetically, and then color-coded by discipline. To display the Padlet correctly, enter full screen mode. You can select this option using the three dots at the top right of the page. You can also use the "Ctrl+F" function to search for a specific name in the Padlet.

Wednesday March 3, 2021 1:30pm - 2:50pm CST
Padlet and Individual Zoom Links

3:05pm CST

Bridging the Divides: Continuing Engagement and Closing Remarks
Moderators
avatar for Joe Dauer

Joe Dauer

Associate Professor of Life Science Education, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
I am interested in cognitive psychology and how undergraduate students learn. I primarily work in life sciences although I like to understand how these students use quantitative modeling to better understand biology concepts.
avatar for Tomas Helikar

Tomas Helikar

Associate Professor, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
I am an Associate Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. My research program centers around multi-scale modeling of the immune system, and technology development in an effort to make computational modeling accessible to anyone, regardless... Read More →
AM

Alena Moon

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Speakers
avatar for Stephanie Gardner

Stephanie Gardner

Associate Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University
STEM DBER-Alliance
avatar for Ellen Carpenter

Ellen Carpenter

Program Director, National Science Foundation
Programmatic support for undergraduate STEM education from the National Science Foundation


Wednesday March 3, 2021 3:05pm - 3:50pm CST
Zoom
 
  • Timezone
  • Filter By Date X-DBER 2021 Conference Mar 1 - 3, 2021
  • Filter By Venue Zoom
  • Filter By Type
  • Individual Zoom Links
  • Zoom Meeting Room A
  • Zoom Meeting Room B
  • Zoom Meeting Room C
  • Zoom Meeting Room D
  • Conference Theme
  • Room Theme
  • Subject