3D-LOP: Three-Dimensional Learning Observation Protocol Becky - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
3d lop three dimensional learning observation protocol
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

3D-LOP: Three-Dimensional Learning Observation Protocol Becky - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 17, 2023 238 likes •441 views

3D-LOP: Three-Dimensional Learning Observation Protocol Becky Matz CREATE for STEM Institute WMU-MSU Institutional Transformation Symposium Western Michigan University May 22, 2014 The premise of the AAU

slide-1
SLIDE 1

3D-LOP:
 Three-Dimensional 
 Learning Observation Protocol

Becky Matz

  • CREATE for STEM Institute
  • WMU-MSU Institutional Transformation Symposium
  • Western Michigan University
  • May 22, 2014
slide-2
SLIDE 2

The premise of the AAU project is three-fold

  • Engaging faculty to

determine the scientific practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas for the gateway STEM courses will lead to changes in classroom practice and changes in assessment practices

slide-3
SLIDE 3

With RTOP, TDOP, OTOP, and COPUS already available, why bother developing another observation protocol?

  • Existing assessment instruments focus on the “how” of teaching
  • 3D-LOP also incorporates the “what” of teaching:
  • Scientific practices
  • Crosscutting concepts
  • Disciplinary core ideas
  • Phenomena
slide-4
SLIDE 4

The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS)

  • Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM

(COPUS): A New Instrument to Characterize University STEM Classroom Practices. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618-627.

  • Records how both instructors and students spend their time
  • Each 2-minute interval is a unit of analysis
  • Coders can be reliably trained in ~90 min
slide-5
SLIDE 5

The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS)

  • Lec

RtW Fup PQ CQ AnQ MG 1o1 D/V Adm W

Instructor is doing:

L Ind CG AnQ SQ

Students are doing:

Coded by J.T. Laverty Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A New Instrument to Characterize University STEM Classroom Practices. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618-627.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A New Instrument to Characterize University STEM Classroom Practices. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618-627.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Another way to view the COPUS data is to put it on a timeline

  • !

" # $ %& %! %" %# %$ !& !! !" !# !$ '& '! '" '# '$ "& "! "" "# "$ !"#$%&"&' (&)"*")+,- .-"/0%12314+5# 6&#7%1"&'28+%#$"4& 9$+)%&$28+%#$"4& !%/$+1"&' :%,-;$"<%2=1"$"&' >4--472?@ @4#%28+%#$"4& .-"/0%128+%#$"4& 6&#7%1"&'28+%#$"4& A4*"&'B3+")"&' C24&2C D%<4BE"#+,-# 6)<"&"#$1,$"4& =,"$"&' ()*+,-). /-.)0*1)20

Coded by J.T. Laverty Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A New Instrument to Characterize University STEM Classroom Practices. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618-627.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

The same classroom recording coded with 3D-LOP

  • First half of class

Coded by J.T. Laverty

slide-9
SLIDE 9

The same classroom recording coded with 3D-LOP

  • Whole class

Coded by J.T. Laverty

slide-10
SLIDE 10

A brief comparison of COPUS (top) and 3D-LOP (bottom)

  • !

" # $ %& %! %" %# %$ !& !! !" !# !$ '& '! '" '# '$ "& "! "" "# "$ !"#$%&"&' (&)"*")+,- .-"/0%12314+5# 6&#7%1"&'28+%#$"4& 9$+)%&$28+%#$"4& !%/$+1"&' :%,-;$"<%2=1"$"&' >4--472?@ @4#%28+%#$"4& .-"/0%128+%#$"4& 6&#7%1"&'28+%#$"4& A4*"&'B3+")"&' C24&2C D%<4BE"#+,-# 6)<"&"#$1,$"4& =,"$"&' ()*+,-). /-.)0*1)20

slide-11
SLIDE 11

7 teaching activities constitute the “how” of the observations

  • 1. Clicker questions
  • 2. Tasks
  • 3. Interactions
  • 4. Lecture
  • 5. Administration
  • 6. Miscellaneous
  • 7. Questions

Students respond with personal response instruments

  • Students work together or alone to solve a

problem, construct a diagram, etc. Substantive and possibly lengthy exchanges between the instructor and students Instructor-directed presentation of content- related information “Housekeeping” items such as exam logistics, scheduling, and announcements Anything that does not fit above Content-related questions from the instructor Mutually exclusive and complete

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Scientific practices, crosscutting concepts, core ideas and phenomena constitute the “what” of the observations

  • 1. Scientific practices
  • 2. Crosscutting concepts
  • 3. Disciplinary core ideas
  • 4. Phenomena
  • Asking questions
  • Developing and using models
  • Constructing explanations
  • Patterns
  • Scale, proportion, and quantity
  • Stability and change
  • The cell is the fundamental unit of life.
  • DNA is the source of heritable information.
  • Basic structural units define the function of

all living things.

  • When instructors contextualize learning for

students using real-world examples, videos, images, etc.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

How do the following measures change between years 1 and 3 in the disciplines as the result of engaging faculty? How much class time involves: How frequently is class time contextualized using phenomena? How frequently do instructors solicit input from students with questions? What does instruction look like that overlaps core ideas, practices, and crosscutting concepts?

Research questions

  • scientific practices?

crosscutting concepts? disciplinary core ideas? student-centered activities (clicker questions, tasks, and interaction)?

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Teaching practice in these courses will be measured with

  • 3D-LOP in year 1 (2013-14) and year 3 (2015-16) of the project
  • BS 161: Cell and Molecular Biology
  • BS 162: Organismal and Population Biology

Biology

  • CEM 141: General Chemistry
  • CEM 142: General and Inorganic Chemistry
  • CEM 151: General and Descriptive Chemistry
  • CEM 152: Principles of Chemistry

Chemistry

  • PHY 183: Physics for Scientists and Engineers I
  • PHY 184: Physics for Scientists and Engineers II
  • PHY 231: Introductory Physics I
  • PHY 232: Introductory Physics II

Physics

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Each section of each course will be observed

  • three times for each year of data collection
  • Section 1
  • Section 2
  • Section 3
  • Section 4

Fall 2013

  • Section 1
  • Section 2
  • Section 3
  • Section 4
  • Section 5

Spring 2014 For example, BS 161: Cell and Molecular Biology was recorded 27 times in 2013-14. 12 recordings 15 recordings

slide-16
SLIDE 16

StudioCode is the software package that will be used to analyze the classroom recordings

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Measures for reliability, validity, and objectivity

  • Reliability: Multiple iterations of multiple researchers coding the same

recordings

  • Validity: Vetting selections with disciplinary researchers
  • Objectivity: One-third of year 1 videos will be blind coded with all year 3

recordings

slide-18
SLIDE 18

The software and our coding scheme will allow us to more deeply analyze individual teaching activities through labeling

  • Potential criteria (labels) for clicker questions:
  • Do students have time to think alone?
  • Do students have the time to discuss with
  • ne another?
  • Are the students re-polled?
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Acknowledgements

  • Melanie Cooper
  • Diane Ebert-May
  • Joe Krajcik
  • Sekhar Chivukula
  • Rob LaDuca
  • Danny Caballero
  • Cori Fata-Hartley
  • Bob Geier
  • Sarah Jardeleza
  • J.T. Laverty
  • Tammy Long
  • Lynmarie Posey
  • Sonia Underwood
  • Biological sciences faculty
  • Chemistry faculty
  • Physics faculty
  • College of Natural Science Deans
slide-20
SLIDE 20

A possible question for discussion

  • How to give feedback to faculty (if at all)?