Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Using the Reasoned Action Approach to Predict Active Teaching Behaviors in College STEM Courses

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal for STEM Education Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Active learning can have a substantial impact on STEM student learning outcomes. This study used the reasoned action approach to predict the presence of active teaching techniques. Instructor attitudes, perceived social norms, perceived behavioral control and intentions concerning active learning strategies were assessed before and after a teaching workshop, in addition to retrospectively. Behavioral teaching practices were recorded using the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). Results indicated that instructor attitudes toward and perceived behavioral control over implementing active learning significantly contributed to STEM instructor intentions to use active learning. Further, instructor intentions assessed after the workshop and retrospectively were predictive of instructor behavior. Instructors with high intentions exhibited an increase in ‘active’ instructor behavior (group work) and a decrease in ‘passive’ instructor behavior (lecture). These results suggest that whether instructors view active learning as favorable or unfavorable, and whether instructors feel they have control over implementing active learning strategies, is critical to increasing the presence of active teaching intentions and behaviors. Professional development programs wishing to create instructional change should target instructor attitude and control beliefs, as well as discuss normative teaching practices in aim of contributing to instructors’ understanding of and future intentions to implement active learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barber, M., & Njus, D. (2007). Clicker evolution: Seeking intelligent design. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC higher education reports. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.

  • Bonwell, C. C., & Sutherland, T. E. (1996). The active learning continuum: Choosing activities to engage students in the classroom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(67), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braxton, J. M., Jones, W. A., Hirschy, A. S., & Hartley III, H. V. (2008). The role of active learning in college student persistence. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(115), 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B. (2012). The focus theory of normative conduct. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 295–312). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dooner, A. M., Mandzuk, D., & Clifton, R. A. (2008). Stages of collaboration and the realities of professional learning communities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(3), 564–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, J. (2008). Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education. Board of Science Education, National Research Council, The National Academies, Washington, DC.

  • Faust, J. L., & Paulson, D. R. (1998). Active learning in the college classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 9(2), 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1994). Cooperative learning in technical courses: Procedures, pitfalls, and payoffs. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 377038.

  • Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., Woods, D. R., Stice, J. E., & Rugarcia, A. (2000). The future of engineering education II. Teaching methods that work. Chemical Engineering Education, 34(1), 26–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Taylor & Francis.

  • Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hora, M. T., Oleson, A., & Ferrare, J. J. (2013). Teaching dimensions observation protocol (TDOP) user’s manual. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, G. S., Ralph, K. M., Gulanick, N. A., Maxwell, S. E., Nance, D. W., & Gerber, S. K. (1979). Internal invalidity in pretest-posttest self-report evaluations and a re-evaluation of retrospective pretests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larzelere, R. E., Kuhn, B. R., & Johnson, B. (2004). The intervention selection bias: An underrecognized confound in intervention research. Psychological Bulletin, 130(2), 289–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., et al. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 51–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeachie, W. (1972). Research on college teaching. Educational Perspectives, 11(2), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). STEM in postsecondary education. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M. F. (2009). Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2009(117), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. K., Vinson, E. L., Smith, J. A., Lewin, J. D., & Stetzer, M. R. (2014). A campus-wide study of STEM courses: New perspectives on teaching practices and perceptions. CBE- Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 624–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinath, A. (2014). Active learning strategies: An illustrative approach to bring out better learning outcomes from science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 9-14.

  • Stains, M., Harshman, J., Barker, M. K., Chasteen, S. V., Cole, R., DeChenne-Peters, S. E., et al. (2018). Anatomy of STEM teaching in north American universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468–1470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UMich Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (2016). Active Learning. Retrieved from http://www.crlt.umich.edu/tstrategies/tsal

  • UNC Center for Faculty Excellence (2009). Classroom Activities for Active Learning. Retrieved from https://cfe.unc.edu/files/2014/08/FYC2.pdf

  • Vosen Callens, M., Kelter, P., Motschenbacher, J., Nyachwaya, J., Ladbury, L., & Semanko, A. (2019). Developing and implementing a campus-wide professional development program: Successes and challenges. Journal of College Science Teaching, 49(2), 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieman, C., & Gilbert, S. (2014). The teaching practices inventory: A new tool for characterizing college and university teaching in mathematics and science. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 552–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., & Yin, H. (2017). Effects of professional learning community and collective teacher efficacy on teacher involvement and support as well as student motivation and learning strategies. In Life in Schools and Classrooms (pp. 433–452). Springer, Singapore.

Download references

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation [NSF DUE 152056].

We appreciate the support of the Gateways-ND research and leadership team in this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, North Dakota State University, P.O. Box 6050, Fargo, ND, 58108-6050, USA

    Anna M. Semanko

  2. Department of Psychology, Minnesota State University Moorhead, P.O. Box 115, Moorhead, MN, 56563, USA

    Jared L. Ladbury

Authors
  1. Anna M. Semanko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jared L. Ladbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna M. Semanko.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Semanko, A.M., Ladbury, J.L. Using the Reasoned Action Approach to Predict Active Teaching Behaviors in College STEM Courses. Journal for STEM Educ Res 3, 387–402 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00038-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00038-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation