Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Active Learning Catalysts Project

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "The Active Learning Catalysts Project"— Presentation transcript:

1 The Active Learning Catalysts Project
Increasing Adoption of Active Learning in STEM Disciplines Technology-Rich Studio Classroom Professional Development of Faculty “Catalysts” In 2011, NMU transformed a traditional classroom into a 63-seat active learning classroom. Classes were first held in the classroom during the winter 2012 semester. NMU’s Instructional Design and Technology unit, directed by Matt Smock, provides training and support for faculty teaching in the classroom. Principal Investigators Jill Leonard (Biology) and J.D. Phillips (Mathematics and Computer Science) lead a team of faculty catalysts that are redesigning at least one of their own courses and serving as models for other faculty. Catalysts represent each of the six STEM departments: Biology - Alec Lindsay Chemistry - Thomas Getman Earth, Environmental, & Geographical Sciences - Robert Legg Engineering Technology - Michael Martin Mathematics & Computer Science - Quinghong Zhang Physics - William Tireman Classroom Features Seven student tables, each seating 9 students, with: Multimedia document cameras 42” monitors with switching for 9 student laptops and document camera Interactive whiteboard overlays Microphones Dry-erase surfaces on all walls Two projectors that can display instructor or student content Centrally located instructor station with: Touch-screen projector controls for selecting content for projector Interactive podium tablet Document camera Dedicated licenses for web-based student response system Catalysts Receive Training, including on-campus pedagogy workshops, educational technology training, and off-campus conferences. Development time needed to integrate technology-enhanced active learning techniques into their courses. Resources, including articles and other publications about active learning, discipline-specific online resources, and an Active Learning at NMU community with both online and in-person components. Design Principles Follows SCALE-UP, the active learning approach developed by Dr. Robert Beichner and his team at North Carolina State University Round tables, 7 feet in diameter Chairs on castors to facilitate movement Centrally located instructor station serves as home base for a “guide on side” not a stage for a sage Accommodates multiple levels of collaboration 3 teams of 3 at each table for some activities 9 students at each table for other exercises Entire class for larger discussions and presentations Catalysts’ Commitment Help expand and sustain use of active learning within and outside of NMU STEM courses by: Sharing ideas and activities in a variety of forums Promoting active learning within their departments and disciplines, and Presenting their experiences at conferences. Acknowledgements: Thank you to all the faculty and students involved in this project, especially the STEM catalysts and our outside evaluator, Dr. Diane Ebert-May (Michigan State University). This project is funded as an NSF TUES Phase I project DUE with additional support from Northern Michigan University.

2 End of Semester Feedback Faculty Interest in Active Learning Classroom
The Active Learning Catalysts Project Objectives and Assessment Project Objectives Establish a student-centered technology-rich studio classroom designed to support active learning pedagogy. (Completed November 2011) Facilitate the implementation of technologically-enhanced active learning by developing a cohort of six STEM faculty catalysts who will redesign at least one of their own courses and serve as models for other faculty. (January 2012 – April 2014) Assess the overall and individual impacts of technological tools in an active learning studio classroom on the reform of STEM education. (January 2012 – April 2014) End of Semester Feedback Faculty Students Responses by faculty (18 over 3 semesters) and students (421 over 3 semesters) to survey questions related to their experience in the technology-enhanced active learning teaching space. Courses include those taught by catalysts as well as others who self-selected to use the teaching space. 2 3 Assessment Methods Tracking classroom activities and technology usage through daily logbook. End-of-semester feedback surveys for all faculty and students who have courses in active learning classroom. Tracking requests by all faculty to have courses scheduled in active learning classroom. Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) pre and post surveys for courses taught by Catalysts in active learning classroom (winter 2012 and fall 2012 analysis in progress) Faculty Interest in Active Learning Classroom Course requests and scheduling metrics for the technology-enhanced active learning room. Note that average room usage rates for NMU classrooms are hours per week in the regular academic year. Semester # course requests # instructors scheduled # course sections scheduled # STEM sections Classroom Use (hours/wk) Winter ‘12 19 14 17 46 Summer ‘12 9 3 4 1 10,18 Fall ‘12 16 13 11 42.5 Winter ‘13 15 44 Relative proportion of class sessions that implemented traditional lecture and group activities based on self-reported data from instructional faculty (N=30) from daily logbook. Left panel shows choices as given to instructors and instructors were allowed to choose more than one to represent a single session. Right panel shows data reassessed with all group activities pooled; in any session, both lecture and group work could still have occurred. Initial results suggest that instructors (catalysts and non-catalysts) are implementing group activities in the active learning room in a slightly higher proportion of classes than they are using for lecturing. Most respondents reported using a combination of techniques in a single class period. In-Class Activities Use of technology associated with the active learning space over two semesters (Winter 2012 and Fall 2012). Data is presented as the number of class sessions (all courses per semester pooled) where each type of equipment was reported by instructors as used. Note that instructors were able to record using more than one apparatus per session. Data covers 359 (Fall) – 353 (winter) sessions with entries. Technology Usage 1 Learn more!


Download ppt "The Active Learning Catalysts Project"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google