Interpret with Caution: COPUS Instructional Styles May Not Differ in Terms of Practices That Support Student Learning

Autor/inn/en	McConnell, Melody; Boyer, Jeffrey; Montplaisir, Lisa M.; Arneson, Jessie B.; Harding, Rachel L. S.; Farlow, Brian; Offerdahl, Erika G.
Titel	Interpret with Caution: COPUS Instructional Styles May Not Differ in Terms of Practices That Support Student Learning
Quelle	In: CBE - Life Sciences Education, 20 (2021) 2, Artikel 26 (9 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1931-7913
Schlagwörter	Teaching Methods; STEM Education; Undergraduate Students; Evaluation Methods; Formative Evaluation; Classroom Observation Techniques; Student Centered Learning; Didacticism; Active Learning + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; STEM; Group work; Student-entered learning; Student-centred learning; Student centred learning; Schülerorientierter Unterricht; Schülerzentrierter Unterricht; Gruppenarbeit; Didaktisierung; Aktives Lernen
Abstract	There is a growing need for valid and reliable measures to monitor the efficacy of undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) reform initiatives. The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) is a widely used tool originally designed to measure the presence of overt instructor and student behaviors. It has subsequently been used to characterize instruction along a continuum from didactic to student centered, and more recently to categorize instruction into one of three styles. Initiatives focused on professional development often support instructors' progression from didactic to student-centered styles. There is a need to examine COPUS instructional styles in terms of behaviors that research has shown to improve student learning. Formative assessment is a research-based practice that involves behaviors accounted for by the COPUS (e.g., posing a question). We qualitatively compared the formative assessment behaviors in 16 biology class sessions categorized into each of the three COPUS styles. We were unable to detect differences in formative assessment behaviors between the COPUS styles. Caution should be taken when interpreting COPUS data to make inferences about the effects of reform efforts. This study underscores the need for additional measures to monitor national reform initiatives in undergraduate STEM. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Society for Cell Biology. 8120 Woodmont Avenue Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20814-2762. Tel: 301-347-9300; Fax: 301-347-9310; e-mail: ascbinfo@ascb.org; Website: http://www.ascb.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01