A National Snapshot of Introductory Chemistry Instructors and Their Instructional Practices.

The effectiveness of active learning on promoting students' academic outcomes and persistence has been established in the literature. However, despite the effort of purposeful change agents, the uptake of active learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is slow. While previous research from the chemistry education community has provided insights into the implementation of specific active learning strategies across the United States, the extent to which chemistry instructors leverage these strategies in general remains unknown. This article presents the results of a national survey aimed at exploring introductory chemistry instructors' knowledge and implementation of active learning, variations on this knowledge, and use across tenure statuses and institution types. This paper also aims to address the gap in the literature in our understanding of the characteristics of instructors of these courses. We thus provide a description of instructors' demographics, training, teaching experience, and teaching responsibilities. Our findings reveal that instructors in these courses are prominently males of European descent. Additionally, instructors come into their teaching position with minimal pedagogical training and participate mainly in short training once in their position. While the majority of instructors have knowledge of specific active learning strategies, their consistent implementation remains limited, with lecturing still being the instructional practice of choice. Variations were found between institution types and across tenure statuses within institutions in terms of pedagogical training, use of specific active learning strategies, and proportion of class time spent lecturing. The findings provide a baseline for future studies that aim to assess the effectiveness of interventions fostering the implementation of active learning in introductory chemistry courses and highlight the critical need for improved communication about teaching practices across institutions and tenure statuses.

What really impacts the use of active learning in undergraduate STEM education? Results from a national survey of chemistry, mathematics, and physics instructors.

Six common beliefs about the usage of active learning in introductory STEM courses are investigated using survey data from 3769 instructors. Three beliefs focus on contextual factors: class size, classroom setup, and teaching evaluations; three focus on individual factors: security of employment, research activity, and prior exposure. The analysis indicates that instructors in all situations can and do employ active learning in their courses. However, with the exception of security of employment, trends in the data are consistent with beliefs about the impact of these factors on usage of active learning. We discuss implications of these results for institutional and departmental policies to facilitate the use of active learning.

A structural equation model looking at student's participatory behavior and their success in Calculus I.

BACKGROUND: Government projections in the USA indicate that the country will need a million more science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduates above and beyond those already projected by the year 2022. Of crucial importance to the STEM pipeline is success in Calculus I, without which continuation in a STEM major is not possible. The STEM community at large, and mathematics instructors specifically, need to understand factors that influence and promote success in order to mitigate the alarming attrition trend. Previous work in this area has defined success singularly in terms of grades or persistence; however, these definitions are somewhat limiting and neglect the possible mediating effects of affective constructs like confidence, mindset, and enjoyment on the aforementioned markers of success. Using structural equation modeling, this paper explored the effect of participation on grades in freshman college calculus and investigated whether these effects were mediated by affective variables. RESULTS: Results indicated that participation had no significant direct effect on any of the success components in the final model-a finding that was not only counterintuitive but actually contradicted previous research done on this data. Participation was however highly correlated with two other exogenous variables indicating it would be inappropriate to dismiss it as being unrelated to success. Furthermore, the results suggested a cluster of affective success components and an achievement component with confidence being the intermediary between the two. CONCLUSIONS: This paper extends upon previous work with this data set in which the effect of participatory behaviors on success was investigated wherein success was measured singularly with expected course grade and affective components of success were not considered. The limited explanatory power of the model, coupled with the seemingly contradictory results, indicates that participatory behaviors alone might be insufficient to capture the complexity of the success response variable.

Factors contributing to students and instructors experiencing a lack of time in college calculus.

BACKGROUND: Calculus is a foundational course for STEM-intending students yet has been shown to dissuade students from pursuing STEM degrees. In this report, we examine factors related to students and instructors reporting a lack of time in class for students to understand difficult ideas and relate this to students' and instructors' perceptions of opportunities to learn using a hierarchical linear model. This work is part of the US national study on college calculus, which provides an ideal landscape to examine these questions on a large scale. RESULTS: We find a number of student factors associated with students experiencing negative opportunities to learn, such as student gender, lacking previous calculus experience, and reports of poor and non-student-centered teaching. Factors weakly associated with instructor reports of lack of time were a common final and reporting that approximately half of the students lacked the ability to succeed in the course. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis offers insight into how we might create more positive opportunities to learn in our own classrooms. This includes preparing students before they enter calculus, so they feel confident in their abilities, as well as weakening the internal framing of the course by engaging in teaching practices that provide students opportunities to communicate and influence their learning (e.g., discussion and group work). We argue that this is especially important in introductory college calculus courses that are packed with material, taught to a diverse population of students in terms of demographics, mathematical preparation, and career goals.