A framework for leveraging network course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) faculty to develop, validate, and administer an assessment instrument.

Over the last several years, nationally disseminated course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have emerged as an alternative to developing a novel CURE from scratch, but objective assessment of these multi-institution (network) CUREs across institutions is challenging due to differences in student populations, instructors, and fidelity of implementation. The time, money, and skills required to develop and validate a CURE-specific assessment instrument can be prohibitive. Here, we describe a co-design process for assessing a network CURE [the Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance in the Environment (PARE)] that did not require support through external funding, was a relatively low time commitment for participating instructors, and resulted in a validated instrument that is usable across diverse PARE network institution types and implementation styles. Data collection efforts have involved over two dozen unique institutions, 42 course offerings, and over 1,300 pre-/post-matched assessment record data points. We demonstrated significant student learning gains but with small effect size in both content and science process skills after participation in the two laboratory sessions associated with the core PARE module. These results show promise for the efficacy of short-duration CUREs, an educational research area ripe for further investigation, and may support efforts to lower barriers for instructor adoption by leveraging a CURE network for developing and validating assessment tools.

Student-Authored Scientist Spotlights: Investigating the Impacts of Engaging Undergraduates as Developers of Inclusive Curriculum through a Service-Learning Course.

Scientist Spotlights-curricular materials that employ the personal and professional stories of scientists from diverse backgrounds-have previously been shown to positively influence undergraduate students' relatability to and perceptions of scientists. We hypothesized that engaging students in authoring Scientist Spotlights might produce curricular materials of similar impact, as well as provide a mechanism for student involvement as partners in science education reform. To test this idea and investigate the impact of student-authored Scientist Spotlights, we developed a service-learning course in which teams of biology students partnered with an instructor to develop and implement Scientist Spotlights in a biology course. Results revealed that exposure to three or four student-authored Scientist Spotlights significantly shifted peers' perceptions of scientists in all partner courses. Interestingly, student-authored Scientist Spotlights shifted peers' relatability to scientists similarly among both white students and students of color. Further, student authors themselves showed increases in their relatability to scientists. Finally, a department-wide survey demonstrated significant differences in students' perceptions of scientist representation between courses with and without student-authored Spotlights. Results suggest that engaging students as authors of inclusive curricular materials and partners in reform is a promising approach to promoting inclusion and addressing representation in science.

Fear of the CURE: A Beginner's Guide to Overcoming Barriers in Creating a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience.

Over the past decade, growing evidence has shown that there are many benefits to undergraduate students engaging in scientific research, including increased persistence in pursuing STEM careers and successful outcomes in graduate study. With these benefits in mind, there has been a significant push toward providing research opportunities for students in STEM majors. To address this need, an increasing number of undergraduate courses have been developed to provide students with research experiences in a class setting, also known as course-based undergraduate research experiences, or CUREs. Despite the growing success of these courses, a number of barriers remain that deter faculty from developing and implementing CUREs. Here, we will review the perceived challenges of developing a CURE and provide practical strategies to overcome these challenges.

Investigating Instructor Talk in Novel Contexts: Widespread Use, Unexpected Categories, and an Emergent Sampling Strategy.

Instructor Talk-noncontent language used by instructors in classrooms-is a recently defined and promising variable for better understanding classroom dynamics. Having previously characterized the Instructor Talk framework within the context of a single course, we present here our results surrounding the applicability of the Instructor Talk framework to noncontent language used by instructors in novel course contexts. We analyzed Instructor Talk in eight additional biology courses in their entirety and in 61 biology courses using an emergent sampling strategy. We observed widespread use of Instructor Talk with variation in the amount and category type used. The vast majority of Instructor Talk could be characterized using the originally published Instructor Talk framework, suggesting the robustness of this framework. Additionally, a new form of Instructor Talk-Negatively Phrased Instructor Talk, language that may discourage students or distract from the learning process-was detected in these novel course contexts. Finally, the emergent sampling strategy described here may allow investigation of Instructor Talk in even larger numbers of courses across institutions and disciplines. Given its widespread use, potential influence on students in learning environments, and ability to be sampled, Instructor Talk may be a key variable to consider in future research on teaching and learning in higher education.

Collectively Improving Our Teaching: Attempting Biology Department-wide Professional Development in Scientific Teaching.

Many efforts to improve science teaching in higher education focus on a few faculty members at an institution at a time, with limited published evidence on attempts to engage faculty across entire departments. We created a long-term, department-wide collaborative professional development program, Biology Faculty Explorations in Scientific Teaching (Biology FEST). Across 3 years of Biology FEST, 89% of the department's faculty completed a weeklong scientific teaching institute, and 83% of eligible instructors participated in additional semester-long follow-up programs. A semester after institute completion, the majority of Biology FEST alumni reported adding active learning to their courses. These instructor self-reports were corroborated by audio analysis of classroom noise and surveys of students in biology courses on the frequency of active-learning techniques used in classes taught by Biology FEST alumni and nonalumni. Three years after Biology FEST launched, faculty participants overwhelmingly reported that their teaching was positively affected. Unexpectedly, most respondents also believed that they had improved relationships with departmental colleagues and felt a greater sense of belonging to the department. Overall, our results indicate that biology department-wide collaborative efforts to develop scientific teaching skills can indeed attract large numbers of faculty, spark widespread change in teaching practices, and improve departmental relations.

Classroom sound can be used to classify teaching practices in college science courses.

Active-learning pedagogies have been repeatedly demonstrated to produce superior learning gains with large effect sizes compared with lecture-based pedagogies. Shifting large numbers of college science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty to include any active learning in their teaching may retain and more effectively educate far more students than having a few faculty completely transform their teaching, but the extent to which STEM faculty are changing their teaching methods is unclear. Here, we describe the development and application of the machine-learning-derived algorithm Decibel Analysis for Research in Teaching (DART), which can analyze thousands of hours of STEM course audio recordings quickly, with minimal costs, and without need for human observers. DART analyzes the volume and variance of classroom recordings to predict the quantity of time spent on single voice (e.g., lecture), multiple voice (e.g., pair discussion), and no voice (e.g., clicker question thinking) activities. Applying DART to 1,486 recordings of class sessions from 67 courses, a total of 1,720 h of audio, revealed varied patterns of lecture (single voice) and nonlecture activity (multiple and no voice) use. We also found that there was significantly more use of multiple and no voice strategies in courses for STEM majors compared with courses for non-STEM majors, indicating that DART can be used to compare teaching strategies in different types of courses. Therefore, DART has the potential to systematically inventory the presence of active learning with ∼90% accuracy across thousands of courses in diverse settings with minimal effort.