Eleni K. Geragosian, Diana Zhu, Marc Skriloff and Ginger V. Shultz
{"title":"Chemistry graduate teaching assistants’ teacher noticing","authors":"Eleni K. Geragosian, Diana Zhu, Marc Skriloff and Ginger V. Shultz","doi":"10.1039/D3RP00003F","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Chemistry graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) have substantial facetime with undergraduate students at large research institutions where they lead discussion and lab sessions. Emerging research describes GTAs’ content and teaching knowledge for introductory chemistry classes, but we need to know more about how GTAs manage their classes in the moment and how they assess student learning during class time. We conducted classroom observations and post-observation interviews with six chemistry GTAs with various years of teaching experience and who were teaching a variety of classes (<em>e.g.</em>, general chemistry discussion, biochemistry discussion, organic chemistry lab, computational chemistry lab, and more). These GTAs were each observed and interviewed multiple times over the course of a semester. Through qualitative analysis guided by the teacher noticing framework, we describe what chemistry GTAs notice, or pay attention to, regarding student learning in their teaching sessions and how they interpret what they notice. We found that chemistry GTAs often paid attention to the types of questions that students asked but relied on their students to take initiative to ask questions in order to assess their learning. Also, GTAs often focused on superficial features of their class sessions to assess learning, like whether students finished their tasks and left their session early. However, some GTAs noticed more sophisticated evidence of student understanding, such as when students connected content covered across multiple class sessions. The results from this study contribute to our understanding of how chemistry GTAs lead their sessions and evaluate student learning during their sessions. Results serve to inform potential training designs that can support chemistry GTAs’ teacher learning through learning to notice—and to create opportunities to notice—significant features of their classrooms.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":" 1","pages":" 300-312"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2024/rp/d3rp00003f","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Chemistry graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) have substantial facetime with undergraduate students at large research institutions where they lead discussion and lab sessions. Emerging research describes GTAs’ content and teaching knowledge for introductory chemistry classes, but we need to know more about how GTAs manage their classes in the moment and how they assess student learning during class time. We conducted classroom observations and post-observation interviews with six chemistry GTAs with various years of teaching experience and who were teaching a variety of classes (e.g., general chemistry discussion, biochemistry discussion, organic chemistry lab, computational chemistry lab, and more). These GTAs were each observed and interviewed multiple times over the course of a semester. Through qualitative analysis guided by the teacher noticing framework, we describe what chemistry GTAs notice, or pay attention to, regarding student learning in their teaching sessions and how they interpret what they notice. We found that chemistry GTAs often paid attention to the types of questions that students asked but relied on their students to take initiative to ask questions in order to assess their learning. Also, GTAs often focused on superficial features of their class sessions to assess learning, like whether students finished their tasks and left their session early. However, some GTAs noticed more sophisticated evidence of student understanding, such as when students connected content covered across multiple class sessions. The results from this study contribute to our understanding of how chemistry GTAs lead their sessions and evaluate student learning during their sessions. Results serve to inform potential training designs that can support chemistry GTAs’ teacher learning through learning to notice—and to create opportunities to notice—significant features of their classrooms.