Prior experiences as students and instructors play a critical role in instructors’ decision to adopt evidence-based instructional practices

IF 5.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Stem Education Pub Date : 2024-03-25 DOI:10.1186/s40594-024-00478-3
Annika R. Kraft, Emily L. Atieh, Lu Shi, Marilyne Stains
{"title":"Prior experiences as students and instructors play a critical role in instructors’ decision to adopt evidence-based instructional practices","authors":"Annika R. Kraft, Emily L. Atieh, Lu Shi, Marilyne Stains","doi":"10.1186/s40594-024-00478-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been a growing interest in characterizing factors influencing teaching decisions of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instructors in order to address the slow uptake of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs). This growing body of research has identified contextual factors (e.g., classroom layout, departmental norms) as primary influencers of STEM instructors’ decision to implement EBIPs in their courses. However, models of influences on instructional practices indicate that context is only one type of factor to consider. Other factors fall at the individual level such as instructors’ past teaching experience and their views on learning. Few studies have been able to explore in depth the role of these individual factors on the adoption of EBIPs since it is challenging to control for contextual features when studying current instructors. Moreover, most studies exploring adoption of EBIPs do not take into account the distinctive features of each EBIP and the influence these features may have on the decision to adopt the EBIP. Rather, studies typically explore barriers and drivers to the implementation of EBIPs in general. In this study, we address these gaps in the literature by conducting an in-depth exploration of individual factors and EBIPs’ features that influence nine future STEM instructors’ decisions to incorporate a selected set of EBIPs in their teaching. We had hypothesized that the future instructors would have different reasoning to support their decisions to adopt or not Peer Instruction and the 5E Model as the two EBIPs have distinctive features. However, our results demonstrate that instructors based their decisions on similar factors. In particular, we found that the main drivers of their decisions were (1) the compatibility of the EBIP with their past experiences as students and instructors as well as teaching values and (2) experiences provided in the pedagogical course they were enrolled in. This study demonstrates that when considering the adoption of EBIPs, there is a need to look beyond solely contextual influences on instructor’s decisions to innovate in their courses and explore individual factors. Moreover, professional development programs should leverage their participants past experiences as students and instructors and provide an opportunity for instructors to experience new EBIPs as learners and instructors.","PeriodicalId":48581,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stem Education","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stem Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00478-3","RegionNum":1,"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

There has been a growing interest in characterizing factors influencing teaching decisions of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instructors in order to address the slow uptake of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs). This growing body of research has identified contextual factors (e.g., classroom layout, departmental norms) as primary influencers of STEM instructors’ decision to implement EBIPs in their courses. However, models of influences on instructional practices indicate that context is only one type of factor to consider. Other factors fall at the individual level such as instructors’ past teaching experience and their views on learning. Few studies have been able to explore in depth the role of these individual factors on the adoption of EBIPs since it is challenging to control for contextual features when studying current instructors. Moreover, most studies exploring adoption of EBIPs do not take into account the distinctive features of each EBIP and the influence these features may have on the decision to adopt the EBIP. Rather, studies typically explore barriers and drivers to the implementation of EBIPs in general. In this study, we address these gaps in the literature by conducting an in-depth exploration of individual factors and EBIPs’ features that influence nine future STEM instructors’ decisions to incorporate a selected set of EBIPs in their teaching. We had hypothesized that the future instructors would have different reasoning to support their decisions to adopt or not Peer Instruction and the 5E Model as the two EBIPs have distinctive features. However, our results demonstrate that instructors based their decisions on similar factors. In particular, we found that the main drivers of their decisions were (1) the compatibility of the EBIP with their past experiences as students and instructors as well as teaching values and (2) experiences provided in the pedagogical course they were enrolled in. This study demonstrates that when considering the adoption of EBIPs, there is a need to look beyond solely contextual influences on instructor’s decisions to innovate in their courses and explore individual factors. Moreover, professional development programs should leverage their participants past experiences as students and instructors and provide an opportunity for instructors to experience new EBIPs as learners and instructors.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为学生和教员的先前经历对教员决定采用循证教学实践起着至关重要的作用
为了解决循证教学实践(EBIPs)实施缓慢的问题,人们越来越关注影响科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)教师教学决策的因素。越来越多的研究发现,环境因素(如教室布局、系部规范)是影响 STEM 教师决定在其课程中实施 EBIPs 的主要因素。然而,影响教学实践的模型表明,情境只是需要考虑的因素之一。其他因素属于个人层面,如教师过去的教学经验和他们对学习的看法。很少有研究能够深入探讨这些个人因素对采用 EBIPs 的作用,因为在研究当前的教师时,要控制情境特征具有挑战性。此外,大多数探讨采用 EBIPs 的研究并没有考虑到每个 EBIPs 的显著特征以及这些特征可能对采用 EBIPs 的决定产生的影响。相反,研究通常探讨的是实施 EBIP 的一般障碍和驱动因素。在本研究中,我们针对文献中的这些空白,对影响九名未来科学、技术、工程和数学教员决定在其教学中采用一组选定的 EBIP 的个别因素和 EBIP 的特点进行了深入探讨。我们曾假设,未来的教员会有不同的理由来支持他们决定是否采用同伴指导和 5E 模型,因为这两种 EBIPs 具有不同的特点。然而,我们的研究结果表明,教员们是基于相似的因素做出决定的。特别是,我们发现他们做出决定的主要驱动因素是:(1)EBIP 与他们过去作为学生和教员的经验以及教学价值观的兼容性;(2)他们所参加的教学课程所提供的经验。本研究表明,在考虑采用 EBIPs 时,有必要超越环境对教师决定在其课程中进行创新的影响,并探索个人因素。此外,专业发展项目应充分利用参与者过去作为学生和教员的经验,并为教员提供机会,让他们以学习者和教员的身份体验新的EBIP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Stem Education
International Journal of Stem Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
12.40
自引率
11.90%
发文量
68
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of STEM Education is a multidisciplinary journal in subject-content education that focuses on the study of teaching and learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). It is being established as a brand new, forward looking journal in the field of education. As a peer-reviewed journal, it is positioned to promote research and educational development in the rapidly evolving field of STEM education around the world.
期刊最新文献
The S in STEM: gender differences in science anxiety and its relations with science test performance-related variables The transfer effect of computational thinking (CT)-STEM: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis Exploring instructional design in K-12 STEM education: a systematic literature review Academic social comparison: a promising new target to reduce fear of negative evaluation in large-enrollment college science courses One size doesn’t fit all: how different types of learning motivations influence engineering undergraduate students’ success outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1