就在教学大纲中:关于生物入门课程,教学大纲告诉我们什么?

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Cbe-Life Sciences Education Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1187/cbe.23-05-0081
Austin Heil, Joshua Olaniran, Cara Gormally, Marguerite Peggy Brickman
{"title":"就在教学大纲中:关于生物入门课程,教学大纲告诉我们什么?","authors":"Austin Heil, Joshua Olaniran, Cara Gormally, Marguerite Peggy Brickman","doi":"10.1187/cbe.23-05-0081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Biology education researchers seek to improve biology education, particularly at the introductory level, yet there is little documentation about what is actually happening in introductory biology. To characterize the landscape of learning expectations for introductory biology, we analyzed course-level learning objectives (<i>n</i> = 1108) and course schedules from 188 nonmajor, mixed major, and major introductory biology syllabi. We analyzed syllabi collected from a diverse range of U.S. institution types to uncover insights about instructional design decisions for introductory biology. Our analysis revealed two distinct nonmajor course types: content and issues-based courses. We found syllabi tend to focus on low-cognitive skills and factual content that is essentially a march in step with a typical textbook table of contents, rarely including core competencies or socioscientific issues (SSIs) other than in nonscience major issues-based courses. Our work contributes more evidence that faculty struggle to write course-level learning objectives. Our findings suggest that there is much work to do if Vision and Change are to become more than simply a vision-to be actualized as change-including developing CLOs for introductory biology as a first step toward creating actionable instructional change.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"23 3","pages":"ar37"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440731/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It's in the Syllabus: What Syllabi Tell us about Introductory Biology Courses.\",\"authors\":\"Austin Heil, Joshua Olaniran, Cara Gormally, Marguerite Peggy Brickman\",\"doi\":\"10.1187/cbe.23-05-0081\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Biology education researchers seek to improve biology education, particularly at the introductory level, yet there is little documentation about what is actually happening in introductory biology. To characterize the landscape of learning expectations for introductory biology, we analyzed course-level learning objectives (<i>n</i> = 1108) and course schedules from 188 nonmajor, mixed major, and major introductory biology syllabi. We analyzed syllabi collected from a diverse range of U.S. institution types to uncover insights about instructional design decisions for introductory biology. Our analysis revealed two distinct nonmajor course types: content and issues-based courses. We found syllabi tend to focus on low-cognitive skills and factual content that is essentially a march in step with a typical textbook table of contents, rarely including core competencies or socioscientific issues (SSIs) other than in nonscience major issues-based courses. Our work contributes more evidence that faculty struggle to write course-level learning objectives. Our findings suggest that there is much work to do if Vision and Change are to become more than simply a vision-to be actualized as change-including developing CLOs for introductory biology as a first step toward creating actionable instructional change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"ar37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440731/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-05-0081\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-05-0081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生物教育研究人员致力于改善生物教育,尤其是入门级生物教育,但有关生物入门课程实际情况的文献却很少。为了描述生物学入门学习预期的特点,我们分析了课程层面的学习目标(n = 1108)和来自 188 份非主修、混合主修和主修生物学入门教学大纲的课程表。我们分析了从不同类型的美国院校收集到的教学大纲,以揭示有关生物学入门教学设计决策的见解。我们的分析揭示了两种不同的非专业课程类型:内容型课程和问题型课程。我们发现,教学大纲往往侧重于低认知技能和事实性内容,这些内容基本上与典型的教科书目录同步,很少包括核心能力或社会科学问题(SSI),除非是非科学专业的基于问题的课程。我们的工作提供了更多的证据,证明教师在编写课程学习目标方面存在困难。我们的研究结果表明,要使 "愿景与变革 "不仅仅是一个愿景,而是要将其变成现实的变革,还有很多工作要做,包括为生物学入门课程制定 CLO,以此作为实现可操作的教学变革的第一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
It's in the Syllabus: What Syllabi Tell us about Introductory Biology Courses.

Biology education researchers seek to improve biology education, particularly at the introductory level, yet there is little documentation about what is actually happening in introductory biology. To characterize the landscape of learning expectations for introductory biology, we analyzed course-level learning objectives (n = 1108) and course schedules from 188 nonmajor, mixed major, and major introductory biology syllabi. We analyzed syllabi collected from a diverse range of U.S. institution types to uncover insights about instructional design decisions for introductory biology. Our analysis revealed two distinct nonmajor course types: content and issues-based courses. We found syllabi tend to focus on low-cognitive skills and factual content that is essentially a march in step with a typical textbook table of contents, rarely including core competencies or socioscientific issues (SSIs) other than in nonscience major issues-based courses. Our work contributes more evidence that faculty struggle to write course-level learning objectives. Our findings suggest that there is much work to do if Vision and Change are to become more than simply a vision-to be actualized as change-including developing CLOs for introductory biology as a first step toward creating actionable instructional change.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
期刊最新文献
Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research. Examining How Student Identities Interact with an Immersive Field Ecology Course and its Implications for Graduate School Education. Factors Influencing the Use of Evidence-based Instructional Practices by Community College Biology Instructors. Bee The CURE: Increasing Student Science Self-Efficacy, Science Identity, and Predictors of Scientific Civic Engagement in a Community College CURE. Is Support in the Anxiety of the Beholder? How Anxiety Interacts with Perceptions of Instructor Support in Introductory Biology Classes.
×
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