Modeling Active Engagement Pedagogy through Classroom Response Systems in a Physics Teacher Education Course

Marina Milner-Bolotin,Heather Fisher,Alexandra Macdonald

doi:10.31129/lumat.v1i5.1088

Marina Milner-Bolotin, Heather Fisher + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.31129/lumat.v1i5.1088

Copy DOI

Abstract

One of the most commonly explored technologies in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education is Classroom Response Systems (clickers). Clickers help instructors generate in-class discussion by soliciting student responses to multiple-choice conceptual questions and sharing the distribution of these responses with the class. The potential benefits of clicker-enhanced pedagogy include: increased student engagement, reduced anxiety, continuous formative assessment, and enhanced conceptual understanding. Most studies, however, investigate the effects of clicker-enhanced instruction in large undergraduate STEM courses. The impact of this pedagogy on learning in small secondary or post-secondary classrooms is still relatively unexplored. The context of this study is a secondary physics methods course in a Teacher Education Program at a large Canadian university. One of the course assignments required future teachers to develop multiple-choice conceptual questions relevant to the secondary physics curriculum. This study investigates the impact of modeling clicker-enhanced active engagement pedagogy on future teachers’ Content Knowledge, Pedagogical Knowledge, and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, as revealed by this assignment. The results of the study indicate that: (1) modeling clicker-enhanced pedagogy in a physics methods course increases future teachers’ interest in active learning; (2) clicker-enhanced pedagogy is a powerful vehicle for developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge of future physics teachers; (3) clicker-enhanced pedagogy is a useful tool for teacher educators for identifying and addressing the gaps in the Content Knowledge of future teachers. This study sheds light on developing future teachers’ capacities to design and implement instruction that is driven by conceptual questions in the presence or absence of technology and the impact of this process on their Pedagogical Content Knowledge and attitudes about conceptual STEM learning.

Highlights

Science education has undergone dramatic changes in North American post-secondary institutions over recent decades (Deslauriers, Schelew, & Wieman, 2011; Mazur, 2009)
The results of the study indicate that: (1) modeling clicker-enhanced pedagogy in a physics methods course increases future teachers’ interest in active learning; (2) clicker-enhanced pedagogy is a powerful vehicle for developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge of future physics teachers; (3) clicker-enhanced pedagogy is a useful tool for teacher educators for identifying and addressing the gaps in the Content Knowledge of future teachers
2006); improved access to computerized ways to administer these instruments to obtain quantitative data on student achievement; the realization that traditional teacher-centered pedagogies are largely ineffective for promoting conceptual understanding (Hake, 1998) and positive attitudes about science (Adams & Wieman, 2011); the recognition that engaging all students in STEM learning is important (Hazari, Sonnert, Sadler, & Shanahan, 2010; Let's Talk Science, 2013); and lastly, the availability of new educational technologies to promote the active engagement of students (Milner-Bolotin, 2012; Milner-Bolotin, Kotlicki, & Rieger, 2007; Wieman, Adams, Loeblein, & Perkins, 2010)

Summary

Introduction

Science education has undergone dramatic changes in North American post-secondary institutions over recent decades (Deslauriers, Schelew, & Wieman, 2011; Mazur, 2009). There has been a continuous growth in the number of post-secondary Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses offering student-centered active learning environments. This shift towards the active engagement of students was prompted by a number of factors: increased knowledge of how students learn 2006); improved access to computerized ways to administer these instruments to obtain quantitative data on student achievement; the realization that traditional teacher-centered pedagogies are largely ineffective for promoting conceptual understanding (Hake, 1998) and positive attitudes about science (Adams & Wieman, 2011); the recognition that engaging all students in STEM learning is important (Hazari, Sonnert, Sadler, & Shanahan, 2010; Let's Talk Science, 2013); and lastly, the availability of new educational technologies to promote the active engagement of students (Milner-Bolotin, 2012; Milner-Bolotin, Kotlicki, & Rieger, 2007; Wieman, Adams, Loeblein, & Perkins, 2010). PI has been found to be very effective in college STEM classrooms when students used either clickers (Hake, 1998; Milner-Bolotin, Antimirova, & Petrov, 2010) or flashcards (Lasry, 2008)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion