Assessment in the Science Dept. (10/28)

One of the more exciting assessment tools used in the science department is being piloted by Teresa Brown and Jim Stegge. It has been decided that one measure of critical thinking is the ability to effectively read a graph and upon completion of a science course, it is hoped a student, given a graph, would be able to make predictions, notice trends and understand relationships between data. Brown and Stegge have worked to develop a WebCT quiz with the goal of assessing that skill.

The quiz consists of a pool of approximately 30 questions which are separated into different groups based on type (trends, extrapolation, etc…). Upon first logging in to WebCT, the student must answer 7 of those questions (1 or 2 of each type) within 30 minutes. Later in the semester, the student will log in again and receive a different set of 7 questions. Results can than be tabulated and analyzed by the instructor.

Because it’s such a new project there is very little data at this time but the hope is that the entire department will eventually use the quiz. So far, it’s only been used in introductory biology and general chemistry courses. That will be continued next semester as Troy Cayou will use the assessment quiz in his general chemistry I and II.

Other than the graphing quiz, a number of instructors use pre/post testing to asses the student’s learning in their courses. Terri Hill and Heather Sklenicka (both of chemistry) are using standardized exams created by the American Chemical Society (ACS) for their introductory and health sciences chemistry courses. Terry Brown (biology) also uses the pre/post test methodology in her anatomy and physiology (A & P) course. Next semester Jaime Malcore will also be assessing her student’s learning with the same pre/post test so that all the A & P students at RCTC undergo assessment.

Recently Jaime attended a CTL conference called “Teaching for a Deeper Understanding.” One of the questions discussed was how can instructors best evaluate when students have gained a deep understanding of the material? One of the techniques introduced is called “Think Alouds,” introduced by Lendol Calder from Augustana College. Taken from http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/listserv/remarks/calderandcarlson.htm, this method depends upon a subject that has been “trained to think out loud while completing a defined task… [T]he introspections can [then] be recorded and analyzed by researchers to determine what cognitive processes were employed to deal with the problem”, and thereby give the instructor an idea of the depth of his/her student’s understanding.

Another topic discussed during the conference was titled “Three Episodes of Student Learning” in which groups of students were exposed to material in different ways. Group 1 would read the material of interest, write a summary and hear a lecture that explained that material. Group 2 did not read but analyzed and graphed data relating to the material and also heard the same lecture as group 1. Group 3 did not read and did not attend the lecture but spent their time analyzing and graphing data in the same manner as group 2. Upon testing, group 2 students performed the best and not only understood the facts but were able to make predictions based on the material they analyzed. Group 1 and 3 only were able to prove their understanding of the facts.

The department also has the CTL coordinator, Jim Stegge, available to it. In speaking with him, he made it clear that he has resources on the subjects of active learning, case studies and creating significant learning experiences and would be happy to share the info with those interested.