We found 147 results that contain "peer"

MSU seeks new ideas aimed at improving the digital learning experience. Incorporating digital strategies to support pedagogy can enhance students’ learning experiences and offer efficiencies in assessment and analysis. Many digital learning innovations impacting institutional initiatives at scale often start small. Innovations may spring from novel pedagogical approaches in individual courses, as collaborative experiments across disciplines, or the result of student feedback and needs analysis. We recognize the value of providing support and resources to change the student experience for the better. MSU's Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation is committed to facilitating new ideas and announces the following call for proposals for the Catalyst Innovation Program.
Catalyst Innovation Program
The Catalyst Innovation Program seeks to fund creative and innovative uses of tools, technology, and pedagogical approaches up to $10,000 for the purposes of allowing experimentation in spaces with the potential to enhance student learning experiences.
Please note that these funds are intended to fund software, technology, and/or services but are not able to support salary lines, including faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students. We are especially interested in proposals that include one or more of the following criteria:
Learning

Demonstrate learning, conceptual understanding, or increased content knowledge

Inclusivity and Accessibility

Increase access, as defined as “providing the means for all qualified, motivated students to complete courses, degrees, or programs in their disciplines of choice (Online Learning Consortium, n.d.; MSU Learning Design Strategy.)” For example, reduced or zero cost to students beyond tuition, universally designed experiences, and the like
Contribute to more equitable and inclusive digital learning experiences and environments
Experiences that are universally designed and accessible

Feedback and Adaptivity

Increase formative feedback (assessment for learning)
Provide learning analytics to educators to enable adaptive or personalized pedagogy
Provide mechanisms for student input and collaboration
Increase student engagement as defined by your discipline. For example as increased participation, collaboration, peer learning, and so on

Proposals
Proposals should include a description of the innovation and idea, implementation approach, evaluation and assessment plan, and budget. Click the following link to apply: https://msu.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cSa6sOXdRCQxPtc
Timeline (Extended deadline)

The Call for Proposals opens: April 29, 2022
Proposals are due: 5:00 pm EST, June 3, 2022
Awards will be announced: June 15, 2022
Once awarded, funding is available through December, 2022.  

Selection Criteria

Completeness of the idea proposal

Clearly explained potential impact on student engagement, mastery, or success
Challenge or shift current teaching and learning practices

Readiness to implement

Plan to implement during the funding period in an existing course or program

Opportunity for scale/re-use
Assessment and evaluation plan for your project
Proposed budget
Alignment with MSU Learning Design Strategy

Quality
Inclusivity
Connectivity


References
https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/about/quality-framework-five-pillars/
http://lds.msu.edu

So you've started to think about diversity, equity, and inclusion. You read DEI & Student Belonging and have reflected on your educator identity. But now you're wondering - how... how do I work to make sure my course is an equitable and inclusive space?

Start with your syllabus

Use the Interfaith Calendar when planning important dates for the course
Syllabus resources: The What and Why of a Syllabus, CELT Checklist Iowa State




Consider your course resources

Be mindful of choosing course materials (language, examples, photos) and whose voices you're highlighting
Older materials can be an opportunity to address DEI awareness over time


Think about your students

Pronunciation, pronouns & consistency
Consider everyone as individuals who are unique & don’t make assumptions about student identities (race, religion, orientation, gender)
Address growth mindset & possible anxiety


Be intentional in how you facilitate discussion

Establish ground rules, guidelines, norms
Use a random system for asking questions
Monitor so that no one dominates
Allow students to finish before responding
Avoid generalizations


Think critically about your communication

Language matters: avoid idioms, “common” figures of speech (CSU Inclusive Language Guide), abbreviations and acronyms should be explained
Use multiple forms of communication (seeing/hearing, and also explain key ideas in different ways)
Gather feedback from students 
Don’t assume quiet students don’t understand – there are numerous reasons why a student may not speak up


[Re]consider your classroom presentation/lecture/facilitation approach

Use gender neutral language and include varied examples
Promote a respectful classroom climate
Encourage participation (eye contact, wait time, talk with students outside of class)
Vary teaching methods to learning styles
Be very cautious of humor in class


Be intentional about setting up teams & group projects

Heterogeneous, but avoid tokenism
Check-in often
Use peer evaluations


Articulate assessment and evaluation expectations

Make sure your expectations are clear
Align your learning goals, content and evaluations



Photo by javier trueba on Unsplash

Authors: Jeremy Van Hof, Stephen Thomas, Becky Matz, Kate Sonka, Sarah Wellman, Daniel Trego, Casey Henley, Jessica Knott, David Howe With our guiding principles for remote teaching as flexibility, generosity, and transparency, we know that there is no one solution for assessment that will meet all faculty and student needs.  From this perspective, the primary concern should be assessing how well students have achieved the key learning objectives and determining what objectives are still unmet. It may be necessary to modify the nature of the exam to allow for the differences of the online environment. This document, written for any instructor who typically administers an end-of-semester high-stakes final exam, addresses how best to make those modifications.  In thinking about online exams we recommend the following approaches (in priority order) for adjusting exams: multiple lower-stakes assessments, open-note exams, and online proctored exams.  When changes to the learning environment occur, creating an inclusive and accessible learning experience for students with disabilities should remain a top priority. This includes providing accessible content and implementing student disability accommodations, as well as considering the ways assessment methods might be affected.  
 
Faculty and students should be prepared to discuss accommodation needs that may arise. The team at MSU Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities (RCPD) will be available to answer questions about implementing accommodations. Contact information for Team RCPD is found at https://www.rcpd.msu.edu/teamrcpd. Below you will find a description of each of the recommendations, tips for their implementation, the benefits of each, and references to pertinent research on each.
There are three primary options*: 

Multiple lower-stakes assessments (most preferred)  
Open note exams  (preferred)  
Online proctored exams (if absolutely necessary)

*Performance-based assessments such as laboratory, presentation, music, or art experiences that show proficiency will be discussed in another document



Multiple lower-stakes assessments
Description: The unique circumstances of this semester make it necessary to carefully consider your priorities when assessing students. Rather than being cumulative, a multiple assessment approach makes assessment an incremental process. Students demonstrate their understanding frequently, and accrue points over time, rather than all at once on one test. Dividing the assessment into smaller pieces can reduce anxiety and give students more practice in taking their exams online.  For instance, you might have a quiz at the end of each week that students have to complete. Each subsequent quiz can (and should) build on the previous one, allowing students to build toward more complex and rigorous applications of the content. Using this approach minimizes your need to change the types of questions that you have been asking to date, which can affect student performance (e.g. if you normally ask multiple-choice questions, you can continue to do so).   For the remainder of the semester, use the D2L quizzes tool to build multiple smaller assessments. Spread out the totality of your typical final exam over the month of April. This can be as simple as dividing a 100 question final exam into eight 12-question “synthesis activities” that students complete bi-weekly.
Benefits as noted from the literature: 

No significant differences were observed in terms of keystroke information, rapid guessing, or aggregated scores between proctoring conditions;
More effective method for incentivizing participation and reading; 
Encourages knowledge retention as each subsequent assessment builds on the last

Rios, J. A., & Liu, O. L. (2017). Online proctored versus unproctored low-stakes internet test administration: Is there differential test-taking behavior and performance?. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(4), 226-241. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08923647.2017.1258628  Schrank, Z. (2016). An assessment of student perceptions and responses to frequent low-stakes testing in introductory sociology classes. Teaching Sociology, 44(2), 118-127. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0092055X15624745  VanPatten, B., Trego, D., & Hopkins, W. P. (2015). In‐Class vs. Online Testing in University‐Level Language Courses: A Research Report. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 659-668. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/flan.12160 
Open note exams 
Description: Open note assessments allow students to refer to the Internet and other materials while completing their assessments. By design, this disincentives academic dishonesty. Often instructors put time parameters around open note exams. These types of exams also lend themselves to collaborative work in which multiple students work together to complete the assessment. With an open note strategy, you can keep your general exam schedule and point structure, but you may need to revise questions so they are less about factual recall and more about the application of concepts.  For instance you might give students a scenario or case study that they have to apply class concepts to as opposed to asking for specific values or definitions. If you plan to make such changes, communicate your intent and rationale to you students prior to the exam.  One effective open note testing technique is to use multiple-true/false questions as a means to measure understanding. These questions (called “multiple selection” questions in D2L) pose a scenario and prompt students to check all the boxes that apply. For example, students may be prompted to read a short case or lab report, then check all statements that are true about that reading. In this way a single question stem can assess multiple levels of complexity and/or comprehension. 
Benefits as noted from the literature: 



Open-book exams and collaborative exams promote development of critical thinking skills. 
Open-book exams are more engaging and require higher-order thinking skills. 
Application of open-book exams simulates the working environment. 
Students prefer open-book exams and report decreased anxiety levels. 
Collaborative exams stimulate brain cell growth and intricate cognitive complexes.  



Johanns, B., Dinkens, A., & Moore, J. (2017). A systematic review comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills. Nurse education in practice, 27, 89-94. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1471595317305486
 
Couch, B. A., Hubbard, J. K., & Brassil, C. E. (2018). Multiple–true–false questions reveal the limits of the multiple–choice format for detecting students with incomplete understandings. BioScience, 68(6), 455-463. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy037 
Implementation for multiple lower-stakes and open note assessment strategies: 

Timed vs. untimed: On the whole, performance on timed and untimed assessments yields similar scores. Students express greater anxiety over timed assessments, while they view untimed assessments as more amenable to dishonest behavior. 

NOTE: If you typically have a time limit on your face-to-face assessments, increase it by 20% to allow for the added demands a remote (distinct from online) environment places on students.


If the exam is meant to be taken synchronously, remember to stay within your class period. Adjust the length of the exam accordingly.
Reduced scope: Decreasing content covered in the exam may be necessary to create an exam of appropriate length and complexity, given the unique circumstances this semester. 
Question pools: Create a pool of questions, and let D2L randomly populate each student’s quiz. This helps reduce dishonest behavior 

For example, a 10 question quiz might have 18 total questions in the pool, 10 of which are randomly distributed to each student by D2L. 


Randomize answer order: In questions in which it makes sense, have D2L randomize the order in which the answer options appear. 
Individual question per page: This can reduce instances of students taking the assessment together. It is even more effective when question order is randomized and a question pool is used. <//li>
Honor code attestation: Give students an opportunity to affirm their intent to be honest by making question one of every assessment a 0-point question asking students to agree to an honor code.  You can access the MSU Honor Code: https://www.deanofstudents.msu.edu/academic-integrity 
Live Zoom availability: In D2L Quizzes, set a time window during which the assessment will be available to students. 
Hold a live open office hours session in Zoom at some point during that window, so that students who want to can take the assessment while they have direct access to you - this way they can ask questions if any arise. 

Ultimately, our guiding principles for online teaching are flexibility, generosity, and transparency.  Try to give students as much of an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge as possible.  

Consider allowing multiple attempts on an assessment. 
When conditions allow, consider allowing multiple means of expression. 
Can students choose to demonstrate their knowledge from a menu of options

M/C test
Written response
Video presentation 
Oral Exam (via Zoom) 


Consider giving students choices. Perhaps they can opt out of answering a question or two. Perhaps they can choose which of a series of prompts to respond to. Perhaps students can waive one test score (to help accomodate for their rapidly changing environments) 

Proctored assessments 
Description: Respondus Lockdown Browser and Respondus Monitor are tools for remote proctoring in D2L. More information is available at https://help.d2l.msu.edu/node/4686. Please consider whether your assessments can be designed without the need for Respondus. While Respondus may be helpful in limited circumstances (e.g., when assessments must be proctored for accreditation purposes), introducing a new technology may cause additional stress for both students and instructors, and academic integrity is still not assured.   High-stakes exams (those that are a large percentage of a student’s grade) that use new technologies and approaches can decrease student performance and may not reflect students’ understanding of the material.  Please do not use an online proctored approach unless your assessment needs require its use.   
Benefits: 
Increases the barrier to academic dishonesty. Allows for use of existing exams (assuming they are translated in D2L’s Quizzes tool). 
Implementation:

Any online proctored exam must be created and administered using D2L’s Quizzes tool. 
Prior to offering a graded proctored exam, we strongly recommend that you administer an ungraded (or very low-stakes) practice test using the proctoring tool. 
Clear communication with students about system and hardware requirements and timing considerations is required. 
MSU has gained temporary no-cost access to a pair of online proctoring tools provided by Respondus: https://help.d2l.msu.edu/node/4686 
Respondus Lockdown Browser requires that students download a web browser.
When they click into your exam, the Lockdown Browser opens, and prevents users from accessing anything else on their computer. 
Respondus Monitor requires use of Respondus Lockdown Browser and a webcam.
Students are monitored via the webcam while they complete the exam in Lockdown Browser. 

Additional Resources: 

Remote Assessment Quick Guide 
Remote Assessment Video Conversation 
D2L Quizzes Tool Guide
Self-training on D2L Quizzes (login to MSU’s D2L is required; self-enroll into the training course) 

 References: Alessio, H.M.; Malay, N.; Mauere, K.; Bailer, A.J.; & Rubin, B.(2017) Examining the effect of proctoring on online test scores, Online Learning 21 (1)  Altınay, Z. (2017) Evaluating peer learning and assessment in online collaborative learning environments, Behaviour & Information Technology, 36:3, 312-320, DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2016.1232752 
Couch, B. A., Hubbard, J. K., & Brassil, C. E. (2018). Multiple–true–false questions reveal the limits of the multiple–choice format for detecting students with incomplete understandings. BioScience, 68(6), 455-463. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy037  Cramp, J.; Medlin, J. F.; Lake, P.; & Sharp, C. (2019) Lessons learned from implementing remotely invigilated online exams, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 16(1).  Guerrero-Roldán, A., & Noguera, I.(2018) A Model for Aligning Assessment with Competences and Learning Activities in Online Courses, The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 38, pp. 36–46., doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.005. 
Johanns, B., Dinkens, A., & Moore, J. (2017). A systematic review comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills. Nurse education in practice, 27, 89-94. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1471595317305486  Joseph A. Rios, J.A. & Lydia Liu, O.L. (2017) Online Proctored Versus Unproctored Low-Stakes Internet Test Administration: Is There Differential Test-Taking Behavior and Performance?, American Journal of Distance Education, 31:4, 226-241, DOI: 10.1080/08923647.2017.1258628 Schrank, Z. (2016). An assessment of student perceptions and responses to frequent low-stakes testing in introductory sociology classes. Teaching Sociology, 44(2), 118-127. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0092055X15624745  Soffer, Tal, et al. “(2017) Assessment of Online Academic Courses via Students' Activities and Perceptions, Studies in Educational Evaluation, vol. 54, pp. 83–93., doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.10.001. 
Tan, C.(2020) Beyond high-stakes exam: A neo-Confucian educational programme and its contemporary implications, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52:2, 137-148, DOI: 10.1080/00131857.2019.1605901 
VanPatten, B., Trego, D., & Hopkins, W. P. (2015). In‐Class vs. Online Testing in University‐Level Language Courses: A Research Report. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 659-668. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/flan.12160 

 

 
Image from insidehighered.com
 
How do MSU faculty view their strengths and weaknesses as educators?
What resources do they need to continue to grow?
In 2018, our Learning Community of Adams Academy graduates surveyed 215 faculty to find out.
 
Here are some of our results:
 
Strengths: We see ourselves as having more strengths than challenges, especially:

Teaching with enthusiasm
Fostering active learning
Female respondents: mentoring, teaching teachers, facilitating connections and creating community.

 
Challenges:

Student assessment was the most commonly cited challenge
Fostering active learning (again!)
Fostering dialogue

 
Familiarity with evidence-based teaching practices: much variation!

Broad Business College and the College of Music, no respondents familiar with the concept (or at least the term).
James Madison, the College of Law, the College of Veterinary Med. and the College of Osteopathic Med.: all respondents familiar with it.
Labor categories: a plurality of “no” responses only from tenure-track and “other”: tenured, fixed-term and academic specialists had plurality of “yes” answers.

 
Barriers to developing teaching practice:

“More time” is no. 1 response.

 
Most frequently used resources for developing teaching practice:

Brown Bag or Learn at Lunch presentations
Departmental workshops
Academic Advancement Network
MSU Learning Communities

 
Following our survey, in 2019 we developed a peer-observation protocol.
If you’re interested in trying it out, either in your own department or with one of our group, please contact Mike or Cheryl.
 
Dr. Cheryl Caesar, caesarc@msu.edu
Dr. Michael Ristich, ristich@msu.edu
 

Instructional Guidance Is Key to Promoting Active Learning in Online and Blended Courses Written by: Jay Loftus Ed.D. (MSU / CTLI) & Michele Jacobsen, Ph.D. (Werklund School of Education - University of Calgary)
Abstract - Active learning strategies tend to originate from one of two dominant philosophical perspectives. The first position is active learning as an instructional philosophy, whereby inquiry-based and discovery learning are primary modalities for acquiring new information. The second perspective considers active learning a strategy to supplement the use of more structured forms of instruction, such as direct instruction. From the latter perspective, active learning is employed to reinforce conceptual learning following the presentation of factual or foundational knowledge. This review focuses on the second perspective and uses of active learning as a strategy. We highlight the need and often overlooked requirement for including instructional guidance to ensure active learning, which can be effective and efficient for learning and learners.
Keywords - Active learning, instructional guidance, design strategy, cognitive load, efficiency, online and blended courses
 
Introduction
Learner engagement in online courses has been a central theme in educational research for several years (Martin, Sun and Westing, 2020). As we consider the academic experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in 2020 and started to subside in 2022, it is essential to reflect on the importance of course quality (Cavanaugh, Jacquemin and Junker, 2023) and learner experience in online courses (Gherghel, Yasuda and Kita, 2023). Rebounding from our collected experience, learner engagement continues to be an important element of course design and delivery. This fact was highlighted in 2021, when the United States Department of Education (DOE) set forth new standards for institutions offering online courses. To be eligible for Title IV funding, new standards require non-correspondence courses to ensure regular and substantive interactions (RSI) between instructors and students (Downs, 2021). This requirement necessitates the need to find ways to engage students allowing instructors the ability to maximize their interactions. One possible solution is to use active learning techniques that have been shown to increase student engagement and learning outcomes (Ashiabi & O’ Neal, 2008; Cavanaugh et al., 2023).
Active learning is an important instructional strategy and pedagogical philosophy used to design quality learning experiences and foster engaging and interactive learning environments. However, this is not a novel perspective. Many years ago in their seminal work, Chickering and Gamson (1987) discussed the issue of interaction between instructors and students, suggesting that this was an essential practice for quality undergraduate education. The newfound focus on active learning strategies has become more pronounced following an examination of instructional practices from 2020 to 2022. For example, Tan, Chng, Chonardo, Ng  and Fung (2020) examined how chemistry instructors incorporated active learning into their instruction to achieve equivalent learning experiences in pre-pandemic classrooms. Similarly, Misra and Mazelfi (2021) described the need to incorporate group work or active learning activities into remote courses to: ‘increase students’ learning motivation, enforce mutual respect for friends’ opinions, foster excitement’ (p. 228). Rincon-Flores & Santos-Guevara (2021) found that gamification as a form of active learning, ‘helped to motivate students to participate actively and improved their academic performance, in a setting where the mode of instruction was remote, synchronous, and online’ (p.43). Further, the implementation of active learning, particularly gamification, was found to be helpful for promoting a more humanizing learning experience (Rincon-Flores & Santos-Guevara, 2021).
This review examines the use of active learning and presents instructional guidance as an often-overlooked element that must be included to make active learning useful and effective. The omission of explicit and direct instructional guidance when using active learning can be inefficient, resulting in an extraneous cognitive burden on learners (Lange, Gorbunova, Shcheglova and Costley, 2022). We hope to outline our justification through a review of active learning and offer strategies to ensure that the implementation of active learning is effective.
Active Learning as an Instructional Philosophy
Active learning is inherently a ‘student-centered’ instructional paradigm that is derived from a constructivist epistemological perspective (Krahenbuhl, 2016; Schunk, 2012). Constructivism theorizes that individuals construct their understanding through interactions and engagements, whereby the refinement of skills and knowledge results over time (Cobb & Bowers, 1999). Through inquiry, students produce experiences and make connections that lead to logical and conceptual growth (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Engaging learners in activities, tasks, and planned experiences is an overarching premise of active learning as an instructional philosophy. As an overarching instructional philosophy, the role of instructional guidance can be minimized. As Hammer (1997) pointed out many years ago, the role of the instructor in these environments is to provide content and materials, and students are left make ‘discoveries’ through inquiry.
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is an instructional practice that falls under the general category of ‘active learning’. The tenets of IBL adhere to a constructivist learning philosophy (de Jong et al., 2023) and can be characterized by the following six elements (Duncan & Chinn, 2021). Students will:

Generate knowledge through investigation of a novel issue or problem.
Work ‘actively’ to discover new findings.
Use of evidence to derive conclusions.
Take responsibility for their own learning through ‘epistemological agency’ (Chinn & Iordanou, 2023) and share their learning with a community of learners.
Use problem-solving and reasoning for complex tasks.
Collaborate, share ideas, and derive solutions with peers.

Historically, inquiry-based learning as a form of active learning was adopted as an overall instructional paradigm in disciplines such as medicine and was closely aligned with problem-based learning (PBL) (Barrows, 1996). Proponents of PBL advocate its use because of its emphasis on the development of skills such as communication, collaboration, and critical thinking (Dring, 2019). Critics of these constructivist approaches to instruction highlight the absence of a structure and any form of instructional guidance (Zhang & Cobern, 2021). Instead, they advocate a more explicit form of instruction such as direct instruction (Zhang, Kirschner, Corben and Sweller, 2022).
The view that a hybrid of IBL coupled with direct instruction is the optimal approach to implementing active learning has been highlighted in the recent academic literature (de Jong et al., 2023). The authors suggest that the selection of direct instruction or active learning strategies, such as IBL, should be guided by the desired outcomes of instruction. If the goal of instruction is the acquisition of more foundational or factual information, direct instruction is the preferred strategy. Conversely, IBL strategies are more appropriate ‘for the promotion of deep understanding and transferrable conceptual understanding of topics that are open-ended or susceptible to misconceptions’ (de Jong et al., 2023 p. 7).
The recommendation to use both direct instruction and approaches like IBL has reframed active learning as an instructional strategy rather than an overarching pedagogical philosophy. Active learning should be viewed as a technique or strategy coupled with direct instructional approaches (de Jong et al., 2023).
Active Learning as an Instructional Strategy
Approaching active learning as an instructional strategy rather than an overarching instructional philosophy helps clarify and address the varying perspectives found in the literature. Zhang et al. (2022) suggested that there is a push to emphasize exploration-based pedagogy. This includes instructional approaches deemed to be predicated on inquiry, discovery, or problem-based approaches. This emphasis has resulted in changes to curricular policies that mandate the incorporation of these instructional philosophies. Zhang et al. (2022) discussed how active learning approaches can be incorporated into science education policy to emphasize ‘inquiry’ approaches, despite adequate evidence for effectiveness.  Zhang et al. (2022) stated that the ‘disjoint between policy documents and research evidence is exacerbated by the tendency to ignore categories of research that do not provide the favored research outcomes that support teaching science through inquiry and investigations’ (p. 1162). Instead, Zhang et al. (2022) advocate for direct instruction as the primary mode of instruction in science education with active learning or ‘inquiry’ learning incorporated as a strategy, arguing that conceptual or foundational understanding ‘should not be ‘traded off’ by prioritizing other learning outcomes’ (p. 1172).
In response to Zhang et al. ’s (2022) critique, de Jong et al. (2023) argued that research evidence supports the use of inquiry-based instruction for the acquisition of conceptual understanding in science education. They asserted that both inquiry-based (or active learning approaches) and direct instruction serve specific learning needs. Direct instruction may be superior for foundational or factual learning, while inquiry-based or active learning may be better for conceptual understanding and reinforcement. The conclusion of de Jong et al. ’s (2023) argument suggests the use of a hybrid of direct instruction and active learning techniques, such as inquiry-based designs, depending on the stated learning objectives of the course or the desired outcomes.
This hybrid approach to instructional practice can help ensure that intended learning outcomes are matched with effective instructional strategies. Furthermore, a hybrid approach can help maintain efficiency in learning rather than leaving the acquisition of stated learning outcomes to discovery or happenstance (Slocum & Rolf, 2021).  This notion was supported by Nerantzi's (2020) suggestion that ‘students learn best when they are active and immersed in the learning process, when their curiosity is stimulated, when they can ask questions and debate in and outside the classroom, when they are supported in this process and feel part of a learning community’ (p. 187). Emphasis on learner engagement may support the belief that active learning strategies combined with direct instruction may provide an optimal environment for learning. Active learning strategies can be used to reinforce the direct or explicit presentation of concepts and principles (Lapitan Jr, Tiangco, Sumalinog, Sabarillo and  Diaz, 2021).
Recently, Zhang (2022) examined the importance of integrating direct instruction with hands-on investigation as an instructional model in high school physics classes. Zhang (2022) determined that ‘students benefit more when they develop a thorough theoretical foundation about science ideas before hands-on investigations’ (p. 111). This supports the earlier research in post-secondary STEM disciplines as reported by Freeman, Eddy, McDonough and Wenderoth (2014), where the authors suggested that active learning strategies help to improve student performance. The authors further predicted that active learning interventions would show more significant learning gains when combined with ‘required exercises that are completed outside of formal class sessions’ (p. 8413).
Active Learning Strategies
Active learning is characterized by activities, tasks, and learner interactions. Several characteristics of active learning have been identified, including interaction, peer learning, and instructor presence (Nerantzi, 2020). Technology affords students learning opportunities to connect pre-, during-, and post-formal learning sessions (Zou & Xie, 2019; Nerantzi, 2020). The interactions or techniques that instructors use help determine the types of interactions and outcomes that will result. Instructors may be ‘present’ or active in the process but may not provide adequate instructional guidance for techniques to be efficient or effective (Cooper, Schinske and Tanner, 2021; Kalyuga, Chandler and Sweller. 2001). To highlight this gap, we first consider the widely used technique of think-pair-share, an active learning strategy first introduced by Lyman (1981). This active learning strategy was introduced to provide all students equitable opportunities to think and discuss ideas with their peers. The steps involved in this technique were recently summarized (Cooper et al., 2021): i) provide a prompt or question to students, (ii) give students a chance to think about the question or prompt independently, (iii) have students share their initial answers/responses with a neighbor in a pair or a small group, and (iv) invite a few groups a chance to share their responses with the whole class.
Instructional guidance outlines the structure and actions associated with a task. This includes identifying the goals and subgoals, and suggesting strategies or algorithms to complete the task (Kalyuga et al., 2001). Employing the strategy of think-pair-sharing requires more instructional guidance than instructors may consider. The title of the strategy foreshadows what students will ‘do’ to complete the activity. However, instructional guidance is essential to help students focus on the outcome, rather than merely enacting the process of the activity. Furthermore, instructional guidance or instructions given to students when employing think-pair-sharing can help make this activity more equitable. Cooper et al. (2021) point out that equity is an important consideration when employing think-pair-share. Often, think-pair-share activities are not equitable during the pair or share portion of the exercise, and can be dominated by more vocal or boisterous students. Instructional guidance can help ensure that the activity is more equitable by providing more explicit instructions on expectations for sharing. For example, the instructions for a think-pair-share activity may include those that require each student to compose and then share ideas on a digital whiteboard or on a slide within a larger shared slide deck. The opportunity for equitable learning must be built into the instructions given to students. Otherwise, the learning experience could be meaningless or lack the contribution of students who are timid or find comfort in a passive role during group learning.
Further considerations for instructional guidance are necessary since we now use various forms of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to promote active learning strategies. Web conferencing tools, such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Google Meet, were used frequently during the height of required remote or hybrid teaching (Ahshan, 2021). Activities that separated students into smaller work groups via breakout rooms or unique discussion threads often included instructions on what students were to accomplish in these smaller collaborative groups. However, the communication of expectations or explicit guidance to help direct students in these groups were often not explicit or were not accessible once the students had been arranged into their isolated workspaces. These active learning exercises would have benefited from clear guidance and instructions on how to ‘call for help’ once separated from the larger group meetings. For example, Li, Xu, He, He, Pribesh, Watson and Major, (2021) described an activity for pair programming that uses zoom breakout rooms. In their description, the authors outlined the steps learners were expected to follow to successfully complete the active learning activity, as well as the mechanisms students used to ask for assistance once isolated from the larger Zoom session that contained the entire class. The description by Li et al. (2021) provided an effective approach to instructional guidance for active learning using Zoom.  Often, instructions are verbalized or difficult to refer to once individuals are removed from the general or common room. The lack of explicit instructional guidance in these activities can result in inefficiency (Kalyuga et al., 2001) and often inequity (Cooper et al., 2021).
The final active learning approach considered here was a case study analysis of asynchronous discussion forums. To extend engagement with course content, students were assigned a case study to discuss in a group discussion forum. The group is invited to apply course concepts and respond to questions as they analyze the case and prepare recommendations and a solution (Hartwell et al., 2021). Findings indicate that case study analysis in discussion forums as an active learning strategy “encouraged collaborative learning and contributed to improvement in cognitive learning” (Seethamraju, 2014, p. 9). While this active learning strategy can engage students with course materials to apply these concepts in new situations, it can also result in a high-volume-low-yield set of responses and posts without sufficient instructional guidance and clear expectations for engagement and deliverables. Hartwell, Anderson, Hanlon, and Brown (2021) offer guidance on the effective use of online discussion forums for case study analysis, such as clear expectations for student work in teams (e.g., a team contract), ongoing teamwork support through regular check-ins and assessment criteria, clear timelines and tasks for individual analysis, combined group discussion and cross-case comparison, review of posted solutions, and requirements for clear connections between case analysis and course concepts.
Active Learning & Cognitive Load Theory
In a recent review of current policy and educational standards within STEM disciplines, Zhang et al. (2022) argued that structured instructional approaches such as direct instruction align more closely with cognitive-based learning theories. These theories are better at predicting learning gains and identifying how learning occurs. Cognitive load theory is one such theory based on three main assumptions. First, humans have the capacity to obtain novel information through problem-solving or from other people. Obtaining information from other individuals is more efficient than generating solutions themselves. Second, acquired information is confronted by an individual’s limited capacity to first store information in working memory and then transfer it to unlimited long-term memory for later use. Problem-solving imposes a heavy burden on limited working memory. Thus, learners often rely on the information obtained from others. Finally, information stored in long-term memory can be transferred back to working memory to deal with familiar situations (Sweller, 2020). The recall of information from long-term memory to working memory is not bound by the limits of the initial acquisition of information in working memory (Zhang et al., 2022).
Zhang et al. (2022) state that ‘there never is a justification for engaging in inquiry-based learning or any other pedagogically identical approaches when students need to acquire complex, novel information’ (p. 1170). This is clearly a one-sided argument that focuses on the acquisition of information rather than the application of acquired information. This also presents an obvious issue related to the efficiency of acquiring novel information. However, Zhang et al. (2022) did not argue against the use of active learning or inquiry learning strategies to help reinforce concepts, or the use of the same to support direct instruction.
The combination of active learning strategies with direct instruction can be modified using assumptions of cognitive load, which highlights the need to include instructional guidance with active learning strategies. The inclusion of clear and precise instructions or instructional guidance is critical for effective active learning strategies (Murphy, 2023). As de Jong et al. (2023) suggest, ‘guidance is (initially) needed to make inquiry learning successful' (p.9). We cannot assume that instructional guidance is implied through the name of the activity or can be determined from the previous learning experiences of students. Assumptions lead to ambiguous learning environments that lack instructional guidance, force learners to infer expectations, and rely on prior and/or potentially limited active learning experiences. In the following section, we offer suggestions for improving the use of active learning strategies in online and blended learning environments by adding instructional guidance.
Suggestions for Improving the Use of Active Learning in Online and Blended Courses
The successful implementation of active learning depends on several factors. One of the most critical barriers to the adoption of active learning is student participation. As Finelli et al. (2018) highlighted, students may be reluctant to participate demonstrating behaviors such as, ‘not participating when asked to engage in an in-class activity, distracting other students, performing the required task with minimal effort, complaining, or giving lower course evaluations’ (p. 81). These behaviors are reminiscent of petulant adolescents, often discouraging instructors from implementing active learning in the future. To overcome this, the authors suggested that providing a clear explanation of the purpose of the active learning exercise would help curb resistance to participation. More recently, de Jong et al. (2023) stated a similar perspective that ‘a key issue in interpreting the impact of inquiry-based instruction is the role of guidance’ (p. 5). The inclusion of clear and explicit steps for completing an active learning exercise is a necessary design strategy. This aspect of instructional guidance is relatively easy to achieve with the arrival of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools used to support instructors. As Crompton and Burke (2024) pointed out in their recent review, ‘ChatGPT can assist teachers in the creation of content, lesson plans, and learning activities’ (p.384). More specifically, Crompton and Burke (2024) suggested that generative AI could be used to provide step-by-step instructions for students. To illustrate this point, we entered the following prompt into the generative AI tool, goblin.tools (https://goblin.tools/) ‘Provide instructions given to students for a carousel activity in a college class.’ The output is shown in Fig. 1. This tool is used to break down tasks into steps, and if needed, it can further break down each step into a more discrete sequence of steps.

Figure 1 . Goblin.tools instructions for carousel active learning exercises.
The omission of explicit steps or direct instructional guidance in an active learning exercise can potentially increase extraneous cognitive load (Klepsch & Seufert, 2020; Sweller, 2020). This pernicious impact on cognitive load is the result of the diversion of one’s limited capacity to reconcile problems (Zhang, 2022). Furthermore, the complexity of active learning within an online or blended course is exacerbated by the inclusion of technologies used for instructional purposes. Instructional guidance should include requisite guidance for tools used in active learning. Again, generative AI tools, such as goblin.tools, may help mitigate the potential burden on cognitive load. For example, the use of webconferencing tools, such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams, has been pervasive in higher education. Anyone who uses these tools can relate to situations in which larger groups are segmented into smaller groups in isolated breakout rooms. Once participant relocation has occurred, there is often confusion regarding the intended purpose or goals of the breakout room. Newer features, such as collaborative whiteboards, exacerbate confusion and the potential for excessive extraneous load. Generative AI instructions (see Figure 2) could be created and offered to mitigate confusion and cognitive load burden.

Figure 2. Zoom collaborative whiteboard instructions produced by goblin.tools
 
Generative AI has the potential to help outline the steps in active learning exercises. This can be used to minimize confusion and serve as a reference for students. However, instruction alone is often insufficient to make active learning effective. As Finelli et al. (2018) suggest, the inclusion of a rationale for implementing active learning is an effective mechanism to encourage student participation. To this end, we suggest the adoption of what  Bereiter (2014) called Principled Practical Knowledge (PPK) which consists of the combination of ‘know-how’ with ‘know why’ (Bereiter, 2014). This perspective develops out of learners’ efforts to solve practical problems. It is a combination of knowledge that extends beyond simply addressing the task at hand. There is an investment of effort to provide a rationale or justification to address the ‘know why’ portion of PPK (Bereiter, 2014). Creating conditions for learners to develop ‘know-how’ is critical when incorporating active learning strategies in online and blended courses. Instructional guidance can reduce ambiguity and extraneous load and can also increase efficiency and potentially equity.
What is typically not included in the instructional guidance offered to students is comprehensive knowledge that outlines the requirements for technology that is often employed in active learning strategies. Ahshan (2021) suggests that technology skill competency is essential for the instructors and learners to implement the activities smoothly. Therefore, knowledge should include the tools employed in active learning. Instructors cannot assume that learners have a universal baseline of technological competency and thus need to be aware of this diversity when providing instructional guidance.
An often-overlooked element of instructional guidance connected to PPK is the ‘know-why’ component. Learners are often prescribed learning tasks without a rationale or justification for their utility. The underlying assumption for implementing active learning strategies is the benefits of collaboration, communication, and collective problem-solving are clear to learners (Dring, 2019; Hartikainen et al., 2019). However, these perceived benefits or rationales are often not provided explicitly to learners; instead, they are implied through use.
When implementing active learning techniques or strategies in a blended or online course one needs to consider not only the ‘know-how,’ but also the ‘know-why.’ Table 1 helps to identify the scope of instructional guidance that should be provided to students.
 
Table 1. Recommended Type of Instructional Guidance for Active Learning




 


Know How


Know Why




Activity


Steps


Purpose / Rationale




Technology


Steps


Purpose / Rationale




Outcomes / Products


Completion


Goals




 
The purpose of providing clear and explicit instructional guidance to learners is to ensure efficiency, equity, and value in incorporating active learning strategies into online and blended learning environments. Along with our argument for “know-why” (Bereiter, 2012), we draw upon Murphy (2023) who highlights the importance of “know-how’ by stating, ‘if students do not understand how a particular learning design helps them arrive at a particular outcome, they tend to be less invested in a course’ (n.p.).
Clear instructional guidance does not diminish the authenticity of various active learning strategies such as problem-based or inquiry-based techniques. In contrast, guidance serves to scaffold the activity and clearly outline learner expectations. Design standards organizations, such as Quality Matters, suggest the inclusion of statements that indicate a plan for how instructors will engage with learners, as well as the requirements for learner engagement in active learning. These statements regarding instructor engagement could be extended to include more transparency in the selection of instructional strategies. Murphy (2023) suggested that instructors should ‘pull back the curtain’ and take a few minutes to share the rationale and research that informs their decision to use strategies such as active learning. Opening a dialogue about the design process with students helps to manage expectations and anxieties that students might have in relation to the ‘What?’, ‘Why?’ and ‘How?’ for the active learning exercises.
Implications for Future Research
We contend that a blend of direct instruction and active learning strategies is optimized by instructional guidance, which provides explicit know-how and know-why for students to engage in learning tasks and activities. The present discussion does not intend to evaluate the utility of active learning as an instructional strategy. The efficacy of active learning is a recurring theme in the academic literature, and the justification for efficacy is largely anecdotal or based on self-reporting data from students (Hartikainen, Rintala, Pylväs and Nokelainen, 2019). Regardless, the process of incorporating active learning strategies with direct instruction appears to be beneficial for learning (Ahshan, 2021; Christie & De Graaff, 2017; Mintzes, 2020), and more likely, the learning experience can be harder to quantify. Our argument relates to the necessary inclusion of instructions and guidance that make the goals of active learning more efficient and effective (de Jong et al., 2023). Scardamalia and Bereiter (2006) stated earlier that knowledge about dominates traditional educational practice. It is the stuff of textbooks, curriculum guidelines, subject-matter tests, and typical school “projects” and “research” papers. Knowledge would be the product of active learning. In contrast, knowledge of, ‘suffers massive neglect’ (p. 101).  Knowledge enables learners to do something and allows them to actively participate in an activity. Knowledge comprises both procedural and declarative knowledge.  It is activated when the need for it is encountered in the action. Instructional guidance can help facilitate knowledge of, making the use of active learning techniques more efficient and effective.
Research is needed on the impact of instructional guidance on active learning strategies, especially when considering the incorporation of more sophisticated technologies and authentic problems (Rapanta, Botturi, Goodyear, Guardia and Koole 2021; Varvara, Bernardi, Bianchi, Sinjari and Piattelli, 2021). Recently, Lee (2020) examined the impact of instructor engagement on learning outcomes in an online course and determined that increased instructor engagement correlated with enhanced discussion board posts and student performance. A similar examination of the relationship between the instructional guidance provided and student learning outcomes would be a valuable next step. It could offer more explicit guidance and recommendations for the design and use of active learning strategies in online or blended courses.
Conclusion
Education was disrupted out of necessity for at least two years. This experience forced us to examine our practices in online and blended learning, as our sample size for evaluation grew dramatically. The outcome of our analysis is that effective design and inclusion of student engagement and interactions with instructors are critical for quality learning experiences (Rapanta et al., 2021; Sutarto, Sari and Fathurrochman, 2020; Varvara et al., 2021). Active learning appeals to many students (Christie & De Graaff, 2017) and instructors as it can help achieve many of the desired and required outcomes of our courses and programs. Our review and discussion highlighted the need to provide clear and explicit guidance to help minimize cognitive load and guide students through an invaluable learning experience. Further, instructors and designers who include explicit guidance participate in a metacognitive process, while they outline the purpose and sequence of steps required for the completion of active learning exercises. Creating instructions and providing a rationale for the use of active learning in a course gives instructors and designers an opportunity to reflect on the process and ensure that it aligns with the intended purpose or stated goals of the course. This reflective act makes active learning more intentional in use rather than employing it to ensure that students are present within the learning space.
 
References
Ahshan, R. (2021). A Framework of Implementing Strategies for Active Student Engagement in Remote/Online Teaching and Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090483
Ashiabi, G. S., & O’neal, K. K. (2008). A Framework for Understanding the Association Between Food Insecurity and Children’s Developmental Outcomes. Child Development Perspectives, 2(2), 71–77.
Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70.
Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem‐based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(68), 3–12.
Bereiter, C. (2014). Principled practical knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 4–17.
Cavanaugh, J., Jacquemin, S. J., & Junker, C. R. (2023). Variation in student perceptions of higher education course quality and difficulty as a result of widespread implementation of online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 28(4), 1787–1802.
Chinn, C. A., & Iordanou, K. (2023). Theories of Learning. Handbook of Research on Science Education: Volume III.
Christie, M., & De Graaff, E. (2017). The philosophical and pedagogical underpinnings of Active Learning in Engineering Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 5–16.
Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4–15.
Cooper, K. M., Schinske, J. N., & Tanner, K. D. (2021). Reconsidering the share of a think–pair–share: Emerging limitations, alternatives, and opportunities for research. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(1), fe1.
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2024). The Educational Affordances and Challenges of ChatGPT: State of the Field. TechTrends, 1–13.
de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Chinn, C. A., Fischer, F., Gobert, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Koedinger, K. R., Krajcik, J. S., Kyza, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2023). Let’s talk evidence–The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction. Educational Research Review, 100536.
Dring, J. C. (2019). Problem-Based Learning – Experiencing and understanding the prominence during Medical School: Perspective. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 47, 27–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2019.09.004
Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2021). International handbook of inquiry and learning. Routledge.
Finelli, C. J., Nguyen, K., DeMonbrun, M., Borrego, M., Prince, M., Husman, J., Henderson, C., Shekhar, P., & Waters, C. K. (2018). Reducing student resistance to active learning: Strategies for instructors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 47(5).
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485–529.
Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., & Nokelainen, P. (2019). The Concept of Active Learning and the Measurement of Learning Outcomes: A Review of Research in Engineering Higher Education. Education Sciences, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040276
Hartwell, A., Anderson, M., Hanlon, P., & Brown, B. (2021). Asynchronous discussion forums: Five learning designs.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learner experience and efficiency of instructional guidance. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 5–23.
Klepsch, M., & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48(1), Article 1.
Krahenbuhl, K. S. (2016). Student-centered Education and Constructivism: Challenges, Concerns, and Clarity for Teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 89(3), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2016.1191311
Lange, C., Gorbunova, A., Shcheglova, I., & Costley, J. (2022). Direct instruction, worked examples and problem solving: The impact of instructional strategies on cognitive load. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–13.
Lapitan Jr, L. D., Tiangco, C. E., Sumalinog, D. A. G., Sabarillo, N. S., & Diaz, J. M. (2021). An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education for Chemical Engineers, 35, 116–131.
Lee, J. W. (2020). The roles of online instructional facilitators and student performance of online class activity. Lee, Jung Wan (2020). The Roles of Online Instructional Facilitators and Student Performance of Online Class Activity. Journal of Asian Finance Economics and Business, 7(8), 723–733.
Li, L., Xu, L. D., He, Y., He, W., Pribesh, S., Watson, S. M., & Major, D. A. (2021). Facilitating online learning via zoom breakout room technology: A case of pair programming involving students with learning disabilities. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 48(1), 12.
Lyman, F. (1981). Strategies for Reading Comprehension Think Pair Share. Unpublished Paper. University of Maryland Paper. Http://Www. Roe13. K12. Il.
Mintzes, J. J. (2020). From constructivism to active learning in college science. Active Learning in College Science: The Case for Evidence-Based Practice, 3–12.
Misra, F., & Mazelfi, I. (2021). Long-distance online learning during pandemic: The role of communication, working in group, and self-directed learning in developing student’s confidence. 225–234.
Murphy, J. T. (2023). Advice | 5 Ways to Ease Students Off the Lecture and Into Active Learning. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/5-ways-to-ease-students-off-the-lecture-and-onto-active-learning
Nerantzi, C. (2020). The use of peer instruction and flipped learning to support flexible blended learning during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 7(2), 184–195.
Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2021). Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(3), 715–742.
Rincon-Flores, E. G., & Santos-Guevara, B. N. (2021). Gamification during Covid-19: Promoting active learning and motivation in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7157
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building. The Cambridge.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective. Pearson Education, Inc.
Seethamraju, R. (2014). Effectiveness of using online discussion forum for case study analysis. Education Research International, 2014.
Slocum, T. A., & Rolf, K. R. (2021). Features of direct instruction: Content analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(3), 775–784.
Sutarto, S., Sari, D. P., & Fathurrochman, I. (2020). Teacher strategies in online learning to increase students’ interest in learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Jurnal Konseling Dan Pendidikan, 8(3), 129–137.
Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16.
Tan, H. R., Chng, W. H., Chonardo, C., Ng, M. T. T., & Fung, F. M. (2020). How chemists achieve active learning online during the COVID-19 pandemic: Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework to support remote teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9), 2512–2518.
Varvara, G., Bernardi, S., Bianchi, S., Sinjari, B., & Piattelli, M. (2021). Dental Education Challenges during the COVID-19 Pandemic Period in Italy: Undergraduate Student Feedback, Future Perspectives, and the Needs of Teaching Strategies for Professional Development. Healthcare, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9040454
Zhang, L. (2022). Guidance differs between teaching modes: Practical challenges in integrating hands-on investigations with direct instruction. Learning: Research and Practice, 8(2), 96–115.
Zhang, L., & Cobern, W. W. (2021). Confusions on “guidance” in inquiry-based science teaching: A response to Aditomo and Klieme (2020). Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21, 207–212.
Zhang, L., Kirschner, P. A., Cobern, W. W., & Sweller, J. (2022). There is an evidence crisis in science educational policy. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 1157–1176.
Zou, D., & Xie, H. (2019). Flipping an English writing class with technology-enhanced just-in-time teaching and peer instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1127–1142.
 

The ISB202 course is asynchronous, and thus one of the main ways that the teaching team (i.e., the ULAs and instructor [Dr. Bierema]) interact with students is on the discussion board. This guide was created for ULAs, but much of it might also be helpful for instructors that are new to participating in a discussion board.
 
You can read more about the instructions provided to students as well!
How is Participation Different for a ULA vs. a Student?

In some ways, participation looks the same for a student or ULA, but the purpose of posting is different. As a student, the goal of participating (whether the student realizes it or not), is to engage with the material of the course in a meaningful way. As a ULA, it is to further discussion so that students engage with the material on a deeper level.
Some ULA posts may be representative of a student post. For instance, if students are posting about a specific topic and you know of a great resource for them to check out, the resource should be cited properly. This allows the students to see what a good post looks like.
Other ULA posts are different from a student post. For instance, sometimes we need to ask students to think more deeply or research an idea further. Although these posts would not count as a student participation post, they are essential for furthering that student’s engagement with the material.
Some types of posts may or may not be representative of a student post. For instance, if a discussion is moving off-track, then a student or a ULA may bring it back to the course objectives by asking a meaningful, detailed, possibly leading question. A student may do this, but they are not in charge of this. It is our responsibility as a teaching team to bring the discussion back to the course objectives.

Why Participate in the Discussion Board?

Interact with and form relationships with students.
Illustrate how to setup a meaningful and detailed post.
Move off-topic discussions back to course objectives.
Have students think more deeply about their posts.
Offer new information and new resources relevant to student posts.
Relate posts to what was covered previously in class or what will be covered in the future.
Encourage students to look up information rather than guess.

 
When do I Participate?

Start at the beginning of the discussion week. It can be overwhelming to start later in the week when there are so many posts.
Have the goal to participate more during the beginning than later in the semester (not vice versa). If we do a good job in our posts and feedback early on, then students should need less of our help later in the semester.
If the class is divided into multiple discussion board groups and there is more than one ULA, then self-assign yourselves to different groups and change it each week. Make a calendar to keep track.

 
How do I Format the Post?

Address the student and, if posting something for the entire class, also refer to the class.
Change the text color of the post. Everyone in the teaching team can use dark blue to make it clear which posts come from the teaching team.
Italicize components of a post that address the entire class. See examples throughout this document.
There may be a few students that posted something similar for which you would like to address. If so, acknowledge all of them in your post.

Example response:

Interesting point, [student], about using greenways to connect areas for nature. Although we tend to only think of paths being used by humans, there are also non-human animals that might use these paths. Class, do a little research and let us know which animals might benefit from having these paths and which ones might not benefit. Explain your reasoning and don’t forget to cite your sources. 





 
What do I Post?
The following is a list of different types of possible posts.

Request that the student think more deeply about their post and provide additional information.

Example response to one student:

Student initial post: My family does our best to limit of carbon footprint. We recycle more than we throw away, reuse as much as we can but aim to reduce our plastic consumption, and limit our mat consumption (I consider myself a flexitarian) There are still a lot of adjustments to be made. 
I really like the term "flexitarian," [student]! What are some ways that you and your family are working to reduce your plastic consumption?


Example response to the class:

Context: Students were posting generic concepts regarding ecological footprints.
[Student], you brought up an important point about how overwhelming it can be to make these steps. Some of the points brought up by others, such as remembering to turn off the lights or trying a vegan meal once a month, as [student] mentioned earlier, are things are not too drastic. Class, look back at your reflections- or if you haven't written one yet, consider this question: are the ideas that you brought up actually likely to happen? Which specific things could you start doing now that wouldn't be too costly or too life changing?


Provide a more specific question than what a student originally posted.

Example response:

Student’s question: “I wonder if in the United States they implemented more options in more places, if people would be less likely to litter.”
Great question, [student]! Class, do some research in your own area. What are the recycling capabilities in your area? Does it match what you see? Explain.


Re-route the conversation to class objectives with leading questions.

Example response:

Context: A course focus was on environmental impacts and a discussion on Covid-19 drifted off-topic.
Nice job [student] and others for relating the topics to a truly "current event." Class, how much has delivery increased during these times? How is that overall impacting the environment compared to the positives of so fewer people driving and less manufacturing? Do some research and get back to us!


Provide more information. Make the post representative of the ideal student post: cite properly and hyperlink as needed.

Example response without a citation:

Great point, [student], about avoiding plastic bags at grocery stores. This point, though, reminded me of another interesting point- Class, how have your behaviors that affect the environment been impacted by COVID 19? For instance, I have used reusable bags for years- this is why it got me thinking- but now many stores will not allow them during this pandemic. On the flip side of things, I live in Kalamazoo and used to commute to East Lansing three to five days a week, but since campus closed, I barely drive my car at all.


Example response with a citation:

Great point, [student], regarding how we also need to consider our impact on water when we are determining our ecological footprint quiz. There is actually a calculation for determining our water footprint! Class, check out the Water Footprint Calculator created by the Grace Communications Foundation (2020). What did you find out? Compare it to the ecological footprint quiz- why do you think those similarities and differences exist?











Citation: Grace Communications Foundation. (2020). Water footprint calculator [web interactive]. Retrieved from https://www.watercalculator.org/

Ask the class to think about topics in different ways.

Example response:

Context: Each student had to choose a specific stakeholder to represent, and after the first day of discussion everyone had chosen the same stakeholder.
Hi class,we've heard from a couple of "environmental scientists" now and they have opposing views. After reading through them and critiquing their explanations, what do you think? Would one area be better than another? Those that have written the posts from the perspective of an environmental scientist- what do you think? (Please note that I am not leading to one right answer- the goal is to evaluate the evidence.)


Admire and acknowledge a great post

Example response:

Interesting question, [student]- it takes the idea of our case study this week and really scales it up. I look forward to hearing students' responses!







How do I Build Relationships?

Address the specific student that you are replying to.

If more than one student posted a similar idea, then state all of their names.
Or, if it is more than a few students, use the person’s name for which you are replying and add “others” or “and other classmates.”
If posting a question to the entire class, then address the class, not just the student who you are responding to.
See the various examples in this document.


Acknowledge the good work that students do, such as participating early in the week.

Example response to a student that posted early and thoroughly:

Thanks for starting the conversation, [student]! [student] concluded that this greenway "would help all of the public in many ways."Class, which stakeholders are part of the "public" and which ones benefit from this greenway being between 2 and 5 (besides City Bicycling Club, as [student] thoroughly described)?


Example response to a student that posted a detailed question:

Great questions, [student]!Class, I look forward to your thoughts!


Example response to a student that posted a useful resource:

Thanks for sharing the infographic, [student]! I'm going to post it in the announcements so that students in all of the DB sections are aware of it!


Encourage students to bring in information specific to their discipline.

Example response:

Very interesting question, Sean! Any engineers in the class (or engineer enthusiasts)? How could Houston approach this problem? Feel free to bring in ideas learned from other classes!


If a student seems to be struggling with developing thorough posts, then send the student an email with the included post. Do not wait until grading the following week.

Example Email:

Thank you, [name], for participating in the discussion board. Although I noticed that you have already done a few posts, they are not quite yet demonstrating critical thinking. For instance, rather than posting that someone should look into a topic, do the investigation on your own. What did you find and where did you find it? Post a reply with your findings and citations and explain how it relates to what your peer posted. Please see the rubric on D2L for details on what we look for in posts and contact us if you have any questions. We are here to help!

The following is a list of the educators receiving the #iteachmsu Educator Award from all other educator units. For more information on these awards, check out the article entitled "#iteachmsu Educator Awards".
Human Resources
Amanda Farrar: Amanda was THE integral component in helping me navigate onboarding to a new role at MSU. Though my transition was messy (from graduate student employee to full time employee) and Amanda wasn't always the "power person"; she helped me feel heard, gave great recommendations, and followed up promptly. At such a large organization and at such a complicated time, I felt overwhelmed and stuck in the lack of clarity I felt around my transition... Amanda helped me feel like (and see how) things were moving.
 
Hub for Innovation in Learning and Technology
Jerry Rhead: Jerry is one of the kindest, down-to-earth people I've met in my multiple years at MSU. He brings a wealth of experience and expertise everywhere he goes, but shares it in a way that is always accessible and collegial. I've never felt a sense of competition around Jerry. He always lifts others up. What an amazing colleague, friend, and educator.
 
Breana  Yaklin: Bre deserves a huge shout out for her leadership of the SOIREE and ASPIRE efforts. Countless times across the past six months, I've heard rave reviews from instructors who had to pivot their courses last minute due to Covid19. Not only has Bre designed an experience that introduces other educators to online teaching and learning, but also helps those who have been working in the online space revisit their courses to ensure they're aligned with best practices. Breana Yaklin is a meta educator... teaching other educators in a way that helps them be better!
 
Summer Issawi: Thank you for your role as mentor for the 2020-2021 Hub Faculty Fellow Project, and I want to especially thank you for participating as a judge in the MSU/ISS Film Festival and for providing so many thoughtful comments on the individual student films. You might not always received feedback on your particular impact on actual students in our MSU classes, but I am here to publicly thank and acknowledge your very important and positive impact on instructors and students at MSU. You are appreciated!
 
Ashley Braman: I'm a learning designer working with faculty to design experiential, interdisciplinary courses at MSU. Ashley Braman is the project manager in our unit and this year her support, advice, and skills have made a huge difference in my work on these courses. In the last few months, she helped me build next year's budget, consulted on our quarterly reporting, and helped me strategize about future trajectories for this project. The latter especially was a huge help before presenting those plans to our director for his decision. As a project lead, I'm much better equipped for success being able to draw on Ashley's expertise. My work goes so much more smoothly now that I can reach out to a competent and insightful project manager with issues big and small. In addition, she has been a wonderful resource during work-from-home as we struggle with productivity under covid and work-life balance; she makes herself available to check-in and support her team and help us find solutions that are a good fit for our situations. Ashley's work definitely makes a difference to our academic projects, and that's why she deserves a big thank you.
 
Integrative Studies in Social Science
Alison Rautman: I love Dr. Rautman and I think she is handling the online teaching very well! She is always checking in on her students and making sure we are keeping up with our material!
 
Center for Statistical Training and Consulting (CSTAT)
Sanket Jantre: Sanket provides thorough and thoughtful advice on statistical methods for research projects at CSTAT. He is also a member for the student organization Statistics in the Community (STATCOM) that provides pro bono statistical consulting to local nonprofit, governmental, and community service organizations and was a team leader for a project in 2020 working on an interactive online tool designed for analyzing water pollution samples. Sanket was selected for a competitive internship position with the National Science Foundation Mathematical Sciences Graduate Internship program for summer 2021 to explore probabilistic deep learning methods at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Congratulations!
 
Sichao Wang: Sichao is very engaged in helping MSU graduate students and scholars in their research at CSTAT. She is president of the student organization Statistics in the Community (STATCOM) that provides pro bono statistical consulting to local nonprofit, governmental, and community service organizations. Sichao has a wide range of interest in statistical topics and takes every opportunity to learn new skills through seminars and workshops.
 
Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education Office
Jim Lucas:

Dr. Lucas has made an exceptional impact on my life as a professor, a mentor, and a friend. Throughout my time at MSU he has always offered a helping hand, and has been willing to go the extra distance to help me achieve my goals. MSU is truly lucky to have someone like Dr. Lucas.
Dr. Lucas is the most influential instructor that I've ever had and having him in my life has helped me grow tremendously as a student at MSU. He gave me the support I needed to choose a path that is typically discouraged by society and encourages me to reach my full potential. I do best learning in an open environment, and Dr. Lucas creates this by making students feel as though their voice matters in the world. Dr. Lucas carries his variety of passions into the classroom and inspires me to be inventive, knowledgeable, and passionate. 
I consider myself extremely blessed to have Dr. Lucas as one of my first professors during my academic career. When I came to MSU, I was apprehensive based on the horror stories I had heard about college instructors. From the get-go, Dr. Lucas had an extremely inviting classroom. Not only was the course content in UGS101 interesting, but he designed his classroom in a way where every student could feel at home. He stimulated interesting discussions each class period, and every week his course was the highlight of my busy schedule. He was not afraid to joke around with students, and I felt like I was able to connect with Dr. Lucas on a personal level. I was sad when the semester ended, as I thought it would also mean the end of my relationship with Dr. Lucas. Instead, Dr. Lucas went above and beyond his duty as an instructor, becoming not only a mentor but a friend. As I am set to graduate next semester, I look back and think of all the support Dr. Lucas has provided over the years, be it academic or personal. I am confident that as I move to medical school and beyond, Dr. Lucas will continue being an important figure in my life. While I have met some really great professors at Michigan State University, they all pale in comparison to the enormous positive impact Dr. Lucas has had on me.
He was my professor at my study abroad 2 summers ago, and he has been like my second father type figure, helping me around throughout my freshman year at MSU
Through two classes and a study abroad trip with Dr. Lucas over the years, he has not only showed his capability to reach various types of students on a wide variety of topics, but he has shown a true desire to raise important issues, for students as individuals as well as the world as a whole, and explore them in a meaningful way. Dr. Lucas has changed my views on topics I felt nihilistic towards or was misguided in my judgement on, from commercial whaling to minority representation in film, and everything in between. He takes it upon himself to prioritize such valuable discussion both in the classroom and outside of it, and I have come to know Dr. Lucas as an extraordinary professor as well as a great friend.

 
Technology at State
Nick Noel: Nick dedicated himself to supporting instructors with the transition to online. He worked tirelessly to lead hundreds through a course peer-review process through the summer, and has been working to provide workshops and training about key instructional technologies. He works hard to collaborate with others across campus and improve the teaching and learning experience for instructors and students.
 
Kevin Henley

Kevin is always willing to help on projects, troubleshoot issues, or research solutions. He has a wide breadth of knowledge, but also understand things deeply, and can apply his experience across a broad spectrum of issues. Kevin isn't a member of my team, but he is still an invaluable part of it, and IT as a whole.
Kevin is an excellent collaborator. He thinks through educator issues when the learning takes place virtually, knows a lot about platforms and how they do/not work for learners, and always has creative ideas on how to solve problems and make things better. He is endlessly patient, and helps everyone feel like their voices are heard.

 
Drew Beach: RCPD had a difficult issue we were trying to resolve that dealt with a students D2L exam and whether they received the correct testing accommodations. The student was very upset and the instructor was adamant they had provided the accommodations correctly. Drew Breach stepped in and took time to walk me through exactly what happened, explained how the instructor misunderstood the process to extend testing time. He then provided additional information about D2L settings for my knowledge, offered to work with the instructor on further training, and typed up a detailed email with screen shots and helpful information so we could better advise faculty in the future. I was very thankful for the extra effort Drew provided to help. The student was even more grateful as it made a substantial difference in his grade and success in the course. During these difficult times and having to navigate technology in new ways, it is great to have caring and supportive IT staff!!! Thank YOU!
 
Libraries
Jessica Sender: Jessica worked through the summer and into the fall to support the transition to online. She jumped in to help develop and facilitate training and workshops to support instructors with the move to online. She is working to connect librarians across campus to support teaching and learning efforts in new ways.   
 
Susan Kendall: Susan has presented at many workshops and meeting with faculty to educate others about copyright law and how to adjust for copyright in the online environment. She's become active in the SOIREE workshop to teach others about copyright and answer questions. She volunteered to write a page for the ASPIRE workshop and has worked diligently to support and teach others about copyright in their courses. 
 
Julie Taylor: Julie is a gem in the landscape of MSU. I originally reached out to Julie in regards to a personal book printing project (which turned out beautifully, thanks to her). After having such a great experience working with her asynchronously, we scheduled a proactive meeting regarding formatting for another larger project. A short zoom call with her was not only pleasant (as far as company goes) but informative and will save me tons of time and headache as I begin a huge writing/formatting project. If only I had found her before I was trying to submit my dissertation - so much frustration could have been circumnavigated. I will be telling all my colleagues and friends still working on their dissertations to reach out to Julie! What a lifesaver (especially during covid-life which is already so stressful on the daily). Big love for Julie!
 
University Outreach and Engagement
Diane Doberneck: Diane is one of the most astounding people I've had the pleasure of getting to know during my time at MSU. Diane regards and value everyone she encounters for their knowledge and lived experience- and on top of that is a global leader in her field. Down to earth, kind, and collaborative- Diane is one of MSU's educators who truly lifts others up. She is a joy to work with, a wealth of knowledge, and to top it all off helps other educators at MSU utilize practices to engage in partnership with communities!
 
WorkLife Office
John Girdwood: John has been an exceptional example of flexibility and innovation in a rapidly changing landscape. He helped advance technology usage in the office prior to the pandemic. This allowed the office to quickly adjust to online educational and community connection events which helped the university faculty and staff populations adjust to the unknowns of the drastically shifting landscape of work and life. John is an incredible collaborator who shares ideas that continue to enhance the topics and audience reach for WorkLife Office programming. He's been a wonderful influence in my life and I've enjoyed working alongside him.
Tiana Carter: Tiana jumped into the deep end with a new role in the middle of a crisis situation and a quickly shifting landscape of work. She continues to adapt to her changing role while connecting with and inspiring the people that she meets along the way. I've seen the impact that she's had on educational and community connection events over the course of the past six months. She is a talented organizer who focuses on a commitment to follow thru and keeps the many variable pieces moving forward. She has been a delightful addition to the WorkLife team and I'm so grateful to have her as part of my life.Jaimie Hutchison: Jaimie has been an incredible force for good over the past year. I appreciate her answers and messages on Facebook. She helped me feel included even though I was isolated and gave the campus a friendly face for information and guidance! She definitely made a difference.
 
Barbara Roberts: Barbara and her team have made such a big impact over this past year. Knowing I have a place I can go to and ask questions during a time of such uncertainty has felt very comforting. I am grateful for what she does for MSU!Anyone can recognize a fellow Spartan for their contributions to MSU's teaching and learning mission or for how they made a lasting impression on your experience. All you have to do is click "Thank an Educator" in the left panel of iteach.msu.edu. From there you'll see a short form where you can enter the name, netID, and a short story of the educator you'd like to recognize.

This week, we are featuring Dr. Stephen Thomas who wears many hats here at MSU. He is the Digital Curriculum Coordinator in the College of Natural Science, the Assistant Dean for STEM Education, Teaching and Learning, and he is also the Associate Director for the Center for Integrative Studies in General Science. Stephen was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high-impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator initiative) regularly!
I’m Dave Goodrich and I help design engaging learning experiences with educators like Stephen here at MSU. I’ve had the privilege of getting to work and learn from Stephen over the years and was glad to get to be able to interview him for this series. This is a longer conversation than typical educator stories, but we could have talked even longer, I’m sure. In fact, from this conversation, I’d love to have follow-up conversations with Stephen on some of the things that came up here, but for now, read more about Stephen's perspectives and experiences below:
--
Dave  
I thought we could begin our conversation by having you give a glimpse into how you became an educator and your path to becoming an educator. We also usually start this with a challenging question: In one word, what does being an educator mean to you?
Stephen  
I would say I am really focused on connection. So usually I'm dealing with populations who are studying things that are unfamiliar to them. So usually I'm teaching non-majors or done some work and informal science education, and, you know, some work with majors. But I feel like in general, I'm usually talking to a naive or inexperienced population, and I'm trying to help them to see themselves in the content that they're studying. And then I think over time, I've realized that there's a large piece of having a connection with the individual in order to help them then make a connection with the content. And so you know, and sometimes it's even like, how are you connecting them to each other, in order to help support them, like peers and their fellow students? I think there's a lot of that element in how I go about probably in the educational endeavor. So it's a lot of like, how do we engage people and get them to see themselves in the content that they're working with?
Dave  
Yeah, absolutely. So I love talking to educators, like you, who inspire me. It's educators like you who helped me decide to go into education, because of how they kind of poured themselves into it and really cared for their students like how you're describing. I'm curious, I don't know if I've ever, ever asked you before, was there a moment in your life where you were like, yes, this is what I want to do. How did you enter the world of education?
Stephen  
So I come from a long line of educators and lawyers. I was never going to choose law. I find it fascinating, but it just wasn't for me. And it just seemed like a very natural fit. So I think what's interesting, though, is that the piece that I've really resonated with is not necessarily the teacher part, it's actually the curriculum part. To go to the law piece, you have trial lawyers, and then you have the lawyers who are like, in the background, like, you know, getting everything together. I really like the background piece. I like thinking about what you are trying to do and how does it play out? And what kind of challenges might you face? And what kind of background materials can you prepare someone with? And so I think over time, I've realized, it's not the actual performance piece that I enjoy, although sometimes that can be really nice. I actually just really enjoy the preparation and the thought exercise that's involved in it. Sometimes the production of curriculum, like I sometimes dip my toe into, like the artistic side of the world. I feel like curriculum development is like artwork where you produce something and it's like, here's the tangible evidence of my labor, as opposed to the kind of experiential part that goes on in the classroom.
Dave  
Oh, man, you're speaking my language now. That's interesting to hear, because, I mean, I see you as being one of the most interesting educators in that regard. You really seem to be excellent at the delivery, the performance, and the curriculum design also. If your experience is like mine, it can be a challenge to work both those hats at the same time.
Stephen  
Honestly, I find the performance piece difficult. So for me, it took a long time to resolve being like a gay man in front of a class. That identity piece was really hard, and I didn't want it involved at all in my teaching. There was a lot of mental effort about how I just portray myself as an individual that people would connect with, but also that they wouldn't necessarily have difficulty with me being gay. So, I feel like there was a lot of performance in that it made it an extra cognitive piece of how am I portraying myself. Simultaneously, I'm trying to make sure that they're learning, you know, the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, and it's just like, there's a lot going on in those two things that made it just not as pleasurable as some people find it. After like a decade of that tension is part of why I didn't necessarily go towards the performance piece of teaching as much.
Dave  
That's fascinating. I'd love to talk to you more about that. That's interesting, like how identity I mean, shapes, obviously, who we are as an educator, but how different identities intersect with the role of an educator. 
Stephen  
Right, like, women and minorities. I feel like with mine, it could be like a hidden component, but we hear lots of studies looking at women and minorities in front of a classroom and the extra difficulties they face. I feel like that's just this unfortunate overlap with the fact that they have to deal with his added difficulties. At the same time, they're trying to manage student learning. We also talk about the benefit of having diverse audiences in front of students. I think those are, you know, some things that are kind of woven into the situation of having diverse faculty teaching or instructors teaching.
Dave  
Yeah, you mentioned “connection” as this key keyword for you in your teaching. Could you share what connection looks like for you in your practice?
Stephen  
So one of the things in teaching science to non-scientists, I feel like one of the things I tackled earlier on was this idea of subject anxiety. And so I was getting a lot of feedback from students about when they were coming into the class that they were scared. They wouldn't say scared, they would say that they were anxious. Like, ‘science isn't my forte or that ‘I've never really done well in science courses.’ And so I feel like there's a potential barrier between the instructor and the students because they're anxious about how they're going to perform and whether or not they're capable of succeeding. That has been shown to impact their ability to succeed. I've always been asking how to reduce that kind of subject anxiety. I’ve looked at things like how do you incorporate comics as a way of softening the subject matter so that people are more engaged by it? I did a whole video series of me in weird places where it was all green screen. The idea is if your instructor is willing to do that, then surely it's not difficult to ask them questions, right? There's no barrier to them in that, ‘Oh, he's a scientist, and I'm going to look stupid in front of him.’ Instead, he's looking stupid in front of me. So like, I don't have to worry about it being something that I can't do. Right. So I've always tried to figure out, like, how do you make connections with people. It facilitates the ability to ask for help. And to take risks in trying to convey what you understand, right? 
Because I feel that part of participating in the conversation is how you help grow as an intellectual, I would say, maybe that's one of my tendencies. Personally, when I'm learning something, I like to talk about it, get corrected, and then have a discussion and dialogue. And if you're afraid of showing your ignorance, then it's really difficult because it still remains hidden, right? And so to me, it is about how do you create an environment where they do feel connected, where they can feel connected with each other? When you confront that misconception, that's really where some significant learning can occur.
Dave  
Yeah, absolutely. It almost sounds like you're talking a bit about modeling vulnerability as a posture toward learning itself.
Stephen  
Right. I would say that I definitely did not have that terminology or that thought process at the time. But I feel like some of the conversations that have gone on with authors like Brene Brown, and, you know, thinking about allowing yourself to be vulnerable and connect to students has helped me to think about it maybe in similar terms.
Dave  
Yeah. Vulnerability is probably not generally a scientist’s favorite word?
Stephen  
Well, we have thought about having some workshops on that. But I think we sometimes talk about it with regards to how you have difficult conversations in the classroom, right? But it really does boil down to some of that being about vulnerability. That's also around kind of the intellectual components of being able to be wrong, and how you grow from that. So there are concepts of failing forward or failing fast or growth mindsets, right? And how do you help people to realize that it's not a condition of being either good in math or not good in math or good in science or not good at science? It's how do you grow what you have to be better? 
Dave  
Yeah, oh, that would be an interesting conversation to have around the scientific process itself. Some might argue this is based around an intellectual humility, of understanding that we don't understand and know that we don't know and constantly trying to engage the unknowing with things that we do know, to try, to build on that with solid evidence.
Stephen  
There's an article that is basically on stupidity in science. It's a one-page description of regrets of a professional who was talking about his experience in grad school and realized that the ability to handle your own ignorance allows you to be successful in science. So it was talking about why some people make it and some people don't. And this was one of the aspects of the ability to be okay with realizing that you don't know the answer. Being willing to push that boundary is what allows you to be successful. So it's just, I think, an interesting take for students to realize that successful scientists recognize that they don't know and be okay with it.
Dave  
How have your ideas about these things changed over time?
Stephen  
Well, like what the identity piece, I feel like, there's definitely a component of feeling like it was just information, but they didn't really need to know me and to know aspects about who I am. And I feel like that's, you know, more especially in an online environment. I feel like there was a time when I wondered how you most interestingly convey this content, and you can totally do it divorced from identity and the connection piece is the part that helps to bridge those who are not already passionate about the topic. That's what's going to get them to connect with it. And so just figuring out how we humanize the digital experience is, that's been one progression, I would say.
One of the other ones I would say is my thinking about educator development because a lot of my work is working with faculty about how to improve their practice. I feel like that progression has been one of being rooted in a kind of best practice, or being very prescriptive, to actually having conversations with faculty about what it is that they value, and then figuring out how that ties into the primary literature or into and to various literature's, in general. There are times when you want to know just like, what are some of the things that people have learned that are best that have been shown in the literature with regards to having discussions in class. But it's really different. When thinking about life as an individual, I'm interested in having discussions with students, and identifying that as actually a pedagogical approach that you want to expand because that's what you're actually rooted in. That's what you're going to put the time in. That's what's going to define your actual classroom experience. So instead of someone coming in and being like, actually, you need to use whiteboards more. Yes, whiteboards can be effective, but you actually have to figure out what your identity is as an instructor, and then go from there. I just feel like that's so much more powerful. 
Dave  
That's really quite profound because they do seem to have eager tentativeness to “best practices.” It reminds me of one of my favorite authors, Parker Palmer, he has a book called “The Courage to Teach.” And he talks a lot about how a lot of and how we as educators, essentially, teach from who we are, as you're talking about that very thing, starting with the heart of the individual educator first and what their goals are and then building technological support.
Stephen  
I totally remember having conversations with other educators, then pushing back on the best practices. And, like, I feel like this comes from a place of being in the sciences for, you know, so long of like, what, like, you measure things and we find out what is more effective. That's how we improve. And just disregarding this aspect of what would nurture a faculty member. I mean, like when we think about, like, how much time faculty spend on improving their teaching like they're balancing out research and service and all of these other components. And so like, in order for them to really grow, it has to be the thing that you're super passionate about. This is how I actually connect with people. And so I feel like the discussions or arguments we had about best practices and whether or not that's a valuable framework to go from is actually just moving in a different direction from this conversation of like, why would you just not focus on the thing that people are passionate about? Right? So it's not that it's incorrect, it's just not really looking at it from the same perspective. And so, it is, you know, sometimes a little painful to be like, oh, yeah, I think I said something like that. You know, like, a few years ago, and yeah, so it has been interesting.
Dave  
Yeah, absolutely. And I certainly then, early on, in my work in instructional design, I was a strong proponent of best practices. I’m critical of that, lately, myself also. So, could you tell us a little bit more about your settings? I think when you were at first MSU, you were primarily teaching and an instructor and now you do a lot of educator development. I guess we could say, and you also do a lot of design and curricular work, and also some teaching, I believe, or
Stephen  
…up until this last summer,
Dave  
okay. Okay, gotcha. Okay. So could you tell us a little bit about your, your setting in which you're in, and then these different hats that you're wearing now?
Stephen  
Part of my role is in the Center for Integrative Studies in general science. So that's the Gen Ed Science course for non-scientists. And a lot of my work in the last few years has been focused on curriculum reform. And I have to say, that's probably some of the most rewarding work that I've done. Because it's, I just love it. The idea of so thinking about, if you have a three-class sequence, like how do students progress between those classes? And then like, how do you resolve to have different faculty and their identity and their topic? And so it's just been, I feel fascinating about like, how do you first off physically map the curriculum? How do you get faculty buy-in for various curricular reforms? How do you build a community around curriculum, like, I'm interested in those, those ideas, and so that work has been really, really rewarding? And then I'd say in college, that setting is looking at how technology is a filter or a lever for impacting student learning. And so I get a lot of help from faculty to think about technology tools that they could use in order to facilitate things like discussions online. But a lot of that work has also been focused on accessibility. 
I feel like that has been an incredible lens that also had a lot of unique challenges about how you get people to buy into doing extra labor for, for accessibility, for widening their impact on their curriculum. And so like, we had gone through many different lenses of like, oh, well, accessibility is about compliance, and then looking at how that impacted faculty buy-in. And, you know, how it was limiting their participation, because as a concept, it's not very engaging, and then, you know, shifting over to more of a social justice piece, or going even into an equity viability piece, I feel has really allowed people to, to think about that, and see how that is actually aligned with their beliefs, and how that type of work is important. 
I feel like there's, you know so that accessibility work was like, how do we make sure that all the digital pieces that we're making are accessible to, so there ADA, so Americans with Disabilities Act, so it responds to that? But also, you know, what we've found is that those accommodations helped all students. And so, you know, it kind of broadened to this idea of going from an idea of compliance to really how do we impact a larger number of students. So that's kind of that work. And then my new role, as the assistant dean, it's focused on STEM teaching and learning. It's really focused on the STEM building, and then figuring out how a single location can bring faculty and disciplines from across the STEM disciplines and even outside of STEM, to talk with each other and to learn from each other, and to better use the physical spaces in their pedagogical approach. 
So, you know, when you have small groups of people, how do you foster discussion in that and then build ways of reporting out to a larger community is the, you know, is what we're working on. And so the STEM building has lots of innovative approaches to their classroom design. And so figuring out how do we train faculty to do that is, you know, is, again, you can see a hopefully the parallel between what's going on in the center for, you know, building a community around curriculum, and then in the college about how do we as a community, figure out what are the standards for the curriculum that we're creating? And then the STEM building is how do we have conversations in typically siloed communities that can help us to improve our practice. So there's a lot about communication. And probably a parallel, you know, connection. Right? 
How do we have connections between faculty members from diverse groups? 
How do we connect it to the technologies that we use? 
And how do we make better impacts with the students that we're serving?
--
Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative.