Fidelity of Implementation of Research‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses

Abstract

Background Increasing attention is being paid to improvement in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education through increased adoption of research-based instructional strategies (RBIS), but high-quality measures of faculty instructional practice do not exist to monitor progress.Purpose/Hypothesis The measure of how well an implemented intervention follows the original is called fidelity of implementation. This theory was used to address the research questions: What is the fidelity of implementation of selected RBIS in engineering science courses? That is, how closely does engineering science classroom practice reflect the intentions of the original developers? Do the critical components that characterize an RBIS discriminate between engineering science faculty members who claimed use of the RBIS and those who did not?Design/Method A survey of 387 U.S. faculty teaching engineering science courses (e.g., statics, circuits, thermodynamics) included questions about class time spent on 16 critical components and use of 11 corresponding RBIS. Fidelity was quantified as the percentage of RBIS users who also spent time on corresponding critical components. Discrimination between users and nonusers was tested using chi square.Results Overall fidelity of the 11 RBIS ranged from 11% to 80% of users spending time on all required components. Fidelity was highest for RBIS with one required component: casebased teaching, just-in-time teaching, and inquiry learning. Thirteen of 16 critical components discriminated between users and nonusers for all RBIS to which they were mapped.Conclusions Results were consistent with initial mapping of critical components to RBIS. Fidelity of implementation is a potentially useful framework for future work in STEM undergraduate education.

Understanding How a Culture of Collaboration Develops Among STEM Faculty

“…The two most cited barriers to implementing RBIS's in core electrical engineering courses included 1) concern for requiring too much class time which could potentially undermine their efforts to cover the course content and 2) the cost of preparation time to implement RBIS 1 . As a result, engineering education researchers were urged to provide details of implementation and the underlying educational research principles in addition to evidence of efficacy when attempting to convince STEM faculty to apply RBIS's in their classroom 2 . Potential adopters should seek out the background information to make informed decisions about how to properly implement the RBIS within the course and achieve the desired student outcomes 2 .…”

“…As a result, engineering education researchers were urged to provide details of implementation and the underlying educational research principles in addition to evidence of efficacy when attempting to convince STEM faculty to apply RBIS's in their classroom 2 . Potential adopters should seek out the background information to make informed decisions about how to properly implement the RBIS within the course and achieve the desired student outcomes 2 . Furthermore, the obstacles impeding wide spread integration into the engineering education seem to occur at later stages of adoption beyond awareness and implementation such as a sustained effort to continue the use of the RBIS or discontinue 1,3 .…”

Sustaining Innovation in Engineering Education through Faculty Communities

“…While the spread of CCPS has been the most far reaching spread of RBIS, other RBIS are also spreading across the program. Classroom response systems (i.e., clickers) and peer instruction [4] are being used in 16 SIIP-affiliated courses, most of which had not been using clickers before SIIP. The use of an adaptive learning and testing platform is now being used in 10 SIIP-affiliated courses.…”

“…Studies guided by the Diffusion of Innovations have shown that faculty are generally aware of Research-Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS), but they either fail to incorporate them into their teaching methods or quickly abandon their adoption of RBIS shortly after beginning to use them [2][3][4][5][6] . The first challenge suggests that faculty need to perceive the value that RBIS bring to their own classrooms 6 .…”

A Multivariate Examination of Active and Interactive Learning and Student Engagement in Post-Secondary Engineering Energy Science Classrooms: The "Why" of Instructional Strategy Use

“…From a practical standpoint, it is important to understand the relationship between instruction, active learning, and engagement so that strategies can be tailored to provide appropriate learning experiences for students. Different forms of instructional strategies (Borrego, et al, 2013) may engage students in different ways, producing different cognitive, affective, and behavioral processes better suited for one type of learning over another.…”