Graduate teaching assistants' epistemological and metacognitive development

Research in chemistry education has highlighted a number of variables that predict learning and performance, such as teacher-student interactions, academic motivation and metacognition. Most of this chemistry research has examined these variables by identifying dyadic relationships through bivariate correlations. The main purpose of this study was to simultaneously investigate students' perceptions of teacher-student interactions (autonomy support), motivation (expectancy, importance, utility and interest), metacognitive strategies for problem solving (planning, monitoring and evaluation), and performance in chemistry.Measures were collected from 503 Spanish undergraduates (53.13% females) aged 18 to 36 years. Structural equation modeling (SEM) tested the hypothesized direct and mediated relations between these variables. First, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) provided evidence of the robustness of the evaluation instruments. Second, perceived autonomy support positively predicted expectancy, importance, utility, interest, planning, monitoring, evaluation and performance in chemistry; motivational variables positively predicted metacognitive strategies and performance; and metacognitive strategies positively predicted performance. Moreover, all hypothesized mediated effects between variables were also supported.We conclude discussing the main findings of this study, highlighting their educational implications, acknowledging their limitations, and proposing lines of future research on chemistry education.

Section: Direct Relationshipssupporting

confidence: 94%

Perceived autonomy-support, expectancy, value, metacognitive strategies and performance in chemistry: a structural equation model in undergraduates

González

Paoloni

2015

“…Reviewing the literature as a whole provides a starting point for better understanding TA training for inquiry-based laboratories. Weekly TA meetings are recommended in order to address the practical course details (Nurrenbern et al, 1999;Roehrig et al, 2003;Sandi-Urena et al, 2011). Shannon et al, 1998;Hammrich, 2001;Roehrig et al, 2003;Luft et al, 2004;Cho et al, 2010;Marbach-Ad et al, 2012;Kendall and Schussler, 2013).…”

Section: Ta Support In Laboratory Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Herrington and Nakhleh, 2003;Roehrig et al, 2003;Luft et al, 2004;Bond-Robinson and Bernard Rodriques, 2006). Sandi-Urena et al, 2011). TA training program articles suggest feedback is important for TAs and can come from peers, students, or faculty (e.g.…”

Section: Ta Support In Laboratory Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching assistants' perceptions of a training to support an inquiry-based general chemistry laboratory course

Wheeler

Maeng

Whitworth

2015

The purpose of this qualitative investigation was to better understand teaching assistants' (TAs') perceptions of training in a guided inquiry undergraduate general chemistry laboratory context. The training was developed using existing TA training literature and informed by situated learning theory. TAs engaged in training prior to teaching (B25 hours) and attended weekly meetings throughout the year (B60 hours). Assessment of training utilized a constructivist framework to understand TAs' perceptions of training in supporting their implementation of guided inquiry in the laboratory. Participants included 20 graduate TAs and 8 undergraduate TAs of varying teaching experience. Data collection included three open-ended surveys across the academic year and two semi-structured interviews with a purposefully sampled subset of TAs. Data were analyzed using systematic data analysis (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Results indicated different aspects of the training were helpful for different subgroups of participants. For example, going over logistics and completing the experiments were most helpful for TAs with no previous teaching experience while discussing learning theory was least helpful for TAs whose future career goals were research-focused. Analyzing participants' experiences and perceptions through a situated learning theory lens suggested TAs with little prior teaching experience appreciated the authentic experiences (e.g., experiments and grading) provided by the training. The results of the study suggest TA training should address prior experiences, particularly language and teaching, as well as the larger context of research and future careers. Future research will focus on examining how TAs learn within a situated training and how that impacts TA beliefs, practices, and student learning.

“…In their 2003 re-examination of their 1982 review, Hofstein and Lunetta stand by their claim that ''the assumption that laboratory experiences help students understand materials, phenomena, concepts, models, and relationships, almost independent of the nature of the laboratory experience, continues to be widespread in spite of the sparse data from carefully designed and conducted studies'' (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004, p. 46). Since these reports, studies have been published on reformed laboratory curricula (Cooper and Kerns, 2006;Sandi-Urena et al, 2011a, 2011b, the role of the graduate teaching assistant (Herrington and Nakhleh, 2003;Sandi-Urena et al, 2011a;Sandi-Urena and Gatlin, 2013), and of faculty goals for student learning (Bruck et al, 2010;Bretz et al, 2013;Bruck and Towns, 2013). Since these reports, studies have been published on reformed laboratory curricula (Cooper and Kerns, 2006;Sandi-Urena et al, 2011a, 2011b, the role of the graduate teaching assistant (Herrington and Nakhleh, 2003;Sandi-Urena et al, 2011a;Sandi-Urena and Gatlin, 2013), and of faculty goals for student learning (Bruck et al, 2010;Bretz et al, 2013;Bruck and Towns, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using cluster analysis to characterize meaningful learning in a first-year university chemistry laboratory course

Galloway

Bretz

2015

The Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory Instrument (MLLI) was designed to measure students' cognitive and affective learning in the university chemistry laboratory. The MLLI was administered at the beginning and the end of the first semester to first-year university chemistry students to measure their expectations and experiences for learning in their laboratory course. To better understand what students' expectations for learning were fulfilled, and what expectations went unmet, cluster analysis was used to examine students' expectations and experiences as measured by their average scores on the MLLI at both the beginning and the end of the semester. The cluster solution yielded four clusters.Three of the four clusters consisted of parallel responses, i.e., the first cluster had both low expectations and low experiences, the third cluster had both high expectations and high experiences, and the second cluster was in the middle of the first and third. The fourth cluster had expectations similar to those of the high cluster, but surprisingly had experiences similar to those of the middle and low clusters.Descriptions of each cluster of students, including distinguishing characteristics of their learning in the laboratory, and the implications of this research are discussed.