Toward a Descriptive Science of Teaching: How the TDOP Illuminates the Multidimensional Nature of Active Learning in Postsecondary Classrooms

Hora, Matthew T.

doi:10.1002/sce.21175

Cited by 53 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With both protocols, trained observers document student and instructor activities during each 2 minute time interval of an observed class period (Hora and Ferrare, 2013;Smith et al, 2014) by coding for occurrences of specific student and teacher behaviors (Hora and Ferrare, 2013;Smith et al, 2013). The TDOP has 33 possible activities to code in 5 categories (Hora, 2015), which are reduced to 25 elements in the COPUS. Similarly, the Practical Observation Rubric to Assess Active Learning (PORTAAL) was developed from discipline-based education research to capture evidence of students engaged in research-based elements of active learning in observed STEM classrooms (Eddy et al, 2015).…”

Section: Common Observation Protocols Used In Stem Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the three instructional category labels, Student Centered, Transitional, and Teacher Centered (Budd et al, 2013), have been criticized as being value laden (e.g., Hora, 2015), they are already in use, and therefore we use them here to avoid inventing new category titles that may cause confusion. The Transitional category is used only to indicate that the RTOP score is intermediate between the Teacher Centered and Student Centered categories (Budd et al, 2013), and does not suggest that an instructor is attempting to pass through this category to get to another.…”

Section: Classroom Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyzed quantitative and qualitative data from classroom observations combined with instructor survey results to characterize the application of reformed teaching practices in undergraduate geoscience classes in the United States. Trained observers used the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) to score 204 geoscience classes. Observed faculty represent a diversity of institutions, teaching rank, and years of experience. Classrooms observed included introductory and upper-level undergraduate courses that ranged in size from 6 to 275 students. Total RTOP scores do not correlate with class size, class level, institution type, instructor gender, instructor rank, or years of teaching experience. Classroom instruction was separated into three categories based on total RTOP scores: Teacher Centered (≤30), Transitional (31-49), or Student Centered (≥50). Statistical analyses of RTOP subscales and individual item scores are used to identify the instructional practices that are characteristic of each category. Instructor survey responses and qualitative classroom observations provide additional details about instructional practices common within each instructional category. Results of these analyses provide a coherent picture of instructional strategies used in geoscience classrooms. Instruction in the most Student Centered classrooms differs from that in Transitional and Teacher Centered classrooms in at least one of three ways. Student Centered classes are more likely to include (1) students engaged in class activities with one another; (2) activities in which instructors assess student learning and adjust lessons accordingly; and (3) opportunities for students to answer and pose questions that determine the focus of a lesson.

show abstract

Section: Common Observation Protocols Used In Stem Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Classroom Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an attempt to gain a more quantifiable understanding of the quite different learning dynamics and student-teacher interactions which presented themselves so readily perceivable in the different types of laboratory classes, we attempted to capture the interaction learning pattern in the class using the Dimensions Observation Protocol (TDOP) tool developed by Hora [21]. The TDOP tool captures instructional practices, student-teacher interactions, and instructional technology through minute, direct observations and recording of the presence of key activities within the class room.…”

Section: Dynamics Of Laboratory Learning Experiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authentic Student Laboratory Classes in Science Education

Schulte¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The traditional hands-on nature in science laboratory classes creates a sense of immediacy and presence of authenticity in such learning experiences. The handling of physical objects in a laboratory class and the immediate responses provided by the experiments are certainly real-live observations, yet may be far from instilling an authentic learning experience in students. This paper explores the presence of authenticity in hands-on laboratory classes in introductory science laboratories. With our own laboratory program as backdrop we introduce four general types of hands-on laboratory experiences and assign degrees of authenticity according the processes and student engagement associated with them. In that course, we present a newly developed type of hands-on experiment which takes a somewhat different view of the concept of hands-on in a laboratory class. A proxemics-based study of teacher-student interactions in the hands-on laboratory classes presents us with some insights into the design of the different types of laboratory classes and the pedagogical presumptions we made. A step-by-step guide on how to embed industry engagement in the curriculum and the design of an authentic laboratory program is presented to highlight some minimum requirement for the sustainability of such program and pitfalls to avoid.

show abstract

“…While these definitions may be useful for differentiating pedagogies which are essentially reformed in nature from those that take a more traditional, didactic approach, they have been criticized for describing teaching in binary terms [5]. They are also rather broad, encompassing a range of activity types.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing interactive engagement activities in a flipped introductory physics class

Wood

Galloway

Donnelly

et al. 2016

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interactive engagement activities are increasingly common in undergraduate physics teaching. As research efforts move beyond simply showing that interactive engagement pedagogies work towards developing an understanding of how they lead to improved learning outcomes, a detailed analysis of the way in which these activities are used in practice is needed. Our aim in this paper is to present a characterization of the type and duration of interactions, as experienced by students, that took place during two introductory physics courses (1A and 1B) at a university in the United Kingdom. Through this work, a simple framework for analyzing lectures-the framework for interactive learning in lectures (FILL), which focuses on student interactions (with the lecturer, with each other, and with the material) is proposed. The pedagogical approach is based on Peer Instruction (PI) and both courses are taught by the same lecturer. We find lecture activities can be categorized into three types: interactive (25%), vicarious interactive (20%) (involving questions to and from the lecturer), and noninteractive (55%). As expected, the majority of both interactive and vicarious interactive activities took place during PI. However, the way that interactive activities were used during non-PI sections of the lecture varied significantly between the two courses. Differences were also found in the average time spent on lecturer-student interactions (28% for 1A and 12% for 1B), although not on student-student interactions (12% and 12%) or on individual learning (10% and 7%). These results are explored in detail and the implications for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Toward a Descriptive Science of Teaching: How the TDOP Illuminates the Multidimensional Nature of Active Learning in Postsecondary Classrooms

Cited by 53 publications

References 66 publications

A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms

A multidimensional assessment of reformed teaching practice in geoscience classrooms

Authentic Student Laboratory Classes in Science Education

Characterizing interactive engagement activities in a flipped introductory physics class

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About