If you are unable to join the seminar face-to-face in Bessey room 109, you are welcome to join us via zoom teleconferencing by clicking on (or copying-and-pasting into your browser) the following URL:
https://unl.zoom.us/j/212107342
Abstract for DBER Group Discussion on 02-01-2018:
Authors and Affiliations:
Mary Durham
Postdoctoral Research Associate
School of Biological Sciences
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Title:
Investigating agreement between students, instructors, and observers regarding frequencies of Scientific Teaching practices using the Measurement Instrument for Scientific Teaching for Observers (MISTO)
Abstract:
The Scientific Teaching (ST) pedagogical framework encompasses many of the science teaching practices recommended in the literature and highlighted in national reports. We recently developed and validated an online survey called the Measurement Instrument for Scientific Teaching (MIST) to quantify ST practices in undergraduate sciences courses. MIST questions were written so that students, instructors, or observers can interpret and respond to the questions in similar ways. However, since not all ST practices are observable in the classroom setting, we created MISTO (MIST for Observers). In developing MISTO, we slightly modified the original MIST to include only practices that were observable in video recordings of class sessions, and we modified response scales of all perspectives to reflect implementation frequencies detectable in one week of class sessions. In this study, we investigated the degree of similarity between student, instructor, and observer scores for each of 70 undergraduate science courses at 7 different U.S. institutions. All three perspectives showed moderate to high correlations in overall MISTO scores and for practices related to Active Learning Strategies. Pair-wise matches in scores between perspectives were high for the overall MISTO and often exceeded 75% for subcategories of teaching practices. However, the degree of match varied among pairs of perspectives by MISTO subcategories. Match scores between students and instructors were significantly higher than the match scores of observers with either students or instructors for the full MISTO and for the Active Learning Strategies and Inclusivity subcategories. The instructor-observer match was significantly higher than student matches with either instructors or observers for the Reflection subcategory. Our results suggest that all three perspectives might produce comparable results when reporting overall ST implementation and for some subcategories. We recommend that MISTO users consider their research goals, available resources, and potential artifacts that may arise to assist in deciding which perspective to sample from when using MISTO.