Inquiry-based Curriculum
Reform from Faculty Learning
Communities
Nancy Shapiro and David May, University System of Maryland
Philip Sokolove, University of Maryland Baltimore County
Supported by NSF’s Mathematics and Science Partnership program
1
Context: A partnership of diverse institutions
The Vertically Integrated Partnerships project (VIP K-16) was a 5-year
Math Science Partnership grant from NSF. The main purpose of VIP K-16
was to improve science instruction and curriculum in Maryland high
schools and universities. It created learning communities of teachers and
faculty in which they developed their inquiry pedagogy skills and science
content knowledge by learning from each other, and developed new
curricula for science based on inquiry pedagogy.
 K-12:

Montgomery County Schools
(140,000 students)
 2-year higher education:

Montgomery College
 University System of Maryland
institutions:




Univ. of Maryland, College Park
Univ. of Maryland, Baltimore County
Towson University
Univ. of Maryland Biotech Institute
2
Context: Diverse programs of the partnership
•Professional development and curriculum guides for high school: Teacherand faculty-designed professional development and associated curriculum guides
for 350 high-school science teachers
•Undergraduates in high school classrooms: We have created a
mentoring/internship program that matches university biology majors with MCPS
high school teachers. This project involved students from UMCP and UMBC.
•Graduate students as mentor teachers: We created a program for a few
science grad students at UMCP to become master teaching fellows and mentor
their peers in inquiry instruction.
•High school teachers as science researchers: This program has provided
summer internships for MCPS high-school teachers in biology research labs at
UMBI. The teachers formed a learning community focused on understanding real
science inquiry and how to bring it into their instructional practice.
•Faculty learning communities to design science curricula: The focus of this
poster.
3
The Learning Community strategy
Towson University:
 17 science faculty met monthly to share ideas about their own courses and
instruction.
 Pairs of faculty met more frequently on specific reforms.
Montgomery College:
 An experienced science teacher (who was also adjunct faculty) mentored dozens of
faculty through private meetings, classroom observations, and syllabus review.
 Special seminars and department meetings focused on inquiry-based curriculum
reform and consolidated the participants in a community of practice.
University of Maryland, Baltimore County:
 Bi-annual colloquia brought together faculty and area teachers.
 Collaborative partnerships of faculty, teachers, and grad students produced many
changes.
University of Maryland, College Park:
 Key faculty and administrative leaders brought together a group of faculty to design
new “Marquee” courses that focus on the science of contemporary issue.
4
Some learning-community outcomes
 STEM faculty involved: 100
 Undergraduate courses – revised or completely new: 30
 Examples of inquiry-based reforms:






New laboratory exercises or entire lab manuals
New grading rubrics for student lab reports
New lecture-hall-based active engagement lessons
New textbook
Guides for new instructors of reformed courses
Lesson plans designed around a case-study approach
 Titles of some of the new courses:




“The Science of Networks”
“Engineering Issues in Medicine”
“Biogenesis: Making a Habitable Planet”
“Physics for Decision Makers”
5
Example: Active learning without small
groups in introductory biology
 Biology 100 at UMBC - typically 250-300 students per lecture
 An experiment: In one semester, the course had small in-class groups
of 4-6 students; in another semester, groups were not possible. In this
context, extensive interactive engagement is difficult, so “Activelearning Lite” techniques were developed by Dr. Phil Sokolove:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Raised Name Signs with large lettering
Peer Interaction (Think-Pair-Share with neighbors, with or without clickers)
Student Role-Play activities
CD Animations (with pause for discussion)
Encourage Student Questions
Discussion Board forums using Blackboard software environment
The two semesters were compared: full active learning and “active learning lite.”
6
Example (continued): Discussion of
“Active learning lite” techniques


The first 5 methods are used in class to promote an active learning
environment.
The Blackboard Discussion Board extends active learning to the out-ofclass environment -- provided that the instructor monitors, but does NOT
contribute to discussion board interaction by jumping into answer students'
content questions.


Wait time: If one waits long enough (discussion-board equivalent of "wait time"), other
students almost always volunteer to answer a question.
Process questions: The ONLY thing the instructor should do is to ask for the source of the
answering student's "facts" (and also encourage students to google for information -surprisingly enough, they don't usually), and then ask them how they determined how
reliable their source was.
7
Example (continued): “Active learning lite”
is okay with students
Survey Results: % of Students Responding Positively to ActiveLearning Components (significant differences in green)
(Fall 2004, n=235 ; Spring 2005, n=288)
A-L Component
Fall, A-L Lite
Spring, A-L Full
Name Signs
50%
42%
Peer Interaction
78%
80%
Student Role-Play
75%
72%
CD Animations
68%
68%
Student Questions
80%
79%
Blackboard
68%
80%
8