Conference PaperPDF Available


We investigated student perceptions of cold calling on their feelings of anxiousness and how graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) alleviated these feelings when students shared their ideas publicly in the context of tutorial and laboratory sessions. Physics and chemistry GTAs who led active-learning tutorials and labs practiced cold calling paired with error framing with avatar-students in a mixed-reality simulator at the beginning of the semester. Then, we observed the GTAs teaching real students in their actual classroom. We recruited eleven students from sections led by GTAs who were observed to use cold calling in their classroom to participate in semi-structured interviews. Several students reported that cold calling increased their feelings of anxiousness. However, students also reported that GTAs used strategies paired with cold calling that reduced their feelings of anxiousness, such as acknowledging student responses as valuable and remembering student names. We discuss implications for professional development on active learning strategies.
Student perspective of GTA strategies to reduce feelings of anxiousness with cold-calling
Constance M. Doty1,
1Department of Physics, University of Central Florida, 4111 Libra Drive, Orlando, FL, 32816
Ashley A. Geraets2, Tong Wan1, Erin K. H. Saitta2 and Jacquelyn J. Chini1
1Department of Physics, University of Central Florida, 4111 Libra Drive, Orlando, FL, 32816
2Department of Chemistry, University of Central Florida, 4111 Libra Drive, Orlando, FL, 32816
We investigated student perceptions of cold calling on their feelings of anxiousness and how graduate
teaching assistants (GTAs) alleviated these feelings when students shared their ideas publicly in the context of
tutorial and laboratory sessions. Physics and chemistry GTAs who led active-learning tutorials and labs
practiced cold calling paired with error framing with avatar-students in a mixed-reality simulator at the
beginning of the semester. Then, we observed the GTAs teaching real students in their actual classroom. We
recruited eleven students from sections led by GTAs who were observed to use cold calling in their classroom
to participate in semi-structured interviews. Several students reported that cold calling increased their feelings
of anxiousness. However, students also reported that GTAs used strategies paired with cold calling that reduced
their feelings of anxiousness, such as acknowledging student responses as valuable and remembering student
names. We discuss implications for professional development on active learning strategies.
The STEM education community has used a variety of
training formats to support graduate teaching assistants’
(GTA) development of the pedagogical skills needed for
active learning, such as pedagogy seminars and practice
microteaching to peers [1-4]. In addition, researchers and
educators have described a variety of pedagogical strategies
instructors can use to support student engagement in active
learning (e.g., [6-7]). Two instructional strategies that
promote student participation in the classroom are cold
calling and error framing.
In cold calling, an instructor calls on a non-volunteering
student by name to respond to a question (the instructor may
or may not have prompted the students to have a response
ready before asking them to answer) [1,7]. Cold calling has
been reported to increase student participation with active
learning activities like whole class discussion [8]. Random
call, a specific version of cold calling where the instructor
uses a randomized list to select who to call on, has been
demonstrated to increase equity in participation [9].
However, researchers have reported that cold calling can
also increase students’ feelings of anxiousness [10,11].
Cooper, Downing and Brownell propose students’ fear of
negative evaluation as a possible mechanism through which
cold calling can increase anxiety [11]. In a classroom
setting, fear of negative evaluation is students fear of being
negatively judged by their instructor or their peers when they
participate in a classroom activity or share their ideas [12].
To reduce the potential negative impact of cold calling on
students affect, an instructor could pair cold calling with
another teaching strategy to promote student engagement
while also helping students feel comfortable with sharing
their ideas in front of the class.
In error framing, the instructor creates an environment
that error is framed as a natural part of the learning process
[1,7,13-15]. Instructors can error frame while introducing an
activity (e.g., by stating that students should expect to engage
in “productive failure”) [16] and in response to student errors
(e.g., by framing student ideas as common and reasonable)
[1]. Becker et al. and Eddy, Converse, and Wenderoth have
suggested the use of error framing to decrease student
anxiety related to active learning classroom activities and to
encourage student participation in class [1,13]. However, in
the same studies, instructors were rarely observed to use
error framing [1,13]. Therefore, the impact of error framing
on student affect is a continuing investigation.
In our study, we are engaged in a project exploring the
use of a mixed-reality classroom simulator as a safe
environment for STEM GTAs to practice instructional
strategies with avatar-students. The simulator is mixed-
reality because GTAs are in a physical classroom while they
interact with a virtual class of students who are puppeteered
through human-in-the-loop technology. While GTA
professional development often focuses on changing GTA
beliefs about teaching and learning, it is also important to
explore changes in GTAs’ teaching actions and impacts on
their students [5]. In this paper, we explore the impact of
GTA use of cold calling on the undergraduate students they
taught. We recruited students from the classes of GTAs who
were observed to use cold calling and asked them about the
strategies their GTAs used along with cold calling to
increase student comfort. We identified seven strategies the
undergraduate students reported their GTAs used that
increased their comfort sharing their ideas in front of peers:
1) error framing; 2) allowing other students to assist with
answering the cold call question; 3) building off of what
students know; 4) providing neutral responses with
explanations; 5) using student names; 6) calling on student
groups; and 7) providing thinking time before cold calling.
Based on these findings, we suggest that GTAs already have
and can learn new strategies to reduce student anxiety
associated with cold calling.
A. Context
GTAs leading the introductory inquiry-based general
chemistry lab [17] (~24 students) and the introductory
physics “mini-studio” (recitation and lab combined) [18]
(~32 students) participated in a one-day boot camp during
the first week of the spring 2019 semester in addition to their
weekly prep meetings. Each GTA participated in two seven-
minute sessions in a mixed-reality simulator [19]. GTAs
were prompted to practice cold calling and error framing
with avatar-students while facilitating a whole class
discussion. The GTAs rehearsed in the simulator in groups
of two or three. Each GTA led one seven-minute session,
followed by five minutes of feedback from the facilitators
and a second round of seven-minute sessions with the avatar-
students. Throughout the spring 2019 semester, we observed
ten GTAs in physics and eleven GTAs in chemistry teaching
in their classrooms four times using a modified version of
the Laboratory Observation Protocol for Undergraduate
STEM (LOPUS) [20]. We added codes to the protocol for
cold calling and error framing. We observed four GTAs
(three in chemistry and one in physics) using cold calling and
error framing in at least two of the four observations.
B. Interviews
We recruited eleven students from sections taught by the
four identified GTAs via a survey posted on their course
website to participate in one-hour semi-structured interviews
about their experiences in their physics mini-studio or
chemistry lab. Considering that students may have different
class schedules and various comfort levels for individual
interviews, students were allowed to choose either focus
group or individual interviews. Seven students participated
in individual interviews, and four students participated in
two-person focus groups; the students in each focus group
shared the same GTA. Due to the social nature of focus
groups, participants' ideas voiced during a focus group may
be different than the ideas they would provide during an
individual interview. Thus, we present our findings
disaggregated by interview type in Table 1. All interviews
were audio-recorded and transcribed.
Two researchers (C.M.D. and A.A.G.) conducted the
semi-structured interviews. The interview protocol was
developed after reviewing relevant literature (e.g., [1,7,11])
which provides evidence for the validity of our
interpretations of what students say because the participants
were prompted to talk about the relevant concepts. During
the interviews, students were asked to discuss the impact of
cold calling on their feelings of anxiousness [21] and were
prompted to describe what their GTA has done to make them
feel comfortable with sharing their ideas with the whole class
or their lab group.
C. Data analysis
C.M.D. and A.A.G analyzed transcripts of the student
interviews in multiple rounds using the constant comparative
method to develop a codebook [22]. First, each researcher
individually identified key phrases and documented
emergent themes in the transcripts. We then compared
phrases and themes to develop a codebook with seven codes
for identified strategies, including code names, descriptions,
and exemplar student quotes. Lastly, we each independently
implemented the codebook on all the transcripts. We
investigated inter-rater reliability (IRR) for our
implementation of the seven codes using Gwet’s AC1, which
is robust to low trait prevalence [23]. Our Gwets AC1
values ranged from 0.89 to 0.94 for all seven codes across
the nine transcripts. Gwet’s values greater than 0.81 indicate
near perfect agreement; thus, we have evidence for the
reliability of our implementation of the seven codes [24].
After the individual coding, we discussed discrepancies in
our implementation of the codebook until we reached
agreement. We present the agreed upon coding.
III. Findings
We found ten out of eleven students reported an increase
in anxiety associated with their GTA’s use of cold calling,
comparable to Cooper, Downing and Brownell’s findings
from students in a large enrollment biology course [11].
However, we also found all the students had perceived their
anxiety associated with cold calling to decrease when their
GTA paired cold calling with another teaching strategy. We
identified seven teaching strategies students reported their
GTA to use with cold calling that increased their comfort
with sharing their ideas in front of their peers, as shown in
Table I. Since GTAs were instructed to rehearse error
framing, we discuss this strategy first.
TABLE I. Teaching strategies students identified to reduce
their feelings of anxiousness related to cold call. We indicate
the type of interview: individual (I) or focus group (F). P
(physics) and C (chemistry) indicate the discipline of the
GTA. The number next to P or C indicates a different GTA
in the same discipline. The number of participants for each
GTA is shown.
*These students did not give specific error framing-type
statements, but their responses suggest an error-friendly climate.
A. Error framing
In their training, GTAs were prompted to practice error
framing with avatar-students in the simulator and were
observed to use it in their classrooms. Notably, three students
perceived their anxiety with cold calling to decrease when
their GTA used an error framing-type statement in response
to student answers. Brocky (P1) [25] explained that they
were nervous with cold calling at first but their GTA’s
response to an incorrect answer helped them feel more
comfortable. They provided an example:
Int.: Do you think that’s typical of your physics lab with
professors like that or is it kind of that specific GTA has a
really good way of handling wrong answer?
Brocky: Yeah. I think it's more specifically him ‘cause he
knows, he'll [P1] say I know this is really hard so don't
worry if you answer it wrong'.
Brocky perceived that GTA’s response mitigated their
nervousness with cold calling as their GTA emphasized
effort over correctness. While three students gave specific
examples of GTA responses similar to Brocky’s example,
five other students reported an overall feeling of not being
afraid to share an incorrect answer in front of the class.
Amari (C2) and Jamie (C2) explained their reasoning:
Amari: I felt like it made me more comfortable with doing
something wrong because
Jamie: I think he was very big on the fact that we were
just learning this stuff and it wasn't about getting the right
answers, but like the process.
Val (C1) shared similar feelings about their GTA’s
responses to incorrect student answers:
Int.: … when you don't necessarily know the right answer
when you're called on, do you feel okay with giving a
Val: … he makes it known that you don't need to have a
correct answer. Any answer is a good answer as long as you
are participating
In total, eight students reported GTA responses that were
either consistent with the definition of error framing or with
the implication of an error-friendly climate existed in their
B. Allowing other students to assist
Eight students expressed comfort with cold calling when
their GTA gave them the option to say, “I don’t know” and
allowed their peers to help with the cold-call question. When
asked about how being called on affected their feelings of
anxiousness, Marley (C3) responded:
Marley: I mean I didn’t really care … ‘cause I feel like
sometimes when like you're called on and you have to give
an answer, that's where the anxiety comes from but there are
people who are like ‘I have no idea’ and he was like ‘okay’
and he picked someone else so.
Bo (C1) and Jordan (C1) described their reasoning about
how their GTA allowing others to help them answer the cold
call helped reduce their anxiety:
Int: … why do you feel like the pressure was relieved?
Bo: Because not only is he looking for the answer, but
there's also other people in the class that are looking for the
Jordan: I feel like it saves time. If I'm dead in my tracks
and have to sit there for a good minute while everyone looks
at me waiting for an answer, oh man is that uncomfortable!
These examples are representative of the ways students
described GTAs allowing them to back out of a cold call
decreased their feelings of anxiousness associated with cold
C. Building off what students know
Six students perceived their GTA to build off their prior
knowledge by encouraging students to say what they did
know or by asking questions about content students already
knew during cold calling. Amari (C2) was asked to explain:
Int.: So, you say he was nice about it (cold calling), could
you elaborate more on that?
Amari: So, if he called on you and you didn't know, he
would encourage you to say something that you did know,
and then he would build off of that.
Like Amari’s GTA, the other five students reported their
GTA to encourage them to say what they already knew as a
way of alleviating their feelings of anxiousness with cold
D. Providing neutral responses with explanations
Five students felt relieved after being cold called when
their GTA responded the same way regardless of the
correctness of a student’s answer. Marley (C3) described
similar feelings as the other four students. When asked what
their GTA had done to make them feel comfortable with
sharing their ideas, Marley responded:
Marley: I think that whether you were right or wrong like
there was always an explanation. So, I mean, it's like when I
was wrong like you didn't feel like it.
Marley felt comfortable with sharing their ideas because
their GTA would respond in a similar way to any student
response with an explanation.
E. Using student names
Four students expressed they felt more comfortable with
being called on when GTAs learned their names and used
them as part of the cold call. Val (C1) was the only one to
explain their reasoning:
Int.: …having him know your name and knowing that you
could possibly be called on, does that affect your feelings in
the classroom?
Val: I feel like yeah because he knows my name, because
it's more like I know everybody in the class, it's such a small
class, I feel better about answering and being called on.
Val explained how their GTA knowing student names
made them feel connected to their classmates and more
comfortable sharing their answer in front of the class.
Learning student names has been suggested to be the easiest
way for an instructor to demonstrate student care [26].
Undergraduate biology students expressed similar feelings
to Val when the bridge program faculty used their names
when interacting with them resulting in the student
perception of the faculty to be approachable and helpful [27].
F. Calling on student groups
Four students perceived their GTA to cold call on student
groups during whole class discussions. Quinn (C1)
expressed why they felt comfortable sharing their ideas:
Quinn: …within our groups we have multiple brains, and
we were all thinking together, and then we would share as a
group. So that's good at making people comfortable because
it's not just yourself talking.
Quinn felt comfortable responding to a cold call when
they were able to respond as a group because they were not
alone. Brocky (P1) shared an example from their class:
Brocky: …before he's gone around the room and every
group will, like one person will answer what they think and
then we'll just compare… which is nice ‘cause everyone does
have a different answer, so it's not like one person's wrong.
Int: Okay. How does that way of doing it impact your
feeling of anxiousness?
Brocky: A lot less.
Similar to the other two students, Quinn and Brocky felt
comfortable with cold calling when their GTA called on their
student group because they were not alone with responding.
Further investigation is necessary about the impact of calling
on student groups on student anxiety because students have
reported a mixture of negative and positive impacts on their
anxiety when working in groups [11].
G. Providing thinking time before cold calling
Two students perceived their GTA to provide thinking
time before they called on students or expected a student
response. Bo (C1) explained:
Bo: he'd ask you a question, and we would've already
written it down. So, I don't really have to worry about what
I'm going to say because I've already written it down, so I
would just reciprocate what I wrote down but in a shortened,
more concise manner.
As Bo explained, time to think before answering
mediated the pressure of thinking in the moment. Similarly,
Cooper, Downing and Brownell found students reported
their anxiety to increase with cold calling when they were
not given enough time to articulate their thoughts before they
were expected to respond [11].
In this study, we found students perceived their GTA to
implement a variety of teaching strategies that reduced their
anxiety associated with cold calling. Prior research has
similarly shown students enrolled in active learning biology
courses in community college expressed they would feel
more comfortable with cold calling if their instructor paired
it with other teaching strategies [28]. These findings support
our hypothesis that pairing cold calling with another
teaching strategy can reduce student anxiety associated with
cold calling.
Our findings also indicate that GTAs might already be
aware of the anxiety associated with cold calling and are
proactive about mitigating student anxiety with other
teaching strategies. However, different students may have
different reactions to the same strategy even when used by
the same GTA. Therefore, we recommend that GTA
preparation include rehearsal with a variety of teaching
strategies that increase student participation and reduce
student anxiety, as it is not likely that one strategy will work
for all students. As the literature about how an instructor can
effectively reduce student anxiety with cold calling is
limited, future research could include investigating how
GTAs implement cold calling in their courses and which
teaching strategies implemented by GTAs are the most
effective for minimizing student anxiety with cold calling.
In addition, eight of the eleven students described cold
calling paired with an error framing statement or error-
friendly climate to reduce their anxiety associated with cold
calling, similar to what community college biology students
suggested might reduce their anxiety associated with cold
calling [28]. Error framing was a teaching strategy the
participating GTAs had practiced pairing with cold calling at
the beginning of the semester. Future research could
investigate how error framing paired with cold calling can
mitigate the anxiety associated with cold calling.
Furthermore, we are currently comparing GTA classroom
observation data between semesters with and without the
simulator training to investigate if the intervention
influenced the GTAs to choose error framing as a teaching
strategy. The results could inform future GTA training.
Nine out of eleven students described the actions of their
GTA to be relatable, personable, and helpful, which created
a welcoming environment for them to share their ideas. The
student perception of their GTA creating a welcoming
environment is similar to a strategy described by Kerssen
Griep as instructor “communication maintaining a climate
safe for independent thought and risk-taking” specifically
when instructors learned student names and shared personal
information [29]. During analysis we identified that student-
perceived teaching strategies, like using student names and
providing thinking time, aligned with core constructs of the
conceptual framework facework (actions taken to prevent
threats to and to maintain students’ self-image) [29-32].
Instructor use of facework has been linked to an increase in
students’ willingness to participate in classroom activities
and with students’ course satisfaction [31,32]. Future
investigations about the impact of teaching strategies on
student affective behaviors, like anxiety, could be guided by
such a framework that has been applied in other areas of
education research.
The generalizability of our claims are limited by several
factors. Our sample size was small, and we did not
investigate our findings across identity groups. Moreover, it
is possible the interviews filtered students who do not have
high levels of social anxiety in their classroom.
We only investigated one instructional setting. Here, we
focused on small sections (2432 students); however the
class size and type of instructor (i.e., faculty or GTA) could
have influenced the anxiety with cold calling. Cooper et al.
also found students expressed more comfort with cold
calling in a smaller class [11]. It is difficult to disentangle the
teaching strategies with the size of the classroom, as seen in
Val’s quote about their GTA’s use of student names.
Additionally, students’ comfort with cold calling may vary
across instructor type. Future research could compare how
different instructional styles impact student anxiety.
This work is supported in part by the National Science
Foundation DUE Grant No. 1725554.
[1] E. A. Becker, et al., The effects of practice-based training on
graduate teaching assistants’ classroom practices. CBE Life
Sci. Educ., 16 (4), ar58 (2017).
[2] G. Harris, J. Froman, and J. Surles, The professional
development of graduate mathematics teaching assistants. Int.
J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., 40(1), 157-172 (2009).
[3] L. B. Wheeler, J. L. Maeng, and B. A. Whitworth, Teaching
assistants' perceptions of a training to support an inquiry-based
general chemistry laboratory course. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.,
16(4), 824-842 (2015).
[4] T. D. Reeves, T. D., L. E. Hake, X. Chen, J. Frederick, K.
Rudenga, L. H. Ludlow, and C. M. O’Connor, Does context
matter? Convergent and divergent findings in the cross-
institutional evaluation of graduate teaching assistant
professional development programs. CBE Life Sci.
Educ., 17(1), ar8 (2018).
[5] T. D. Reeves, G. Marbach-Ad, K. R. Miller, J. Ridgway, G. E.
Gardner, E. E. Schussler, and E. W. Wischusen, A conceptual
framework for graduate teaching assistant professional
development evaluation and research. CBE Life Sci.
Educ., 15(2), es2 (2016).
[6] K. D. Tanner, Structure matters: twenty-one teaching strategies
to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity.
CBELife Sci. Educ., 12(3), 322-331 (2013).
[7] D. Lemov, (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that
put students on the path to college (K-12) (John Wiley & Sons,
San Francisco, 2010), Vol. 1, p. 111-114, 221-223.
[8] E. J. Dallimore, J. H. Hertenstein, M. B. Platt, Impact of cold-
calling on student voluntary participation. J. Manag. Educ.,
37(3), 305-341 (2013).
[9] S. L. Eddy, S. E. Brownell, and M. P. Wenderoth, Gender gaps
in achievement and participation in multiple introductory
biology classrooms. CBE Life Sci. Educ., 13(3), 478-492
[10] B. J. England, J. R. Brigati, and E. E. Schussler, Student
anxiety in introductory biology classrooms: Perceptions about
active learning and persistence in the major. PloS one, 12(8),
e0182506 (2017).
[11] K. M. Cooper, V. R. Downing, and S. E. Brownell, The
influence of active learning practices on student anxiety in
large-enrollment college science classrooms. Int. J. STEM
Educ., 5(1), 23 (2018).
[12] D. Watson and R. Friend, Measurement of social-evaluative
anxiety. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 33(4), 448 (1969).
[13] S. L. Eddy, M. Converse, and M. P. Wenderoth, PORTAAL:
a classroom observation tool assessing evidence-based teaching
practices for active learning in large science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics classes. CBE Life Sci.
Educ., 14(2), ar23 (2015).
[14] N. Keith and M. Frese, Effectiveness of error management
training: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol., 93(1), 5969
[15] B. S. Bell and S. W. Kozlowski, Active learning: effects of
core training design elements on self-regulatory processes,
learning, and adaptability. J. Appl. Psychol., 93(2), 296 (2008).
[16] M. Kapur and K Bielaczyc, Designing for productive
failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 4583 (2012).
[17] R. W. Bybee and N. M. Landes, Science for Life & Living: An
Elementary School Science Program from Biological Sciences
Curriculum Study. Am. Biol. Teach. 52, 92 (1990).
[18] M. Wilcox, Y. Yang, and J. J. Chini, Quicker method for
assessing influences on teaching assistant buy-in and practices
in reformed courses. Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020123
[19] J. J. Chini, C. L. Straub, C. L., and K. H. Thomas, Learning
from avatars: Learning assistants practice physics pedagogy in
a classroom simulator. Phys. Rev. Phys. Ed. Res., 12(1),
010117 (2016).
[20] J. B. Velasco, A. Knedeisen, D. Xue, T. L. Vickrey, M. Abebe,
and M. Stains, Characterizing instructional practices in the
laboratory: The Laboratory Observation Protocol for
Undergraduate STEM. J. Chem. Educ., 93(7), 1191-1203
[21] Students were prompted to talk about their feelings of
anxiousness associated with cold calling when (1) they
anticipated being called on and (2) they are being called on.
[22] D. M. Fetterman et al., in Qualitative approaches to
evaluation in education: The silent scientific revolution, edited
by D. M. Fetterman (Praeger Publishers, 1988), Vol. 1, p. 212-
[23] K. Gwet, Kappa statistic is not satisfactory for assessing the
extent of agreement between raters. Statistical Methods for
Inter-Rater Reliability Assessment Series 2, 9 (2002).
[24] K. L. Gwet, Handbook of Inter-Rater Reliability: The
Definitive Guide to Measuring the Extent of Agreement Among
Raters 4th ed. (Advanced Analytics, Gaithersburg, 2014), Vo1.
1 p. 104 - 107.
[25] We did not collect demographic information (e.g., gender,
race/ethnicity) from the interview participants. Thus, we will
refer to all participants with gender neutral pronouns (i.e.,
they/them/their) and with gender neutral pseudonyms. We
recognize the exclusion of demographic information for
students and GTAs is a limitation to this study.
[26] J. D. H. Gaffney and J. T. Whitaker, Making the Most of Your
First Day. Phys. Teach., 53(3), 137 (2015).
[27] K. M. Cooper, M. Ashley, and S. E. Brownell, Breaking Down
Barriers: A Bridge Program Helps First-Year Biology Students
Connect With Faculty. J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 47(4), 60-70 (2018).
[28] V. R. Downing et al., Anxiety in community college active
learning courses. CBE Life Sci. Educ., (to be published).
[29] J. KerssenGriep, Teacher communication activities relevant
to student motivation: Classroom facework and instructional
communication competence. Commun. Educ., 50 (3), 256-273
[30] E. Goffman, On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in
social interaction. Psychiatry, 18(3), 213-231 (1955).
[31] J. KerssenGriep, J. A. Hess and A. R. Trees, Sustaining the
desire to learn: Dimensions of perceived instructional facework
related to student involvement and motivation to learn.
Western J. Comm., 67(4), 357-381 (2003).
[32] J. D. Gaffney and A. L. H. Gaffney, Student satisfaction in
interactive engagement-based physics classes. Phys. Rev. Phys.
Ed. Res., 12(2), 020125 (2016).
Tertiary mathematics educators have been shifting towards an active learning approach to teaching. Many external factors support or hinder their transition towards evidence-based instructional practices, including, of recent international interest, the physical learning spaces. In this study in the U.S., I observed and interviewed instructors of introductory-level courses who taught in different types of classrooms during the same semester; in this paper, I focus on two of the instructors. A practicality theory lens, paired with qualitative coding methods that highlighted comparisons and tensions, revealed the challenges that instructors faced as they navigated the variability in learning spaces. Through analysis of classroom norms and pedagogical decisions and justifications, I found that particular resources, layouts, and features of classrooms influenced the feasibility of implementing active learning practices and the instructors’ perceptions of an active learning approach in these spaces. This study presents implications for institutions wanting to support instructors as they transition to student-centered teaching approaches, especially instructors who must adapt between different types of learning spaces.
Full-text available
Background Over the past decade, the prevalence of anxiety has increased among college-aged students and college counseling centers have become increasingly concerned about the negative impact of anxiety on students. While college in general can be stressful, college science classrooms have the potential to be especially anxiety-inducing because of the sometimes chilly and competitive environment of the class. Further, college science courses are increasingly being transitioned from traditional lecture to active learning where students take an active role in their learning, often through participating in activities such as clicker questions and group work. There is emerging evidence that suggests active learning activities may cause students to feel anxious, but no studies have thoroughly explored why active learning activities in science courses may increase students’ anxiety. Further, no studies have explored whether active learning activities can reduce students’ anxiety. In this exploratory interview study of 52 students enrolled in large-enrollment active learning college science courses, we investigate how three active learning practices, clicker questions, group work, and cold call/random call, increase and decrease students’ anxiety. Results Students reported that clicker questions and group work had the potential to both increase and decrease their anxiety. The way the active learning activity is implemented and the extent to which students perceive they benefit from the activity seems to influence the effect of the activity on students’ anxiety. Conversely, students reported that cold call and random call only increased their anxiety. From our interviews, we identified the fear of negative evaluation, or the sense of dread associated with being unfavorably evaluated while participating in a social situation, as the primary construct underlying students’ high levels of anxiety associated with speaking out in front of the whole class when they do not volunteer. Conclusion This study illustrates that active learning can both increase and decrease students’ anxiety depending on the way active learning is implemented. We hope that this study encourages instructors to create more inclusive active learning science courses by implementing active learning in ways that minimize students’ anxiety.
Full-text available
Graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) play important instructional roles in introductory science courses, yet they often have little training in pedagogy. The most common form of teaching professional development (PD) for GTAs is a presemester workshop held at the course, department, or college level. In this study, we compare the effectiveness of presemester workshops at three northeastern research universities, each of which incorporated scientific teaching as the pedagogical content framework. The comparison of GTA PD program outcomes at three different institutions is intended to test theoretical assertions about the key role of contextual factors in GTA PD efficacy. Pretest and posttest surveys were used to assess changes in GTA teaching self-efficacy and anxiety following the workshops, and an objective test was used to assess pedagogical knowledge. Analysis of pretest/posttest data revealed statistically significant gains in GTA teaching self-efficacy and pedagogical knowledge and reductions in teaching anxiety across sites. Changes in teaching anxiety and self-efficacy, but not pedagogical knowledge, differed by training program. Student ratings of GTAs at two sites showed that students had positive perceptions of GTAs in all teaching dimensions, and relatively small differences in student ratings of GTAs were observed between institutions. Divergent findings for some outcome variables suggest that program efficacy was influenced as hypothesized by contextual factors such as GTA teaching experience. © 2018 T. D. Reeves et al. and 2018 The American Society for Cell Biology.
Full-text available
Many researchers have called for implementation of active learning practices in undergraduate science classrooms as one method to increase retention and persistence in STEM, yet there has been little research on the potential increases in student anxiety that may accompany these practices. This is of concern because excessive anxiety can decrease student performance. Levels and sources of student anxiety in three introductory biology lecture classes were investigated via an online survey and student interviews. The survey (n = 327) data revealed that 16% of students had moderately high classroom anxiety, which differed among the three classes. All five active learning classroom practices that were investigated caused student anxiety, with students voluntarily answering a question or being called on to answer a question causing higher anxiety than working in groups, completing worksheets, or answering clicker questions. Interviews revealed that student anxiety seemed to align with communication apprehension, social anxiety, and test anxiety. Additionally, students with higher general anxiety were more likely to self-report lower course grade and the intention to leave the major. These data suggest that a subset of students in introductory biology experience anxiety in response to active learning, and its potential impacts should be investigated.
Full-text available
Interactive engagement-based (IE) physics classes have the potential to invigorate and motivate students, but students may resist or oppose the pedagogy. Understanding the major influences on student satisfaction is a key to successful implementation of such courses. In this study, we note that one of the major differences between IE and traditional physics classes lies in the interpersonal relationships between the instructor and students. Therefore, we introduce the interpersonal communication constructs of instructor credibility and facework as possible frameworks for understanding how instructors and students navigate the new space of interactions. By interpreting survey data (N=161 respondents in eight sections of an IE introductory algebra-based physics course), we found both frameworks to be useful in explaining variance in student ratings of their satisfaction in the course, although we are unable to distinguish at this point whether instructor credibility acts as a mediating variable between facework and course satisfaction.
Full-text available
Teaching assistants (TAs) that lead reformed recitations and labs must understand and buy into the design of the course and the research-based instructional strategies that the course requires in order to create high-fidelity implementations. We present a model that outlines possible influences on TAs’ buy-in and their in-class actions coupled with a method, using a Real-time Instructor Observation Tool-based [E. A. West et al. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 9, 010109 (2013)] exercise, to measure the effect of these influences that is not only quicker than interviews but also allows one to quantify these effects. We use this method to measure the influences on six graduate TAs teaching algebra-based introductory mechanics and electricity and magnetism recitations and labs (“mini studios”) at the University of Central Florida. The results from the exercise are confirmed by interview responses from the TAs. We find a relatively high degree of buy-in to the design of the course, yet this is not reflected in the TAs’ actions. The TAs’ actions appear to be most influenced by student responses and expectations which do not align with the design of the course. Our study examines the effect of three influences shown in our model, and we argue that our method could be easily adapted to examine additional influences.
Full-text available
Biology graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) are significant contributors to the educational mission of universities, particularly in introductory courses, yet there is a lack of empirical data on how to best prepare them for their teaching roles. This essay proposes a conceptual framework for biology GTA teaching professional development (TPD) program evaluation and research with three overarching variable categories for consideration: outcome variables, contextual variables, and moderating variables. The framework’s outcome variables go beyond GTA satisfaction and instead position GTA cognition, GTA teaching practice, and undergraduate learning outcomes as the foci of GTA TPD evaluation and research. For each GTA TPD outcome variable, key evaluation questions and example assessment instruments are introduced to demonstrate how the framework can be used to guide GTA TPD evaluation and research plans. A common conceptual framework is also essential to coordinating the collection and synthesis of empirical data on GTA TPD nationally. Thus, the proposed conceptual framework serves as both a guide for conducting GTA TPD evaluation at single institutions and as a means to coordinate research across institutions at a national level.
Evidence-based teaching is a highly complex skill, requiring repeated cycles of deliberate practice and feedback to master. Despite existing well-characterized frameworks for practice-based training in K–12 teacher education, the major principles of these frameworks have not yet been transferred to instructor development in higher educational contexts, including training of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs). We sought to determine whether a practice-based training program could help GTAs learn and use evidence-based teaching methods in their classrooms. We implemented a weekly training program for introductory biology GTAs that included structured drills of techniques selected to enhance student practice, logic development, and accountability and reduce apprehension. These elements were selected based on their previous characterization as dimensions of active learning. GTAs received regular performance feedback based on classroom observations. To quantify use of target techniques and levels of student participation, we collected and coded 160 h of video footage. We investigated the relationship between frequency of GTA implementation of target techniques and student exam scores; however, we observed no significant relationship. Although GTAs adopted and used many of the target techniques with high frequency, techniques that enforced student participation were not stably adopted, and their use was unresponsive to formal feedback. We also found that techniques discussed in training, but not practiced, were not used at quantifiable frequencies, further supporting the importance of practice-based training for influencing instructional practices.
There is extensive evidence that active learning works better than a completely passive lecture. Despite this evidence, adoption of these evidence-based teaching practices remains low. In this paper, we offer one tool to help faculty members implement active learning. This tool identifies 21 readily implemented elements that have been shown to increase student outcomes related to achievement, logic development, or other relevant learning goals with college-age students. Thus, this tool both clarifies the research-supported elements of best practices for instructor implementation of active learning in the classroom setting and measures instructors’ alignment with these practices. We describe how we reviewed the discipline-based education research literature to identify best practices in active learning for adult learners in the classroom and used these results to develop an observation tool (Practical Observation Rubric To Assess Active Learning, or PORTAAL) that documents the extent to which instructors incorporate these practices into their classrooms. We then use PORTAAL to explore the classroom practices of 25 introductory biology instructors who employ some form of active learning. Overall, PORTAAL documents how well aligned classrooms are with research-supported best practices for active learning and provides specific feedback and guidance to instructors to allow them to identify what they do well and what could be improved.
Chemistry laboratories play an essential role in the education of undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM students. The extent of student learning in any educational environment depends largely on the effectiveness of the instructors. In chemistry laboratories at large universities, the instructors of record are typically graduate or undergraduate teaching assistants (TAs). Despite the importance of their role in the education of undergraduate students, TAs’ instructional practices have been largely understudied outside specific reform efforts. In this study, we developed a segmented observation protocol, the Laboratory Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (LOPUS), in order to characterize TAs’ instructional styles in a General Chemistry laboratory curriculum. LOPUS captures both students’ and TAs’ behaviors every 2 min as well as initiators of verbal interactions and the nature of these verbal interactions (e.g., data analysis, explanation of concepts). Analyses of 19 videos collected from 15 TAs resulted in the identification of four instructional styles: the waiters, the busy bees, the observers, and the guides on-the-side. We found that students’ behaviors were independent of these styles and limited to performing the laboratory activities, initiating conversation with TAs, and asking TAs questions. Interestingly, students rather than TAs were initiators of most verbal interactions, regardless of TAs’ instructional styles. Finally, we found that the nature of TA–student verbal interactions was related to the nature of the laboratory activity (e.g., only following step-by-step instructions versus carrying out extensive data analysis). Implications of these findings for future research investigations and TA training are discussed.