東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

The transformation of science and ma...

Flynn, Natalie P.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty./
Author:	Flynn, Natalie P.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2015,
Description:	192 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-09A(E).
Subject:	Science education. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3702987
ISBN:	9781321745528

The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty.
Flynn, Natalie P.

The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2015 - 192 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Temple University, 2015.

This study developed a survey from the existing literature in an attempt to illuminate the processes, tools, insights, and events that allow university science and mathematics content experts (Ph.D.'s) unpack their expertise in order to teach develop and teach undergraduate students. A pilot study was conducted at an urban university in order to refine the survey. The study consisted of 72 science or mathematics Ph.D. faculty members that teach at a research-based urban university. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 21 volunteer faculty to further explore their methods and tools for developing and implementing teaching within their discipline. Statistical analysis of the data revealed: faculty that taught while obtaining their Ph.D. were less confident in their ability to teach successful and faculty that received training in teaching believed that students have difficult to change misconceptions and do not commit enough time to their course. Student centered textbooks ranked the highest among tools used to gain teaching strategies followed by grading of exams and assignments for gaining insights into student knowledge and difficulties. Science and mathematics education literature and university provided education session ranked the lowest in rating scale for providing strategies for teaching. The open-ended survey questions were sub-divided and analyzed by the number of years of experience to identify the development of teaching knowledge over time and revealed that teaching became more interactive, less lecture based, and more engaging. As faculty matured and gained experience they became more aware of student misconceptions and difficulties often changing their teaching to eliminate such issues. As confidence levels increase their teaching included more technology-based tools, became more interactive, incorporated problem based activities, and became more flexible. This change occurred when and if faculty members altered their thinking about their knowledge from an expert centered perspective to a student centric view. Follow-up interviews of twenty faculty yielded a wide variety of insights into the complicated method of deconstructing expert science and mathematics content. The interviews revealed a major disconnect between education research and researchers and the science and mathematics content experts who teach. There is a pervasive disregard for science and mathematics education and training. Faculty members find little to no support for teaching. Though 81% obtained their Ph.D. with the intent to enter an academic setting, pedagogical training was non-existent or limited, both prior to and after obtaining faculty positions. Experience alone did not account for confidence or ability to successfully teach. Faculty that were able to 'think like a student' and view their material from a student's perspective' seemed to be the most confident and flexible in their teaching methods. Grading and having an open and interactive teaching style, being on the 'side of the students' also seemed to allow faculty to connect more deeply with the students and learn about common misconceptions and difficulties. Though most faculty claimed to not teach as they were taught and not recall having specific content difficulties, this essential interaction with many students facilitated a shift in thinking about their content. This shift allowed for a reversal from teacher centered classrooms to student centered. Multiple issues arise when teaching at a traditional larger lecture style found in the majority of universities science and mathematics courses that constrain and provide unique teaching challenges. Many faculty have developed unique tools to incorporate successful teaching strategies, such as daily pre-quizzes and smart-phone questioning as well as small group work, computer posted guides, strategic class breaks, and limiting lecture style in favor of a more active engaged classroom. (Abstract shortened by UMI.).

ISBN: 9781321745528Subjects--Topical Terms:

521340
Science education.

The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty.
LDR:04919nmm a2200277 4500 001 2128325
005 20180105074638.5
008 180830s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321745528
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3702987
035 $a AAI3702987
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Flynn, Natalie P. $3 3290498
245 1 4 $a The transformation of science and mathematics content knowledge into teaching content by university faculty.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2015
300 $a 192 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Joseph DuCette.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Temple University, 2015.
520 $a This study developed a survey from the existing literature in an attempt to illuminate the processes, tools, insights, and events that allow university science and mathematics content experts (Ph.D.'s) unpack their expertise in order to teach develop and teach undergraduate students. A pilot study was conducted at an urban university in order to refine the survey. The study consisted of 72 science or mathematics Ph.D. faculty members that teach at a research-based urban university. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 21 volunteer faculty to further explore their methods and tools for developing and implementing teaching within their discipline. Statistical analysis of the data revealed: faculty that taught while obtaining their Ph.D. were less confident in their ability to teach successful and faculty that received training in teaching believed that students have difficult to change misconceptions and do not commit enough time to their course. Student centered textbooks ranked the highest among tools used to gain teaching strategies followed by grading of exams and assignments for gaining insights into student knowledge and difficulties. Science and mathematics education literature and university provided education session ranked the lowest in rating scale for providing strategies for teaching. The open-ended survey questions were sub-divided and analyzed by the number of years of experience to identify the development of teaching knowledge over time and revealed that teaching became more interactive, less lecture based, and more engaging. As faculty matured and gained experience they became more aware of student misconceptions and difficulties often changing their teaching to eliminate such issues. As confidence levels increase their teaching included more technology-based tools, became more interactive, incorporated problem based activities, and became more flexible. This change occurred when and if faculty members altered their thinking about their knowledge from an expert centered perspective to a student centric view. Follow-up interviews of twenty faculty yielded a wide variety of insights into the complicated method of deconstructing expert science and mathematics content. The interviews revealed a major disconnect between education research and researchers and the science and mathematics content experts who teach. There is a pervasive disregard for science and mathematics education and training. Faculty members find little to no support for teaching. Though 81% obtained their Ph.D. with the intent to enter an academic setting, pedagogical training was non-existent or limited, both prior to and after obtaining faculty positions. Experience alone did not account for confidence or ability to successfully teach. Faculty that were able to 'think like a student' and view their material from a student's perspective' seemed to be the most confident and flexible in their teaching methods. Grading and having an open and interactive teaching style, being on the 'side of the students' also seemed to allow faculty to connect more deeply with the students and learn about common misconceptions and difficulties. Though most faculty claimed to not teach as they were taught and not recall having specific content difficulties, this essential interaction with many students facilitated a shift in thinking about their content. This shift allowed for a reversal from teacher centered classrooms to student centered. Multiple issues arise when teaching at a traditional larger lecture style found in the majority of universities science and mathematics courses that constrain and provide unique teaching challenges. Many faculty have developed unique tools to incorporate successful teaching strategies, such as daily pre-quizzes and smart-phone questioning as well as small group work, computer posted guides, strategic class breaks, and limiting lecture style in favor of a more active engaged classroom. (Abstract shortened by UMI.).
590 $a School code: 0225.
650 4 $a Science education. $3 521340
690 $a 0714
710 2 $a Temple University. $b Educational Psychology. $3 1024095
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-09A(E).
790 $a 0225
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3702987