東華大學圖書館 |

Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium./
作者:	Schultz, Sara K.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
面頁冊數:	163 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-05B.
標題:	Science education. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28030165
ISBN:	9798684689512

Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium.
Schultz, Sara K.

Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 163 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wyoming, 2020.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Planetariums were created to teach astronomy by simulating motions of the star-filled night sky; however, simply having a virtual reality facility to immerse students beneath a projected night sky in and of itself is insufficient to automatically ensure student learning occurs. Modern teaching strategies, like active learning, have consistently shown to move students toward a better and longer-lasting understanding in classrooms (viz., Bonwell & Eison, 1991), yet active learning approaches seem to be only rarely observed among planetarium educators' instructional practices. Because of the nature of planetarium learning environments and the innate constraints of fixed-planetarium seating arrangements, one naturally wonders if active learning-particularly of the genre that leverages the benefits of formative assessment-by conducting complete assessment conversation cycles with planetarium audiences could serve as a fruitful pathway to intellectually engage with their students and audiences and gather information about student understanding in order to better guide the teaching and learning process. Ruiz-Primo and Furtak (2006, 2007) developed a coding scheme to systematically identify and analyze the depth of formative assessment conversations between K-12 classroom teachers and their students. Formal formative assessment conversation cycles in this context observed in STEM classrooms are framed as a four-part, observable cycle, known as the ESRU cycle. The overarching goal of this study is to evaluate the nature of active learning-based formative assessment conversation cycles in the planetarium learning environment and, using follow up clinical interviews with planetarians, identify any rationale or barriers to their use. This first phase of this study systematically analyzes 26 recordings for the of live planetarium programs to describe and document evidence for active learning teaching strategies in the form of assessment conversations cycles in the planetarium. The second phase of the study conducted follow-up interviews to determine if there are any rewards or barriers to using active learning in the planetarium. Answering these study questions can guide planetarium directors who manage a staff of planetarium lecturers and inform planetarium professional development providers on what explicit training might be needed to increase formative assessment-based active learning in planetarium education. In the end, a synthesis of collected data found scant evidence of complete formative assessment conversation cycles, but varying degrees of interactivity between the planetarium lecturer and the audience were observed. Similar to what researchers report about typical K-12 classrooms, the results of this study reveal that active learning featuring complete formative assessment conversation cycles is largely absent in the planetarium programs studied. It is not that planetarians didn't ask questions of their audience, but audiences' responses did not serve to guide instructional decisions. Moreover, interviews revealed that planetarians have an extremely wide range of personal definitions of what constitute active learning, often convoluting a vague notion of active learning with rhetorical questioning strategies used by speakers to manage audiences' attention. This appears to be largely similar to how some traditional classroom teachers use teacher-directed questions to manage students' behavior and attention in the classroom instead of using a formative assessment-based question and answer cycle that leverages students' thinking and guides instructional decisions in a learner-centered way. Additionally, interviews revealed that the planetarium educators interviewed viewed their primary educational responsibility to be that of inspiring, motivating, and entertaining their audiences with teaching new astronomy concepts being a lessor secondary goal. Planetarium educators' goals of inspirational entertainment rather than educational enhancement implies some explanatory power about why active learning was largely absent in systematic observations. Furthermore, planetarium interviews revealed that most planetarium educators have little formal training in planetarium lecturing at all, let alone active learning specifically. Nevertheless, planetarium educators clearly state a desire for professional development opportunities to critically observe other planetarium educators so that they themselves might become more effective educators. Taken together, these results lend weight to the notion that professional development for planetarium educators in using active learning and formative assessment conversation cycles could improve the quality of instruction given in planetariums.

ISBN: 9798684689512Subjects--Topical Terms:

521340
Science education.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Active learning

Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium.
LDR:06258nmm a2200493 4500 001 2346338
005 20230315102142.5
006 m o d
007 cr#unu||||||||
008 241004s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798684689512
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28030165
035 $a AAI28030165
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Schultz, Sara K. $3 3685419
245 1 0 $a Nature of Formative Assessment-Based Active Learning in the Interactive Planetarium.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 163 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Slater, Timothy F.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wyoming, 2020.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Planetariums were created to teach astronomy by simulating motions of the star-filled night sky; however, simply having a virtual reality facility to immerse students beneath a projected night sky in and of itself is insufficient to automatically ensure student learning occurs. Modern teaching strategies, like active learning, have consistently shown to move students toward a better and longer-lasting understanding in classrooms (viz., Bonwell & Eison, 1991), yet active learning approaches seem to be only rarely observed among planetarium educators' instructional practices. Because of the nature of planetarium learning environments and the innate constraints of fixed-planetarium seating arrangements, one naturally wonders if active learning-particularly of the genre that leverages the benefits of formative assessment-by conducting complete assessment conversation cycles with planetarium audiences could serve as a fruitful pathway to intellectually engage with their students and audiences and gather information about student understanding in order to better guide the teaching and learning process. Ruiz-Primo and Furtak (2006, 2007) developed a coding scheme to systematically identify and analyze the depth of formative assessment conversations between K-12 classroom teachers and their students. Formal formative assessment conversation cycles in this context observed in STEM classrooms are framed as a four-part, observable cycle, known as the ESRU cycle. The overarching goal of this study is to evaluate the nature of active learning-based formative assessment conversation cycles in the planetarium learning environment and, using follow up clinical interviews with planetarians, identify any rationale or barriers to their use. This first phase of this study systematically analyzes 26 recordings for the of live planetarium programs to describe and document evidence for active learning teaching strategies in the form of assessment conversations cycles in the planetarium. The second phase of the study conducted follow-up interviews to determine if there are any rewards or barriers to using active learning in the planetarium. Answering these study questions can guide planetarium directors who manage a staff of planetarium lecturers and inform planetarium professional development providers on what explicit training might be needed to increase formative assessment-based active learning in planetarium education. In the end, a synthesis of collected data found scant evidence of complete formative assessment conversation cycles, but varying degrees of interactivity between the planetarium lecturer and the audience were observed. Similar to what researchers report about typical K-12 classrooms, the results of this study reveal that active learning featuring complete formative assessment conversation cycles is largely absent in the planetarium programs studied. It is not that planetarians didn't ask questions of their audience, but audiences' responses did not serve to guide instructional decisions. Moreover, interviews revealed that planetarians have an extremely wide range of personal definitions of what constitute active learning, often convoluting a vague notion of active learning with rhetorical questioning strategies used by speakers to manage audiences' attention. This appears to be largely similar to how some traditional classroom teachers use teacher-directed questions to manage students' behavior and attention in the classroom instead of using a formative assessment-based question and answer cycle that leverages students' thinking and guides instructional decisions in a learner-centered way. Additionally, interviews revealed that the planetarium educators interviewed viewed their primary educational responsibility to be that of inspiring, motivating, and entertaining their audiences with teaching new astronomy concepts being a lessor secondary goal. Planetarium educators' goals of inspirational entertainment rather than educational enhancement implies some explanatory power about why active learning was largely absent in systematic observations. Furthermore, planetarium interviews revealed that most planetarium educators have little formal training in planetarium lecturing at all, let alone active learning specifically. Nevertheless, planetarium educators clearly state a desire for professional development opportunities to critically observe other planetarium educators so that they themselves might become more effective educators. Taken together, these results lend weight to the notion that professional development for planetarium educators in using active learning and formative assessment conversation cycles could improve the quality of instruction given in planetariums.
590 $a School code: 0264.
650 4 $a Science education. $3 521340
650 4 $a Curriculum development. $3 684418
650 4 $a Educational technology. $3 517670
650 4 $a Astronomy. $3 517668
650 4 $a Artificial intelligence. $3 516317
650 4 $a Instructional design. $3 3172279
653 $a Active learning
653 $a Assessment conversation cycles
653 $a Formative assessment
653 $a Informal science education
653 $a Interactive planetarium
653 $a Immersive learning
653 $a Interactive learning
653 $a K-12 classroom teachers
653 $a STEM classrooms
653 $a Science programs
690 $a 0714
690 $a 0606
690 $a 0800
690 $a 0710
690 $a 0447
690 $a 0727
710 2 $a University of Wyoming. $b Curriculum & Instruction. $3 1026503
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-05B.
790 $a 0264
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28030165