Measurement of Faculty’s Fidelity of Implementation of Peer Instruction following an Intensive Professional Development Workshop

Peer Instruction is an evidence-based instructional strategy that has been empirically shown to improve students’ learning and attitude in a variety of STEM disciplines. Peer Instruction involves students individually voting on a multiple choice question using a clicker or flashcards. If the majority of students answer incorrectly, students engage in peer discussion and vote again, which is followed by instructor explanation. Research investigating faculty’s implementation of evidence-based instructional strategies indicates that faculty often adapt practices as opposed to adopting them fully. Unfortunately, low fidelity of implementation often reduces the efficacy of an instructional strategy. Physics education researchers have previously demonstrated that knowledgeable Peer Instruction users routinely adapt this strategy, most notably by skipping the individual vote, which could compromise the positive student outcomes associated with this technique. In this study, we investigate the fidelity of implementation of Peer Instruction by STEM faculty who participated in a semester-long professional development workshop focused on the research supporting and the implementation of Peer Instruction. Video recordings of STEM faculty were collected before and after participation in our workshop. Based on a recent literature review on Peer Instruction, we identified the components of this method that are critical for fidelity of implementation. We then analyzed each clicker question asked during these video recordings using an adapted version of a rubric developed by Turpen and Finkelstein. We report common implementation strategies and variations of use during Peer Instruction exhibited by the STEM faculty who participated in the professional development program. (This is an abstract only.

Research-Based Implementation of Peer Instruction: A Literature Review

Current instructional reforms in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses have focused on enhancing adoption of evidence-based instructional practices among STEM faculty members. These practices have been empirically demonstrated to enhance student learning and attitudes. However, research indicates that instructors often adapt rather than adopt practices, unknowingly compromising their effectiveness. Thus, there is a need to raise awareness of the research-based implementation of these practices, develop fidelity of implementation protocols to understand adaptations being made, and ultimately characterize the true impact of reform efforts based on these practices. Peer instruction (PI) is an example of an evidence-based instructional practice that consists of asking students conceptual questions during class time and collecting their answers via clickers or response cards. Extensive research has been conducted by physics and biology education researchers to evaluate the effectiveness of this practice and to better understand the intricacies of its implementation. PI has also been investigated in other disciplines, such as chemistry and computer science. This article reviews and summarizes these various bodies of research and provides instructors and researchers with a research-based model for the effective implementation of PI. Limitations of current studies and recommendations for future empirical inquiries are also provided

The Best of Both Worlds: Building on the COPUS and RTOP Observation Protocols to Easily and Reliably Measure Various Levels of Reformed Instructional Practice

Researchers, university administrators, and faculty members are increasingly interested in measuring and describing instructional practices provided in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses at the college level. Specifically, there is keen interest in comparing instructional practices between courses, monitoring changes over time, and mapping observed practices to research-based teaching. While increasingly common observation protocols (Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol [RTOP] and Classroom Observation Protocol in Undergraduate STEM [COPUS]) at the postsecondary level help achieve some of these goals, they also suffer from weaknesses that limit their applicability. In this study, we leverage the strengths of these protocols to provide an easy method that enables the reliable and valid characterization of instructional practices. This method was developed empirically via a cluster analysis using observations of 269 individual class periods, corresponding to 73 different faculty members, 28 different research-intensive institutions, and various STEM disciplines. Ten clusters, called COPUS profiles, emerged from this analysis; they represent the most common types of instructional practices enacted in the classrooms observed for this study. RTOP scores were used to validate the alignment of the 10 COPUS profiles with reformed teaching. Herein, we present a detailed description of the cluster analysis method, the COPUS profiles, and the distribution of the COPUS profiles across various STEM courses at research-intensive universities