AER Banner
  • Keyword
  • Volume/Page
  • DOI
  • Citation
  • Advanced
 
   
 
 
Astronomy Education Review / Volume 2 / Issue 1 / RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS

2003, AER, 2 (1), 46, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2003003

Activities-based Astronomy: An Evaluation of an Instructor’s First Attempt and its Impact on Student Characteristics

Published 28 April 2003

William J. Straits

L. L. Hotchkiss Elementary, Dallas Independent School District

R. Russell Wilke

Angelo State University

Full Text: Read Online (HTML) | Download PDF | View Cart
This study assessed the effectiveness of an instructor’s first attempt at an activities-based, non-majors astronomy course. Although students in this course performed as well as those in a lecture-based course, students in the activity-based course had a significant reduction in their self-efficacy with regard to science. Findings suggest that activities were most effective when they helped students to visualize spatial relationships, provided equal opportunity for engagement, and were clearly related to course content. However, activities often led to student confusion regarding the relevancy of activities to course content, the importance of information presented, and the connection between class and textbook information.

© 2003 William Straits. Copyright assigned to the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.

KEYWORDS and PACS

Keywords

College non-majors, General (applies to all topics), Hands-on activities, Research into teaching∕learning

PACS

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN

1539-1515 (online)

Publisher

$abstract.society.value is a Member of CrossRef William Straits. Copyright assigned to the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.

ARTICLE DATA

History
Published online 28 April 2003
Digital Object Identifier
http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2003003

    References

  1. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. 1991, Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
  2. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. 1998, Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for Americas Research Universities, Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
  3. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. 1996, Making Sense of Qualitative Data, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  4. Deming, G. L., Miller, S. T., & Trasco, J. D. 1997, Cooperative Learning Activities in Introduction Astronomy for Non-Science Majors, College Park: University of Maryland.
  5. Ebert-May, D., Brewer, C., & Allred, S. 1997, Innovation in Large Lectures—Teaching for Active Learning, BioScience, 47(9), 601.
  6. Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. 1993, Doing Naturalistic Inquiry; A Guide to Methods, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
  7. Hemenway, M. K., Straits, W. J., Wilke, R. R., & Hufnagel, B. 2002, Educational Research in an Introductory Astronomy Course, Innovative Higher Education, 26(4), 271.
  8. Hufnagel, B., Slater, T., Deming, G., Adams, J., Brick, C., & Zeilik, M. 2000, Pre-Course Results from the Astronomy Diagnostic Test, Publ. - Astron. Soc. Aust., 17(2). http://www.atnf.csiro.au/pasa/17_2.
  9. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. 1991, Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom, Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
  10. Miller, J. E., Groccia, J. E., & Wilkes, J. M. 1996, Providing Structure: The Critical Element, New Dir. Teach. Learn., 67, 17.
  11. National Research Council. 1996, From Analysis to Action, Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Report of a Convocation, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  12. National Science Foundation. 1996, Advisory Committee for the National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources, Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
  13. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. 1992, The Psychological Basis of Problem-Based Learning: A Review of Evidence, Acad. Med., 67(9), 557.
  14. Orzechowski, R. F. 1995, Factors to Consider before Introducing Active Learning into a Large, Lecture Based Course, J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 24, 347.
  15. Rankin, M. A. 1998, Importance of Instructional Development in the College of Natural Sciences, Proceedings of the Discovery Learning Conference, Austin: University of Texas.
  16. Schmidt, H. G. 1993, Foundations of Problem-Based Learning: Some Explanatory Notes, Med. Educ., 27, 422. [ISI] [MEDLINE]
  17. Schunk, D. H. 1994, Self-Regulation of Self-Efficacy and Attributions in Academic Settings, in Self-regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Implications, D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Editors), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  18. Svinicki, M. D. 1998, A Theoretical Foundation for Discovery Learning, Advances in Physiology Education, 20(1), 4.
  19. Wilke, R. R., & Straits, W. J. 2001, The Effects of Discovery Learning in a Lower-Division Biology Course, Advances in Physiology Education, 25(2), 1.



Close
ADVERTISEMENT

Copyright © 2001 - American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.

close