Professional Development Program for Instructors of Online Undergraduate STEM Courses: Research in Progress

The United States lags behind other nations in professional proficiency in the sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Professional development (PD) programs for faculty are critical for improvement of STEM instruction. However, little research exists on the impact of such programs. This paper reports the results from the pilot study on the development of an online PD program for STEM faculty grounded in research-based instructional strategies (RBIS) and the development plan for the program. A RBIS-based Observation Protocol (OP) in place at Franklin University will be used to identify and assess STEM instructors’ teaching practices before and after the PD program. Results of a pilot study suggested that the OP yielded valid and reliable evidence of STEM faculty’s RBIS usage. Approximately eighty STEM course sections will be observed using the OP with data collected pre- and post-PD (2017-2019). The mixed-method data will be analyzed by university researchers in conjunction with a community research partner. This project will test the success of an online professional development program with RBIS for higher education STEM faculty, will aid determination of which RBIS can contribute most effectively to improving student outcomes, and will produce the first robust evidence of the impact of an online PD for STEM faculty.

The purpose of this paper is to report the results from the pilot study on the development of a PD program grounded in RBIS and share the development plan for the PD program.  After development and implementation of the PD, undergraduate STEM faculty will be assessed for their integration of RBIS more effectively and frequently in their online instruction, resulting in improved student success, persistence and satisfaction in online undergraduate STEM courses. The program developed, grounded in RBIS, is designed to provide the STEM online faculty with knowledge about, models of the use of, and opportunities for practice of RBIS. The major question to be explored is this: Will participation in the PD lead to the faculty’s use of RBIS in their online professional practice following PD completion? Currently, there is a dearth of research on faculty development that addresses RBIS for the online learning environment (Sibley & Whitaker, 2015; Whitaker & Montgomery, 2014).

The OP domains were defined as follows:

Active/engaged learning: The instructor uses instructional strategies that engage the student during class meetings, such as peer instruction, think/pair/share, inquiry learning, asking open-ended questions, problem-based learning, collaborative learning, and complex problem solving (Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Gagne, 1985; Jang, 2015; Keeton, 2004; Ruhl, Hughes, & Schloss, 1987).

Monitor learning/offering feedback: The instructor uses formative assessment strategies, such as think aloud paired problem solving and think-pair-share, to determine students’ understanding of course concepts, offering feedback that includes building a complete and accurate knowledge of the course concepts (Kober, 2015; National Research Council, 1999; Wood, 2009).

Intentionality: The instructor elicits students’ prior knowledge and helps them to connect prior knowledge to course concepts. The instructor provides the students with opportunities to explicitly transfer knowledge to new situations (Fisher, Denning, Higgins, & Loveless, 2012; Gagne, 1985, 1987; Kober, 2015; Merrill, 2002; Wood, 2009).

Relevance: The instructor specifically supports students in connecting new knowledge with personal/professional/societal issues. The instructor encourages students to generate and answer their own questions that apply the new knowledge to their own personal/professional/ societal issues (Froyd, 2008; Gagne, 1985, 1987; Lombardi, 2007; Simpkins et al., 2002).

21st-century literacies: The instructor uses relevant media to support student understanding of course concepts and supports students as they explore new media and technology applicable to course concepts (Borrego et al., 2013; Jang, 2015; Kennedy & Odell, 2014).

In establishing face validity of the Observation Protocol, two groups reviewed the instrument and provided input regarding its validity in measuring RBIS usage in STEM teaching practices:

1.  All full-time STEM faculty at Franklin University, who have had extensive

    experience in teaching STEM courses and supervising STEM teaching.

 2. Educational researchers from outside Franklin who served on the Association of

    Independent Colleges and Universities of Ohio.

For use in the current research, construct validity and inter-rater reliability were

Determined with pilot testing to investigate whether the Observation Protocol might need adjustment. The pilot test consisted of two observers using the OP to independently rate RBIS usage in 50 course sections. Of the 79 total sessions that were offered in the 2015-2016 school year, these 50 course sections were randomly selected with a stratified random sampling technique. The goal for the selection was to ensure that both the multiple STEM discipline areas and the four different levels of courses (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior) would be proportionally represented in the sample. Each of the 50 course sections selected was independently observed by both raters.

     Construct validity, which measures the validity of inferences about the constructs for an instrument, is established through factor analysis (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 1999; Fabrigar & Wegener, 2004). For the pilot test, the researchers conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which revealed five constructs or factors:

1. Teaching content
2. Teaching problem solving in STEM disciplines
3. Communicating with learners
4. Organizing instructions
5. Facilitating interactions among learners.