National-level calls for reforming introductory biology curricula suggest that science courses should be taught as science is practiced. This approach is particularly conducive for laboratory courses where students can develop field and bench skills in the context of inquiry-driven investigations. However, redesigning and restructuring large-enrollment laboratories is particularly challenging since much of the teaching responsibility lies with graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) who may lack the confidence and expertise necessary for successfully engaging students in meaningful inquiry experiences. The paucity of resources that inform us about effective preparation of GTAs for implementing inquiry contributes inertia to the reform movement.
At MSU, the Biological Sciences 110: Organisms and Populations course required for life science majors is undergoing a major renovation. BS110 laboratories serve approximately 1000 students per semester. In Fall 2008, we implemented a professional development program for GTAs that: 1) focused on providing pedagogical support, 2) engaged GTAs as genuine collaborators in the redesign of the labs, and 3) was responsive to TA feedback and data about student learning.
Results/Conclusions
Pedagogical support. Lab renovation resulted in new level of support for GTAs. Traditionally, GTA training has emphasized procedural knowledge, ensuring that GTAs could successfully perform the lab activities, but little in the way of pedagogical support. GTAs now receive pedagogical training in pre-course workshops and as a regular component of weekly prep sessions.
Engaging GTAs as collaborators. GTAs used principles of Backward Design to first define broad objectives for the laboratory course and then converge on an assessment strategy and rubric for evaluating student performance. GTA teams then worked throughout the semester to restructure existing labs to reflect the new emphasis on inquiry and scientific process.
Data driven. GTA feedback has driven the overall design of our lab reform. Each week, GTAs provide written reflections about the previous lab – from both their own perspective as instructors teaching and learning science and pedagogy, and from the perspective of their student learners. These data, combined with data about student learning, inform us about both the effectiveness of weekly lab activities as well as our efforts to prepare GTAs for successful instruction. Our demonstrated responsiveness to the needs and concerns of GTAs has improved GTA motivation and allowed us to pursue authentic inquiry experiences for students. We predict that our GTAs have developed pedagogical content knowledge that will improve their confidence in mentoring student research – both in the lab course and in their research labs.
