Minna Ng

Co-Presenter Dr. Thomas Newpher, Co-PI of Duke Team-Based Learning Lab
Undergraduate research experiences are associated with many positive outcomes on student learning, self-efficacy, academic performance, and post-graduation plans. Importantly, these high-impact learning activities show even greater benefits for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Thanks to generous funding from several families, the Duke Neuroscience major has recently established a Neuroscience Teaching Lab. The Teaching Lab is located in the Duke Institute for Brain Sciences and also serves as a mobile laboratory, bringing hands-on active learning experiences to classrooms across Duke's campus. The goal of the Teaching Lab is to introduce our students to the tools and techniques of modern neuroscience research with the hope of increasing research self-efficacy, science identity, and engagement in neuroscience research. Our Emerging Pedagogies Seed Grant from the Office of the Vice Provost for Learning Innovation and Digital Education has allowed us to assemble a team of undergraduate researchers to track the impacts of the teaching lab. To date, our team has designed and released an IRB-approved survey to students enrolled in the Neuroscience gateway course. In the coming months, we plan to analyze results from the initial survey, release additional surveys to our core and methods courses, and begin work on a manuscript to communicate our findings.

Team-based learning (TBL) is a structured approach to teaching that enhances accountability and fosters connection among students, enriching classroom dynamics. It also prepares students for collaborative scientific research. The workshop offers data on improved academic outcomes with TBL in STEM courses, student testimonials, an expert's valuable insights, and an interactive TBL demonstration. By the workshop's end, attendees will have foundational tools to implement TBL in their neuroscience classroom.

Authors: Huibregtse M, Santeiro N, Bennion A, Long M, Perez A, Simmons S, Swigart I, Braswell T, Their B, Shead C, Yu J, Newpher T, Ng M.

How did students’ intent to major in STEM or pursue a STEM field compare between active learning and lecture-based courses? Background: Compared to lecture-based (LB) classes, research shows that active learning (AL) positively influences student outcomes, including reduced failure rates, improved exam scores, and enhanced attitudes toward learning.
In this study, we explored the impact of active learning on students’ (1) intent to pursue or continue a STEM major; and (2) enter a STEM field. We also considered student responses based on sex/gender.
METHODS
We received approval by the University Institutional Review Board (2020-0148).
STEM designations follow National Science Foundation guidelines.
Of the 245 instructors invited in Fall 2020, 65 from different 14 STEM disciplines participated for a sample of 41 classes from these. As expected, most were from large and introductory lecture-bases courses.
Anonymous voluntary web-based survey asked students class experience decreased, did not change or increased their intent to pursue a STEM major or enter a STEM field.
We received 877 student responses; 811 responded once, 66 responded more than once.
RESULTS. We observed a significant difference in students’ intent to pursue/remain a STEM major between AL and LB for all class sizes (p=.01). About 3x more AL students in small classes reported an increase, and about 2x more in medium & large classes reported a decrease. We observed a significant difference in responses in moderate (p<.10) and advanced courses (p<.05). About 2x more LB students in moderate courses reported a decrease, about 3x more AL students in advanced courses reported an increase. We observed a significant difference in students’ intent to enter a STEM field between AL and LB for medium (p<.10) and large (p<.05) classes. More than 2.5x AL students in medium classes reported an increase, and more than 3x more LB students in large classes reported a decrease.
We observed a significant difference in responses in moderate and advanced courses (p<.05). 6x more LB students in moderate courses reported a decrease, and 3x more AL students in advanced courses reported an increase.

CONCLUSIONS
Active learning benefits were most pronounced in smaller class settings and advanced courses. We recommend a follow-up study to track STEM graduation rates and career path. Limitations: sampling did not include representation from all STEM disciplines and were skewed toward large introductory lecture-based courses. There is also no direct comparison of an AL vs LB version of the same course.
Future studies should explore these and additional factors, such as sense of belonging, interaction with teaching assistants, number of instructors for a given class, and the type of active learning.

We will discuss practices that promote equity and inclusiveness in components typically found in collaborative and team-based learning courses. These include content delivery, individual and team/group formative and summative assessments, in-class activities, and self- and peer evaluations.

Cultural differences influence communication, power dynamics and decision-making. The cognitive and identity diversity across students in a group can catalyze creative problem-solving and enhance deep learning. The overall goal is to share our experiences and approaches for promoting equity through collaborative and team-based learning.

Topic: Artificial Intelligence in Undergraduate STEM Education
Project Kaleidoscope is AAC&U’s center of STEM higher education reform initiatives, dedicated to empowering all STEM faculty and administrators to graduate more students who are competitively trained in STEM disciplines and liberally educated for an increasingly technologically-based world. The PKAL Regional Networks provide low-cost, effective professional development opportunities for STEM faculty and administrators to foster a caring community, explore and advance modern undergraduate STEM pedagogies, disseminate findings from undergraduate STEM research and practice, and promote STEM faculty career advancement.

As we look at the undergraduate STEM education landscape, one of the major disruptors is artificial intelligence. This meeting offers practical applications and implications for AI both in and out of the STEM classroom. This meeting intentionally incorporates networking time to discuss ideas with presenters and participants. Whether you are an AI novice, skeptic, or expert, you will find relevant information at this meeting.

A NC PKAL Network will leverage the expertise and experience of STEM educators within the state of North Carolina to facilitate greater engagement of STEM faculty and administrators to implement more effective, learner-centered teaching strategies to improve student learning and success in STEM education. As a result of faculty and administrator involvement in the NC PKAL Network, a strong, interconnected community that is focused on improving student learning and achievement in the STEM fields will grow.

The Faculty Fellows Program is a program for sophomore merit scholars. Thirteen distinguished faculty members representing a wide range of disciplines from across the university are leading small groups of 6-7 students in discussions of academic articles throughout the year. Each group will meet four times during the year—twice in the fall semester and twice in the spring semester.

Duke University Libraries Summer Research Grants are awarded to first-generation and/or low-income undergraduate students to support original library research either at Duke or at another library or cultural institution with a library. Awards are granted up to a maximum of $4500 to cover expenses such as campus housing, transportation, lodging, and meals while conducting research. Because research expenses can vary depending on the field of research and the duration of the project, students are able to pool grant funding with other awards.