Embracing or resisting evidence-based instruction: Exploring the lasting effect of a sudden pivot to online learning on higher education STEM faculty

Abstract

There is a significant body of literature showing improved student outcomes in higher education STEM courses when evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) are used. Despite this, traditional, lecture-style instruction remains the primary means of instruction in these courses. However, given the situation of the sudden shift to online teaching as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty were participating in training programs with greater frequency, and thus learning more about the use of EBIPs than ever before. Through the lens of Kurt Lewin’s theory of organizational change in the three stages of unfreezing, change, and refreezing, this explanatory mixed methods study sought to explore through a survey and interviews whether this shift to online teaching and the resulting increase in training participation did, in fact, result in changes in instructional practices, implementation, and perceptions of EBIPs, and whether any changes were sustained upon the return to in-person instruction.The survey tool used in this study was a subset of the Teaching Practices Inventory, developed by the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative from the University of British Columbia. This generated a modified “extent of use of research-based teaching practices” (METP) score, as well as METP sub-scores in five subcategories of the survey. These results, as well as data obtained from demographic questions and questions about teaching responsibilities and training participation, informed the selection of twelve participants for semi-structured interviews. Through one-way ANOVA testing, the quantitative analysis showed a statistically significant increase in METP (p < .001) from Pre-Covid to Post-Covid scores. Statistical significance was also found in the subcategories of In Class Features (p = .003) and Collaboration (p = .005). Two-way ANOVA testing was also done to explore statistical significance for demographic subcategories, which was found to exist for gender, tenure status, and various categories relating to participation in training and professional development. Interview data supported the quantitative data analysis, and offered further insight and context for the changes that have been made and sustained, including changes regarding the use of educational technology tools, introduction of authentic learning experiences, streamlining of content, and intentional alignment of activities and assessments with course goals. Additional analysis showed faculty relied on virtual collaboration to develop community with other instructors, and realized the importance of student feedback to inform their instruction and of fostering a classroom community. Most significantly, the ability to see first-hand the effect of the pandemic on students and to have a window into their personal lives caused faculty to make sweeping changes with respect to their beliefs in the affective domains of learning, emphasizing the need for empathy, flexibility, and equity-mindedness in their classrooms. This study showed that faculty became convinced of the need for change, consistent with Lewin’s unfreezing stage, not solely through training and professional development, but largely through the realizations about the individuality of students that faculty experienced during the pandemic. This occurred simultaneously with an increase in virtual collaboration as well as the influence of changes peers had made and suggested upon the return to in-person instruction. The recognition of the need to center students in learning combined with these outside influences resulted in the increased use of EBIPs upon the return to in-person instruction, therefore creating the desired change. Lastly, these practices have been maintained as of two years after the return to in-person, thus indicating refreezing, and further data showed that faculty continue to adapt their practices to create more inclusive and student-centered learning environments.