Main Article Content
Introductory STEM courses are traditionally considered gateway classes that introduce difficult concepts and often have significant retention challenges. Students taking these STEM classes are challenged to develop higher-level critical thinking skills, but at the same time, research has shown that they often exhibit negative affective responses to traditional teaching. This article describes using small-group whiteboards to create collaborative classroom communities in introductory Physics and Anatomy and Physiology courses. Having students solve problems and describe processes in small groups, using a whiteboard to facilitate interaction, makes visible students’ conceptions and misconceptions about course material. Faculty can then scaffold new material based on where students have demonstrated mastery. By working this way, students participate in a collaborative classroom atmosphere that encourages peer-to-peer learning. Data from student perception surveys, presented here, indicated that students felt comfortable with this mode of instruction, prepared in advance for classes, and gained a better understanding of experimental design as a result of the entire whiteboarding process.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: From small group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 37-40. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1176492
Brewe, E., Kramer, L., & O’Brien, G. (2009). Modeling instruction: Positive attitudinal shifts in introductory physics measured with CLASS. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 5(1), 013102.
Desbien, D. M. (2002). Modeling discourse management compared to other classroom management styles in university physics (Ph.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (304795659). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304795659?accountid=2909
Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (1997, May). The role of a whiteboard in a distributed cognitive system. In Swiss Workshop on Distributed and Collaborative Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
Jackson, J., Dukerich, L., & Hestenes, D. (2008). Modeling Instruction: An effective model for science education. Science Educator, 17(1), 10-17.
Lasry, N., Mazur, E., & Watkins, J. (2008). Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. American Journal of Physics, 76(11), 1066-1069.
Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2016). Whiteboarding: A tool for moving classroom discourse from answer-making to sense-making. The Physics Teacher, 54(2), 83-86.
Meltzer, D. E., & Manivannan, K. (2002). Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. American Journal of Physics, 70(6), 639-54.
Michael, J. (2006). Where's the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159-167.
Nielsen, M. F. (2012). Using artifacts in brainstorming sessions to secure participation and decouple sequentiality. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 87-109.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education-Washington,93, 223-232.