Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

A Discipline-Based Teaching and Learning Center pp 19–53Cite as

Building Interest and Engagement Through Enrichment Activities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 996 Accesses

Abstract

The Teaching and Learning Center (TLC) offers a variety of enrichment programs that bring people together to learn from experts and from one another. This menu of opportunities provides faculty, postdoctoral fellows (postdocs), and graduate students with a venue to learn about effective teaching practices, and fosters dialogue about teaching and learning. Our enrichment programs generally take one of two forms: (1) visits from prominent Visiting Teacher/Scholars who come to share their expertise and engage in conversations, presentations, and brainstorming sessions; and (2) seminars and workshops that are organized by the TLC with university personnel serving as presenters and/or facilitators. In this chapter, we will describe both types of enrichment programs and provide examples of each.

I love going to the talks. I’m very excited about trying things.

I like hearing about the new things other people are doing.

–Biology faculty member

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Angelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2011). Vision and change: A call to action. Washington, DC: AAAS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Teaching thinking skills in context-based learning: Teachers’ challenges and assessment knowledge. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 207–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17, 48–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birenbaum, M. E., & Dochy, F. J. (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore, J. A. (2005). A critical evaluation of peer review via teaching observation within higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 19, 218–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandwein, P. F. (1977). What is curriculum? National Elementary Principal, 57(1), 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S. D., Pelaez, N. J., Rudd, J. A., Stevens, M. T., Tanner, K. D., & Williams, K. S. (2008). Science faculty with education specialties. Science, 322, 1795–1796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cathcart, L. A., Stieff, M., Marbach-Ad, G., Smith, A. C., & Frauwirth, K. A. (2010). Using knowledge space theory to analyze concept maps. Paper presented at the 9th international conference of the learning sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M. (1999). The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 69, 145–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. G., & Rivet, A. E. (2013). Science education. Science learning progressions. Science, 339(6118), 396–397. doi:10.1126/science.1228692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in Grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebert-May, D., Derting, T. L., Hodder, J., Momsen, J. L., Long, T. M., & Jardeleza, S. E. (2011). What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. Biosciene, 61(7), 550–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert-May, D., & Hodder, J. (2008). Pathways to scientific teaching. Sunderland, CT: Sinauer Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, K. (2003). What is curriculum? Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 1(1), 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K. M. (1983). Amino acids and translation: a misconception in biology. Paper presented at the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Curriculum coherence and learning progressions. In B. J. Fraser, K. T. Kenneth, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 783–798). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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 National Academic Science U S A 111(23), 8410–8415. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111

  • Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., . . . Wenderoth, M. P. (2007). Prescribed active learn­ing increases performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6, 132–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, N. (2011). An effective and agonizing way to learn: Backwards design and new teachers’ preparation for planning curriculum. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(3), 151–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., . . . Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304(5670), 521–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching. New York, NY/Englewood, CO: W.H. Freeman & Company in collaboration with Roberts & Company Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, P. (1996). The peer review of teaching: Progress, issues and prospects. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 221–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, D., Moore, J. S., Kardos, S., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2002). Lost at sea: New teachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment. The Teachers College Record, 104(2), 273–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28(5), 469–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ/Cambridge, UK: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohut, G. F., Burnap, C., & Yon, M. G. (2007). Peer observation of teaching: Perceptions of the observer and the observed. College Teaching, 55(1), 19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, S. J., Kelly, A., Tasooji, J., Corkins, B. D., & Purzer, S. (2010). Effect of pedagogy on conceptual change in an introductory materials science course. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26, 869–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, L., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G. (2009). From misconceptions to concept inventories. Focus on Microbiology Education, 15(2), 4–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Briken, V., El-Sayed, N., Frauwirth, K., Fredericksen, B., Hutcheson, S., . . . Smith, A. C. (2009). Assessing student understanding of host pathogen interactions using a concept inventory. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 10, 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Briken, V., Frauwirth, K., Gao, L. Y., Hutcheson, S. W., Joseph, S. W., . . . Smith, A. C. (2007). A faculty team works to create content linkages among various courses to increase meaningful learning of targeted concepts of microbiology. CBE life sciences education, 6(2), 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., McAdams, K., Benson, S., Briken, V., Cathcart, L., Chase, M., . . . Smith, A. (2010). A model for using a concept inventory as a tool for students’ assessment and faculty professional development. CBE Life Science Education, 9, 408–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove, P. G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 854–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2000). Students’ cellular and molecular explanations of genetic phenomena. Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 200–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building background knowledge for academic achievement: Research on what works in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2007). Student learning assessment: Options and resources (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Middle States Commission on Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (2005). Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view. San Diego, CA: Academic Press: An Elsevier Imprint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (2003). National Research Council, Bio 2010: Transforming undergraduate education for future research biologists. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulson, M. B. (2002). Evaluating teaching performance. New Directions for Institutional Research, 114, 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional strategies. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneps, M. H., & Sadler, P. M. (Writers). (2003). A private universe. Minds of our own. Available in the form of DVD, an electronic source.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Krauter, K., & Knight, J. K. (2011). Combining peer discussion with instructor explanation increases student learning from in-class concept questions. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10, 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavy, R., & Tirosh, D. (2000). How students (mis-) understand science and mathematics: Intuitive rules. New York, NY: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stieff, M. (2005). Connected chemistry—A novel modeling environment for the chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(3), 489–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suskie, L. (2010). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thijs, G. D., & van den Berg, E. (1993, August 1–4). Cultural factors in the origin and remediation of alternative conceptions. Paper presented at the third international seminar on misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieman, C. (2007). Why not try a scientific approach to science education? Change. http://www.changemag.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/September-October%202007/index.html

  • Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyse, S. A., Long, T. M., & Ebert-May, D. (2014). Teaching assistant professional development in biology: Designed for and driven by multidimensional data. CBE Life Science Education, 13, 212–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yon, M., Burnap, C., & Kohut, G. (2002). Evidence of effective teaching perceptions of peer reviewers. College Teaching, 50, 104–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Gili Marbach-Ad, Laura C. Egan & Katerina V. Thompson

Authors
  1. Gili Marbach-Ad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura C. Egan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katerina V. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Marbach-Ad, G., Egan, L.C., Thompson, K.V. (2015). Building Interest and Engagement Through Enrichment Activities. In: A Discipline-Based Teaching and Learning Center. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01652-8_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation