> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
News
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

Low-Cost Instructional Changes Can Cut Achievement Gap in Intro Biology, Scholars Say

By  David Glenn
June 2, 2011

When instructors at the University of Washington redesigned their introductory-biology course in a “highly structured” style, with active-learning exercises, daily quizzes, and weekly online essay assignments, all students’ performance improved, but especially the performance of students whose high-school preparation was weak. The achievement gap between students from advantaged and disadvantaged backgrounds closed by nearly half.

And all of that, the instructors believe, can be accomplished at any college without increasing instructional costs. In fact, they achieved their gains during a period when budget pressures at Washington forced a doubling of the course’s maximum size, from 345 to 700.

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

When instructors at the University of Washington redesigned their introductory-biology course in a “highly structured” style, with active-learning exercises, daily quizzes, and weekly online essay assignments, all students’ performance improved, but especially the performance of students whose high-school preparation was weak. The achievement gap between students from advantaged and disadvantaged backgrounds closed by nearly half.

And all of that, the instructors believe, can be accomplished at any college without increasing instructional costs. In fact, they achieved their gains during a period when budget pressures at Washington forced a doubling of the course’s maximum size, from 345 to 700.

The scholars report their findings in the June 3 issue of Science. (The paper is accessible only to subscribers.)

“Simple changes in teaching style can dramatically improve students’ performance across the board,” said David C. Haak, one of the paper’s four authors, in an interview on Wednesday. Mr. Haak earned a doctorate in biology at Washington in 2010 and is now a postdoctoral researcher at Indiana University at Bloomington.

The course’s redesign was led by Scott Freeman, a lecturer in biology at Washington who is also among the paper’s authors. According to Mr. Haak, the Washington team borrowed liberally from pedagogical reforms in physics. In a related paper published this year in CBE Life Sciences Education, Mr. Freeman and two colleagues describe the basic elements of the redesigned course:

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Instead of simply lecturing, the instructors frequently call on students to answer questions. After the class size increased to 700, Mr. Freeman developed a method of randomly calling on a certain number of students each day.
  • During class time, the students are asked to do short ungraded assignments. Those include “minute papers” (papers that summarize the day’s main idea, are expected to be written in 60 seconds, and must conclude with a question about something that puzzles the student) and case studies reviewed in small groups.
  • Each week outside of class, students are required to answer five short-answer questions. The answers are then randomly and anonymously given to other students in the class for grading. Students are also required to answer multiple-choice questions about the reading for the next week’s lecture.

In the Science paper, Mr. Freeman and his colleagues compare students’ performance in two highly structured sections of the course with other students’ performance in 27 less-structured sections in recent years. In the highly structured sections, the instructors write, the raw achievement gap between disadvantaged students and their peers was 0.44 grade points—much better than the 0.8-point gap in the other sections.

The Washington instructors did make a sacrifice, however. When the class size ballooned, they reduced the number of weekly laboratory hours from three to two. Mr. Haak says that was a painful choice, but it was the only way to preserve teaching assistants’ time for grading essays. The instructors did not want to turn to a multiple-choice test format because they were committed to helping students learn high-level problem-solving and analysis, not simple memorization of facts.

“It was tough,” Mr. Haak says. “The real crux was finding a way to maintain the number of essay questions, without having the TA’s go stir-crazy trying to grade them all.” (One answer was to have more-frequent but smaller tests.)

Mr. Freeman and Mr. Haak were joined in writing the paper for Science by Janneke Hille Ris Lambers, an assistant professor of biology at Washington, and Emile Pitre, associate vice president for minority affairs at the university.

Mr. Haak and his colleagues are now applying for grants to support training programs that might spread the model to other campuses. They also plan to analyze further data from the Washington campus, including statistics about how well students perform in subsequent biology classes after taking the redesigned introductory course.

ADVERTISEMENT

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
David Glenn
David Glenn joined The Chronicle of Higher Education in 2002. His work explored how faculty members are trained, encouraged, and evaluated as teachers; how college courses and curricula are developed; and the institutional incentives that sometimes discourage faculty members from investing their energy in teaching.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin