Skip to main content

The Impending Revolution in Undergraduate Science Education

Abstract

There is substantial evidence that scientific teaching in the sciences, i.e. teaching that employs instructional strategies that encourage undergraduates to become actively engaged in their own learning, can produce levels of understanding, retention and transfer of knowledge that are greater than those resulting from traditional lecture/lab classes. But widespread acceptance by university faculty of new pedagogies and curricular materials still lies in the future. In this essay we review recent literature that sheds light on the following questions:

  • What has evidence from education research and the cognitive sciences told us about undergraduate instruction and student learning in the sciences?

  • What role can undergraduate student research play in a science curriculum?

  • What benefits does information technology have to offer?

  • What changes are needed in institutions of higher learning to improve science teaching?

We conclude that widespread promotion and adoption of the elements of scientific teaching by university science departments could have profound effects in promoting a scientifically literate society and a reinvigorated research enterprise.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Allen, D., and Tanner, K. (2003a). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Learning content in context—Problem-based learning. Cell Biology Education 2(2): 73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D., and Tanner, K. (2003b). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Mapping the journey-concept maps as signposts of developing knowledge structures. Cell Biology Education 2(3): 133–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, B. S., Heron, P. R. L., Vokos, S., and McDermott, L. C. (1999). Student understanding of light as an electromagnetic wave: Relating the formalism to physical phenomena. American Journal of Physics 67(10): 891–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arons, A. B. (1983). Achieving wider scientific literacy. Daedalus 112: 91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, C. A. R., Bergendahl, V. C. B., and Lundberg, B. K. S. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education 25(3): 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bligh, D. A. (2000). What’s the Use of Lectures? Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. (1998). Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America’s Research Universities, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Menlo Park, CA. Retrieved January 21, 2003 from: http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/boyer.nsf/.

  • Breuer, J. T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational Researcher 26(8): 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cech, T. R. (2003). Rebalancing teaching and research. Science 299: 165.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, A. (2004). Cosmetic neurology: The controversy over enhancing movement, mentation, and mood. Neurology 63(6): 968–974.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C. H., and Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics 69(9): 970–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. R. (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness, Harcourt, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dancy, M. H., and Beichner, R. J. (2002). But are they learning? Getting started in classroom evaluation. Cell Biology Education 1(3): 87–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deardorf, J. (2004). To many, using Ritalin to think faster looks like cheating, Billings Gazette. Retrieved January 9, 2005 at http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=/rednews/2004/04/14/build/health/40-ritalin.inc.

  • DebBurman, S. K. (2002). Learning how scientists work: Experiential research projects to promote cell biology learning and scientific process skills. Cell Biology Education 1(4): 154–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dede, C. (2000). Emerging Technologies and Distributed Learning in Higher Education, at http://www.virtual.gmu.edu/SS_research/cdpapers/hannapdf.htm.

  • Donald, J. (2002). Learning to Think: Disciplinary Perspectives, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duch, B., Gron, S., and Allen, D. (2001). The Power of Problem-Based Learning, Stylus, Sterling, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, F. M. (1972). The effect of overt responses in improving visually programmed science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 9: 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebert-May, D., Brewer, C., and Allred, S. (1997). Innovation in large lectures—teaching for active learning. Bioscience 47: 601–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckel, P. D. (2002). Institutional transformation and change: Insights for faculty developers. In Lieberman, D. (Ed.), To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional, and Organizational Development, Anker, Bolton, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, N. (1996). Computer-based laboratory simulations: Evaluations of students’ perceptions. Association for Learning Technology Journal 4(3): 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K. M. (2000). SemNet software as an assessment tool. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 197–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, D. A. (2003). Making the case: Professional education for the world of practice. Harvard Magazine 106(1): 56–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (1999). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2003). Language in the science classroom: Academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In Yerrick, R., and Roth, W.-M. (Eds.), Establishing Scientific Classroom Discourse Communities: Multiple Voices of Research on Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, R., and Gallistel, C. R. (2004). Language and the origin of numerical concepts. Science 306: 441–443.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn Commission Report. (2000). Before It’s Too Late: A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. Retrieved December 15, 2004 from http://www.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn/report.pdf.

  • Gordon, P. (2004). Numerical cognition without words: Evidence from Amazonia. Science 306: 496–499.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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: 64–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hake, R. R. (2002). Assessment of Student Learning in Introductory Science Courses. 2002 PKAL Roundtable on the Future: Assessment of Student Learning, Duke University. Retrieved December 15, 2004 from http://www.pkal.org/documents/ASLIS.Hake.060102f.pdf.

  • Hall, S. S. (2003). The quest for a smart pill. Scientific American 289(3): 54–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., and Hakel, M. F. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond: Teaching for long-term retention and Transfer. Change 35(4): 37–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R. L., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tilghman, S. M., and Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science 304: 521–522.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heron, P. R. L., Loverude, M. E., Shaffer, P. S., and McDermott, L. C. (2003). Helping students develop an understanding of Archimedes’ principle. II. Development of research-based instructional materials. American Journal of Physics 71(11): 1188–1195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes, D., Wells, M., and Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. Physics Teacher 30: 141–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education 22: 85–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honan, W. H. (2002). The college lecture, long derided, may be fading. The New York Times (August 14, Section B, p. 7).

  • Horwitz, P. (1999). Designing computer models that teach. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 179–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., and Jessell, T. H. (2000). Principles of Neural Science, 4th edn., McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kardash, C. M. (2000). Evaluation of an undergraduate research experience: Perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors. Journal of Educational Psychology 92(1): 191–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1994). Inquiry as a tool in critical thinking. In Halpern, D. F. (Ed.), Changing College Classrooms: New Teaching and Learning Strategies for an Increasingly Complex World, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 13–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klymkowsky, M. W., Garvin-Doxas, K., and Zeilik, M. (2003). Bioliteracy and teaching efficacy: What biologists can learn from physicists. Cell Biology Education 2(3): 155–161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, C., and Laurent, G. (1999). Complexity and the nervous system. Science 284: 96–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching: A Conversational Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies, 2nd edn., Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laws, P. W. (1997). Workshop Physics Activity Guide: Core Volume with Module 1, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. E. (2003). Using the RTOP to evaluate reformed science and mathematics instruction. In McCray, R. A., DeHaan, R. L., and Schuck, J. A. (Eds.), Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop, Center for Education, Division of Behavorial and Social Sciences and Education, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, pp. 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loverude, M. E., Kautz, C. H., and Heron, P. R. L. (2003). Helping students develop an understanding of Archimedes principle. I. Research on student understanding. American Journal of Physics 71(11): 1178–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C. (1974). Combined physics course for future elementary and secondary school teachers. American Journal of Physics 42: 668–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C. (1991). Millikan Lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned—closing the gap. American Journal of Physics 59: 301–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C. (2001). Oersted Medal Lecture 2001: Physics education research –the key to student learning. American Journal of Physics 69(11): 1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C., and Redish, E. F. (1999). Resource Letter PER-1: Physics Education Research, available at http://www.phys.washington.edu/groups/peg/rl.htm.

  • Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery. American Sociological Review 22(6): 635–659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mervis, J. (2003). Scientific workforce: Down for the count? Science 300(5622): 1070–1074.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, S. B. (2003). Effecting faculty change by starting with effective faculty: Characteristics of successful STEM education innovators; National Research Council. (2003). In McCray, R. A., DeHaan, R. L., and Schuck, J. A. (Eds.), Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, pp. 101–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D. (Eds.) (2000). Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View, Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyashita, Y. (2004). Cognitive memory: Cellular and network machineries and their top-down control. Science 306(5695): 435–440.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mulford, D. R., and Robinson, W. R. (2002). An inventory for alternate conceptions among first-semester general chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education 79(6): 739–744.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Musallam, S., Corneil, B. D., Greger, B., Scherberger, H., and Andersen, R. A. (2004). Cognitive control signals for neural prosthetics. Science 305(5681): 258–262.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, US Department of Education, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1997). Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook, Committee on Science Education, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1999a). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. In Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., and Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds.), Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1999b). Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school, expanded edition. In Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. R. (Eds.), Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning; and Donovan,/M. S., Bransford, J. D., and Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds.), Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. In Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., and Glaser, R. (Eds.), Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

  • National Research Council. (2002a). BIO2010: Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists, Committee on Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Research Scientists for the 21st Century, Board on Life Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2002b). In Hilton, M. (Ed.), Enhancing Undergraduate Learning with Information Technology: A Workshop Summary, Center for Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

  • National Research Council. (2003a). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In Fox, M. A., and Hackerman, N. (Eds.), Committee on Recognizing, Evaluating, Rewarding, and Developing Excellence in Teaching of Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Center for Education, Division of Behavorial and Social Sciences and Education, The National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

  • National Research Council. (2003b). Improving undergraduate instruction in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Report of a workshop. In McCray, R. A., DeHaan, R. L., and Schuck, J. A. (Eds.), Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, The National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

  • National Research Council. (2003c). Envisioning a 21st Century Science and Engineering Workforce for the United States: Tasks for University, Industry, and Government, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR), The National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2004). A Companion to Science and Engineering Indicators 2004, NSB 04-07. Retrieved October 20, 2004 from www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsb0407/start.htm.

  • Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education 86: 548–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogborn, J. (1999). Modeling clay for thinking and learning. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 5–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pica, P., Lemer, C., Izard, V., and Dehaene, S. (2004). Exact and approximate arithmetic in an Amazonian indigene group. Science 306: 499–503.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, K. (2003). Spare me the lecture. Nature 425: 234–236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Project Kaleidoscope. (2002). Recommendations for Action in Support of Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report on Reports, Author, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pukkila, P. J. (2004). Introducing student inquiry in large introductory genetics classes. Genetics 166(1): 11–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Redish, E. F. (1999). Millikan Lecture 1998: Building a science of teaching physics. American Journal of Physics 67(7): 562–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redish, E. F. (2003). Teaching Physics with the Physics Suite,/Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinvention Center at Stony Brook. (2001, May). Reinventing Undergraduate Education: Three Years After the Boyer Report. Retrieved January 21, 2003 from www.sunysb.edu/reinventioncenter/boyerfollowup.pdf.

  • Roth, W.-M., and Duit, R. (2003). Emergence, flexibility, and stabilization of language in a physics classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40(9): 869–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roussev, B., and Rousseva, Y. (2004). Active learning through modeling: Introduction to software development in the business curriculum. Decision Sciences 2(2): 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S., and Fischer, K. W. (2003). Building vs. borrowing: The challenge of actively constructing ideas in post-secondary education. Liberal Education 89(3): 22–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, E., and Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, E., Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S. L., and Deanton, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education 88: 493–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1993). Teaching as community property: Putting an end to pedagogical solitude. Change 25(6): 6–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, T. D. N., Aguiar, L. C. daC., Leta, J., Santos, D. O., Cardoso, F. S., Cabral, L. M., Rodrigues, C. R., and Castro, H. C. (2004). Role of the undergraduate student research assistant in the new millennium. Cell Biology Education 3(4): 235–240.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spitulnik, M. W., Krajcik, J., and Soloway, E. (1999). Construction of models to promote scientific understanding. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag,/New York, pp. 70–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strangman, N., and Hall, T. (2003). Virtual Reality/Computer Simulations: Curriculum Enhancement, National Center on Assessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved January 9, 2005 at http://www.cast.org/ncac/index.cfm?i=4832.

  • Tagg, J. (2003). The Learning Paradigm College, Anker, Bolton, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobias, S. (1992). Revitalizing Undergraduate Science: Why Some Things Work and Most Don’t, Research Corporation, Tucson, AZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tully, T., Bourtchouladze, R., Scott, R., and Tallman, J. (2003). Targeting the CREB pathway for memory enhancers. Nature Reviews: Drug Discovery 2(4): 267–277.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Twigg, C. (2003). Improving quality and reducing cost: Designs for effective learning. Change 35(4): 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twigg, C. A. (2001). Innovations in On-Line Learning: Moving Beyond No Significant Difference, The Pew Learning and Technology Program. Retreived October 20. 2004 from http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/Mono4.html#Anchor-47857.

  • Udovic, D., Morris, D., Dickman, A., Postlethwait, J., and Wetherwax, P. (2002). Workshop biology: Demonstrating the effectiveness of active learning in an introductory biology course. Bioscience 52(3): 272–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whatley, J. (2004). An agent system to support student teams working online. Journal of Information Technology Education 3: 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W. B. (2003). Inquiry-based undergraduate teaching in the life sciences at large research universities: A perspective on the Boyer Commission Report. Cell Biology Education 2(2): 112–116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woods, H. A., and Chiu, C. (2003). Wireless Response Technology in College Classrooms. Technology Source. Retrieved October 20, 2004 from http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=1045.

  • Wooldridge, M. J., and Jennings, N. R. (Eds.) (1995). Intelligent Agents, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. C., Millar, S. B., Kosciuk, S. A., Penberthy, D. L., Williams, P. H., and Wampold, B. E. (1998). A novel strategy for assessing the effects of curriculum reform on student competence. Journal of Chemical Education 75(8): 986–992.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert L. DeHaan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DeHaan, R.L. The Impending Revolution in Undergraduate Science Education. J Sci Educ Technol 14, 253–269 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-4425-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-4425-3

Keywords

  • science education
  • cognitive science
  • undergraduate instruction
  • information technology
  • student research