Fidelity of Implementation of Research‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses

Maura J. Borrego · Stephanie L. Cutler · Michael J. Prince · Charles Henderson · Jeffrey E. Froyd

155 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Engineering Education

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Innovative Teaching Methods Engineering Education and Curriculum Development Evaluation of Teaching Practices

Abstract

Abstract Background Increasing attention is being paid to improvement in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education through increased adoption of research‐based instructional strategies (RBIS), but high‐quality measures of faculty instructional practice do not exist to monitor progress. Purpose/Hypothesis The measure of how well an implemented intervention follows the original is called fidelity of implementation . This theory was used to address the research questions: What is the fidelity of implementation of selected RBIS in engineering science courses? That is, how closely does engineering science classroom practice reflect the intentions of the original developers? Do the critical components that characterize an RBIS discriminate between engineering science faculty members who claimed use of the RBIS and those who did not? Design/Method A survey of 387 U.S. faculty teaching engineering science courses (e.g., statics, circuits, thermodynamics) included questions about class time spent on 16 critical components and use of 11 corresponding RBIS. Fidelity was quantified as the percentage of RBIS users who also spent time on corresponding critical components. Discrimination between users and nonusers was tested using chi square. Results Overall fidelity of the 11 RBIS ranged from 11% to 80% of users spending time on all required components. Fidelity was highest for RBIS with one required component: case‐based teaching, just‐in‐time teaching, and inquiry learning. Thirteen of 16 critical components discriminated between users and nonusers for all RBIS to which they were mapped. Conclusions Results were consistent with initial mapping of critical components to RBIS. Fidelity of implementation is a potentially useful framework for future work in STEM undergraduate education.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 155 citations exist upstream.

References

2019Diffusion of Innovations 1 1983Experiential Learning : Experience as the Source of Learning and Development 2004Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research 2003Diffusion of innovations 1998Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses 2001Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results 2006Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases 2006Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys

Cited by

2015The Laboratory Course Assessment Survey: A Tool to Measure Three Dimensions of Research-Course Design 2015Active Teaching and Learning Methodologies: Some Considerations 2020Design-Based Research: A Methodology to Extend and Enrich Biology Education Research 2017ASPECT: A Survey to Assess Student Perspective of Engagement in an Active-Learning Classroom 2014Faculty Motivation: A Gateway to Transforming Engineering Education

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.