CU Science Values Teaching Over Technology

With universities using innovative technology to spice up introductory science courses, Columbia professors and students have said that it is the quality of teaching that matters more than the method.

Schools are reanalyzing their science programs and exploring means to increase classroom involvement. For example, last semester, Massachusetts Institute of Technology started an interactive project known as Technology Enabled Active Learning to engage students in science courses. Under this method, all introductory physics classes are limited to about 80 students and are taught in huge classrooms with a storm of teaching assistants, white boards, and computers. The students are split into round tables and are encouraged to solve problems together.

But Columbia professors and students found that while such a system is beneficial, student interest and faculty expertise are more important to a student’s success in a science course.

Shahid Naeem, an Introductory Biology teacher and chair of the department of ecology, evolution and environmental biology, said the TEAL approach is helpful but unnecessary. “We could provide the world’s best science education in introductory courses in the world with terrific faculty, TAs, and students, but all the plasma monitors, electronic white boards, and computers in the world won’t make up for a lack of good TAs and faculty,” Naeem said.

Biology professor Lawrence Chasin admitted that large classes are problematic for reaching students. However, he said, “Once the class size reaches about 30 or 40, I don’t see much difference if it reaches 200, except perhaps for a psychological effect of sitting in such a large lecture hall.” He suggested recitations, office hours, an extensive Web site, and optional review sessions as alternative means of engagement.

“There is considerable credible evidence that students learn best in classes of all sizes when they feel engaged and are placed in situations in which ideas are shared with peers during class,” said Nicholas Turro, the William P. Schweitzer Professor of Chemistry at Columbia.

Overall, students said they believe that Columbia’s approach to science is very effective.

“Science is different from the humanities. It’s not a discipline where you can just sit and have a discussion for an hour and then come away with a firm grasp of the material,” Joe Barakat, SEAS ‘12, said. “The way my experience has been, you sit in lecture and read the textbook to learn the fundamentals, and then apply your knowledge to problems in the homework. If you have questions, there are office hours and recitation sessions. That’s it. MIT seems to be integrating that whole process within the context of the class, and good for them. But our way works too.”

Tabes Bridges, CC ’12, generally agreed. He added the concern that TEAL “probably puts a great decrease on the amount of material that can be covered.”