A comparison of self-reported teaching practices focused on student skills in introductory geoscience courses at two-year and four-year institutions: Results from the National Geoscience Faculty Survey

Abstract

Community colleges are a major entry point for many students to post-secondary education, particularly for minority, first-generation, low-income, and older students. A range of factors including transfer-readiness, curricular alignment, financial barriers, and transfer guidance, influence successful transfer between two-year colleges (2YCs) and four-year colleges and universities (4YCs). One critical factor related to transfer-readiness may be the degree to which students have similar experiences in the development of key skills in their introductory courses. This study uses the 2016 National Geoscience Faculty Survey to compare self-reported teaching practices used by instructors in introductory geoscience courses that support the development of students’ quantitative, data analysis, problem-based, communication, and metacognitive skills in 2YCs and 4YCs. Based on responses of 1,027 instructors (238 in 2YCs and 789 in 4YCs), a majority of the teaching practices in skills development in 2YCs are similar to those in 4YCs. Of the 24 teaching practices analyzed, seven displayed statistically significant differences after accounting for class size and active class time, however, the logistic models do not predict major differences between 2YCs and 4YCs. The findings of this study may serve to initiate discussions and collaborations between 2YCs and 4YCs, which could strengthen the transfer process and reduce challenges for transfer students.

Keywords:

• Teaching practices
• two-year colleges
• developing students’ skills
• quantitative
• data analysis
• and metacognitive skills
• undergraduate geoscience education

Acknowledgments

The administration of the 2016 National Geoscience Faculty Survey was developed by a team involving leadership from the National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT), On the Cutting Edge, InTeGrate, and SAGE 2YC. We thank the other members of the survey research team for discussions and Greenseid Consulting Group, LLC. and Professional Data Analysts for their assistance. We also thank Catherine Riihimaki, Karen Viskupic, two anonymous reviewers, and the editors for reviews and suggestions that helped us to strengthen this article.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation Division of Undergraduate Education under grants DUE-1022844, DUE-1125331, and DUE-1525593. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.