Author Archives: Anne Crecelius

Questioning How I Question

For some, “assessment” is sometimes a dirty word, with visions of rubrics, accreditation reports, and piles of data.  Readers of this blog hopefully do not have this vantage point, thanks in part to some great previous posts on this topic and an overall understanding of how assessment is a critical component of best practices in teaching and learning.  Yet, even as a new(ish) faculty member who values assessment, I still struggle with trying to best determine whether my students are learning and to employ effective and efficient (who has time to spare?!) assessment strategies.  Thus, when a professional development opportunity on campus was offered to do a book read of “Fast and Effective Assessment: How to Reduce Your Workload and Improve Student Learning” by Glen Pearsall I quickly said “Yes! Send me my copy!”

 

Prior to the first meeting of my reading group, I dutifully did my homework of reading the first chapter (much like our students often do, the night before…).  Somewhat to my surprise, the book doesn’t start by discussing creating formal assessments or how to effectively grade and provide feedback.  Rather, as Pearsall points out “a lot of the work associated with correction is actually generated long before students put pen to paper. The way you set up and run a learning activity can have a profound effect on how much correction you have to do at the end of it.” The foundation of assessment, according to Pearsall is then questioning technique. 

 

Using questions to promote learning is not a new concept and most, even non-educators, are somewhat familiar with the Socratic Method.  While the simplified version of the Socratic Method is thought of as using pointed questions to elicit greater understanding, more formally, this technique encourages the student to acknowledge their own fallacies and then realize true knowledge through logical deduction[1],[2].  Compared to the conversations of Socrates and Plato 2+ millennia ago, modern classrooms not only include this dialectic discourse but also other instructional methods such as didactic, inquiry, and discovery-based learning (or some version of these strategies that bears a synonymous name).  My classroom is no different — I ask questions all class long, to begin a session (which students answer in writing to prime them into thinking about the material they experienced in preparation for class), to work through material I am presenting (in order to encourage engagement), and in self-directed class activities (both on worksheets and as I roam the room).  However, it was not until reading Pearsall’s first chapter that I stopped to question my questions and reflect on how they contribute to my overall assessment strategy.

 

Considering my questioning technique in the context of assessment was a bit of a reversal in thinking.  Rather than asking my questions to facilitate learning (wouldn’t Socrates be proud!), I could consider my questions providing important feedback on whether students were learning (AKA…Assessment!).  Accordingly, the most effective and efficient questions would be ones that gather more feedback in less time.  Despite more focus on the K-12 classroom, I think many of Pearsall’s suggestions[3] apply to my undergraduate physiology classes too.  A brief summary of some strategies for improving questioning technique, separated by different fundamental questions:

 

 

How do I get more students to participate?

  • We can “warm up” cold calling to encourage participation through activities like think-pair-share, question relays, scaffolding answers, and framing speculation.
  • It is important to give students sufficient thinking time through fostering longer wait and pause times. Pre-cueing and using placeholder or reflective statements can help with this.

How do I elicit evidentiary reasoning from students?

  • “What makes you say that?” and “Why is _____ correct?” encourages students to articulate their reasoning.
  • Checking with others and providing “second drafts” to responses emphasizes the importance of justifying a response.

How do I sequence questions?

  • The right question doesn’t necessarily lead to better learning if it’s asked at the wrong time.
  • Questions should be scaffolded so depth and complexity develops (i.e. detail, category, elaboration, evidence).

How do I best respond to student responses?

  • Pivoting, re-voicing, and cueing students can help unpack incorrect and incomplete answers as well as build and explore correct ones.

How do I deal with addressing interruptions?

  • Celebrating good practices, establishing rules for discussion, making it safe to answer and addressing domineering students can facilitate productive questioning sessions.

 

After reviewing these strategies, I’ve realized a few things.  First, I was already utilizing some of these techniques, perhaps unconsciously, or as a testament to the many effective educators I’ve learned from over the years.  Second, I fall victim to some questioning pitfalls such as not providing enough cueing information and leaving students to try their hand at mind-reading what I’m trying to ask more than I would like.  Third, the benefits of better questioning are real.  Although only anecdotal and over a small sampling period, I have observed that by reframing certain questions, I am better able to determine if students have learned and identify what they may be missing.  As I work to clean up my assessment strategies, I will continue to question my questions, and encourage it in my colleagues as well.

 

1Stoddard, H.A. and O’Dell, D.A. Would Socrates Have Actually Used the Socratic Method for Clinical Teaching? J Gen Intern Med 31(9):1092–6. 2016.

2Oyler, D.R. and Romanelli, F. The Fact of Ignorance Revisiting the Socratic Method as a Tool for Teaching Critical Thinking. Am J of Pharm Ed; 78 (7) Article 144. 2014.

3A free preview of the first chapter of Pearsall’s book is available here.

Anne Crecelius (@DaytonDrC) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Health and Sport Science at the University of Dayton where she won the Faculty Award in Teaching in 2018.  She teaches Human Physiology, Introduction to Health Professions, and Research in Sport and Health Science. She returned to her undergraduate alma mater to join the faculty after completing her M.S. and Ph.D. studying Cardiovascular Physiology at Colorado State University.  Her research interest is in the integrative control of muscle blood flow.  She is a member of the American Physiological Society (APS), serving on the Teaching Section Steering Committee and will chair the Communications Committee beginning in 2019.  In 2018, she was awarded the ADInstruments Macknight Early Career Innovative Educator Award.
Report from the Inaugural Physiology Majors Interest Group Meeting

When I first heard about the Physiology Majors Interest Group at the APS Teaching Section Symposium entitled “What’s Your Major? The Rise of the Undergraduate Physiology Degree” by co-chairs Erica Wehrwein and John Halliwell at Experimental Biology in 2015, I was immediately excited.  I’m primarily an undergraduate educator and strongly identify as a ‘physiologist’ and hope some of my students do as well.  Yet, I wasn’t entirely sure.  As an assistant professor in a department of Health and Sport Science who primarily advises students in the Exercise Physiology major who want to be physician assistants and physical therapists, was I “enough” physiology?  After attending the first stand-alone conference for this group in East Lansing earlier this summer, I’m not only confident that I was right to be excited about this APS interest group but also that as Erica Wehrwein, organizer of the conference has previously reported, physiology really is alive and well at the undergraduate level.

 

What is a Physiology Major?

One of the overarching topics of discussion at the meeting, in formal sessions and during breaks revolved around this central question regarding physiology education at the undergraduate level.  From the first introductions onward, it was clear it wasn’t going to be a simple answer.  Of the 45 in attendance, a number of different departments and/or majors were represented: physiology, biology, health sciences, human biology, and kinesiology to name a few with 24 to 2274 students in these different majors.  When we talked about the students we teach, advise, and mentor, they are future physicians, nurses, physical therapists, researchers, physician assistants, and many other professions.  Still more diverse, when we compared curricula as reported in a pre-meeting survey, we saw ranges of required courses in basic sciences, anatomy, physiology, and associated laboratories.  Yet, among these differences, there were striking similarities as well.  Sessions sparked discussions of the core concepts (a topic discussed previously on this blog) of physiology we emphasize, required skills that we want our graduates to have and how we try to build these, and common employment trends when students leave our programs and the challenges this can pose for advising.  In regard to the original query of what is a physiology major, as can often be the case in our discipline, it was less about the answer itself, and more about the discussions we had along the way.

 

An integrative discipline, an integrated community

One of the most valuable aspects of the meeting was being able to spend two days with other passionate physiology professionals.  Just as I see integration of physiology and other scientific disciplines, similar to integrated body systems, I was making connections with others from large, research-intensive universities, to small, liberal arts colleges and still others that like myself, fit somewhere in the middle.  Everyone was extremely willing to share their thoughts and ideas on how to best push physiology forward and increase its value in the ever-competitive landscape of higher education.  Conversations ranged from curriculum design to specific teaching strategies and there was a free flow of information with both newer and more seasoned participants engaging in the learning process.  In a sense, the meeting modeled what we often strive to achieve in our programs and classrooms- critical thinking, grounded in evidence, with a creative application towards future improvements or development of new knowledge.

 

What does the future hold?

As the meeting ended, we went our separate ways, armed with new tools and ideas we can implement or consider in our own programs.  A sampling of the ideas I took home:

  • In teaching materials, identify the conceptual model or core principle that is being taught and ask students to do the same when completing assessments.
  • Include teaching about T-Shaped professionals in my Introduction to Health Professions course.
  • Use Khan academy YouTube videos to demonstrate to students how they can concept map while studying.
  • Help students identify transferable skills and knowledge from non-health related job (such as a cashier or server) through ONET.
  • Consider departmental membership in the American Kinesiology Association to further connect with similar programs.
  • Use and contribute to the resources I already knew about, such as Advances in Physiology Education, this LifeSciTRC, and other APS resources.

The interest group will continue, and future meetings are already being planned.  The next meeting will be held in June 2018 at the University of Arizona.  To stay in the loop, join the listserv by contacting Erica Wehrwein (wehrwei7@msu.edu).  To keep physiology education a priority, we will continue to meet, discuss, and inspire the next generation of those who identify with physiology, just as I have and will continue to.  I’m grateful to Erica and the work of the planning committee for putting together an event that focused on this important aspect of the work I do as a physiology educator.

Anne Crecelius is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Health and Sport Science at the University of Dayton.  She teaches Human Physiology and a Capstone Research course.  She returned to her undergraduate alma mater to join the faculty after completing her M.S. and Ph.D. studying Cardiovascular Physiology at Colorado State University.  Her research interest is in the integrative control of muscle blood flow.  She is a member of the American Physiological Society (APS), serving on the Teaching Section Steering Committee and the Communications Committee.