For my first class observation I chose a course that I had an interest in teaching in, and knew the instructor fairly well. Dr. Chowrira is a tenured instructor at UBC and has a strong focus on pedagogy, cell biology, biochemistry, and plant biology. In this class the discussion was mostly centred on transporters and their role in the cell.

The first thing I noticed was that the lesson design was very flexible. The class didn’t have a clear beginning or ending, as some topics needed to be finished from an earlier class before a new topic was begun. This wasn’t a problem though, as the instructor clearly reviewed the content of the previous lecture to set the stage for the lesson. There was a strong emphasis on learning objectives, which seemed to be focused on exam preparation. This is likely unavoidable in such first-year courses, where outcomes need to be aligned between the different sections. However, exams in the course are conducted in a mixed individual/group exam format. I like this idea, as it both allows the assessment to give a grade to the students (again, somewhat of a necessity in first-year science courses), but also really drives the concept of using assessments for learning as transformation. By doing the group exam, the students get better immediate feedback on their own grasp of the content, and thus are able to adjust their learning outcomes and do better in the course.

There was a strong focus on experiential learning. In particular, the lecturing segments were broken up by activities which I think really helped to keep the students engaged in an 80 minute lesson, as well as summarise each topic. One worksheet had students drawing out curves on a chart individually, and then comparing with their peers. These were well timed and helped the students consolidate concepts from the lecture. I noticed that engagement was low among the students. I believe that setting students in pre-defined groups from the beginning of the course could be a good idea, as it somewhat “forces” students to at the very least contribute to these activities (and to their own learning). This “chunking” concept is something I would like to take into my own lessons.

I think that these types of introductory courses are excellent opportunities to really apply the instructor’s pedagogical content knowledge, as students may come in with little to no content knowledge, and from a wide range of experiences and perspectives. The instructor was able to bring in a strong focus on the “big picture”, i.e. having students think about how systems in biology connect, and about the applications of what they are learning both in other courses and in the real world. Certain important concepts, such as how structure affects function in biology, were reiterated multiple times throughout the lecture in different contexts, to really drive the idea home. The instructor also used clicker questions to gauge the class’s grasp of the material, but included some multi-stage questions which really required the students to apply their knowledge to different situations. These questions were well presented, clearly demonstrating the instructor’s strong content knowledge and pedagogical background.

I did not have a chance to meet with the instructor directly after the lesson, but my thoughts after this lesson were largely focused on student engagement, especially in introductory courses. This seems to be a real problem, throughout most courses I have observed or taken part in. Active learning is certainly a powerful method for teaching in these courses, but students on average seem to want the information fed to them and move on. This is somewhat understandable, as they are often taking many different courses simultaneously and are often overburdened by their workload and the anxiety of being in the first year of university. Clearly, this is something to consider and address.