Session Information
16 SES 05.5 A, General Poster Session
General Poster Session
Contribution
The purpose of this research study was to improve the ability of students to prove concepts in nerve impulse generation and transmission topics using the Pear Deck learning approach. The objectives of this research study were to use the Pear Deck learning approach to explain the neuron's shape and position in relation to its activities and describe how mechanoreceptors react to stimulus pressure and how nerve impulses are transmitted via the PNS and CNS.
Pear Deck Learning is a technique of active participation strategy that involves students in different ways. Pear deck is straightforward and fosters a collaborative environment between the teacher and the students. In today’s education world, students require more engaging, interactive, and thought-provoking learning interactions, especially in today’s technological world.
Pear Deck Learning is a powerful ecosystem of education tools that monitors progress, offers real-time feedback, and provides differentiated instruction and gamified practice that keeps students engaged and excelling. Pear Deck Learning allows the students to interact with the presentation by answering questions, sharing their thinking, giving short structured questions, drawing, and following along during the teacher’s presentation so it makes engagement a lot and it is more fun for students to have this interactive experience.
As a teacher, one can add questions on the PowerPoint slides while teaching and lock students’ screens so they can focus on what you are teaching. One can incorporate a student-paced option which is beneficial for small group instructions that students can complete independently. The audio option is beneficial for students who are slower in reading and pronunciation of terminologies. The teacher dashboard allows one to view students’ responses and provide feedback on their progress in real-time. Multiple choice questions can be used in all kinds of ways like checking for understanding, determining what students already know, or providing them with a choice about where they want to go next.
For the group that went through the Pear Deck Learning lessons, the results showed that fifteen students out of twenty (75 %) achieved 70 % or higher scores on their work on the formative assessment questions. For the group that did not study through Pear Deck Learning the results showed that seven students out of twenty (35 %) achieved 70 % or higher scores on their work on the formative assessment questions. This was an indication that this group of students could not answer questions that required them to prove the concepts of the neuron’s structures, functions, location; and nerve impulse transmission between the PNS and CNS.
According to the research study, the majority of the student’s ability to prove concepts of the human nervous system was in a good category and above. Therefore, if the concept taught has a higher complexity than the lower complexity concept the Pear Dear learning approach can allow a strong association between thinking level and the capacity to verify concepts.
Some recommendations for Biology teachers include being innovative and creative to diversify instructional aids based on current scientific research, technology, and psychosocial factors. For example, by using animation, videos, and research articles in Pear Deck Learning to explain abstract and microscopic concepts. Stand-alone learning utilities allow students to study at their own pace either in or out of school hours and gain knowledge beyond the textbook content. This pedagogical technique should begin in preschool or elementary school. If necessary, the Pear Deck learning technique can be repeated in the following classes with minimal customization.
Method
This is a descriptive research study that used random sampling of two groups of a total of sixty A-level Biology students in grade 11, in Nazarbayev Intellectual School, Karaganda, who are studying about human nervous system as part of their Biology curriculum requirement. This study involved students to interactively learning and answer questions on the level of understanding of the topic of Nerve impulse generation and transmission and a formative test of the topic which contains eight structured questions following Bloom’s taxonomy higher order thinking levels. The two grade 11 class groups are randomly sampled from four grade 11 class groups to complete both research instruments. For Pear Deck interactive questions, students were offered rubrics with criteria for evaluation. With rubrics, students could evaluate not only themselves but also the work of other students and give 2 suggestions for improvement and 1 good point. This allowed students to properly organize their work and simulate the mechanism of formation and transmission of a nerve impulse successfully, linking everything into a cohesive whole. Rubrics are used for both formative assessment (in-process feedback to be used for improvement) and summative assessment (evaluation of student learning after an assignment or project). Essentially, a rubric is a tool for communication between instructor and student. Students assess their work using the rubric more effectively and submit the rubric with their assignment. This is a great basis for deep discussion about which aspects they can improve or change. The learning process was done with the Pear Deck learning approach for 6 lessons. During the first lesson, students learned the concepts about neuron structures, functions, and locations in the human body by logging on to their laptops and joining the interactive Pear Deck PowerPoint slides presented by the teacher. They learned of the mechanoreceptors (Pacinian corpuscles) and their reaction to changing stimulus, and pressure. In the second lesson, they learned the initiation and transmission of the action potential in myelinated neurons and the connection between the structure and function of the cholinergic synapse. In the next three lessons, using the Pear Deck guidelines of the rubric, they worked in groups, discussed, prepared, and presented their understanding and analysis of the transmission of nerve impulses in the human nervous system. In the last lesson, they answered the formative assessment questions and filled in the questionnaire. Another group was taught without the Peak Deck learning approach and formative assessment given.
Expected Outcomes
A higher percentage of students that were under the Very Poor category were taught without the Pear Deck Learning strategy (B) at 6.67% compared to those taught with the Pear Deck Learning strategy (A) at 3.33%. The average score achieved for the Fair category was higher in group A than in B at 46.67% and 26.67% respectively. In the Very Good category, the percentage of students was higher with those taught with the Pear Deck Learning strategy (A) at 10.00% compared to those taught without the Pear Deck Learning strategy at 0.00%. For the group that went through the Pear Deck lessons, the formative assessment results show that fifteen students out of twenty (75 %) got 70 % or above marks on their work on the worksheet. For the group that did not study by Pear Deck Learning, the results show that seven students out of twenty (35 %) got 70 % or above marks on their work on the formative assessment worksheet. This is an indication that this group of students could not answer questions that required them to prove the concepts of the neuron’s structures, functions, location; and nerve impulse transmission along the PNS and CNS. In the control group, students were not offered the use of Pear Deck guidelines rubrics and they went through the whole mechanism in parts and did not do the Pear Deck presentation at the end, which would help to visualize and see the relationship between the work of the parts of the neuron. They could not answer questions where it was asked to provide evidence. We recommend using the Pear Deck guidelines rubric presentation to improve students' understanding of different concepts as a whole so that they can bring evidence to their answers through analysis and evaluation.
References
[1] Owens M.T., Tanner K.D. Teaching as Brain changing: Exploring Connections between Neuroscience and Innovative Teaching. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2017 Summer; 16(2). [2] Marzano R. J. and Heflebower T. Grades that show what know. 2011 69 34-9 [3] Goff E, Reindl K, Johnson C, McClean P, Offerdahl J, Schroeder N, and White A 2017 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 45 226 – 34 [4 Lazarowitz R and Penso S 1992 J. Of Biological Education, 26 215–23 [5] Lestari D, Mulyani S E S, and Susanti R 2016 J. of Innovative Science Education 5 83–93 [6] Cavalho J C Q, Beltramini L M, and Bossolan N R S 2018 J. of Biological Education 53 205-16 [7] Louca L T, and Zacharia Z C 2012 Educational Review 64 471-92 [8] Fretz E B, Wu H K, Zhang B, Davis E A, Krajcik J S, and Soloway E 2002 Res. in Sci. [9] Larson-Green J. (2024, January) Engaging instruction and powerful practice. https://www.peardeck.com/products/pear-deck-and-pear-practice
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.