Dr Lowe Peer Evaluation

Dr. Lowe and I made arrangements to observe MSED 251, Life Science for Educators Methods on Thursday, October 8th. This lesson focused on how students (1) explore the structure of the DNA molecule and (2) begin to understand how the elements of DNA molecule are related.. Specifically students explored the structure of the DNA molecule to begin to understand how chromosomes, genes, and the base pairs, sugars, and phosphates of the DNA molecule are related. Students viewed and discussed video segments that describe the role of various genetic units. They also built models of DNA molecules -- using gumdrops, licorice, and toothpicks. At the end of the lesson, they join their model molecules together to form one large strand of DNA.

During

My function as the observer is to collect observed data from the classroom as a way of providing the communication basis between Dr. Lowe and myself. My role in this process is to capture as many details of the event as possible, as objectively as possible. This means transcribing what happens during the class meeting. The resulting document is a good way of providing formative feedback to Dr. Lowe. For this reason, my observations are noted using an Ethnographic approach.

There are the risks involved using peer review. Peer review may be difficult for even a well-intentioned observer to filter out his/her own bias against a given teaching method or personality while conducting an observation. For example, someone who values strict classroom control and considers the instructor’s presentation to be the key learning object of the classroom may not keep an open mind when observing moments of seeming chaos in a collaborative learning classroom, and vice versa. For this reason, I have considered my assumptions about Dr. Lowe’s teaching and plan for several visits for

Lowe treated her students respectfully, appearing to know each student individually and referring to them by name. Frymier (2000) found referential skill, ego support, and immediacy to have a strong relationship with student learning and motivation. Dr. Lowe’s classroom dialogue with her students about DNA and replication was student-focused.

Dr. Lowe demonstrated Derivative #3, Subject Matter Content as Medium, by having her students connect lab experience with ongoing class experiences. It is, and should be important to note, MSED courses are not methods or education courses rather they are content-based courses for education majors which rely on laboratory skills and procedures. Although the NMU Science Faculty understands there are many ways to perform science, the hands-on engagement is at the center of learning science.

Near the end of the observation time, Dr. Lowe transitioned into application of strategies from the course objectives listed in the beginning, evidenced by the discussions lead by Dr. Lowe and directed towards students. Further demonstrated by the students excitement to show other science “discoveries. It is the task of the Science Content Professor to design laboratory experience that will enable students to develop their own capacity for understanding (i.e., form habits of judgment,