Interpret with Caution: COPUS Instructional Styles May Not Differ in Terms of Practices That Support Student Learning

Area of Science:

• Undergraduate STEM Education Research
• Educational Measurement

Background:

• Effective undergraduate STEM education reform requires reliable assessment tools.
• The Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) is a common tool for observing instructor and student behaviors.
• COPUS has been used to categorize instruction into didactic, student-centered, or hybrid styles.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate if COPUS instructional styles align with formative assessment behaviors.
• To determine if COPUS can reliably differentiate instruction based on formative assessment practices.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative comparison of formative assessment behaviors.
• Analysis of 16 undergraduate biology class sessions across three COPUS instructional styles.

Main Results:

• No significant differences in formative assessment behaviors were detected between the COPUS instructional styles.
• COPUS categorization did not reliably distinguish classes with varying formative assessment practices.

Conclusions:

• Caution is advised when using COPUS to infer the impact of STEM reform initiatives.
• Additional measures are necessary to accurately monitor undergraduate STEM education reforms.
• COPUS may not fully capture the nuances of effective pedagogical practices like formative assessment.