Incorporating Deep Learning and Higher Order Thinking Skills in a Large, Lecture‐based Human Physiology Course
Authors: Hobbins Justine , Murrant Coral , Snook Laelie , Tishinsky Justine , Ritchie Kerry 
Published: June 2021

Traditionally, didactic lecture methods and multiple‐choice assessments are heavily relied upon in large classes, despite consistently being reported in literature to encourage a surface approach to learning and being limited to assessing lower order (LO) skills (Biggs & Tang, 2011). However, the perceived effort and resources required to restructure an environment such that a deep approach to learning may be encouraged often prevents instructors from altering teaching and assessment methods, particularly in large classes. The goal of this study was to determine if a large lecture‐based course (350+ students) could be modestly, but manageably, modified to support a deep approach to learning and promote the development of higher order (HO) thinking skills. Specifically, this study took place in a two‐semester Human Physiology course sequence (Phys I and Phys II) taught with instructor‐led scaffolded lectures and assessed with long‐answer written tests. It was hypothesized that this teaching and assessment structure would encourage a deep approach to learning and develop students' HO thinking skills.The Revised Two‐Factor Study Process Questionnaire (rSPQ) was administered at the beginning and end of each course to measure student approach to learning score, while student academic performance was tracked on assessment questions categorized as requiring either LO or HO thinking skills, according to the Blooming Biology Tool (BBT). Student performance on HO thinking questions remained consistent from the start to end of Phys 1 (72.9±19.4% versus 74.8±20.7%, p=0.37), but significantly improved over the course of Phys II (69.9±18.4% versus 79.4±14.8%, p<0.001). Unexpectedly, students' performance on LO thinking questions decreased in a similar pattern from the start to end of both Phys 1 (78.5±20.6% versus 69.4±17.9%, p<0.001) and Phys II (80.5±19.6% versus 72.2±24.3%, p<0.001). There was no significant change in deep or surface approach to learning scores over the course of either semester; although students consistently preferred a deep approach to a surface approach at each time point measured. Limitations regarding the tool used to measure approach to learning, combined with specific student, classroom and educational factors, may partially explain the lack of measurable changes. However, these results suggest that a large lecture‐based course which has been modestly, but manageably, modified from traditional teaching and assessment methods, can provide a learning environment which supports the maintenance of a deep approach to learning and promotes the development of HO thinking skills.Biggs JB, Tang CS, Society for Research into Higher Education. Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does [Online]. McGraw‐Hill Education. http://search.ebscohost.com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=405333&site=ehost‐live&scope=site [12 Jul. 2018].Support or Funding InformationSSHRC Doctoral FellowshipThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.