Culturally Responsive Teaching Fall 23-Spring 24

PUBH 148: Epidemiology

grading structure / community context / work-in-progress

Reflection on Instructional Change:

During the 2023-2024 academic year, I implemented several instructional changes as a result of my participation in the Culturally Responsive Teaching FLC. For example, I have incorporated validating language in my course syllabus, expanded opportunities for low-stakes assessment, and offered multiple modes of participation/engagement during class meetings. Many of these strategies were directly informed by the ESCALA mini-course on Culturally Responsive Teaching for STEM in Hispanic Serving Institutions. During the winter break, we read Feldman’s Grading for Equity, which drastically changed my thinking around grading structure. I decided to significantly alter the grading structure of my PUBH 148 Epidemiology course as a result. This is the change that I felt most uncertain about going into the spring semester; I am not sure at this point whether the change will advance or retract from grading equity in my course. However, I feel that the other instructional changes I have made complement the change in grading structure, and I am hopeful that the combination of these new practices will make for a better learning experience for my students and ultimately advance grading equity.

During the fall 2023 semester (and entirety of the 2022-2023 academic year), my PUBH 148 course involved many different types of graded activities, including weekly reading quizzes, in-class group activities, exams, and surveys. The in-class group activities were worth a major portion of the grade (36%) and were graded solely based on participation (attendance). Most students would attend class on the days we had graded activities, but some would not meaningfully engage with the activities; they seemed to be there just for the points. Prior to the spring 2024 semester, I modified the grading structure such that the reading quizzes became practice quizzes, the in-class group activities were no longer worth points (but still showed in the gradebook as complete/incomplete), and the only activities that counted toward the final grade were exams (two midterms and a final exam). I worried that attendance would drop without offering points for the in-class activities, but overall this has not been the case. I realize that this change in the grading structure may increase test anxiety for some students. I have tried to be very transparent with students about what to expect for the exams so that they are all aware of how and what to study beforehand. Compared to the former grading structure, I feel that this change will help to reduce grade inflation and make the final grade more reflective of student learning. In the future, I am planning to offer the opportunity to make corrections on midterm exams (but not the final exam); I am still figuring out the logistics for this strategy.

In additional to modifying the grading structure, I have also tried to incorporate more community context so that students can more easily make connections between course topics and real-life applications. For example, many students used to struggle to understand the importance of understanding properties of diagnostic/screening tests, such as test sensitivity and specificity. This semester, before introducing this new concept, I gathered input from students on their experiences with at-home COVID tests and then provided some data related to the validity of these tests. One study showed that the at-home tests correctly detected cases about half the time, meaning that the test had about 50% sensitivity. By introducing the topic of diagnostic/screening test properties (which has typically been on the dryer side), students appeared to be more engaged, and they seemed to grasp the concepts more quickly than in previous semesters.

Moving forward, I am planning to continue to make changes to the ways I introduce new topics in class. Ideally, I would like to always start with the community/real-world context before diving into the details and calculations. I anticipate this strategy will be fairly easy to implement more consistently in the course; it just required a small amount of reflection and a quick literature search.

**Evidence of Instructional Change**
Image 1	Image 2
Graded activities in PUBH 148, Fall 2023 vs. Spring 2024	This is the slide I used to first introduce properties of diagnostic and screening tests. It stimulated a lot of discussion about experiences with different COVID tests.

Course Syllabus

PUBH148_S24_Syllabus_Wagner-1.pdf

**Faculty Bio**
	Jenny Wagner is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Public Health here at Sac State. Dr. Wagner earned her Masters in Public Health (MPH) and PhD in Public Health Sciences from UC Davis. She is currently teaching in both the undergraduate and graduate public health programs at Sac State. Dr. Wagner's research investigates historical and contemporary institutionalized racism in housing markets and implications for health and health inequities.

This work was supported by:
	Grant funding from Sacramento State Division of Inclusive Excellence *Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Sacramento State.