Adronisha Frazier teaches medical microbiology and biology lecture and lab courses at San Joaquin Delta College.
Many teaching assistants—often first-year, first-semester master’s degree students—may agree that teaching ability did not feel innate. That was my experience the first time I had to develop a lecture and present introductory biology lab concepts to eager freshman and sophomore students. I had some basic support, like the lab coordinator who guided me through the general biology lab activities and discussed potential issues students may face during weekly preparatory sessions. I also reviewed misconceptions with my major professor so that I could effectively dispel and replace these notions with scientifically accurate information. Still, many of us learned to teach on the fly.
I noticed gaps in my teaching style that I believed hindered my ability to reach all students and wanted to do even better for them. So, I dove into understanding best teaching practices through an instruction-based course in biological sciences. After graduating with my master’s degree and working as a microbiology laboratory technician for a year, I taught at the community college level. Then, I pursued a teaching certification in high school science and taught high school before realizing that I needed a better grasp on pedagogical practices. I pursued additional training due to my deficiency in comprehending education-based research practices in science that support positive student outcomes. Here are a few of the things I’ve learned while earning my doctorate and after years of researching and trialing pedagogical innovations.
Creating a Sense of Belonging
Over the years, I learned from colleagues and drew from experiences with my former teachers to include additional ways to connect with students and understand their unique needs as I assert the belief that they belong in the sciences despite their prior experiences and have functional responsibilities in all aspects of their learning. This is especially important to implement in courses with underrepresented minority students as research shows that underrepresented minority students have an increased self-efficacy (belief in oneself) in classrooms that allow for participation, collaboration, and an active role in their learning (Ballen et al., 2018).
I find that centering belonging and inclusion is especially important during the first week of classes. During their first day of class introduction, I check students’ names on my roster and write notes about their program of study and significant details to help remember who they are. Granted, these details can be difficult to keep track of in larger lectures, so I also have students answer two questions on an index card:
- What is something you want to know more about this semester?
- What are your concerns about microbiology/biology?
These student cards are collected and compiled into categories based on similar phrasing to create themes. If you’re short on time, ask a student worker to aggregate and sort these responses. This allows me to address concerns—especially lab safety–related questions— within the first two weeks. The remaining questions are added to a document and revisited throughout the semester.
I also share my educational and career journey, including my undergraduate experiences, my past and evolving research projects, various jobs and volunteer roles, and my current position as their professor. I encourage my students to use what they have learned about me to determine whether I can help them in any way. However, remembering to include feedback about my students’ experiences and history also allows me to build connections with other professors or organizations and to create a network for my students who may lack the social capital to build bridges of their own. For example, I took three students from my classes to the Northern California American Society for Microbiology (NCASM) meeting in Fall 2025 and four students in Spring 2026. I also connected one of my students with a colleague currently working with the California Department of Public Health. They have established a relationship to support her interest in becoming a clinical laboratory professional.
Lastly, I learn the correct way to enunciate their names by asking students to say their names loudly and clearly. I always call students by their first names and encourage them to correct me every time I say their names incorrectly— supporting my goals of visibility, inclusion, and belonging in scientific and educational spaces. Ultimately, reaching students where they are at starts on day one of the class. I build a rapport with students as a guiding, growth-minded facilitator with guidelines to maintain a healthy power balance.
Building on the Basics
In my instructional lessons, I use scaffolding to incorporate content that students should (but may not) have acquired in prerequisites. Supporting students in elemental concepts provides a reasonable foundation to build on when presenting new concepts. While facilitating in-class discussions, think-pair-share activities, and two-question assignments, I can gauge whether my students understand the course material and share resources that can help with reviewing prerequisite materials. If the content is central to their success in the course, I provide a brief review of the content, such as providing a set of handouts and lecture recordings to coincide with refresher resources on chemistry concepts, especially when teaching medical microbiology.
Engaging Students with Active Learning
I frame my course around active learning practices, which studies have shown is an important factor in student success in STEM courses (Freeman et al., 2014). Active learning is a learner-centered pedagogical approach that incorporates various techniques allowing students’ direct involvement in activities rather than teacher-centered lecturing (Michael, 2006). I incorporate active learning activities from resources I created at conferences (OpenStax Microbiology Concept Connection Cards), find in online repositories such as Quantitative Undergraduate Biology Education and Synthesis (QUBES), and even adapted from online shared resources, such as think-pair-share activities that drive individual critical thinking and in-class collaboration.
These various activities are incorporated into my courses and sometimes combined based on my students’ needs. I begin lectures with questions intended to spark critical thinking or a review from a previous chapter that will connect to this new one. I incorporate questions throughout my lecture to gauge student understanding. I also include graphic organizers and concept maps as resources, which have led many of my students to create their own. For smaller classes, I have students complete a “Two-Question Assignment” allowing them to ask any content-related clarifying questions. I provide answers individually to personalized questions and incorporate responses to broader questions in the lecture or as part of the in-class discussions.
Collaborating with On-Campus Resources
I took my support a step further and learned about resources outside of my class that could support my students. At my institution, student support outside of the classroom includes in-person tutoring, online tutoring, and supplemental instruction (SI) with SI leaders. Supplemental instruction is an academic support model designated for courses identified as having a high risk of failure or withdrawal due to the curriculum rigor. These institution-trained peer learners— referred to as SI leaders—facilitate instructional sessions that supplement the lecture or lab course with the goal of driving increased academic performance and program retention (Arendale, 1994). SI leaders receive training prior to the semester start and concurrently as the semester progresses. Many of these SI leaders are recruited by the instructor after successfully completing the course in a previous semester. The SI leader meets with their supervisor and faculty member to discuss how the students need to be supported through student-centered sessions focused on enhancing critical skills. This level of interaction, combined with all the elements of my teaching process, seems to be effective for my students. Other institutions may have peer support programs, such as SIs, undergraduate learning assistants, peer tutoring, and peer mentoring.
Regardless of the approach, peer interactions are one component that can improve student outcomes, as I noticed in my first semester when I had an SI leader in medical microbiology. It is important to remember correlation does not mean causation. Of the 41 students enrolled in the course, 19 students faithfully attended the SI sessions and seven students occasionally attended. Five students directly communicated that SI sessions led to their success while 18 students were likely to have improved their exam grades after attending the SI sessions. Traditionally, supplemental instruction has a significant impact on improving performance in high-risk courses but additional research—developing a quasi-experimental model controlling for extraneous variables—in my courses is needed to definitively attribute increased academic performance to supplemental instruction.
Ultimately, elevating students can serve as the catalyst that leads to increased motivation and effort in college courses. A student recently told me, “You made us believe,” when asked about her success in the course in my first semester in California. As I enter my tenth year of teaching at the community college level, I welcome learning more ways to reach my students where they are.
Thank you for reading! If you have any questions or would like to continue the conversation, please email Courtney Zanosky at czanosky@wwnorton.com to request my contact information.
REFERENCES
Arendale, D. R. (1994). Understanding the supplemental instruction model. In D. C. Martin & D. R. Arendale (Eds.), Supplemental Instruction: Increasing student achievement and retention (pp. 11–21). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219946004
Ballen, C. J., Wieman, C., Salehi, S., Searle, J. B., & Zamudio, K. R. (2018). Enhancing diversity in undergraduate science: Self-efficacy drives performance gains with active learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(4), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-12-0344
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00053.2006
MEET THE AUTHOR
Adronisha Frazier teaches medical microbiology and biology lecture and lab courses at San Joaquin Delta College. She works closely with colleagues to mentor, teach, and support a diverse student population in earning credentials and transferring to 4-year institutions. Her background includes curriculum design and development in biology subdisciplines, developing CUREs for first-year students, assisting science faculty in implementing pedagogical practices in the classroom, and selecting, developing, and modifying OERs.