Why does one student fear mathematics while another hates biology? 

The challenge often lies not in the discipline itself but in how it is taught. Traditional methods of teaching, which rely heavily on rote learning, fail to foster genuine understanding or enthusiasm for the subject. While students are informed about concepts, questioning them or delving deeper is often discouraged. Such an approach lacks the hands-on engagement necessary for an immersive and enjoyable learning experience.

Sugat Dabholkar, a Research Assistant Professor at Tufts University, USA, is pioneering a shift in how students engage with science and mathematics. As a ​“Learning Scientist” and faculty member of the Lodha Genius Programme (LGP), he designs curricula that emphasise better engagement through computational thinking.

The computational thinking approach

Computational thinking has been conceptualised in multiple ways. Based on the work by Weintrop et al., 2016 , Dabholkar uses a definition of computational thinking in STEM as thinking that helps investigate a research question or solve a problem using computational tools and methods. Computational thinking has significantly transformed how scientists engage in scientific inquiries. When students participate in scientific investigations using computational tools to learn about a concept, they develop a deeper understanding of the concept and learn computational thinking. Dabholkar describes one project where, using the computational thinking approach, he co-designed a computational model that mimics an experimental model system.

This model is based on a prey-predator relationship and is designed using NetLogo (a multi-agent programmable modelling environment). Using this model, they studied natural selection and adaptation in a population of rock pocket mice in the desert of New Mexico. Being an interactive platform, it allows users to change specific parameters and settings using interface elements.

Aligning pedagogy with national goals

The National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023 in India recommends various pedagogical approaches suitable across the classroom, the field, and the laboratory. It includes hands-on science, the discovery approach, the inquiry approach, and the project-centric approach. The inquiry approach states, ​“Inquiry approach allows students to navigate through unknown questions, and to explore solutions by themselves. It allows students to work in the same way as scientists. The inquiry approach engages students with systematic observation, visualising, experimenting, inferring, communicating, discovering relations. This approach allows Teachers to choose the appropriate type of inquiry with respect to the concept, and to scaffold (support as per needs) students’ learning.”

The framework encourages students to ask questions, conduct experiments, and independently explore concepts. Dabholkar’s computational thinking approach aligns perfectly with this vision, fostering inquiry and critical thinking through interactive and practical learning modules.

Practical applications in education

One of the first courses that Dabholkar co-designed for the LGP was a quantitative and computational biology course. This course was developed around ecology and evolution, and students used computational tools to model and investigate ecological systems. Dabholkar co-taught this course with Sudipta Tung, a faculty at Ashoka University. He has also co-designed a course on stem cell differentiation with Joseph Thottacherry and another on neuroscience with Mehrab Modi.

In the course Tung and Dabholkar co-designed, the LGP students worked in groups on different investigations. One group studied how tree density influenced the spread of forest fires, discovering a tipping point where slight density increases could escalate fires dramatically. Studying such questions was possible due to the computational models that the team developed together. 

This model also incorporated variables like wind and humidity, demonstrating the complexities of real-world phenomena. Such hands-on, team-based projects encourage students to think critically, collaborate, and understand the multifaceted nature of scientific problems.

Transforming classroom dynamics

Only course designs do not ensure a better pedagogy. It also involves creating a collaborative learning environment. ​“In the classroom, I typically try to have less time for an instructor to speak. And more time for students to speak. So, students learn from each other, and there is a lot of peer learning involved,” explains Dabholkar.

Hierarchy in the education system often leads to adverse outcomes in the learning process. Dabholkar bridged the gap between students and teachers interestingly. ​“One shift we did in the courses was in the teaching team. We were senior learning partners, and the students were junior learning partners. We said we are building a learning community, so there’s no teacher-student relationship, but we are all learning together and will be learning partners in the process. And I have continued that idea throughout,” describes Dabholkar. This shift encourages peer learning and fosters a sense of community, enabling students to freely explore ideas and ask meaningful questions.

Pursuing research in this field of education for a decade, Dabholkar has seen how students respond to this teaching pedagogy. While most things are not surprising to him anymore, they still amaze him nevertheless. He says, ​“Students have a lot of ideas that are not encouraged.” As students try to provide answers based on what is ​“expected” by the teacher, they generally hesitate to express their own ideas about anything. ​“However, once you shift that, how students engage with these ideas is exciting. And the kind of questions they ask when they’re free to ask are research questions that PhD level scholars ask when engaging with their research,” says Dabholkar.

The art of teaching does not involve just the students in the learning process. Teachers or instructors also learn while developing courses and interacting with the students. 

Dabholkar explains, ​“One thing that I would say was surprising was actually how much I learned about each of these domains when I designed these modules. And I think that is an important aspect for teachers and even scientists. When I talked with Modi, Thottacherry, and Tung, they also mentioned that they developed some insights in their respective fields when creating materials like this.”

Building the future of STEM education

Despite these advancements, Dabholkar highlights the need for significant investment in science education research in India. Few institutions currently specialise in this field, limiting the potential for widespread adoption of innovative teaching practices. He advocates for establishing science education research centres to develop advanced pedagogical methods that can transform the education system.

Dabholkar’s initiatives extend beyond the LGP. In Pune, he collaborated with school teachers to create computational modules for topics like Newton’s laws, simple harmonic motion, and kidney functions. These efforts have shown how engaging teaching methods can make complex STEM concepts accessible to students.

Introducing such approaches into India’s education system on a national scale could revolutionise how students perceive and excel in STEM fields. As Dabholkar aptly puts it, 

If I want my child to learn to play cricket, I would give her a cricket bat and send her to the ground. I won’t ask her to read about cricket in the books. So why not do the same for science students?