Workshop on Linking Evidence and Promising Practices in STEM Undergraduate Education

Monday June 30, 2008

Following the meeting, each panelist will write a brief paper based on his/her presentation and input from the discussion. Panelists were asked to address the following questions in their papers and will select specific areas to highlight in their presentations.

1. What are and what should be some of the most important learning goals for science students in lower division courses? We are interested in goals over a range of grain sizes from activities within an individual course to college-wide efforts.

2. In the context of the learning goals you identified, what types of evidence would be needed in order to conclude that a specific goal had been achieved?

3. With so many forms of evidence available to us in science education, are there some types of evidence that carry more weight in your experience? If so, what makes that evidence particularly compelling?

4. As you consider learning goals and evidence, where are the biggest gaps in evidence in science undergraduate education?

5. How important has the quality of evidence been in influencing or guiding the widespread uptake of a promising practice? Can you identify specific examples where the presence or absence of evidence of effectiveness has had a major impact on dissemination or use?

Each panelist was asked to respond to the following:

1. Summarize the major findings from discipline-based education research in your discipline.

2. Identify the most promising or important directions for future research.

Following the meeting, each panelist will write a brief paper based on his/her presentation and input from the discussion. Panelists were asked to address the following questions in their papers and will select specific areas to highlight in their presentations.

1. How would you categorize the range of promising practices that have emerged over the past 20 years? Consider practices that are discipline-specific as well as those that are interdisciplinary.

2. What types of categories do you find are most useful in sorting out the range of efforts that have emerged? Why did you choose to aggregate certain practices within a category?

3. As you chose exemplars for your categories, what criteria did you use to identify something as a promising practice?

Jeffrey Froyd, Texas A&M University

Bruce Grant, Widener University

Jose Mestre, University of Illinois, Urbana/Champaign

Cathy Middlecamp, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Helen King, Helen King Consultancy

Jeanne Narum, Project Kaleidoscope

Edward Redish, University of Maryland

Philip Sadler, Harvard University

William Wood, University of Colorado, Boulder

Susan Albertine, Association of American Colleges and Universities

Robert Beichner, North Carolina State University

Myles Boylan, National Science Foundation

Celeste Carter, National Science Foundation

Amber Coleman, Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology, National Research Council

Mark Connolly, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Malcolm Drewery, National Academy of Engineering

Adam Fagen, Board on Life Sciences, National Research Council

Adam Gamoran, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Pamela Hines , American Association for the Advancement of Science

Kimberly Kastens, Columbia University

Mary M. Kirchhoff, American Chemical Society

David Mandel, National Center on Education and the Economy

Tina Masciangioli, Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology, National Research Council

Lillian McDermott, University of Washington

Susan Millar, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Michael Moloney, Board on Physics and Astronomy, National Research Council

Lina Patino, National Science Foundation

Dexter Perkins, University of North Dakota

Ginger Holmes Rowell, National Science Foundation

Carol Schneider, Association of American Colleges & Universities

Dee Silverthorn, University of Texas, Austin

Linda Slakey, National Science Foundation

Carol Snyder, American Association of Colleges and Universities

Brock Spencer, Beloit College

James Stith, American Institute of Physics

Larry Suter, National Science Foundation

Partibha Varma-Nelson, National Science Foundation

Jodi Wesemann, American Chemical Society

Karl Wirth, Macalester College

Robin Wright, University of Minnesota

Terry Woodin, National Science Foundation