Research Based Undergraduate Science Teaching: Investigating

Reform in Classrooms – June 19-21 2011, University of Alabama,

Tuscaloosa AL

A Faculty Professional Development Model: Factors that Sustain Reform

Dennis Sunal and Cynthia SunalUniversity of Alabama

Higher Education Faces Significant Challenges

Nation at Risk (1983)Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Project 2061

(AAAS, 1993)Shaping the Future (NSF, 1996) NASA Strategic Plan, Implementation Plan for

Education (NASA, 1999 – 2003)No Child Left Behind (DOE, 2001) Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate

Teaching in STEM (NRC, 2003)Rising Above the Gathering Storm (NAS, 2007)

Higher Education Faces Significant Challenges

Higher education faculty are attempting to improve the effectiveness of undergraduate STEM courses.

However, we face the problem of determining the extent to which undergraduate entry level science courses affect student learning outcomes.

Based on this challenge:What do we need to know?

One question might be:What is the impact of undergraduate

courses, especially reformed courses, on short- and long-term student outcomes?

National Study of Education in Undergraduate Science (NSEUS)

Funded by the National Science Foundation in 2006

Implementation of a national study designed to determine the short- and long-term impact of reform in undergraduate science courses on students, with special emphasis on pre-service teacher education candidates.

Time line 2006-2012

Sequenced NSEUS Study Components Components reviewed in the paper include: NASA/NOVA faculty development program, 1995-2006 Literature review on reform in undergraduate science NSEUS research model National survey of institutions involved in reforming

undergraduate science, 2006-2007 Pilot study to determine the efficacy of a procedure and

the instruments for gathering data in a large scale national study of undergraduate science teaching and learning.

The focus of this presentation will be on the first and third items.

Additional components to be reported next: National study of a sample of institutions involved

in course reform in education in undergraduate science, 2007-2012

National conference on undergraduate science education – June, 2011

NASA/NOVA Faculty Development Program, 1995-

2006

NASA Opportunities for Visionary Academics (NOVA) first awarded in 1995, became a NASA Higher Education Program in 1997, and continued funding through 2006.

NOVA Objectives Disseminate NASA’s faculty development and pre-

service education model. Promote collaborative development within and

among institutions through the model. Utilization of the research and development

activities from NASA’s strategic enterprises Sustain the change process through continued

professional development and collaboration with networking,and mentoring.

Stimulate and conduct action research and change.

Sequence of Events during the NOVA Professional Development Program

Phase I—Professional Development Workshops and Proposal Development (Yr 1)

Phase II - Research and Dissemination grants (Yr 2) Phase III - NASA Field Center Program, online

course enhancements (Yr 3) Leadership Development Conference (LDC) (annual) Research and evaluation, including on-site action

research assessment (continuous) Collaborating , networking, and mentoring on

teaching, technology, course design, and new funding (continuous and value added change)

NASA/NOVA National University Workshop Locations 1995-2006

NOVA Dissemination: 1996-2006 – 23 WorkshopsUniversity of AlabamaEastern Michigan UniversityFayetteville State UniversityNASA JPL/California State Polytechnical Univ – PomonaNASA Langley Research Center, VANew Mexico Highlands UniversityNASA Lewis Research Center/Ohio Aerospace InstituteUniversity of Idaho, IDNASA Kennedy Space Flight Center, FLNASA Johnson Space Flight Center/Univ of Houston, TXUniversity of New Hampshire, NHKansas State University, KS

NASA Ames Research Center, CAWestern Kentucky University, KYBellingham, WANASA Marshall Space Flight Center, ALHampton University, VAPrairie View A & M University, TXColorado Springs, CONASA Goddard Space Flight Center, MDNASA Dryden Research Center, CANASA Stennis Space Flight Center, MSNASA Marshall Space Flight Center, AL

NOVA Annual Conference, Towson State Univ. MD Feb. 2005

Characteristics of NASA/NOVA Institutions, Faculty, and Students

240 institutions teams attended workshops from 1996 to 2006.

Institutions located in 44 states, Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

354 multidisciplinary NOVA faculty were funded from 103 institutions.

185 STEM courses; enrolling over 10,000 students annually, serving over 100,000 by 2006.

Institutions range dfrom Doctoral/Research I to Associate of Arts Community Colleges.

NOVA Network of Institutions Involved in Undergraduate STEM Course Reform

National Study of Education in Undergraduate Science (NSEUS)

Research ModelProblem: the extent to which

undergraduate entry level science courses effect student learning outcomes.

Central Research Question: What is the impact of undergraduate course reform as measured by the beliefs and actions of higher education faculty on short- and long-term student outcomes?

Research Sub-Questions:1. How do course characteristics relate to undergraduate students

short-term learning outcomes?2. How do reform science course characteristics differ from

traditional courses?3. What are the essential characteristics of an entry level reformed

undergraduate science course? 4. How do characteristics differ between courses with varying

degrees of reform?5. How do varying degrees of reform characteristics relate to

undergraduate students short-term learning outcomes? 6. How do reform and traditional courses differ in their long-term

impacts on K-6 teachers in their own science classrooms?

NSEUS Undergraduate Science Course Impact Research Model

NSEUS Study Timeline Year 1National Survey and Literature Review Synthesis: Population = 103 higher education institutions reforming courses from 1996-2007 using a similar professional development model Years 1-2Pilot Study and Selection of Sample: Sample = 2 institutions, 4 courses, 12 in-service elementary teachers Years 3-5National Study: Sample = 20 US institutions, approximately 40 entry level undergraduate science courses, 100 in-service elementary teachers Years 5-6Analysis of Data and Dissemination: Sample data and national conference

NSEUS Survey of Institutions Involved in Reforming Undergraduate Science

Characteristics of the Institutions The population was diverse.

Carnegie Classification of Institution Population

MA-II5%

BA-GEN14%

DR-EXT13%

DR-INT11%

MA-I48%

BA-LA7%

BA-SPECI1%

AA1%

Characteristics of the STEM Reform Courses

103 institutions with 185 reform courses. Nova-like courses offered at 49 institutions (a total of

118 courses) Total original reform courses = 303

Number still offered in 2007 (average course age = 8 years) 72 institutions with 146 reform courses Nova-like courses offered at 41 institutions (a total of

104 courses Total remaining STEM reform courses = 250

Characteristics of the STEM Reform Courses

39

118146

# of reform courses

still offered # of reform courses ended

# of courses modeled after initial reform course (unfunded)

Characteristics of Faculty Collaborative Teams

At 72 institutions where courses were still offered 83% of the faculty teams were still functioning At 31 institutions where courses stopped being

offered 39% of the faculty teams were still functioning

A most important factor related to the sustained offering of reform courses was the continuous functioning of a collaborative team.

Characteristics of NOVA Reformed and Comparison Undergraduate STEM Courses

1) 68% vs 16% of the weekly class time involving students in an inquiry/investigative approach to learning science,

2) 10% vs 3% using collaborative and cooperative learning or student guided activities during course activities,

3) 15% vs 63% of the weekly class time with lecture and discussion

Characteristics of NOVA Reformed Undergraduate STEM Courses

15%

3%

10%

68%

4%

Lecture Traditional lab

Integrated use of

technology

Student

discussion and

presentationInquiry-based integrated

lab

Characteristics of Comparison Undergraduate STEM Courses

63%12%

3%

16%6%

LectureTraditional lab

Use of technology

Student presentation

Inquiry-based integrated lab

Survey Summary Reform courses were successfully developed in all of

the diverse institution types Learning environments in reform courses at these

institutions shared common course features Faculty collaborative teams were related to sustaining

reforms in STEM undergraduate courses NOVA –like reform courses were significant value

added outcomes to the professional development model Once developed, reforms created in the faculty

professional development program have been sustained in the majority of the settings

Research Based Undergraduate Science Teaching: Investigating

Reform in Classrooms – June 19-21 2011, University of Alabama,

Tuscaloosa AL

A Faculty Professional Development Model: Factors that Sustain Reform

Dennis Sunal and Cynthia SunalUniversity of Alabama