National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 6 Epilogue
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2003. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10711.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2003. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10711.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2003. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10711.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2003. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10711.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2003. Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10711.
×
Page 86

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

References Accreditation Board for Engineering and naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/boyer.nsf/ Technology. (2002). Criteria for accrediting [January 21, 2003]. engineering programs. Baltimore: Author. Chatterji, M. (2002). Models and methods for Available: http://www.abet.org [January 21, examining standards-based reforms and 2003]. accountability initiatives: Have the tools of Ambrose, B.S., Heron, P.R.L., Vokos, S., and inquiry answered pressing questions on McDermott, L.C. (1999). Student understand- improving schools? Review of Educational ing of light as an electromagnetic wave: Research, 72(3), 345–386. Relating the formalism to physical phenomena. Collins, A. (1990). Cognitive apprenticeship and American Journal of Physics, 67(10), 891–898. instructional technology. In B.F. Jones and L. American Association for the Advancement of Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New cognitive instruction (pp. 121–138). Hillsdale, York: Oxford University Press. NJ: Erlbaum. American Association of Physics Teachers. Duch, B., Gron, S., and Allen, D. (2001). The (2001). Workshop for new physics faculty: power of problem-based learning. Sterling, VA: Background and purpose. Available: http:// Stylus. www.aapt.org/programs/newnfc1.html Dwyer, F.M. (1972). The effect of overt re- [January 7, 2003]. sponses in improving visually programmed American Psychological Association. (2002). science instruction. Journal of Research in Undergraduate psychology major learning goals Science Teaching, 9, 47–55. and outcomes. Available: http://www.apa.org/ Fink, L.D. (2002). Improving the evaluation of ed/pcue/taskforcereport.pdf [January 21, college teaching, In E.C. Wadsworth, L.R. 2003]. Hilsen, and K.H. Gillespie (Eds.), A guide to Arons, A.B. (1983). Achieving wider scientific faculty development: Practical advice, examples, literacy. Daedalus, 112, 91–102. and resources (pp. 46–58). Bolton, MA: Anker. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Glassick, C.E., Huber, M.T., and Maeroff, G.I. Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of professorate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Teaching. Gomez, L.G. (2001). Identifying and addressing Boyer Commission on Educating Undergradu- student difficulties with rotational dynamics. ates in the Research University. (1998). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University Reinventing undergraduate education: A of Washington. blueprint for America’s research universities. Halloun, I.A., and Hestenes, D. (1985). Common- Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the sense concepts about motion. American Advancement of Teaching. Available: http:// Journal of Physics, 53, 1056–1065. 82

Healey, M., and Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb’s King, A. (1994). Inquiry as a tool in critical experiential learning theory and its application thinking. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Changing in geography in higher education. Journal of college classrooms: New teaching and learning Geography, 99, 185–195. strategies for an increasingly complex world (pp. Heller, P., Keith, R., and Anderson, S. (1992). 13–38). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Teaching problem solving through cooperative Klahr, D., Chen, Z., and Toth, E.E. (2001). grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual Cognitive development and science education: problem solving. American Journal of Physics, Ships that pass in the night or beacons of 60(7), 627–636. mutual illumination? In S.M. Carver and D. Heller, P., and Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: problem solving through cooperative group- Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 75–119), ing. Part 2: Designing problems and structur- Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. ing groups. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experi- 637–644. ence as the source of learning and development. Heron, P. (2002, November). Research as a guide Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. to improving student learning in undergraduate Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university physics. Presentation conducted at National teaching: A conversational framework for the Research Council’s Workshop Criteria and effective use of learning technologies. New York: Benchmarks for Increased Learning from Routledge. Undergraduate STEM Instruction, Washing- Laws, P.W. (1997). Workshop physics activity ton, DC. guide: Core volume with module 1. New York: Herreid, C. F. (1999). Dialogues as case studies; a Wiley. discussion on human cloning. Journal of Lehrer, R., and Chazan, D. (1998). New directions College Science Teaching, 29(4), 225–228. for teaching and learning geometry. Hillsdale, Honan, J.P., and Rule, C.S. (2002). Using cases in NJ: Erlbaum. higher education: A guide for faculty and Loverude, M.E., Kautz, C.H., and Heron, P.R.L. administrators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (2002). Student understanding of the first law Honan, W.H. (2002, August 14). The college of thermodynamics: Relating work to the lecture, long derided, may be fading. The New adiabatic compression of an ideal gas. Ameri- York Times, Section B, p. 7. can Journal of Physics, 70(2), 137–148. Huba, M.E., and Freed, J.E. (2000). Learner- Marchese, T.J. (2002). The new conversations centered assessment on college campuses: about learning: Insights from neuroscience Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. and anthropology, cognitive science, and work- Boston: Allyn and Bacon. place studies. Available: http://www.aahe.org/ Hudson, L. (2002). Demographic and attainment members_only/TM-essay.htm [January 21, trends in postsecondary education. In National 2003]. Research Council, The knowledge economy and Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s postsecondary education, (pp. 13–57). Commit- manual. Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall. tee on the Impact of the Changing Economy on McDermott, L.C. (1993). Guest comment: How the Education System. A.P. Graham and N. we teach and how students learn—a mis- Stacey (Eds.). Division of Behavioral and match? American Journal of Physics, 61(4), 295. Social Sciences and Education. Washington, McDermott, L.C. (2000, December). Improving DC: National Academy Press. student learning in science through discipline- Jarmul, D., and Olson, S. (1996). Beyond Bio 101: based education research. Paper presented in The transformation of undergraduate biology response for the 2000 CSSP Award for education: A report from the Howard Hughes Achievement in Education Research at the Medical Institute. Chevy Chase, MD: Howard Council of Scientific Society Presidents Hughes Medical Institute. National Meeting, Washington, DC. Kerr, C. (1987). A critical age in the university McDermott, L.C. (2001). Oersted Medal Lecture world. European Journal of Education, 22(2), 2001: Physics education research–the key to 183–193. student learning. American Journal of Physics, 69(11), 1127. REFERENCES 83

McDermott, L.C., Shaffer, P.S., and the Physics National Research Council. (1998). Teaching Education Group. (2002). Tutorials in introduc- about evolution and the nature of science. tory physics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice- Working Group on Teaching Evolution. Center Hall. for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering McDermott, L.C., Shaffer, P.S., and Rosenquist, Education. Washington, DC: National Academy M.L. (1996). Physics by inquiry (Vols. I-II). New Press. York: Wiley. National Research Council. (1999). Transforming Merton, R.K. (1957). Priorities in scientific undergraduate education in science, mathemat- discovery. American Sociological Review, ics, engineering, and technology. Committee on 22(6), 635–659. Undergraduate Science Education. Center for Mestre, J.P. (1994). Cognitive aspects of learning Science, Mathematics, and Engineering and teaching science. In S.J. Fitzsimmons and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy L.C. Kerpelman (Eds.), Teacher enhancement Press. for elementary and secondary science and National Research Council. (2000). How people mathematics: Status, issues and problems (NSF learn: Brain, mind, experience and school: 94-80, pp. 3-1–3-53). Arlington, VA: National Expanded edition. Committee on Develop- Science Foundation. ments in the Science of Learning. J.D. Middaugh, M.F., Trusheim, D.W., and Bauer, Bransford, A.L. Brown, and R.R. Cocking K.W. (1994). Strategies for the practice of (Eds.) and Committee on Learning Research institutional research: Concepts, resources, and and Educational Practice. M.S. Donovan, J.D. applications. Tallahassee: The Association for Bransford, and J.W. Pellegrino (Eds.). Com- Institutional Research and The North East mission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Association for Institutional Research. Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Minstrell, J.A. (1989). Teaching science for Press. understanding. In L.B. Resnick and L.E. National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what Klopfer, (Eds.), Toward the thinking curricu- students know: The science and design of lum: Current cognitive research (pp. 130–131). educational assessment. Committee on the Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision Foundations of Assessment. J.W. Pellegrino, N. and Curriculum Development. Chudowsky, and R. Glaser (Eds.). Commission Mintzes, J.J., and Wandersee, J.H. (1998). on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Research in science teaching and learning: A Education. Washington, DC: National Academy human constructivist view. In J.J. Mintzes, J.H. Press. Wandersee, and J.D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching National Research Council. (2002a). BIO2010: science for understanding: A human Transforming undergraduate education for constructivist view (pp. 59–92). New York: future research biologists. Committee on Academic Press. Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Moore, J.A. (1999). Science as a way of knowing: Research Scientists for the 21st Century. The foundations of modern biology. Cambridge: Board on Life Sciences. Washington, DC: Harvard University Press. National Academy Press. National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). National Research Council. (2002b). Learning The condition of education 2000 (NCES 2000- and understanding: Improving advanced study 062). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of of mathematics and science in U.S. high schools. Education. Committee on Programs for Advanced Study National Commission on Excellence in Educa- of Mathematics and Science in American High tion. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for Schools. J.P. Gollub, M.W. Bertenthal, J.B. educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Labov, and P.C. Curtis (Eds.). Center for Department of Education. Education, Division of Behavioral and Social National Research Council. (1997). Science Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: teaching reconsidered: A handbook. Committee National Academy Press. on Science Education. Center for Science, National Research Council. (2002c). Scientific Mathematics, and Engineering Education. research in education. Committee on Scientific Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Principles for Education Research. R.J. 84 I M P R O V I N G U N D E R G R A D U AT E I N S T R U C T I O N

Shavelson and L. Towne (Eds.). Center for Shulman, L. (1990). Aristotle had it right: On Education, Division of Behavioral and Social knowledge and pedagogy. (Occasional Paper No. Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: 4). East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group. National Academy Press. Shulman, L.J. (1997). Disciplined inquiry in National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating education: A new overview. In R.M. Jager and and improving undergraduate teaching in T. Barone (Eds.), Complementary methods for science, technology, engineering, and mathemat- research in education (2nd ed., pp. 3–9). ics. Committee on Recognizing, Evaluating, Washington, DC: American Educational Rewarding, and Developing Excellence in Research Association. Teaching of Undergraduate Science, Math- Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. (1990). ematics, Engineering, and Technology. M.A. Entry-level undergraduate courses in science, Fox and N. Hackerman (Eds.). Center for mathematics and engineering: An investment in Education, Division of Behavorial and Social human resources. Research Triangle Park, NC: Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The Author. National Academies Press. Snyder, T.D. (Ed.). (2001). Digest of education Organization for Economic Cooperation and statistics (NCES 2000-031). Washington, DC: Development. (2002). Understanding the brain: U.S. Department of Education. Toward a new learning science. Paris: Author. Sokoloff, D.R., and Thornton, R.K. (1997). Using Partridge, B., and Greenstein, G. (2001). Goals interactive lecture demonstrations to create an for “Astro 101”: Report on a workshop for active learning environment. The Physics astronomy department leaders. Available: http: Teacher, 35(6), 340–347. //www.aas.org/education/aasprojects/ Stabiner, K. (2003, January 12). Where the girls workshop101.html [January 14, 2003]. aren’t. The New York Times, p. 35. Project Kaleidoscope. (2002). Recommendations Stephans, J., Dyche, S., and Beiswanger, R. for action in support of undergraduate science, (1988). The effect of two instructional models technology, engineering, and mathematics: in bringing about conceptual change in the Report on reports. Washington, DC: Author. understanding of science concepts by prospec- The Reinvention Center at Stony Brook. (2001, tive elementary teachers. Science Education, May). Reinventing undergraduate education: 72(2), 185–195. Three years after the Boyer report. Available: Sundberg, M.D. (2002, Spring-Summer). www.sunysb.edu/reinventioncenter/ Assessing student learning. Cell Biology boyerfollowup.pdf [January 21, 2003]. Education, 1, 11–15. Rogers, G.M. (2002a). Evaluating student Terenzini, P.T., and Pascarell, E.T. (1994). Living learning: E=MC2 assessment methods. Terre with myths: Undergraduate education in Haute, IN: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technol- America. Change, 26(1), 28–32. ogy. Tobias, S. (1992). Revitalizing undergraduate Rogers, G.M. (2002b). Evaluating student science: Why some things work and most don’t. outcomes: E=MC2. Presentation conducted at Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation. National Research Council’s workshop Criteria Topping, K.J., and Stewart, E.W. (1998). Peer- and Benchmarks for Increased Learning from assisted learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Undergraduate STEM Instruction, November, Twigg, C. (1999). Improving learning and Washington, DC. reducing costs: Redesigning large-enrollment Schwartz, D.L., and Bransford, J.D. (1998). A courses. Troy, NY: The Pew Learning and time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, Technology Program. Available: http:// 16(4), 475–522. www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/mono1.html Seldin, P. (1999). Changing practices in evaluating [January 14, 2003]. teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker. Tyler, R.W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum Seymour, E., and Hewitt, N.M. (1997). Talking and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the Press. sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2000). Leadership Shavelson, R.J., and Huang, L. (2003). Respond- reconsidered: Engaging higher education in ing responsibly to the frenzy to assess learning social change. A.W. Astin and H.S. Astin (Eds.). in higher education. Change, 35(1), 11–19. Battle Creek, MI: Author. REFERENCES 85

White, B.Y., and Fredericksen, J.R. (2000). Wright, D.L. (2002). Program types and proto- Metacognitive facilitation: An approach to types. In E.C. Wadsworth, L.R. Hilsen, and making scientific inquiry accessible to all. In J. K.H. Gillespie (Eds.), A guide to faculty Minstrell and E.H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring development: Practical advice, examples, and into inquiry learning and teaching in science resources (pp. 24–34). Bolton, MA: Anker. (pp. 331–370). Washington, DC: American Wright, J.C., Millar, S.B., Kosciuk, S.A., Association for the Advancement of Science. Penberthy, D.L., Williams, P.H., and Wampold, Wiggins, G., and McTighe, J. (1998). Understand- B.E. (1998). A novel strategy for assessing the ing by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, effects of curriculum reform on student Prentice-Hall. competence. Journal of Chemical Education, Wilkerson, L., and Lewis, K.G. (2002). Classroom 75(8), 986–992. observation: The observer as collaborator. In Zumeta, W., and Raveling, J.S. (2003). Attracting E.C. Wadsworth, L.R. Hilsen, and K.H. the best and the brightest. Issues in Science Gillespie (Eds.), A guide to faculty development: and Technology, 19(2), 36–40. Practical advice, examples, and resources (pp. 74–81). Bolton, MA: Anker. 86 I M P R O V I N G U N D E R G R A D U AT E I N S T R U C T I O N

Next: A Commissioned Papers »
Improving Undergraduate Instruction in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Report of a Workshop Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $54.00 Buy Ebook | $43.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Participants in this workshop were asked to explore three related questions: (1) how to create measures of undergraduate learning in STEM courses; (2) how such measures might be organized into a framework of criteria and benchmarks to assess instruction; and (3) how such a framework might be used at the institutional level to assess STEM courses and curricula to promote ongoing improvements. The following issues were highlighted:

  • Effective science instruction identifies explicit, measurable learning objectives.
  • Effective teaching assists students in reconciling their incomplete or erroneous preconceptions with new knowledge.
  • Instruction that is limited to passive delivery of information requiring memorization of lecture and text contents is likely to be unsuccessful in eliciting desired learning outcomes.
  • Models of effective instruction that promote conceptual understanding in students and the ability of the learner to apply knowledge in new situations are available.
  • Institutions need better assessment tools for evaluating course design and effective instruction.
  • Deans and department chairs often fail to recognize measures they have at their disposal to enhance incentives for improving education.

Much is still to be learned from research into how to improve instruction in ways that enhance student learning.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!