. "Appendix A: June Workshop Agenda and Participants List." Promising Practices in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education: Summary of Two Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Promising Practices in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education: Summary of Two Workshops
Start this session with a one-minute written response to the following question:
Reflecting on the panel discussion, from your experience what top three promising practices would you identify? Please list the promising practice, related outcomes, goals, audience, and context in which the practice is best suited.
In a round robin format, discuss why these were the top picks and what the state of the evidence is related to each practice.
Report out by small groups
Steering committee’s and participants’ final reflections
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