|
Second Annual Symposium Series on Excellence in Teaching Undergraduate Science and Mathematics: National and Chicago Perspectives
January 28 Plenary Talks and Break-out Sessions
Framing issues on teaching and learning in undergraduate mathematics and science courses: A discussion
Update on the session · Collaboration among faculty within departments, across departments, within departments, across institutions · Assessment of our teaching (impact of our actions on students), and student assessment (students showing their understandings in multiple ways · Diversity of students' skills, prior understandings, language, study skills, age, reasons for learning. Roles of students and teacher in a class. Negotiations of these roles vis-à-vis students' prior experiences. Issue of developing trust-developing an environment conducive to learning. · Limiting time vis-à-vis issue of understanding, going into depth. Regulations and their influence on teacher. External influences on nature of course and teacher-student relationships. Standards and their influence on shaping teaching and learning. Notes from the four groups
Newtonian Force Concepts and Misconception Belief Systems: Nancy C. Grim, Instructor of Chemistry, Physics, and Science Methods Samuel P. Bowen, Professor of Physics Department of Chemistry and Physics Chicago State University
This presentation will (1) identify the types of scientifically correct Newtonian force concept or common-sense misconception beliefs held by Chicago State University physics students and pre-service teacher students, (2) compare the quality of force concept instruction (measured pre-post by Hestenes et al. Force Concept Inventory (1992)), and (3) discuss correlation results between the force concept scores, instructional methods, anxiety, perceptions of difficulty, and student background variables. In addition, an annotated bibliography of current work that investigates sources, outcomes, and implications of students and teachers who hold several types of force concept misconceptions will be shared.
American Women Mathematicians Earning PhDs Pre-WW II: A report of findings, and implications for teaching today Jeanne LaDuke, Department of Mathematics, DePaul University
Female-friendly Pedagogy: Answers that lie in the questions Cathy Middlecamp, Director, Chemistry Learning Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Creating a classroom environment where students can pose their own questions is more challenging than some may think. It isn't just a matter of saying, "Does anybody have any questions, ...?" and waiting. Rather, it takes careful attention to the classroom atmosphere and a variety of different lecture and laboratory activities. Furthermore, when students get to ask questions, the power dynamics shift. The person who asks the questions for a course can set the agenda and can exert a fair amount of control. Thus, when students are empowered to ask (and answer) their own questions, they then begin to take more control of their learning. They also may come to see how it is important that a diverse group of people have a voice to pose the questions. This workshop will examine questions in an interactive format, blending hands-on activities with practical suggestions that can be applied to a variety of science courses.
New Ways to Think about Science Courses in General Education Programs Donn Branstrator, Department of Biological sciences, DePaul University Chris Goedde, Department of Physics, DePaul University Liam Heneghan, Environmental Science Program, DePaul University
Moving Students from Facts to Meaning Using Analogies and Open-ended Questions Yvonne Harris, Department of Biology, Truman College Mathematics and Science are disciplines rich in terminologies, principles, methodologies and facts, a richness that increases with each new question and discovery. Teachers, investigators and students in these disciplines are faced with the task of learning the old while keeping pace with the new. Unfortunately, students entering the fields of mathematics and science are attempting that challenge through a methodology focused primarily on rote manipulation of information; fact-based learning. The understanding of factual knowledge is necessary in the sciences; however, students have in the past depended too heavily on the acquisition of facts rather than grasping the structure of meanings fundamental to concepts and principles of mathematics and the sciences. The question becomes how do we as teachers move students from fact-based to meaning-based learning. In an attempt to facilitate students' grasp of the meaning of concepts, I have adopted two strategies that appear to have some success with students in general courses such as General Biology: (1) analogies and (2) directed learning using open-ended questions or questions that do not incorporate right or wrong answers. The use of analogy in teaching and open-ended questions are not a novel idea in education. Their use as learning tools in the sciences have not been favored due to the increasing number of facts that must be learned and the decreasing amount of time in which to learn them. In an attempt to address the controversy I've begun to use analogies focused on subjects rather than specific facts. For example, Cell Structure and Function is a common subject in all general biology courses. Students have been directed to write an analogous story using cell structure and function to describe the structure and function of a city or corporation. The theme of the story is of their choosing and may be a mystery, science fiction, romance, etc. They must, however, omit mentioning the cell structure's specific function. The goal of these stories is to force the student to rethink the cellular functions in terms of meaning rather than a compilation of facts. Open-ended questions are questions which are designed to move students to incorporate facts in order to understand the meaning of a specific concept or principle. Students are presented with a question which appears to have a right answer; however, students are not aware that such a question is designed to bring facts into conflict and generate confusion, frustration and debate. Students are forced to seek their answer in what scientific questions and facts mean. They are forced to trust their understanding of the topic. Following the presentation and discussion of examples of analogies and open-ended questions in the session, as a group, we'll discuss what makes for a good analogy or open-ended question. What are the strengths and weaknesses of such an approach? What must be the competency level of the students who are presented with these assignments? What are the limitations of such strategies? In groups of 2 or 3, participants will generate an analogy or open-ended question and present them for a discussion of their strengths and weaknesses.
1999-00 Seminar in Mathematics Education: An invitation Philip Wagreich, Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago During Fall of 1999 faculty from the UIC mathematics department, UIC College of Education and Community Colleges participated in a mathematics education seminar that focused on the mathematical preparation of elementary teachers. A major part of the series was devoted to reading and discussing the recent book by Liping Ma, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics, a comparative study of the mathematical and pedagogical knowledge of American and Chinese elementary teachers.
In this session we will give a brief overview of the research discussed in the Fall and discuss options for continuing the seminar this semester. Among the topics that have been suggested are: 1. research on the teaching and learning of algebra
2. continuing discussion of research related to the content and pedagogical preparation of mathematics teachers
We welcome suggestions for papers to be read as well as input on the scheduling of the seminar.
Multimedia Presentation of General Chemistry 201 Hassan Kahvand, Physical Science Department, Olive-Harvey College
The infusion of technology into the educational environment is a strategic priority of Olive-Harvey College. I have designed a multimedia presentation of the General Chemistry 201 course for classroom presentations utilizing: • a Laptop computer and computer projector • Microsoft PowerPoint as an innovative technology tool • a Chemistry visual resource library on CD ROM.
The multimedia presentation enhances our students' learning through empowering the students' visual imagination and transforming them into more active and engaged participants, while making teaching more organized and easier.
The session will begin with a presentation of examples of the multimedia techniques used in General Chemistry 201, followed by a discussion on introducing and adapting the techniques to other classrooms.
March 24 Plenary Talks and Break-out Sessions
Plenary Talks Using and Abusing Technology in Education John Etchemendy, Professor and Chair, Department of Philosophy, Stanford University It has become increasingly popular to predict that the Internet will completely revolutionize higher education, and perhaps even render the traditional University obsolete. True, most predictions of the imminent demise of the University are made by people who either know little about higher education or little about computer technology (or both). But it is striking how many serious people seriously question the future of traditional, geographically-based universities once the impact of the information revolution has been fully played out.
There is no question that computers and the Internet will have a huge and largely salutary effect on higher education. Some of these changes will be revolutionary; more will be evolutionary as the full and varied potential of the new tools is realized. But the University will survive--and in easily recognizable form.
In this talk, I will discuss why I make that claim--why I am not worried about the continued need for traditional universities, or their ability to put to effective use the very technologies that some see as threatening their existence. At the same time, I will explain where I think universities have failed in their approach to educational technology, and what we need to do to take a more sophisticated approach. The Algebra Project: Lessons for Teacher Preparation Robert Moses, The Algebra Project, Cambridge, MA I will discuss some of the ways in which teachers are helped to
successfully teach the Algebra Project and implications for
university teacher preparation courses. The central problem
is the willingness of the country to provide an adequate platform
for the education of all its youth. Such a platform would
of necessity involve deep changes in teacher preparation.
Abstracts for Break-out Sessions
Further Discussion: The Use and Abuse of Technology in Education John Etchemendy, Professor and Chair, Department of Philosophy,
A small group discussion of the issues raised in the plenary talk will be presented. This discussion will focus on aspects most relevant to the symposium participants
Developing Environments Conducive to Learning in College Classrooms: A Session Grounded on Examples Lynn Narasimhan, Department of Mathematics, DePaul University Maria Varelas, College of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago At the first symposium, one breakout session allowed for an open-ended, interactive discussion in which participants shared their perspectives on teaching and learning science and mathematics. Four issues emerged from that session, http://www.math.uic.edu/IMSE/CETP/128symposium.html. This break-out session is designed to continue the discussion, focusing on the issue of developing classroom environments conducive to learning. Our goal for this session is to have participants share examples from their own teaching practice which will generate discussion and cause us to think more deeply about critical aspects of our teaching and our students' learning. We invite colleagues to join us in this session and bring with them an example from their own practice that they believe will contribute to the discussion. Although we encourage participants to bring examples with them, this is not a requirement for attending the session.
Discussion about the Potential of the Illinois Teaching Standards for Science and Mathematics Gwen Pollock, Principal Education Consultant, Illinois State Board of Education
Participants will be provided with the latest drafts of the teaching standards for elementary and secondary science and mathematics, as well as an overview of the certificate renewal planning process. Participants will be asked to contribute ideas and strategies related to the impact at the college and university levels.
Equity in Assessment Practices in Using a Reform Math Curriculum Margaret Small, Chicago Secondary Mathematics Improvement Project, CPS Erick Smith, College of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago
Equity in assessment focuses on students from groups who have done poorly in traditional mathematical assessments. Such groups include women, students of color and students from low socio-economic backgrounds. This workshop will examine how reconceptualizing assessment is a key part in creating greater access and opportunity for many students.
The workshop is based on leaders' experience with the Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP), one of the exemplary curricula developed over the past ten years with support of the National Science Foundation. Participants will have the opportunity to discuss the range of student work and activities that give teachers insight into their students‚ mathematical understanding. We will share experiences from high school classes and from a class for pre-education majors at UIC who did not place into the required math course, concentrating on the impact of refocusing assessment practices on student performance.
Issues that Arise when our Goal is to Reach All Students Robert Moses, The Algebra Project, Cambridge, MA Young People from the Chicago Algebra Project
The Young People from the Chicago Algebra Project will be demonstrating The Flagway Game, a math game that deals with prime numbers, factoring, Algebra forms of numbers, input numbers and output numbers. This will be a 15 minute demonstration.
A discussion about the demonstration will follow.
Scientist & Science Educator Collaborations: Preconceptions Elizabeth E. Roettger, Associate Dir. Space Science Center for Education and Outreach and Department of Physics, DePaul University Gerald Wm. Foster, School of Education, DePaul University
An ad-hoc committee of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science (AETS) was formed to investigate collaborations between Science Education faculty and Science department faculty. The National Science Education Standards specifically state that such collaborations are needed to improve science education for preservice and inservice teachers (thus improving K-12 science education). We've started an informal collaboration at DePaul and participate in an ongoing discussion with the AETS group. A recent survey and session at a national conference identified "differences in pedagogy and philosophy" between science educators and science department faculty as an important barrier to collaborations.
We wonder: What are the differences? Are these real or perceived? Are there similarities upon which we can build? The AETS conference session did not provide time for details. We ask participants to help define and understand the issues so we can focus our efforts.
We'd like to start the session by asking participants to complete the AETS survey, then discuss the local and general results. We'd like to focus the discussion to our questions as much as possible. If there are many participants, we would break into smaller groups for discussion. We would have prepared a brief presentation of our current collaboration to use as a possible example. We would like the session to open a continuing discussion on collaborations, and help determine some specifics about this barrier to collaboration.
The Importance of Including Women and Minority Scientists and Gender Equitable Teaching Practices in Science Courses for Preservice Educators Mary Crowe, Department of Biology, Coastal Carolina University
Many of us in the science fields are aware of the leaking pipeline of females and minorities out of science. The "leaking" begins as early as the later years of elementary school and continues beyond tenure decisions. There are a variety of factors that contribute to the leaking pipeline, ranging from personal interests, peer pressure, harassment (subtle and not subtle), and encouragement/discouragement by educators.
We have changed the pedagogy of the science courses for preservice educators at Coastal Carolina University to do the following: encourage the students to begin to like science, stress the accomplishments of women and minority scientists and introduce gender equitable teaching strategies; ALL without sacrificing scientific content!
During the break-out session, participants will first be "quizzed" as to their knowledge of women and minority scientists and some gender equitable teaching strategies (participants will first work alone and then in groups). Using those exercises as a springboard we will discuss the steps that lead to the successful inclusion of women and minority scientists in science curriculum (and why I have failed to do so completely). I hope that there will be time for participants to explore how their curriculum can be changed to include women and minority scientists.
Materials to be provided: I will provide a limited bibliography of sources about women and minority scientists as well as sources for gender equitable teaching strategies.
Linking Formal and Informal Science Education through Museum Resources Bryan Wunar, Director of Education, Adler Planetarium and Astronomy Museum
The Adler Planetarium and Astronomy Museum has recently experienced tremendous growth that will enable it to play a significant role in the improvement of science, mathematics and technology education. These changes position education at the forefront of the Adler mission in an effort to promote science literacy among all of its audiences. This presentation will focus on the Adler's strategic plan for education, placing particular emphasis on establishing connections between the formal and informal education communities and outlining the critical role technology will play in the process.
May 5 Plenary Talks and Break-out Sessions
Plenary Talks We Know Science Majors are Lost because of Poor Teaching, but Why do they Resist our Efforts to Improve their Learning Experience? Elaine Seymour, Bureau of Sociological Research, University of Colorado From her studies of science, mathematics, and engineering (SME) persistence and attrition, the speaker outlines the role of “poor teaching” in the loss of actual and potential SME undergraduates, and the dis-satisfactions of seniors remaining in these majors. From data gathered in her current role as formative evaluator of two NSF-funded consortia for improvement of undergraduate chemistry, she considers the causes of undergraduate resistance to active learning methods that are intended to increase comprehension, retention and transfer of learning, and appreciation for the discipline and its applications. Cardano, Sponge Cake, and Notation Andrew Gleason, Professor of Mathematicks and Natural Philosophy, Emeritus, Harvard University Cardano's famous book "Ars Magna" (1545) marked the end of the medieval period in mathematics and triggered the development of modern mathematical notation. The famous formula for the cubic, as presented in the "Ars Magna", resembles more a culinary recipe than a modern formula. The switchover has implications for the teaching of mathematics.
Abstracts for Break-out Sessions Break-out Sessions I Approaching Change in the Classroom Elaine Seymour, Bureau of Sociological Research, University of Colorado
This session is designed for those who wish to discuss the issues that I raised in the plenary session; in particular, how classroom reformers have approached change with their students, TA's, and colleagues. The mode will be one of questions, answers, and open discussion. Cooperative Learning Vs. More Traditional Instruction - Is There an Ideal Balance? David Tartakoff, Department of Math, Statistics, and Comp. Science, University of Illinois at Chicago
There has been considerable movement towards group learning situations in recent years and some (subsequent) movement back to more traditional (e.g., lecture) formats. We will explore the balance between the various formats, including some "all-or-nothing" scenarios. Specific courses will include pre-calculus and first year calculus. Members will share their experiences and, if possible, observe their own interaction with each other. A Wholly "Non-Traditional" Science Course for "Traditional" Undergraduate Students Timothy Bell, Department of Biological Sciences, Chicago State University Susan H. Ford, Department of Chemistry and Physics, Chicago State University
We have designed a course that features no faculty lectures, no exams and no final exam. It does require lab work, field studies and close attention to the presentations by visiting experts from the USEPA, HUD, CEPA (Calumet Environmental Park Association), environmental law, and others. This course, Environmental Impact Analysis (Biology 307/Chemistry 307), aims to help students learn how to work in groups to accomplish one goal, the writing of a major paper modeled on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) format. The submission of an EIS is required by the USEPA for any major construction development involving federal funds, agencies, or land/resources.
We have offered this course four times since 1995. We have found an interested, if sometimes somewhat initially reluctant audience of undergraduate (and a few graduate) students. At the end of the semester, however, the students have been enthusiastic about both the course and their personal growth as a result of its pedagogy and content.
We plan to describe the course, share responses from our students, look at assessment instruments, and discuss how the course evolved. Participants will be guided to think about ways to incorporate open-learning strategies into the courses they teach or may plan to design in the future. Sharing stories from our teacher lives and studying our teaching: Continuing professional conversations Joel Michael, Department of Physiology, Rush Medical College Lynn Narasimhan, Department of Mathematics, DePaul University Maria Varelas, College of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago
This is the first part of a two-part breakout session; participants are welcome to come for either the first or second part of the session, or to participate in both parts. The session extends opportunities to talk about our teaching, and discuss possibilities and struggles that arise when we reform aspects of it. This two-part breakout session continues in the spirit of open-ended, professional conversations about teaching and learning in college classrooms that has started since the first symposium this year.
In the first part, participants will have the chance to hear very brief "stories" about changes that colleagues have attempted, and discuss in small groups, and in a whole-group setting, issues, dilemmas, tensions that these examples and their own experiences raise.
In the second part, we will debate benefits and limitations that studying our own teaching--making our own teaching the object of inquiry--can afford us. Our discussion will be stimulated by brief examples from colleagues. As we share stories about our teaching we will focus not only on approaches that have worked for us, but we will also talk about what has failed, what has surprised us, what has disappointed us so we can learn from these, as well. Science in the Mind's Eye: Making Connections with the Public Jennifer Blitz, Director of Education, Chicago Academy of Sciences
Over the years, the public perceptions of museums have changed, necessitating sweeping changes in the infrastructure and offerings of many museums nation-wide. Discussion will focus on the Nature Museum's current role as a community resource, our diverse audiences, and how we stay relevant in a rapidly changing market. Break-out Sessions II Was Cantor Really Procrustes? Andrew Gleason, Professor of Mathematicks and Natural Philosophy, Emeritus, Harvard University
A discussion on "Was the introduction of set-theory as a foundation for mathematics an unmixed blessing?"
Experiential Learning Mathematics Course Susanna S. Epp, Department of Mathematical Sciences, DePaul University
The presenter will describe a course in mathematics pedagogy during which students are required to work at least two hours a week as mathematics tutors. Through readings, discussion, and reflection on their tutoring experiences, students explore the nature of mathematical problem-solving, obstacles to success in mathematics, current developments in mathematics education, and the role of the tutor. Making a Case for Including Standards Based Curricula in Preservice Content and Methods Courses Darlene Whitkanack, Institute for Math & Science Education, University of Illinois at Chicago
This session will begin by discussing the ways in which Math Trailblazers and TIMS Labs have been integrated into courses for preservice elementary teachers. We will also look at Developing Mathematical Ideas cases as a vehicle for preservice teachers to gain perspective on the conceptual understandings students have and how teachers may need to rethink their own understanding to best facilitate learning in their classrooms.
Participants will be asked to state the goals of their content and methods courses and determine how the use of their favorite NSF supported curriculum could meet at least some of those goals.
A short activity from the curriculum will be done with participants to demonstrate show elementary school mathematics can be challenging for college students by looking at a classic problem at many different levels.
Sharing stories from our teacher lives and studying our teaching: Continuing professional conversations Joel Michael, Department of Physiology, Rush Medical College Lynn Narasimhan, Department of Mathematics, DePaul University Maria Varelas, College of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago
This is the second part of a two-part breakout session; participants are welcome to come for either the first or second part of the session, or to participate in both parts. The session extends opportunities to talk about our teaching, and discuss possibilities and struggles that arise when we reform aspects of it. This two-part breakout session continues in the spirit of open-ended, professional conversations about teaching and learning in college classrooms that has started since the first symposium this year.
In the first part, participants will have the chance to hear very brief "stories" about changes that colleagues have attempted, and discuss in small groups, and in a whole-group setting, issues, dilemmas, tensions that these examples and their own experiences raise.
In the second part, we will debate benefits and limitations that studying our own teaching--making our own teaching the object of inquiry--can afford us. Our discussion will be stimulated by brief examples from colleagues. As we share stories about our teaching we will focus not only on approaches that have worked for us, but we will also talk about what has failed, what has surprised us, what has disappointed us so we can learn from these, as well. |