The Learning Assistant (LA) Program is part of an international alliance to support students in STEM classes by engaging undergraduate majors (LAs) as partners in improving instructional environments. As LAs, students participate in weekly preparation sessions, enroll in a pedagogy course, and act as facilitators in the classroom. While all LA Programs are characterized by these essential elements, individual LA Programs are tailored to leverage specific institutional needs and resources.

In this session we present a brief overview of the international LA Alliance as well as highlight specific elements of the LA Programs at Chicago State University and Harold Washington College. Workshop participants will then engage in mini activities, including reflections on classroom videos, to (1) consider means of starting and sustaining LA Programs, (2) illustrate ways of using LAs in the classroom, and (3) help understand how LAs can be partners in improving courses and promoting active engagement in the classroom.

We also hope participants will consider attending one of the five regional workshops this spring. On April 8 & 9, CSU and HWC will be hosting a joint LA Regional Workshop. See: http://learningassistantalliance.org for more information. This work is funded by the National Science Foundation and the Department of Education.

Sometimes it’s difficult to model and test pedagogical teaching practices for preservice teachers in a methods classroom. In education courses, there is generally a disconnect between the pedagogical theory they learn about, and having a place to actually try to put these ideas into practice. To better prepare candidates to teach students who struggle with language, conceptual understanding, and a sustained opportunity gap, I have been co-teaching general education mathematics classes with secondary mathematics preservice teachers. We will share research findings and discuss the benefits enjoyed by our students and ourselves. We will begin by describing our model of co-teaching. Then each presenter will take a turn to describe some of the benefits gained from this practice.

We are at a critical juncture for STEM education reform. The US is moving from the No Child Left Behind federal policy (2002-2015) to the new Every Student Succeeds Act for elementary and high school education. Concurrently the educational systems are working to implement the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M), the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and to consider a national Code.Org movement to place computer coding into the pre-college curriculum. There are also many post-secondary changes underway. For example, there is a growing discussion around state programs and policies to “promote STEM education and cut liberal arts funding” at colleges and universities (Cohen, 2016). In northern Illinois, these STEM-related challenges are embedded within monumental political, financial, legal, historical and social justice issues.

We will be addressing these issues in a new project, An Interactive Roadmap for Navigating Contemporary STEM Reform Efforts: Where have we been? What do we know? Where do we go from here? In this break-out session, we engage the audience in a focus group about these systemic issues influencing STEM education.

The development and writing of a fourth edition of the Everyday Mathematics curriculum afforded the authors of Everyday Mathematics a unique opportunity to review current research on mathematical concepts, and plan changes to the instructional sequence based on this research, as well as the Common Core State Standards. One of the mathematical topics that the authors examined was rational number. The authors chose to focus their research in rational number on resources that included at least one component of a learning trajectory defined by Confrey et al.: “A researcher-conjectured, empirically-supported description of the ordered network of experiences a student encounters through instruction (i.e. activities, tasks, tools, forms of interaction and methods of evaluation), in order to move from informal ideas, through successive refinements of representation, articulation, and reflection, towards increasingly complex concepts over time” (Confrey, et al., 2009). This work led to major changes in the development of fraction concepts in the newly published fourth edition of Everyday Mathematics.

We propose a two-part breakout session. In the first part, we will examine how the research literature and the Common Core State Standards shaped the recommendations for the development of fraction concepts in the recently published fourth edition of Everyday Mathematics. In the second, we will focus on a specific tool that is used in the new instructional sequence: fraction circles. Participants will interact with fraction circles; learn how they are used in Everyday Mathematics to help students develop key fraction concepts; and view classroom video of children using fraction circles.

In this breakout session, we will share our experiences in laboratory development. In particular, we will discuss the approach we took to developing and refining labs for pre-nursing chemistry majors.

The laboratory goals centered around three principles:

1. Teaching fundamental concepts in Chemistry
2. Relating macroscopic observations to a molecular-level understanding
3. Relating chemical principles to healthcare

The focus of this breakout session will be on our approach to lab development, rather than lab content. How did we decide on content and develop new lab methods? How did we analyze the lab success and refine our approach? Finally, was our lab successful? How did we evaluate student learning, and what student misconceptions were corrected through participation in lab.

Throughout the breakout session, there will be many opportunities for group discussion. Participants will be given the opportunity to discuss topics such as: What sort of activity could be developed that has an application of interest to your students? What types of modeling are relevant for your discipline? What are some methods you have used or could use to evaluate or improve your activity?

This work is supported by NSF DUE 1431926.

Loyola University Chicago (LUC) has instituted programs, funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which aim to implement strategies that enhance the persistence in STEM of all students, but particularly those who belong to groups underrepresented in STEM majors and careers. Two parts of the program will be discussed: the First Year Research Experience (FYRE) Program, and faculty professional learning communities (PLCs). FYRE places new STEM majors in a full-year research-intensive STEM learning community that includes academic and social support services, an introduction-to-research second semester freshman seminar course, and a three-week summer research residency following their first year. Of particular interest will be interdisciplinary research that has impact in local communities. The aim is to support students for whom FYRE participation would make a significant improvement on their chances for success as STEM majors by assisting in their transition to college and fostering a commitment to reflecting upon their experiences in order to inform life and career choices. Faculty PLCs have been meeting to look at what research-based teaching methods in lecture and laboratory help students better understand critical concepts. We are moving towards helping faculty to implement changes in their classrooms.

In this session we will discuss design and implementation of the FYRE program in its first year, when only the research seminar and summer research experience were implemented, and moving into its second year, when the full-year research-intensive STEM learning communities are being implemented. We will share our experiences with recruitment and some preliminary results about how students’ view their expectations for college and careers, their own academic ability, and specific STEM research skills. We will explore students’ views on their financial goals and on how they become more likely to engage with faculty and other students, particularly as they continue their research or seek to move into other research experiences. There is some evidence around positive relationships between FYRE and students’ confidence in carrying out research and their sense of their own intellect. We will also discuss the recruitment of faculty and functioning of the PLCs during the first two years.

There will be many opportunities for discussion during this breakout session. Participants will be able to discuss issues such as recruitment and selection of students for FYRE, how to measure success in the program, and how to overcome obstacles. Participants will also discuss recruitment of faculty for PLCs, building trust, overcoming resistance to change, and various approaches to PLCs.

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) include three closely intertwined domains; one of these is the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs). Although Illinois adopted the standards in 2014 and they will be fully implemented in the 2016-17 academic year, we are just beginning to understand what assessment aligned to the NGSS might look like. We will be focusing on SEP 6, Constructing Explanations and Designing Solutions in an interactive session in which we model a process of looking at student work as if we were middle grades science teachers in a PLC trying to assess our students’ proficiency with this practice. Since assessment is essentially the process of reasoning from evidence (Pellegrino and Goldman, personal communication, 2015), it is particularly germane that the formative assessment task we are using in this session looks at students’ ability to make claims, state evidence and use reasoning to develop a scientific explanation

This discussion session will explore the Standards for Mathematical Practice from the CCSSM (Common Sore State Standards in Mathematics) with an eye towards how these practices influence our teaching. Sometimes misunderstood and sometimes ignored, the mathematical practices are often a blessing to those of us who strive to teach mathematical thinking to our students.

The presenters will introduce the discussion with a few examples and observations from their own teaching experiences, one in college and one from elementary school. We then welcome both newcomers and those well-initiated in the implementation of the Common Core Standards to share experiences, from their teaching, curriculum development, and in the professional development of teachers, that illustrate the spirit and the challenges of the mathematical practices.

No knowledge of CCSSM required, copies of the Standards for Mathematical Practices will be provided.