This work focuses on the preparation of graduate Teaching Assistant in the mathematics department of a large midwestern R1 university. We explore the author’s experience with three different versions of the course in three varying capacities: as a student, a mathematics education researcher and a co-facilitator. As we delve into the author’s reflections on the evolution of the teaching preparation within this timeframe, we highlight some issues with the course structure and execution. This leads to the development of another, more realistic version of the preparation course.

Project-based learning (PBL) and traditional teaching methods represent two opposing pedagogical philosophies. A PBL Biology lab course was designed and taught concurrently with its traditional counterpart to compare student success. The PBL course investigated the effects of simulated acid rain on the rate of adaptation in two species that differ in complexity and rate of reproduction, Caenorhabditis elegans and Paramecium caudatum. The species with the highest number of survivors at the end of six weeks exposure to acid rain was deemed to have adapted best. In two out of three semesters students concluded that P. caudatum responded to acid rain with the greatest rate of adaptation. Student success was compared between both types of courses using four methods of assessment: student academic performance, retention rate, transfer rate to four-year institutions, and participation points. The results of two methods of assessment out of four were statistically significantly higher in the PBL courses. Considering that the other two methods of assessment did not favor traditional pedagogy, but produced comparable student success in the traditional and PBL courses, it can be concluded that PBL pedagogy is a highly desirable alternative to traditional teaching methods in biology courses at the community college level.

The presenter will discuss how to design a Project Based Learning (PBL) Introductory Organismal Biology course and how to evaluate its educational impact. A forum will be provided for presenters to share ideas and views on the educational effectiveness of traditional and non-traditional teaching methods.

There are many challenges teaching mathematics and science. For example students are distracted, ill-prepared and unmotivated. This presentation will examine some of these challenges as well as some strategies to address them. Participants will be strongly encouraged to share their views regarding these issues.

Much research has supported the benefits of using active learning strategies in face-to-face classroom instruction. We also know that the direct translation of what is done in face-to-face classrooms into online instruction has its problems. Starting with one active learning lens, the use of POGIL in online general chemistry courses, this workshop will explore in what aspects of active learning strategies can be implemented in online environments and in what ways the strategies much be adapted and nuanced. Contributions, questions, and insights related to experiences with online instruction from participants will be most welcome in this session.

The format for this breakout will begin with a brief presentation of the presenters experience and research with online instruction in general chemistry and will be followed by guided discussion and input by breakout participants.

Following the presentation on phosphate recovery from waste water, in the breakout session participants are invited to discuss the potential of the topic for high school and undergraduate chemistry education. Further information will be provided. We will look at samples of the lab manual for simple hands-on activities in class. Participants are invited to bring their own devices (laptop, tablet or smartphone) to explore the digital learning environment based on the software PREZI. PREZI works with every common browser program. For iPads, it is recommended to download the free PREZI Viewer app.

As a phase II partner in the SEMINAL (Student Engagement in Mathematics through an Institutional Network for Active Learning) project, Loyola has been working to expand active learning in our precalculus and traditional calculus courses. Our model is to recruit instructors to participate in the project, providing them with interactive class activities and requiring slightly higher levels of coordination (monthly meetings, occasional class visits, and some common exam problems) than the department standard. We will discuss challenges of implementation, preliminary successes, and opportunities to improve, and the insights we’ve developed into department culture and faculty buy-in in the process.

How can a multifaceted department improvement effort transform introductory STEM courses to promote student success? The purpose of this workshop is to explore research based approaches for improving student success in high enrollment introductory STEM courses such as Precalculus and Calculus. Across the country, student success rates in introductory undergraduate courses are unacceptably low. This has a dramatic effect on the lives of hundreds of thousands of students each year, diverting them from opportunities to pursue STEM careers and leaving them discouraged. However, Bressoud, Mesa and Rasmussen (2015) describe a number of key features of successful introductory mathematics programs that begin to paint a picture of the way forward. This workshop is grounded in lessons learned from faculty and administrators at San Diego State University (SDSU) who over the past several years implemented these features to improve their Precalculus to Calculus 2 sequence. Participants will leave this workshop with: 1) An understanding of how SDSU has enacted largescale change and improved student success in the precalculus/calculus sequence; 2) An understanding of varying implementations of common program features (e.g., tutoring centers, adaptive placement systems, course coordination) and how they support different student populations; 3) An actionable roadmap for tweaking aspects of their institution’s mathematics program in order to better support all students.

Participants will first hear a brief overview (10-minutes) of the change initiatives at SDSU, including a summary of the motivation for the change, process, and outcomes thus far. Participants will then rotate around two 20-minute roundtable discussions of programmatic features relevant to their institution. In each roundtable, participants will first share out their institution’s implementation of a particular feature (e.g., course coordination) and how it does (or does not) support intended goals. After ideas have been shared out, each table will discuss actionable ways of improving their programs related to the selected feature. Participants will have the opportunity to participate in roundtables for two different features. This will be followed by approximately 10-minutes of sharing out across the whole group.

Bressoud, D., Mesa, V., & Rasmussen, C. (Eds.). (2015). Insights and recommendations from the MAA national study of college calculus. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.

What is SLA? Why does it work? How do you evaluate program success? Structured Learning Assistance (SLA) was developed and piloted at Ferris State University. The program fosters learning partnerships involving faculty, SLA facilitators, and students. The SLA program targets high-risk for failure courses, not students. SLA is an additional workshop that is attached to certain sections of some of our more difficult courses. Students are required to attend these workshops. We have found that some highly motivated and very successful students enroll in SLA courses to help ensure future success in their courses. There are no additional charges to students who participate in an SLA supported course.

SLA has data to support funding, which is why Ferris’ program continues to grow! One of the key pieces is the collaboration that occurs between the professors and the facilitators running the SLA workshops. This presentation will focus on those features and others that make SLA effective. Data will be shared as well as quotes from faculty and students who have taken SLA supported courses.

The discussion will include what SLA is, program results, as well as how faculty and SLA facilitators collaborate and so much more. Don’t miss the discussion, handouts, resources, and giveaways.

Prof. Kristen Schreck has integrated 3D printing in the undergraduate curriculum of various mathematics courses like Calculus, Modern Geometry, History of Mathematics, General Education Mathematics courses and also the Capstone projects of Senior Seminar. Prof. Sharada Buddha, collaborated with the Ultimaker Pioneer in 3D printing Prof. Schreck to teach molecular geometry, by using computational chemistry for energy minimization and geometry optimization along with 3D printing to understand the relationship of structure and reactivity in organic molecules.

In this interactive workshop we will share the pedagogy of using 3D printing with a lesson in Mathematics of fractals interactively and print a model; in chemistry we will illustrate the use of 3D printing by modeling cyclopentane in the traditional ball stick method and the energy minimized, geometry optimized computational model 3D print to understand the subtle difference in geometry of the molecule which is very important for reactivity.

Educators are increasingly asked to approach instruction from a STEM perspective, integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to prepare students for future careers. But what does this mean for the settings across P-20? A 2013 report issued by the Chicago STEM Education Consortium noted that one fundamental challenge is the absence of a clear and common definition of STEM education (C-STEMEC, 2013).

Two questions drove our work: How do we get K-8 teachers to collaborate around STEM education in a meaningful way? How do we create a common understanding of what science and math integration truly looks like in the classroom? An Illinois State Board of Education Math and Science Partnership Program grant provided us the opportunity to explore these questions through our Practices in Mathematics and Science: Connections and Collaboration project. The jumping off point for exploring these questions were the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) domain of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and the Standards for Mathematical Practices (SMPs) specified by the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M). Predictably, there are many areas of overlap.

In this session we will engage in discussions about the meaning of STEM in the context of P-20 Educational spaces, and the implications of that meaning on the way instruction currently takes place, and will and can take place in the future. We are especially interested in how models of integration of science and mathematics instruction in K-12 can inform how this works at the university level. To fuel the discussions we will share our findings from our work in the Connections project and the collaborative tools we devised to foster the connections that were made.

An essential question in planning a course is “do our assessment methods align with our desired learning outcomes?” As a response to this question, a multivariable calculus course at a small, liberal arts college was redesigned to use standards-based grading. We will discuss the rationale for this change, how the strategy was implemented, and results — in terms of both student achievement and student attitudes. In a roundtable discussion, we will address benefits and drawbacks of standards-based grading in courses at all levels of the undergraduate catalog, along with potential barriers from institutions and student buy-in.

Math circles have been around for a while, and more are starting all the time. There are versions around the country for students of various ages and abilities, and also for teachers. The details vary greatly from place to place, but one thing holds true in almost all locations: math circles engage their participants in open ended problem solving, often in groups. They are also usually participant-based—ideas brought up by participants influence where the sessions go, so the same session can end up in very different places depending on what happens.

We will discuss math circles and what we have learned from hosting the Chicago Math Teachers' Circle for the past four years. We will then do some reflection on this type of math, what its value is, and where it fits in the more general framework of math education. In between we will do some problem solving together!

Harold Washington College was recently awarded a Scholarship in STEM grant from the National Science Foundation. This project is to “Explore the Impact of Cultural Wealth and Scholarships on Community College Student Success in STEM.” To achieve these broad aims we are interested in partnering with other institutions in the Chicago area. These collaborations could further the research component of this project or match scholars in this program with neighboring institutions.

In this breakout section, an innovative STEM Learning-Level- Enhancement (LLE) Methodology of building mental schemata is presented for discussion. It is designed to help students to construct common question types and corresponding common procedures schemata and subsequently to integrate these to master formula or concept schemata at the higher levels under the guideline of a working STEM taxonomy of learning and teaching.

Students’ lack of sufficient abstract thinking ability, problem solving ability, and long-term knowledge retention are three typical problems identified among the STEM educators. All these problems might be mainly caused by one of the common methods of teaching students detailed step-by-step procedures only without making connections to higher abstraction levels of common question types, common procedures, master formula, and concepts. This LLE methodology is specially designed to solve these problems within its framework. Previous preliminary data of a Calculus I class will be shown in order to illustrate the problem of scoring high on test but without conceptual understanding. Both the statistically significant data and the long-term knowledge retention causal study of a Calculus II class on the effectiveness of this LLE approach will be presented and discussed.

Even though this LLE methodology is theoretically applicable to most STEM fields, more well designed and comprehensive studies will be needed in the future in order to verify its validity scope within each field. If it is confirmed further to be widely applicable to most of the STEM fields, then this methodology will eventually help to enhance the overall STEM educational quality.

We will present projects that change the content and implementation of general chemistry laboratory program using the pedagogy of multi-dimensional learning. In this setting, the goals of laboratories are formulated in the form of learning performances with associated tasks and evidence of learning specifications, following the principles of evidence-centered design. Student laboratory work supports learning of content with and through practices associated with scientific reasoning. This project is being done with two different references for “practices.” In some labs, these are taken from the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) of the Framework for K-12 Science Education of the National Research Council. In other labs, the practices are derived from a parallel source: the specifications of competencies for the MCAT 2015 assessment. These are used to generate a learning performance expectation in combination with important content, at the level specified in Anchoring Concept Content Map from the American Chemical Society’s Exams Institute. Pilot work focuses on modification of two different general chemistry laboratories. One investigates understanding of kinetics of a reaction by using fluorescence, and by replacing a spectrometer with a smartphone and ImageJ software. The other has students characterize acid-base titration curves with a focus on mathematical reasoning and patterns. Our overall strategy follows the principles of evidence-based assessment. Ongoing research on student learning and engagement in the practices and competencies as specific parts of the learning performance will be highlighted, along with data on the use of student work as a basis of interactive refinement using the principles of design-based research. During the workshop we will also invite individuals to think about redesign labs using multi-dimensional learning and evidence-centered design.