1 Program Details Name: TIGER DAD (Design & Development) of College Pedagogy Courses Persons responsible: Laura Border, PJ Bennett, Vivek Kaila, Abby Watrous, Lorine Giangola Time Commitment: 24 months R&D; teach one semester # times offered: ENVS 5100 once (2 in development in 2011) Primary Audience: Graduate students 12 = total participation (7 TIGER Team members; 1 grad student instructor; 6 graduate students in ENVS 5100, Fall 2010 TIGER DAD at CU Boulder

2 Goals: 1.Research number of & gaps in STEM college pedagogy course offerings at CU Boulder. 2.Develop & teach new STEM college pedagogy courses that integrate the CIRTL pillars. 3.Evaluate participants’ learning via a pre- and post-test and satisfaction via Faculty Course Questionnaire (FCQ). CIRTL Learning Outcome Level: – For ENVS course developer: Practitioner – For ENVS course participants: Fellow Goals & Learning Outcome Level

3 Evaluation Questions: 1.How many STEM departments have college pedagogy courses? Will a department work with us to develop one? 2.Will students be satisfied with course or not? 3.Did the addition of pillars amplify course content &/or aid student learning? Evaluation Methods: 1.On-line review of pedagogy courses. 2.Review of syllabi of existing courses. 3.Interviews with instructors of 5 STEM pedagogy courses. 4.Pre- and post-test of graduate students in ENVS Evaluation Questions, Methods, Instruments

4 Existing STEM College Pedagogy Courses: 13 of the 18 STEM departments have not for credit pedagogy courses.* 4 of the 5 courses have LtD in the form of Learning Styles.* 1 out of 5 courses specifically reference building community.* None has a TAR component.* New Program (Environmental Studies) agrees to serve as pilot project. *Kaila, V., Watrous, A. and Border, L “A Review of STEM-Discipline College Pedagogy Courses at the University of Colorado at Boulder.” Internal Document, Graduate Teacher Program, University of Colorado, Boulder. Evidence & Evaluative Claims (1 of 3)

5 Environmental Studies Graduate Pedagogy Course (ENVS 5100, Special Topics in Environmental Studies, Fall 2010) Student satisfaction data was gathered from the Faculty Course Questionnaire item 7: How would you rate the course overall? Likert scale of 1 (lowest) – 6 (highest) – The participants rate the course 5.4 out of 6. The departmental average is 4.9. Small sample size (N=5) limits any generalization, however, the data show positive trends in student learning. – A learning gains analysis supports evidence of strong learning with learning gains of on questions 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10. Evidence & Evaluative Claims (2 of 3)

6 Evidence of Change in Attitudes or Priorities: 1.Learning gains (.9) in attitudes about the difference between classroom and course assessment (Q9). 2.Learning gains of.6 in ability/ desire to integrate diverse issues and viewpoints into the ENVS curriculum (Q7) Evidence of Change Behavior/Ability to Apply Knowledge (.8 -.9): 1.The use of Bloom’s Taxonomy for writing quiz and test questions (Q4). 2.The use of the Problem Orientation format to help students analyze a problem (Q5). 3.Greater competence in the students ability to design a problem-based ENVS course (Q10). Evidence & Evaluative Claims (3 of 3)

7 What has been learned to support future learning outcomes, programming, and evaluations? Success of ENVS College Pedagogy Course supports value in maintaining it and using it as a model course. Use of pillars to improve student learning and application supports adding pillars to future courses. Next iteration: IRBs will be approved prior to pre- and post- test data gathering.

TIGER TEAM MEMBERS Laura Border, Director, Graduate Teacher Program Alexander Krolik, MA, Mathematics TIGER/CIRTL Program Offerings: TIGER Workshops Local CIRTL Team, 2006 & TIGER TEAM MEMBERS Laura Border, Director, Graduate Teacher Program PJ Bennett, Assistant Director, Graduate Teacher Program Angel Hoekstra, CIRTL Evaluation Liaison for TIGER TIGER/CIRTL Program Offerings: TIGER Workshops TIGER Teaches TIGER TAR TIGER DAD TIGER Teaches CIRTL

9 1.More workshops are targeted specifically at STEM disciplines than in the past. 2.TAR has given graduate students the opportunity to learn and conduct classroom research without dedicating a dissertation chapter to it—previously the only opportunity to explore pedagogy available. 3.More collaboration is taking place across STEM disciplines on campus. 4.Greater awareness of national issues. 5.Learning from other campuses and opportunities to disseminate our own work and programs. Institutional Change at CU Boulder

10 Participants have gained a better understanding of the role online and distance technologies will play in graduate education. Participants have gained a better understanding of how to evaluate programs. Local knowledge has been shared. CU Boulder students, faculty & administrators are aware of national CIRTL Network. Impact of Cross-network Activities

TIGER Workshops & TIGER Teaches can be integrated into GTP programming. TIGER DAD has the potential to be sustainable through the Lead Network: —In Fall 2011, ENVS, EEB, and GEOG Leads will co-teach EVNS 5100 for TAs in 3 departments. CU Boulder faculty are interested in teaching cross-network courses. Funding for TAR Projects & TIGER/CIRTL staff will require additions to our budget. 11 Evidence of Institutionalization

12 TIGER/CIRTL Programming has impacted 600 graduate teachers on the CU Boulder campus. Interest in TAR now extends beyond STEM departments. Other institutions value the work CIRTL has accomplished. The Graduate Teacher Program is more efficient, effective, and able to contribute nationally than prior to our CIRTL participation. The intellectual capital shared between institutions far exceeds and expands the cost of NSF funding & is essential to maintain US leadership in STEM. Case to NSF