Making an Impact: Building Transportable and Sustainable Projects (formerly Dissemination) Webinar 4 of the Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Planning Collaborative Spaces in Libraries
Advertisements

NETS-TF Standards Take this quiz to test your understanding of the NETS- TF standards! Start quiz!
National Academy of Engineering of the National Academies 1 Phase II: Educating the 2020 Engineer Phase II: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century...
Planning for Numeracy Across Learning within STEM (STEM disciplines - Science, Technologies, Engineering and Mathematics)
Integrating Library Resources into the Course Development Process at an Online College ©2009 The Sheridan Libraries of The Johns Hopkins University Inspiration,
A Practical Guide. The Handbook Part I BCCC Vision of Assessment Guiding Principles of Assessment Part II The Assessment Model Part III A guide on how.
Team 6 Lesson 3 Gary J Brumbelow Matt DeMonbrun Elias Lopez Rita Martin.
Participation: Putting the Individual First Daisy Brooke, Participation Manager, Yachting Australia.
Session 5 Intellectual Merit and Broader Significance FISH 521.
Creator: Wendi South Diffusion and Integration of Technology in Education.
An Excellent Proposal is a Good Idea, Well Expressed, With A Clear Indication of Methods for Pursuing the Idea, Evaluating the Findings, and Making Them.
PER User’s Guide. Development of the PER User’s Guide: Identifying key features of research-based pedagogical tools for effective implementation Sam McKagan.
STEM Education Reorganization April 3, STEM Reorganization: Background  The President has placed a very high priority on using government resources.
Russell Pimmel, Roger Seals and Stephanie Beard.  Spring 2010, NSF/DUE Engineering PDs initiate IWBW Series; Spring 2011-CS PDs join  Overall goals.
Dallas Baptist University College of Education Graduate Programs
The IGERT Program Preliminary Proposals June 2008 Carol Van Hartesveldt IGERT Program Director IGERT Program Director.
1 CCLI Proposal Writing Strategies Tim Fossum Program Director Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Vermont.
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
This work is supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) collaboration between the Directorates for Education and Human Resources (EHR) and Geosciences.
Proposal Strengths and Weakness as Identified by Reviewers Russ Pimmel & Sheryl Sorby FIE Conference Oct 13, 2007.
March 20, 2012 Susan Finger & Sue Fitzgerald Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation March 21, 2012 Sue Fitzgerald & Maura Borrego.
Developing an Effective Evaluation to Check for Understanding Susan E. Schultz, Ph.D. Evaluation Consultant PARK Teachers.
NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT and PROCESS
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
5. How to Amass Evidence (Evaluation) of Change and its Effects? How does assessment drive transformative change in the classroom, at the department level,
Overview of NSF Education R & D Programs with an Emphasis on the TUES Program Louis Everett Susan Finger Sue Fitzgerald.
The Integration of Embedded Librarians at Tuskegee University Juanita M. Roberts Director Library Services Ford Motor Company Library/Learning Resources.
SOLSTICE Conference th & 5 th June 2015 Transactional Distance and Flexible learning Dr John Bostock Edge Hill University.
Project Evaluation Don Millard John Yu March 27, 2012 Guy-Alain Amoussou Lou Everett
Service-Learning and Grant Writing Workshop Tennessee Technological University February 23, 2010 Presented by: Shelley Brown Department of Sociology and.
NCATE Standard 6 Governance and Resources: Debunking the Myths AACTE/NCATE Workshop Arlington, VA April 2008 Linda Bradley James Madison University
9/19/061 The Most Valuable Library Resource* Jordan M. Scepanski Chapel Hill, North Carolina U.S.A.
Describe what your team accomplished.  Rock Creek campus instituted a monthly “V&C Teaching Chat”  Across college sharing of ideas including: readings.
This work is supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) collaboration between the Directorates for Education and Human Resources (EHR) and Geociences.
1. Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the presenter’s opinion and not an official NSF position 2.
Lessons Learned about Going to Scale with Effective Professional Development Iris R. Weiss Horizon Research, Inc. February 2011.
Vision Library Media Center serves as an integral part of the school ’ s educational program and is the information hub of the school. All students will.
FLAGSHIP STRATEGY 1 STUDENT LEARNING. Student Learning: A New Approach Victorian Essential Learning Standards Curriculum Planning Guidelines Principles.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Broadening Participation.
Community Service-Learning: Design, Implementation and Evaluation Cheryl Rose, Canadian Association for Community Service-Learning.
NOVA Evaluation Report Presented by: Dr. Dennis Sunal.
Part 1 1. March 20, 2012 Susan Finger & Sue Fitzgerald Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation March 21, 2012 Sue Fitzgerald &
Project 3 Supporting Technology. Project Proposal.
Using Logic Models in Program Planning and Grant Proposals The Covenant Foundation.
NOVA Evaluation Report Presented by: Dr. Dennis Sunal.
Strengthening Communities Awarded to support the development and implementation of collaborate and innovative community projects that address economic.
Intro to Outcomes. What is “Outcomes”? A. a statewide initiative aimed at improving learning and accountability in education B. a standing SFCC committee.
Planning for School Implementation. Choice Programs Requires both district and school level coordination roles The district office establishes guidelines,
Google Earth INTEGRATING GLOBAL THINKING. Why Use Virtual Tours? Flexible Tool: History, Science, Math, English, etc. An Interactive Way to Explore Supports.
Workshop for Faculty from Minority Serving Intuitions ---- Overview ---- Russ Pimmel Workshop for Faculty from Minority Serving Intuitions Feb. 8 –10,
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
Elementary School Administration and Management GADS 671 Section 55 and 56.
1. October 25, 2011 Louis Everett & John Yu Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation October 26, 2011 Don Millard & John Yu Division.
What does it mean to be a RETA Instructor this project? Consortium for 21 st Century Learning C21CL
Presents: Information for participants: Your microphone will be muted for the formal presentation. If you cant hear, try running the Audio Set Up Wizard.
Using Standards Aligned System to Ensure 21 st Century Teaching and Learning Institute Pennsylvania Department of Education Upper Dublin School District.
1 DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS TO ENSURE STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES RECEIVE A QUALITY HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Performance Measurement, Program and Project Evaluation.
David W. Butler High School Co-Chairs: Anne Bucci, Media Coordinator & Stephanie Ferron, Technology Facilitator
Selection Criteria and Invitational Priorities School Leadership Program U.S. Department of Education 2005.
Writing More Effective IUSE-EHR Proposals Jeff Ryan, University of South Florida Jill Singer, SUNY Buffalo State Earth Educators’ Rendezvous July 14, 2015.
1 Embracing Math Standards: Our Journey and Beyond 2008.
1 Vanderbilt University Name: Vanderbilt TAR Fellows Program Persons responsible: Thomas R. Harris, Derek Bruff, Jean Alley Time Commitment: Introductory.
Making an Excellent School More Excellent: Weston High School’s 21st Century Learning Expectations and Goals
AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS 2017 ANNUAL CONVENTION
NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT and PROCESS
Keywords: Engineering ethics, design education,
Addressing Curricular Barriers to Completion
Maine is IT! at SMCC Grant Playbook for
Developing a Competitive Proposal (An Interactive, Web-Based Workshop) Russell Pimmel Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation.
S-STEM (NSF ) NSF Scholarships for Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics Information Materials 6 Welcome! This is the seventh in a series.
Presentation transcript:

Making an Impact: Building Transportable and Sustainable Projects (formerly Dissemination) Webinar 4 of the Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Series Handout 1 1 Don Millard & John Yu April 17, 2012 Louis Everett & Susan Finger April 18, 2012

 Before you leave, please complete the assessment survey: 2

 Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the presenters’ opinions and not an official NSF position.  Local facilitators will provide the link to the workshop slides at the completion of the webinar.  Participants may ask questions by “raising their virtual hand” during a question session. We will call on selected sites and enable their microphone so that the question can be asked.  Responses will be collected from a few sites at the end of each Exercise. At the start of the Exercise, we will identify these sites in the Chat Box and then call on them one at a time to provide their responses. 3

 Learning must build on prior knowledge ◦ Some knowledge correct ◦ Some knowledge incorrect – Misconceptions  Learning is ◦ Connecting new knowledge to prior knowledge ◦ Correcting misconceptions  Learning requires engagement ◦ Actively recalling prior knowledge ◦ Sharing new knowledge ◦ Forming a new understanding 4

 Effective learning activities ◦ Recall prior knowledge -- actively, explicitly ◦ Connect new concepts to existing ones ◦ Challenge and alter misconceptions  Active & collaborative processes ◦ Think individually ◦ Share with partner ◦ Report to local and virtual groups ◦ Learn from program directors’ responses 5

 Coordinate the local activities  Watch the time ◦ Allow for think, share, and report phases ◦ Reconvene on time -- 1 min warning ◦ With one minute warning, refer to Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response  Ensure the individual think phase is devoted to thinking quietly and not talking  Coordinate the asking of questions by local participants and reporting local responses to exercises 6

The session will enable you to design transportable and sustainable engineering and computer science education projects, based on an understanding of how faculty make decisions about their teaching. 7

After the session, participants should be able to:  Discuss the importance of project transportability ◦ Transfer or transmission model ◦ Readiness Change model ◦ Rational Faculty Model  Discuss key components of institutionalization at home institution ◦ Structural and cultural considerations  Discuss types of transportability and sustainability approaches ◦ Enabling, Facilitating, Encouraging, Collaborating ◦ Greater emphasis on designing for transportability than in the past 8

Reflect on a specific change you have made in your teaching (e.g., active learning, concept inventory, online modules, or any other changes) ◦ How did you first find out about it? ◦ What convinced you to try it? ◦ What aspects of the innovation (would have) made it easy to adopt? ◦ What support from others (would have) made it easy to implement?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 9

 Usually you have a specific problem to solve  You want to adapt or experiment with the change  It shouldn’t be too rigid or complicated  It should be compatible with your students, department, academic term, IT systems  You need different information at different times ◦ Evidence of student learning, assessment data ◦ Advice on how to implement ◦ Help processing “failures” and negative student reactions 10 Handout 2

 Reflect on your own experience to understand your audience and design a plan to ensure others will use your materials  What motivates you to change can ◦ Inspire the need for a project ◦ Inspire the project transportability and institutionalization ◦ Also inspires others to use your materials and approach 11

 Develop and disseminate model ◦ Transfer or transmission model  Developer (change agent) ◦ Creates instructional materials and strategies  Significant effort  Research-based ◦ Tries to convince other faculty to use them  Postings, presentations, publications  Short, one-time workshops 12

 Faculty may need more than one exposure to materials/ideas  Importance of local factors may be overlooked  Faculty are likely to need ongoing support when adopting materials of others 13

 Sequential change models ◦ Pre-awareness – Willing to read a one-pager ◦ Awareness – Willing to read longer summaries ◦ Interest – Willing to read journal or conference publication ◦ Search – Willing to attend a 2-4 hr workshop ◦ Decision – Willing to attend a 1-2 day workshop ◦ Action – Willing to implement ◦ Trial period ◦ Decision to continue or discard Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 1995 Froyd, FIE,

 Faculty cannot be moved from Pre- awareness to Action with a single workshop  Change is not an event – it is a process Froyd, FIE,

 Matched to how faculty members actually change  Dancy and Henderson’s Rational Faculty Model ◦ Provide easily modifiable material  Users will customize ◦ Provide research ideas with material  Users understand the rationale  If not, risk inappropriate adaptation, e.g., clickers for attendance ◦ Make it clear what aspects will transfer under what conditions  Identify critical elements ◦ Recommend modification for different situations Dancy and Henderson, NRC Workshop Report,

 Can’t transform undergraduate education if TUES projects are not sustained at the home institution after NSF funding ends  This process is called institutionalization “when an innovation or program is fully integrated into an organization’s structure” 17 Curry, ASHE Report, 1992

What are some common reasons an education project fails to be institutionalized after NSF funding ends?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 18

 Enthusiasm wanes after grant ends  Money unavailable for personnel, supplies, travel, training, etc.  PI moves on ◦ Other teaching assignments ◦ Administrative responsibilities ◦ Moves to another institution  Multiple/new instructors less comfortable with format  Specially trained TAs graduate  Technology changes (equipment outdated, new computers/software)  Budget cuts reduce offerings of elective courses  Changes to curriculum impact student demand  Administrators unaware or not convinced of value, may move to other positions or change priorities 19

 Not just about money  Two aspects ◦ Structural  policies, curriculum, teaching load/assignments ◦ Cultural  becomes part of normal expectations of how we educate students (in topic X)  The most successful efforts address both structural and cultural 20

For an idea you are considering for a TUES proposal, what institutionalization strategies can you pursue that address structural and cultural aspects?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 21

 State learning outcomes and align to curricula and values  Collect and distribute convincing evaluation data  Publicize successes to deans, chairs, faculty and teaching assistants  Discuss at faculty and curriculum committee meetings  Adapt it to work for all students, faculty, departments (as appropriate)  Recruit other faculty to learn about it and use it in their classes ◦ Provide data, advice, incentives and moral support  Work to secure resources as needed: lab space, staff support  Work to integrate it into curricula (as appropriate) 22 Handout 3

Questions “Hold-up your virtual hand” and you will be called upon after we unmute your mike.

BREAK 15 min

BREAK 1 min warning

 Most NSF education programs require project transportability (broader impact, dissemination)  Example –Review criteria for TUES Program include:  Projects should produce exemplary materials, processes, or models that can be adopted by other sites  Projects should involve a significant effort aimed at facilitating adaptation at other sites  Projects should have the potential to contribute to a paradigm shift in undergraduate STEM education In this section we discuss how to address these criteria in a proposal or project 26

As you work on your project (or develop your proposal) from the very beginning throughout the entire project think about:  Encouraging others ◦ Make others aware of and interested in your materials or approach  Facilitating others ◦ Help others use your materials or approach  Enabling others ◦ Designing your materials so that others can use them  Collaborating with others ◦ Engage others in improving your materials or approach 27 The next activities will help you understand what each of these means

How do you make others aware of and interested in your materials?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 28

 Use a variety of strategies  Post, present, and publish it  Present workshops at your institution or at national meetings  Make personal connections to others’ needs  Post it on more widely accessed sites ◦ Connexions site (cnx.org) ◦ National Instruments (ni.com) ◦ NSF’s NSDL (nsdl.org) ◦ Search engine optimization  Use technology ◦ Videos ◦ Social media (YouTube, Face Book, Google+)  Provide a Information package (a “sales brochure”) ◦ Statement of need and importance, learning objectives ◦ Summary of approach ◦ Evaluation data, assessment evidence ◦ Stories, scenarios, advice for use and troubleshooting 29 Handout 5

How do you help others use your materials?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 30

 Continued support ◦ Organize a support group (a community of practice) ◦ Virtual workshops and support group ◦ Wikis ◦ Series of workshops  Share evaluation instruments and processes ◦ Formative as well as summative  Prepare a user’s guide ◦ Pitfalls ◦ Alternate approaches ◦ Video demonstrations  Use “open source” approach 31 Handout 6

What should you think about when developing your materials so that the final product can be used by others?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 32

 Build in flexibility, e.g. software platforms  Consider how the approach could be used: ◦ In other curricular models, other courses, or other disciplines ◦ With other teaching styles  State clearly the expected learning outcomes and link to needs  Minimize special equipment needs and implementation cost, consider virtual approaches  Collect convincing evaluation data  Summarize the approach’s rationale (the research-base, false starts, etc.) in a simple story  Provide options for gradual scale up  Recruit a few faculty at other sites that teach the course (potential future users) and ask them periodically to consider ◦ How well the approach fits their course and their style ◦ How could it be made more compatible ◦ What data would convince them 33 Handout 4

How do you engage others in designing and developing your materials?  Exercise min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Share with a partner ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 6 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group  With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response 34

 Share control ◦ Allow others to develop pieces of the material ◦ Enable partners to contribute to the posted material ◦ Identify new partners at conferences and workshops ◦ Give credit to collaborators  Develop a common evaluation process and data base  Build in review and improvements at key points  Develop group approaches for engaging and facilitating others  Include collaborators as Co-PIs, advisory board, etc. 35 Handout 7

 Does your proposal or your project have a strong (sustainable, transportable) dissemination plan?  How can you improve it?  Take min ◦ Think individually ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min  Watch time and reconvene after 4 min  Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group 36

 Curry, B.K., (1992). Instituting Enduring Innovations: Achieving Continuity of Change in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7  Dancy, M.H. and Henderson, J.C. (2008). Barriers and Promises in STEM Reform. Commissioned paper presented at NRC workshop on Evidence on Selected Promising Practices in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education, Washington, DC. Retrieved from ionedPaper.pdf. ionedPaper.pdf  Froyd, J.E., “Developing a Dissemination Plan,” Proceedings, 2001 ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.  Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. 37

Question s Hold up your “virtual hand” to ask a question. Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide 38

 To download a copy of the presentation- go to:  Please complete the assessment survey-go to: 39