Research Experiences For Teachers: The Impacts on Their Students and the Economy Jay Dubner Columbia University Summer Research Program for Science Teachers 2006 AGU Fall Meeting December 11, 2006

“Practice What You Teach” Columbia’s Summer Research Program for Science Teachers was established in 1990 to contribute to the improvement of science achievement of students by providing New York metropolitan area middle and high school teachers with experiences in the practice of science. Teachers become members of research teams for 2 consecutive summers.

Summer Research Program middle and high school science teachers + 30 placed at other NYC academic research institutions 87% public schools 60% women 46% minorities

Student Outcome Studies 1.Columbia’s Summer Research Program ( ) –Collected data on the Program’s largest cohort of participants – NYC public high schools 2.NSF-supported SWEPT Multi-site ( ) –8 science teacher research programs from around the United States –New York, Arkansas, Georgia, Texas, Idaho, Washington State, Oregon & California Acronyms SWEPT – Science Work Experience Programs for Teachers RET – Research Experience for Teachers

Instruments Administered Summer Research Program 1993 – 2006 Pre-program survey Post-program survey Mentor survey Spring implementation survey

Instruments Administered Multi-site SWEPT Study Pre-program survey* Post-program survey* Mentor survey* Student Attitudinal Survey* Student Cognitive Tests –Biology & Chemistry * Surveys available at

Comparison of SWEPT and Control Science Teachers (1) (1) Data for 32 SWEPT teachers and 32 Control teachers participating in NSF-sponsored Multi-site Study 1998 – 2002 SWEPT Teachers Comparison Teachers Undergraduate or graduate major or minor in biology, chemistry physics, earth science or math 94%87% Advanced degree63%62.5% Hours course credit beyond highest degree 34 hours54 hours Years of teaching experience Years of science teaching experience Hours/week spent outside of class preparing for teaching 9.7 hours9.25 hours Assigned textbook covered in science course 60%59% Used textbook publisher’s tests rarely or never 68% Used textbook publisher’s tests sometimes 18%26% Used textbook publisher’s tests frequently 14%6%

Findings Program has engaged teachers intellectually Provided teachers with new avenues of professional & personal growth Increased their appreciation for the process of scientific discovery Enhanced their ability to converse the excitement and vitality of science to their students and fellow educators

2006 Teacher Survey Data 95% reported increasing hands-on activities in their classrooms and/or new laboratory exercises in response to their experiences at Columbia. 90% reported developing new or revised content to lessons and/or labs since participating in Columbia’s Program*. 85% reported increased requirements for formal written reports and/or oral presentation requirements. 80% reported introducing new technologies in their classroom instruction (e.g.; chromatography, pipetting, PowerPoint). 70% reported discussing science careers and related job requirements with their students. 55% reported reading scientific journals more frequently. 50% reported assuming new leadership roles/responsibilities in their school/district/region. * 280 Lesson & lab plans referencing the National Science Standards on Program’s Web site

Teacher Retention & Program Impact Study Study conducted with IISME participants 1 1 Weisbaum, K. and Huang, D., IISME Teacher Retention and Program Impact Evaluation Cupertino, CA: Industry Initiatives for Science and Math Education, 2001

Research shows that teacher expertise is one of the most important factors in raising student achievement 1 A review of 60 studies found that investing in support for teacher expertise was the most cost-effective way to increase student achievement. Effective professional development programs stimulate teachers to work with one another. 1 Ohme, P. & Rayford, J., Innovative Program Allows Georgia Teachers to Bring Real-World Work Experiences into the Classroom, The Journal, October 2001

Self-reported Changes in Attitudes and Classroom Practices of SWEPT and Control Teachers (Academic Year Following Program Participation) ScaleSWEPT TeachersComparison Teachers At time of entry into a SWEPT At the end of the following academic year Change At the beginning of the academic year At the end of the following academic year Change Inquiry Goals & Objectives * Inquiry Student Activities * Traditional Goals & Objectives Traditional Student Activities Teacher Efficacy Number of teachers 58 Data obtained from and Pre- and Post-teaching Attitudinal Surveys of SWEPT and Comparison Teachers participating in NSF-sponsored Multi-site SWEPT study * Difference in the two change scores is significant at the p<0.05 level.

Achievement in Science of students of SWEPT and Control Teachers ( Second Year after SWEPT participation ) Subject Test scores of students in classes of SWEPT Teachers Test scores of students in classes of Control Teachers Pre-testPost-test Pre-Post Gain Pre-testPost-test Pre-Post Gain Biology266 (235) 291 (235) 25* (235) 263 (128) 284 (128) 21* (128) Chemistry282 (122) 310 (122) 28* (122) 275 (43) 295 (43) 20* (43) * Difference in Pre-Post change scores is significant at the p<0.05 level.

Columbia’s Summer Research Program has been collecting quantitative student data from NYC public high schools (1993 was first data set) - Study Group -- Students in science classes of Program teachers (Prior to program participation through completion of two summer program) - Comparison Group -- Students in science classes of non- participating teachers from the same schools

Statistically significant at p <.01 New York City Science Regents Pass Rate: 55%

NYC Economic Impact Regents Diploma – Must pass 5 Regents including 1 Science Exam 1 NYC spends $12,930 per public school student 2 Student takes 5 courses/year = $2,586 per course On average, each teacher will teach for 10 more years after participating in the Program 11% more passing Regents = ~110 students 110 students X $2,586 = $284,460 (11 times the cost to train one teacher) 1 New York State Education Department, New York State Total Public Report Card, The New York Sun, New York Outpacing Other States in School Spending, April 4, 2006

National Economic Impacts High School dropouts earn ~$270,000 less over a lifetime than a high school graduate thereby paying less taxes 1. At a tax rate of 20%, loss of $54,600 in local and federal revenues. High School graduates are less likely to commit crimes. Increasing HS completion by just 1% of the males would reduce criminal justice system costs by as much as $1.4 billion per year High School graduates receive higher salaries thereby not needing food stamps, housing assistance, etc. Estimated annual savings are $8 billion per year 1 Cantu, R., Texas Labor Market Review, Labor Market Information Department, Texas Workforce Commission, December 2003

2006 Summer Research Program Funding Sources Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation Howard Hughes Medical Institute Mellam Family Foundation National Institutes of Health National Science Foundation New York Times Company Foundation

Columbia University’s Summer Research Program for Science Teachers