1. Acknowledgements The work represented in this poster is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No DUE 1347817. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We are grateful to the individuals who participated in the studies associated with this work and the people who supported this work with their time and help. Introduction Ann Sitomer, Milo Koretsky, Christina Smith, Kathleen Quardokus Fisher Oregon State University ESTEME@OSU Enhancing STEM Education at Oregon State University, ESTEME@OSU, is a project to increase evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) in large, introductory-level STEM courses via intra- and interdisciplinary Communities of Practice (CoPs), targeted synergy with other STEM improvement entities, and modification of pertinent organizational structures. ESTEME@OSU: Theory of Action Winter 2014 (Project Starts) ESTEME@OSU (Project Conclusion) Four Principles of DBIR within ESTEME@OSU Organizational Change Hypotheses A Model of DBIR within Higher Education We conjecture that widespread change to teaching practice will be facilitated by participation in intra- and interdisciplinary Communities of Practice (CoPs). As these changes occur, data are gathered on the impact of activities and findings are shared with members of the ESTEME@OSU community. These findings are then used to initiate or catalyze further organizational change. Principles of Design- Based Implementation Research (Penuel et al., 2011) ESTEME@OSU Cycles of practice improvements Cycles of structure improvements A focus on persistent problems of practice from from multiple stakeholders’ perspectives Practice: Disciplinary teams focus on unit level innovations to adopt and adapt EBIPs within the department. Interdisciplinary teams focus on scaling EBIPs across university STEM units. Structure: The ESTEME team, which includes educational researchers, practitioners, educational developers and administrators focus on developing structures that support the scaling of and improving implementation of EBIPs. A commitment to iterative, collaborative design Practice: For example, designing learning environments for GTAs and LAs to improve teaching practice. Structure: Design, implementation and redesign of interdisciplinary CoPs to facilitate more educators adopting and adapting EBIPs. A concern with developing theory related to both classroom learning and implementation through systemic inquiry Practice: Educators research their practice as they design environments to engage students in non-linear problem solving and to develop disciplinary habits of mind within large enrollment introductory STEM courses. Structure: Researchers explore the ways a community of educators researching their own practice influence changes to teaching practice across the five participating units. A concern with developing capacity for sustaining change in systems Practice: By understanding how change happened within units and presenting this evidence, we develop capacity for sustaining changes at OSU. Structure: By understanding how change happened at OSU and presenting the evidence, we develop capacity for sustaining changes at OSU. References Design-Based Implementation Research (DBIR) DBIR is grounded on partnerships between multiple stakeholders, who come together to iteratively design and implement educational innovations at scale. One goal of DBIR is to develop “practical theory and tools… to support local innovation and solve practical problems” (Penuel et al., 2011, p. 331). A goal of ESTEME@OSU is to explain how the adoption and adaption of EBIPs occurs within the structures of the institution (practical theory) and to identify the necessary tools to modify pertinent organizational structures. 1.Implementation of EBIPs will be catalyzed through the development of multiple CoPs at different organizational levels and result in changes to educators’ distributed expertise regarding teaching and learning, their pedagogical practices, and adoption of project- affiliated structures and artifacts. 1.OSU will increase its capacity for organizational change with respect to EBIPs using Design- Based Implementation Research towards the strategic implementation of project practices. Elements of ESTEME@OSU 1)Evidence-Based Instructional Practices (EBIPs) Interactive engagement with frequent formative feedback (lecture) Cooperative learning (studio workshop) 2)Communities of Practice (CoPs) (Wenger, 1998) 3)Design-Based Implementation Research (Penuel et al., 2011) Organizational change Student and educator learning 4)Institutional Integration and Sustainability Activities Resources Design-Based Implementation Research EBIPs Cycles of Practice CoPs Cycles of structures Student and Educator Learning Organizational Change Achievement Learning Environments Epistemology Micro Level Meso Level Macro Level OutcomesImpacts Further inquiry 1.In what ways do educators’ participation in ESTEME@OSU activities impact designed opportunities for undergraduate and graduate teaching assistants to learn how to facilitate cooperative learning? 2.How do we design an action research program so that participants develop a community of practice for improving teaching? Beichner, R. J., Saul, J. M., Abbott, D. S., Morse, J. J., Deardorff, D., Allain, R. J., Bonham, S.W., Dancy, M.H., & Risley, J. S. (2007). The student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (SCALE-UP) project. Research-based reform of university physics, 1(1), 2-39. Brown, P. J. (2010). Process-oriented guided-inquiry learning in an introductory anatomy and physiology course with a diverse student population. Advances in physiology education, 34(3), 150-155. Hsu, E., Murphy, T. J., & Treisman, U. (2008). Supporting high achievement in introductory mathematics courses: what we have learned from 30 years of the Emerging Scholars Program. Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education, 18(73), 205-220. Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Cheng, B. H., & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331-337. Our change initiative considers cycles of design and improvements at two levels: learning environments for students (practice) and learning environments for educators (structures).