Reproductions Supplied by EDRS Are the Best That Can Be Made from the Original Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 472 338 SE 067 136 AUTHOR Millar, Susan B., Ed. TITLE Indicators of Success in Postsecondary SMET Education: Shapes of the Future. Synthesis and Proceedings of the Annual NISE Forum (3rd, February 23-24, 1998). Workshop Report. INSTITUTION National Inst. for Science Education, Madison, WI. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA. REPORT NO NISE-R-6 PUB DATE 1998-11-00 NOTE 163p. AVAILABLE FROM National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1025 W. Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706. Tel: 608-263-9250; Fax: 608-262-7428; e-mail: [email protected]. For full text: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ nise/Publications. PUB TYPE Collected Works Proceedings (021) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC07 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Curriculum; Educational Change; *Evaluation; Higher Education; Mathematics Education; Science Education; Teaching Methods; Technology Education ABSTRACT This document presents the written records of the Third Annual National Institute for Science Education (NISE) Forum on indicators of success in postsecondary science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education. The primary goal of this Forum was to initiate a national dialogue about how assessment and evaluation are and should be used to foster improvements in SMET education at all levels in the U.S. higher education systems. The records, all of which appear in this Proceedings, comprise the opening keynote, a digest of the three panel discussions, the remarks of panel discussants, a synthesis of participants' observations written after each panel discussion (think pieces), the closing reflections, an analysis of the participants' theories of change, and the presenters' papers. A list of acronyms and a list of the approximately 300 participants' names and location information are provided in the appendix. The panelists papers include: (1) "Assessment as a Learning Process: What Evidence Will We Accept That Students Have Learned?" (Diane Ebert-May); (2) "Moving the Mountain: Impediments to Change" (Eric Mazur); (3) "The Integrality of Assessment" (David B. Porter); (4) "The Reaction to the Symptoms Versus the Reaction to the Disease" (Brian P. Coppola); (5) "Assessment and the Promotion of Change in Community Colleges" (Eileen L. Lewis); (6) "Assessing and Evaluating the Evaluation Tool: The Standardized Test" (Richard Tapia);(7) "Assessment, Evaluation and Accreditation: Are We on the Same Wave Length? Or How Does One Provide Linkages for Systemic Change?" (Jack Bristol); (8) "An Assessment Model to Drive Undergraduate Educational Reform in the SMET Fields in a Large Public Multicampus University System" (Manuel Gomez); and (9) "Technology-Assisted Learning in Higher Education: It Requires New Thinking about Assessment" (Sheri D. Sheppard). (MM) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. 4) eliTirNationalInstitute .11.1Lemfor ScienCe Education University of Wisconsln-Madlson. National Center for Improving Science Education 1 Workshop Report No. 6 Indicators of Success in Postsecondary SMET Education: Shapes of the Future Synthesis and Proceedings of the Third Annual NISE Forum Edited by Susan B. Millar PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research andImprovement DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION BEEN GRANTED BY CENTER (ERIC) firila.clecument has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES this INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Points of view or opinions stated in document do not necessarily represent 1 official OERI position or policy. JirEST COPY AVAILABLE Funded by the National Science Foundation Workshop Report No. 6 Indicators of Success in Postsecondary SMET Education: Shapes of the Future Synthesis and Proceedings of the Third Annual NISE Forum Edited by Susan B. Millar National Institute for Science Education University of WisconsinMadison November 1998 3 Acknowledgments The authors extend their thanks to Ann Burgess, Susan Daffinrud, Arthur Ellis, Terrence Millar, Joel Mintzes, Andrew Porter, and Paula White for their thoughtful review of the draft version of this document. We also thank Debbie Stewart and Ingrid Rosemeyer for their good suggestions and patience during the editing process. 4 ii Contents -r Introduction: A Framework for Forum Contributions Elaine Seymour Forum Agenda xi Opening Keynote: Shaping the Future Luther Williams 1 Panel Discussion Summaries and Commentaries Panel 1: Assessment of Teaching, Learning, and Curriculum Change in SMET Classrooms Panel Discussion Summary, Susan B. Millar 5 Commentary, Norman L. Fortenberry 9 Panel 2: Assessment and the Promotion of Change in Departments, Disciplines, and Institutions Panel Discussion Summary, Susan B. Millar 13 Commentary, Daryl E. Chubin 18 Panel 3: The Role of Evaluation in Institutional and National Policy and Practice' Panel Discussion Summary, Susan B. Millar 23 Commentary, Larry E. Suter 29 Synthesis of Participant Think Piece Essays: Voices from the Field Assessment, Change and Systemic Reform Sarah A. Mason, Ramona L. Gunter, Susan B. Millar, and Elaine Seymour 1. Introduction 33 2. Constructive Feedback: Issues, Views, and Needs 34 2.1 Defining Change: Purposes, Values, and Process 34 2.2 Alignment 36 2.3 Student-Centered Learning: SMET for All 41 2.4 The Value of Teaching 42 3. Recommendations: Building and Sustaining Change 48 3.1 Catalysts for Change 48 3.2 Sustaining Institutional Change and Fostering Systemic Reform 55 i i i Reflection and Concluding Remarks Closing Speakers Cora B. Marrett 61 John D. Wiley 64 Analysis of Participant Theories of Change Elaine Seymour 69 Appendixes A. Panelist Papers Panel 1: Assessment of Teaching, Learning, and Curriculum Change in SMET Classrooms Assessment as a Learning Process: What Evidence Will We Accept That Students Have Learned? Diane Ebert-May 79 Moving the Mountain: Impediments to Change, Eric Mazur 91 The Integrality of Assessment, David B. Porter 95 Panel2:Assessment and the Promotion of Change in Departments, Disciplines, and Institutions The Reaction to the Symptoms Versus the Reaction to the Disease, Brian P. Coppola 101 Assessment and the Promotion of Change in Community Colleges, Eileen L. Lewis 113 Assessing and Evaluating the Evaluation Tool: The Standardized Test, Richard Tapia 119 Panel 3: The Role of Evaluation in Institutional and National Policy and Practice Assessment, Evaluation and Accreditation: Are We on the Same Wave Length? Or How Does One Provide Linkages for Systemic Change? Jack Bristol 127 An Assessment Model to Drive Undergraduate Educational Reform in the SMET Fields in a Large Public Multicampus University System, Manuel Gomez 133 Technology-Assisted Learning in Higher Education: It Requires New Thinking About Assessment, Sheri D. Sheppard 137 B. Participant List 143 C. Acronyms 161 iv Introduction: A Framework for Forum Contributions Elaine Seymour This document presents the written institutional, and national levelswere records of the Third Annual National chosen. The following strategies were used Institute for Science Education (NISE) to foster productive and genuine dialogue Forum on indicators of success in about these topics: postsecondary science, mathematics, Panelists and panel facilitators were engineering and technology (SMET) selected on the basis of their rich education. The records, all of which appear experiences with assessment and in this Proceedings, comprise the opening evaluation and their diverse keynote, a digest of the three panel backgrounds within higher education. discussions, the remarks of panel The panel facilitators were Brock discussants, a synthesis of participants' Spencer, professor of chemistry and observations written after each panel principal investigator of the NSF- discussion (think pieces), the closing funded ChemLinks Chemistry Systemic reflections, an analysis of the participants' Reform project, Beloit College; Elaine theories of change, and the presenters' Seymour, director of the Ethnography papers. A list of acronyms and a list of the and Evaluation Research Center at the approximately 300 participants' names and University of Colorado at Boulder; and location information are provided in the Clifford Adelman, Senior Research appendix. Analyst at the Office of Educational Arthur Ellis, Elaine Seymour, and Research and Improvement, U.S. Susan Millar led the Forum development Department of Education. team. This core group was assisted by Scientists, mathematicians, engineers program officers from the National Science and administrators from many Foundation's (NSF) Division of disciplines were invited by contacting Undergraduate Education and by the members of higher education following members of NISE's College Level organizations such as the American One team: Aaron Brower, Ann Burgess, Association of Higher Education Anthony Jacob, Kate Loftus, Robert (AAHE), the American Geological Mathieu, and Catherine Middlecamp. Institute, the American Chemical Society, and the American Physical Forum Goal and Design Society. Panelists were asked to write short The primary goal of this Forum was to papers for participants and the other initiate a national dialogue about how panelists to read ahead of time. assessment and evaluation are and should The facilitators worked with the be used to foster improvements in SMET panelists to plan a "fishbowl" format education