ED472766.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 472 766 SE 067 164 AUTHOR Bisgaard, Soren; Brillhart, Lia V.; Burgess, Ann B.; Cramer, Jane Harris; Denton, Denice D.; Downer, Janice D.; Dunwoody, Sharon L.; Ellis, Arthur B.; Hewson, Peter W.; Secada, Walter G.; Tobias, Sheila TITLE College Level One: Articulation, Equity, and Literacy Issues. Workshop Report. INSTITUTION National Inst. for Science Education, Madison, WI. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA. REPORT NO No-1 PUB DATE 1997-06-00 NOTE 27p. CONTRACT RED-9452971 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]; Web site: http:// www.wcer.wisc.edu/ nise/publications. PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Professional Development; *Educational Change; Equal Education; Higher Education; Mathematics Education; Research Design; Research Methodology; Science Education; Scientific Literacy IDENTIFIERS *National Institute for Science Education ABSTRACT This document reports on a workshop entitled "Articulation, Equity, and Literacy Issues" hosted by the College Level One (CL-1) project of the National Institute for Science Education (NISE). CL-1 identifies important issues in undergraduate education and determines the best strategies for addressing them. Workshop discussions examine curriculum content and delivery practices within disciplines and explore the cross- cutting themes of articulation, equity, and lite'racy. The CL-1 team answers the following questions:(1) What are the most strategically valuable research questions?;(2) What are the most appropriate research methodologies?;(3) What is the original mix of research expertise?; and (4) What other considerations might there be? (Author/KHR) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Workshop Report No. 1 College Level One: Articulation, Equity, and Literacy Issues Soren Bisgaard, Lia V. Brillhart, Ann B. Burgess, Jane Harris Cramer, Denice D. Denton, Janice D. Downer, Sharon L. Dunwoody, Arthur B. Ellis, Peter W. Hewson, Walter G. Secada, and Sheila Tobias U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS CENTER (ERIC) ibis-document has been reproduced as BEEN GRANTED BY 2received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to P improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES document do not necessarily represent INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) official OERI position or policy. 1 BIEST COPY AVAILABLE National Institute for Science Education (NISE) Publications The NISE issues papers to facilitate the exchange of ideas among the research and development community in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education and leading reformers of SMET education as found in schools, universities, and professional organizations across the country. The NISE Occasional Papers provide comment and analysis on current issues in SMET education including SMET innovations and practices. The papers in the NISE Research Monograph series report findings of original research. The NISE Conference and Workshop Reports result from conferences, forums, and workshops sponsored by the NISE. In addition to these three publication series, the NISE publishes Briefs on a variety of SMET issues. The research reported in this paper was supported by a cooperative agreement between the National Science Foundation and the University of WisconsinMadison (Cooperative Agreement No. RED-9452971). At UWMadison, the National Institute for Science Education is housed in the Wisconsin Center for Education Research and is a collaborative effort of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, the School of Education, the College of Engineering, and the College of Letters and Science. The collaborative effort is also joined by the National Center for Improving Science Education, Washington, DC. Any opinions, findings, or conclusions are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view of the supporting agencies. 3 Workshop Report No. 1 College Level One: Articulation, Equity, and Literacy Issues Soren Bisgaard, Lia V. Brillhart, Ann B. Burgess, Jane Harris Cramer, Denice D. Denton, Janice D. Downer, Sharon L. Dunwoody, Arthur B. Ellis, Peter W. Hewson, Walter G. Secada, and Sheila Tobias National Institute for Science Education University of Wisconsin-Madison October 1995 Revised June 1997 4 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary Introduction 1 Disciplinary Group Discussions 2 Mathematics 2 Physics, Engineering, and Technology 4 Chemistry and Biology 5 Alternative/Integrated SMET Courses 7 Cross-Disciplinary Group Discussions 7 SMET: Literacy and Careers 7 Equity: Access, Retention, Diversity, and Remediation 9 Articulation: Transfer of Knowledge and Credits 11 Closing Discussion 12 References 14 Appendixes A: Workshop Agenda 15 B: Directory of Participants 17 ii Executive Summary A part of the National Institute for Science Education (NISE), the College Level One (CL-1) Team was established to examine first-year postsecondary courses in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET). These courses represent curriculum "pressure points" in that they greatly influence student career trajectories and attitudes, and they have a strong effect on the courses that follow them. CL-1 will work with the Institute's partners, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Center for Improving Science Education (NCISE), to characterize these courses and suggest strategies that will add value to them. As a first step in this process, CL-1 hosted a workshop entitled "Articulation, Equity, and Literacy Issues" to obtain diverse perspectives on these courses from representatives of various stakeholder groups. Outcomes sought were feedback on an initial set of objectives for year one efforts; acquisition of baseline information on relevant literature, statistics, and "best practices"; and an expanded network of participants. After introductions, the workshop centered around four disciplinary breakout groups (mathematics, physics/engineering/technology, chemistry/biology, and alternate/integrated SMET courses) and, subsequently, three cross-disciplinary breakout groups (literacy, equity, articulation). Within disciplines, discussions centered on what knowledge and skills students should learn as a result of being in SMET courses and how to assess mastery. Although a few disciplines have attempted to address these issues, most have not. There is a general recognition that the clientele of these courses should be better identified and their needs more specifically addressed. Standards currently being developed for the precollege curriculum must be considered in designing SMET courses. A number of innovative effective approaches to both content and pedagogy have been implemented in college level one SMET courses, and these best practices are worth examining in more detail for characteristics that permit transportability. Cross-disciplinary discussions on literacy identified various audiencesSMET majors, non-SMET majors, and future teachers, for examplewho need to be served by these courses and the importance of finding engaging approaches that convey a sense of the method and content of science and its application to the real world. Equity discussions considered the effect of present instructional practices and new technologies on various population groups and their effect on the recruitment and retention of underrepresented groups in SMET-related courses; socioeconomic factors and the sensitization of faculty were other issues that were considered. Articulation discussions highlighted the need to raise awareness of the difficulties associated with transferring knowledge, skills, and credits within and between institutions. New technologies like the Internet and World Wide Web offer the potential to facilitate these transitions for students and teachers and may become especially important as new approaches to teaching SMET courses are implemented. iii 6 The workshop substantially sharpened the focus of the College Level One Team. The Team has now identified three areas for the first-year research effort: > Pathway Studies We will identify the pathways through first-year college SMET courses that were taken by individuals who subsequently entered four career areas: social leadership, business, teaching, and SMET-related fields. Toward this goal, we will conduct analyses of large-scale databases of individuals as a function of their initial careers to see whether they had enrolled in distinctive course sequences. Examples of appropriate resources are "High School and Beyond" and "National Longitudinal Study." Results of this study may be of particular help to NSF's programs in teacher preparation, such as the Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation. > "Best Practice" Programs We will identify outstanding, effective SMET programs being used in the first-year courses in two-year and four-year institutions. These may exemplify new instructional methods, new technologies, and/or new curricula. We will choose a small number of these programs for detailed case studies, including site visits, in year two. In making our selections, we will look at the impact of these programs on