24 March 2000 at Adler Planetarium
Break-out session: Science / Science Education collaborations
Moderators: Gerald Foster, Elizabeth Roettger
Notes taken:
Terminology, such as rubrics, porfolios, assessment, etc. (differ between science and education). (Scientists are typically unfamiliar with these words, for example.)
Junior colleges and the focus on teaching v.s. research:
how to navigate schools (K-12)
also, this (Jr. college) is where pre-service teachers take their
General Education courses
University students often think community college is "easy" -
NOT.
Insufficient content requirements for teachers
Insufficient teaching requirements for professors/instructors (who teach the Gen Ed
courses)
High school: science teachers are disconnected.
there's no communication (between grades)
no requirements (that each grade can depend on students having reached)
(need) vision - it's fragmented, even to use of SI or English units
Early Childhood and Elementary teachers only need to achieve a D in their core curriculum courses (including science)
Our current students learned science from their teachers,
who learned science (including how to teach it) from us and our
colleagues in colleges and universities.
There is a strong connection between how we teach Gen Ed courses and
how prepared our students are.
Science methods - expectations, too; same problem.
There are Science kit hubs in South Carolina (we had one participant from SC)
The NSF (National Science Foundation) will send copies of kits
The NSF is also stressing content and education links
Junior college may not have identified pre-service teachers,
and often don't track them afterward. (So we don't necessarily
know how
pre-service teachers are typically educated.)
Both 2 and 4-year institutions offer CEU's for in-service teachers. We could collaborate there.
Olive-Harvey has a future teachers club (they may be science-phobic).
We need to integrate science into the other subjects, expecially reading and math. (These are the subjects for which schools are mostly judged.) This needs to include good teaching methods.
We need to consider that graduate students are often future faculty (and should be trained how to teach, as future teachers of teachers, as well as others).
Scientists on the faculty often don't realize they're teaching science methods, but they are, even if they don't mean to do so.
Gatekeeping / qualifying tests. (Some general discussion here.)
What is valued at the university for faculty development? (Teaching focussed faculty are getting more grants and respect - they're related - than in the past.)
Faculty value - for tenure and promotion - is separate from grants and respect, however.
The culture in the science department - if it values teaching, then teaching becomes part of the tenure and promotion considerations. (It's the department that seems to count the most, here.)
Scientists tend to try to reach teachers through NSTA (National Science Teachers
Association), but there are other possibilities (and some are more strongly connected to
science education faculty and to teachers). Examples:
Chronicle of Higher Education
NABT (Nat'l Association of Biology Teachers)
and similary associations for chemistry and
physics
Madison's Chem. Edu. Inst.
(This part of the discussion was about using a broader range of existing institutions,
programs, publications, and networks to work together and make the results go farther.)
JOIN THE CSI/CPS
Science Listserve - connect to each other and to teachers!
CONTINUITY in science education is important - especially among part-time faculty.
Review Science Literacy grants.
Try http://www.pkal.org/ (Project Kaleidoscope - for undergraduate science, math, engineering, and technology)