AERA-B: Curriculum Studies Forum
Some subscribers to AERA-B and AERA-C might be interested in a recent post
"The NRC Finally Comes to Its Senses on Improving STEM Education."
The abstract reads:
***************************************
ABSTRACT: Kevin Kiley (2013) in his "Inside Higher Ed"
review <http://bit.ly/1bri3GP> of Robert Zemsky's (2013) "Checklist
for Change" <http://bit.ly/188VYrx> reports that in an interview
Zemsky said that (a) among the questions his book answers is "Why haven’t
we changed?" and (b) a major impediment to change is "a disengaged
faculty resistant to change."
As I indicated in a previous comment [Hake (2013)
<http://bit.ly/1a189YT> ] on Zemsky's book, I've noticed Zemsky's
derogation of faculty before. In "NRC's CUSE: Stranded on Assessless
Island?" [Hake (2013)] at <http://bit.ly/184OVC4> ] I stated that
Zemsky had "missed the boat with respect to the potential reform of
undergraduate education through education research by disciplinary experts as
monitored by rigorous pre/post testing [being] in the good company of CUSE
(Committee on Undergraduate Education) [McCray, et al. (2003) at
<http://bit.ly/y6cFAG> ], and its workshop participants."
Fortunately, the NRC APPEARS TO HAVE FINALLY COME TO ITS SENSES ON
IMPROVING STEM EDUCATION. I'm too modest to mention that on p. 35 of
"Adapting to a Changing World - Challenges and Opportunities in
Undergraduate Physics Education" [NRC (2013) at
<http://bit.ly/126os6j> ] it's stated:
"Hake’s (1998a) seminal report <http://bit.ly/9484DG>
on the effectiveness of interactive engagement methods remains an important
contribution to undergraduate physics education. The article presents results
from the Mechanics Diagnostic (MD) [Halloun & Hestenes (1985) at
<http://bit.ly/fDdJHm>] and the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) [Hestenes
et al. (1992) at <http://bit.ly/foWmEb>], given before and after
instruction on Newtonian mechanics in a variety of courses taught using
different approaches. . . . . . . the conclusion, that more effective
instructional approaches involve active learning, has been supported by many
other studies using different methodology [Meltzer and Thornton (2012) at
<http://bit.ly/O35gtB>] and Hoellwarth et al. (2005) at
<http://bit.ly/156hHhF>.]. **************************************************
To access the complete 53 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/154M5yf>.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University;
Links to: Articles <http://bit.ly/a6M5y0>; Socratic Dialogue Inducing
(SDI) Labs <http://bit.ly/9nGd3M>; Academia <http://bit.ly/a8ixxm>;
Blog <http://bit.ly/9yGsXh>; GooglePlus <http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE>;
Google Scholar <http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3>; Twitter
<http://bit.ly/juvd52>; Facebook <http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm>; Linked
In <http://linkd.in/14uycpW>.
"There is
substantial evidence that scientific teaching in the sciences, i.e., teaching
that employs instructional strategies that encourage undergraduates to become
actively engaged in their own learning, can produce levels of understanding,
retention and transfer of knowledge that are greater than those resulting from
traditional lecture/lab classes. But widespread acceptance by university
faculty of new pedagogies and curricular materials still lies in the future."
- Robert DeHaan (2005)
REFERENCES [URL shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed
on 19 Sept. 2013.]
DeHaan, R.L. 2005. "The Impending Revolution in
Undergraduate Science Education," Journal of Science Education and
Technology 14(2): 253-269; online as a 152 kB pdf at
<http://bit.ly/ncAuQa>.
Hake, R.R. 2013. "The NRC Finally Comes to Its Senses on
Improving STEM Education," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at
<http://bit.ly/154M5yf>. Post of 18 Sep
2013 20:19:57 -0400 to AERA-L and
Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to various
discussion lists and also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at
<http://bit.ly/19hfX6n> with a provision for comments.
An American Educational Research Association List
If you need assistance with this list, please send an email to [log in to unmask]