Targeted Poster Session: TP-B

Beyond Student Transfer: Graduate, Postdoc, and Faculty Development and the Road to Sustainable and Scalable Inclusion of PER

Organizers:
        Noah Finkelstein (noah.finkelstein@colorado.edu), University of Colorado, Boulder
        Melissa Dancy, University of North Carolina, Charlotte

Where: California Suite
When: 8:15 – 9:45 & 3:45 – 5:15, Thursday, August 5

Goal: Participants will begin to explore the broad question of why and how PER-informed practices are taken up (or not). The particular focus of this session is on the graduate, postdoc, and faculty preparation in physics education research and related reforms. In this session we address two interrelated and important themes: i) grad, postdoc and faculty development ii) the broader systemic frameworks that shape faculty practice.

Theme: While the question of transfer of student knowledge from one domain to another is compelling, many of these results (and curricula built on these results) remain compartmentalized because of another failure of transfer--- to faculty practices. This session, as described by the title, will examine some of the factors influencing the transfer of (or scaling and sustaining of) physics education research and physics education research influenced reforms. The common focus of each of these posters is on faculty or future faculty development, programs that foster such development, and challenges to the broad preparation of current and future faculty.

Individual Poster Abstracts

TP-B1
Beyond the Individual Instructor: systemic constraints in the implementation of research-informed practices
Charles Henderson (Charles.Henderson@wmich.edu), Western Michigan University
Melissa Dancy, University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Abstract: Anecdotal evidence suggests that findings of educational research and resulting curricula are, at best, only marginally incorporated into introductory physics courses. Many instructors do not appear to attempt changing from traditional, teacher-centered instruction to PER-informed instruction. Of those who do attempt such a change, many are unsuccessful. Based on interviews with a number of non-PER physics faculty we have considered why such a transition is uncommon. Elsewhere [1], we have reported on a preliminary analysis of this question from the standpoint of the individual instructor’s beliefs and practices. But no instructor exists in isolation. They are embedded in the larger context of their department and institution, the educational system as a whole, and society. In this poster, we will report on a preliminary analysis of our interviews from this broader context rather than the individual instructor.

1. Dancy, M. & Henderson, C. Teaching, Learning and PER: Views from Mainstream Faculty, Summer 2004 AAPT meeting, Sacramento, CA.

TP-B2
Encouraging Faculty to View Teaching and Learning as a Researchable Endeavor: A transfer perspective on the role of graduate preparation
Edward Price (edward@physics.ucsd.edu), University of California, San Diego
Abstract: Refusal to consider education amenable to research methods remains a fundamental barrier to widespread acceptance of PER and research-based instructional practice. In this poster we consider this as a transfer problem: faculty possess expertise in systematically investigating physical phenomena through research, but do not transfer that investigatory approach and expertise to issues of teaching and learning. We analyze faculty views of teaching and learning in terms of factors known to impact transfer: the existence of a theoretical framework, context, representation of the problem, and culture. We focus on graduate education as an opportunity to facilitate this type of transfer by addressing these factors, discuss a graduate preparation program with this explicit goal, and evaluate the impacts on the participants and department.

TP-B3
Race, Culture and Transfer: Factors that Shape Faculty Attitudes and Beliefs about Race and Inclusion
Apriel Hodari (hodaria@cna.org), The CNA Corporation
Abstract: Many faculty members realize that they need to find ways to connect to the diverse perspectives and experiences of all of their students. In the physics, it is often difficult to measure and address diversity issues because doing so is not perceived as central to our disciplines. In this poster, I examine the ideas of aversive racism [1] and colorblind racism [2], and how university faculty might address the challenges of inclusion in physics education reform and research. Results from a workshop designed to address these challenges, particularly by rejecting the “smog of bias” [3] will be presented.

1. Tatum, Beverly Daniel. (2004). Changing demographics and challenges of the future. Draft Proceedings of the National Science Board Workshop on Broadening the Participation in Science and Engineering Research and Education. Arlington, VA: National Science Board.

2. Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. (2003). Racism without Racists: Color-blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.

3. Tatum, Beverly Daniel. (1997). Why are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations about Race. New York: Basic Books.

TP-B4
Seeding change: the challenges of transfer and transformation of educational practice and research in physics
Noah Finkelstein (noah.finkelstein@colorado.edu), University of Colorado, Boulder
Abstract: Academia appears to do a remarkable job at producing the next generation of research faculty. The long-anticipated shortage of well-qualified researchers has not appeared.[1] At the same time, while there are calls to reform educational practices in college and university classrooms, we are not widely preparing our future faculty to develop or implement these research-based educational practices. What mechanisms exist to foster the development of such practices and the field of PER more generally? What are the resources and impediments to do so? This poster examines the interrelated problems of supporting the development of the field, and the ‘transfer’ of what is known from PER to the more general populace of physics instructors. Two programs are examined to highlight these interrelated issues: the Postdoctoral Fellowships in Mathematics Science Engineering and Technology Education and the Preparing Future Physics Faculty Program. Data on successes and failures of these programs will be presented and analyzed from a perspective of cultural change [2] and developing professionals [3].

1. Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy (COSEPUP). (2000). Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

2. Sarason, S.B. (1989). The Creation of Settings and the Future Societies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

3. Shulman. L.S. (1997). Professing the Liberal Arts, In Education and Democracy: Re-imagining Liberal Learning in America, edited by Robert Orrill. New York: College Board Publications

TP-B5
Transfer From Graduate Experience to Faculty Practice: one graduate student's experiences of and ideas about graduate education in physics
David Brookes (dbrookes@physics.rutgers.edu), Rutgers University
Abstract: Viewed through the lenses of cognitive apprenticeship and legitimate peripheral participation, [1] graduate preparation in forms of education in physics departments is often a dismal failure. In searching for reasons for this failure, I will recount some of my own experiences and the experiences of my peers. I will then identify some factors that may be causing and may be sustaining the status quo. I will also discuss some ideas for both graduate students and faculty about how graduate education could be conducted differently and perhaps more effectively.

1. 1. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.