Instructional Development via Intergenerational Team
students taking general chemistry courses do not intend to pursue
careers in chemistry; in fact, they are more likely to end up in
positions where they fund, write, or vote for chemical research and
policies. Professor Mark M. Banaszak-Holl, who was interested in
addressing how to transform a section of General Chemistry in order to
address this type of learning, asked: how we might teach students
scientific reasoning skills and chemical understanding in general
chemistry that they are able to take beyond the classroom into their
everyday lives? To develop an answer to this question, Mark used the
CSIE framework to create, in his own scholarly program, a group of
students interested in future faculty careers to work on this project
with him. The resulting project is called "Studio Chemistry."
Graduate Student Engagament in CSIEDuring
the middle of the first year of graduate school, students interested in
future faculty work can apply for one of the year-long CSIE FellowshipsA program of external speakers and internal brown-bag sessions is offered through-out the yearIn
the second semester of the first year (while on Fellowship) students
take a cognate course (eg, "designing Science Learning Environments")
in the School of Education, Chem 720 A graduate seminar by CSIE project
Director Professor Brian P. Coppola), both of which result in students'
proposing a modestly scaled instructional development project, usually
in collaboration with a faculty member; the four pillars of CSIE work
are instructional design, implementation, assessment, and documentationIn
the first semester of the second year, these students rejoin the
teaching program, ideally to begin to implement their proposed ideas;
continued engagement depends on the student, the research advisor, the
teaching project, etc.CSIE
was implemented at the undergraduate level in 1994, at the graduate
level in 1998, and at the post-doctoral level in 2002 in response to
growing interest and experience in finding new ways to create and
sustain instructional development opportunities in the department - as
well as to address a strong student interest for adding explicit
professional development opportunities relasted to future faculty work
CSIE Home Page
This link opens the CSIE Home Page: filled with information about the program and constantly out of date.
Writing a Statement of Teaching Philosophy
Our paper on writing a statement of teaching philosophy has been quite
widely cited (Coppola, B. P. "Writing a Statement of Teaching
Philosophy" Journal of College Science Teaching 2002, 31, 448-453.).
This link is to its placement at the Project Kaleidescope site, along
with two thoughtful response pieces.
The Technology Transfer Dilemma
topic that has gotten a great deal of discussion going is the question
of integrating academic entrepreneurial activity into the work
professoriate. How do we preserve "educative" decision-making, in the
best interests of students, when "exploitive" decision-making favors
the best interest of a faculty business enterprise? See: Coppola, B. P.
â€œThe Technology Transfer Dilemma: Preserving morally responsible
education in a utilitarian entrepreneurial academic culture.â€ HYLE:
International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry 2001, 7, 155-167.
Scholarly Development in Teaching and Learning
the mantras of a "Scholarship of Teaching and Learning" and the unique
strength of the U.S. educational system's practice of integrating
research and teaching are to be taken seriously, then the same level of
preparation for one's responsibilities as a professional educator
should accompany one's preparation to be a researcher. This
infrastruture, which begins with the design of undergraduate courses
that reveal one's potential aptitude for research, is as complex as it
is robust, and extends through the post-doctoral level. CSIE posits
that a parallel structure can be created to promote educatiional
readiness and it can be integrated with the existing program that does
such a fantastic job at creating research readiness.
Assessing the Effectiveness of the CSIE Program
does one characterize systemic change wtihin a department? We offer a
combination of characteristics, stories from the field, in addition to
collaborative educational research.
Since the CSIE program began:
CSIE undergraduate students have created, implemented, assessed, presented and published their work in educationCSIE
undergraduates have been recognized by the most prestigious graduate
programs as people who have integrated research and teaching, and have
been given opportunities to do instructional development workCSIE
graduate students have teamed with about one third of the department's
faculty members on projects, and collaborated with a number of
out-of-department colleagues on education researchCSIE graduate students have included their instructional development and research in their PhD thesesCSIE post-docs have maintained dual mentorship positions in teaching and researchThe
department is actively seeking to add at least one additional faculty
member whose specialization is discipline-centered teaching and
on the notable and visible success of the chemistry program, the
College is now exploring ways to expand this activity into other
commissioned an external (research) evaluation at the end of the fifth
year of the program, which was carried out by Professor Janet Lawrence
and her collaborators at the UM Center for the Study of Higher and
Post-Secondary Education (CSHPE). Using preliminary results of best
practices gleaned from the large-scale 10-year evaluation of the
national Preparing Future Faculty (PFF) program to guide a reading of
the results, we can say the following:
are a variety of factors that can impact and that are impacted by a
future faculty development program. The results from the national PFF
survey resulted in a series of conclusions about best practices in
effective programs. The review of the national program was strongly
critical of the lack of impact seen in the departments in which PFF
activities were associated. The UM Program, by comparison, not only
showed that its design was aligned with best practices, but even more
significantly that there was a demonstrated and strong impact on the
department, it faculty, and particularly on the undergraduate teaching
summary of conclusions from the national PFF 10-year sunset review
("PFF") and the 5-year review of the future faculty development program
in the University of Michigan Department of Chemistry ("UM Program")
Conclusion: Future faculty development programsshould have general institutional support
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesbenefit from being centralized in departments
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesare less effective when only institutionally centralized
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesare difficult to integrate with professional societies
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesdo not impact time-to-degree
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesimpact PhD student learning
PFF: moderate UM Program: highare cost effective
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesimpact faculty in doctoral departments
PFF: no UM Program: yesimpact departmental structures
PFF: no UM Program: yesimpact the undergraduate teaching programs
PFF: yes; UM Program: yesimpact partnering undergraduate institutions
PFF: slightly UM Program: slightly
Reflection from Professor William R. Roush, Chair (05/2004)
Here is the question for the day:
forming teams of faculty and students to do research absolutely
influences what can be accomplished in certain disciplines, is teaching
and learning also an area that benefits from the team approach as
opposed to the isolated approach?
Until recently, no one knew the answer to that question. Now we knowÃ¢â‚¬Â¦ and the news is as good as it is exciting.
is a remarkably simple idea: we have learned how to use the team model
as a way to move undergraduate education to a whole new level.
And, bona fide
chemistry students from all levels--undergraduates, graduates and
post-doctorals--who are all interested in potentially becoming faculty
members themselves one day, will participate in this work for exactly
the same reason as they join our research groups: these future faculty
members, get a better education about teaching in the discipline as
they learn about the discipline.
the same time, our other students, the Michigan undergraduates in our
courses, get more innovative and exciting instruction. And by finding
ways to support faculty and student positions within a program focused
on future faculty development, we have created three significant
we are educating chemistry students at all levels in a dramatically
different way when they express an interest in higher education careers;
UM undergraduatge students are the primary and direct recipients of an
education that would simply not be possible without this structure; and
as a department, we have discovered a new source of energy for helping
us do the job we want to do as faculty members at the University of
We know this works in a department; and we know what it takes.
Reflection from Pascale Leroueil (05/2004)
am completing my first year as a chemistry graduate student. I am also
a part of the future faculty training program because I am interested
in exploring the option of an academic career.
a new graduate student, I was expecting the learning curve to be pretty
steep when it came to laboratory work. I have to say that I am equally
impressed by the chance that I have had to think really hard about
teaching and learning during my first year, too.
have had all of the usual things that a first year graduate student
might have if she was working in a new area. We have an
education-related seminar program; we take a couple of courses that
focus on educational design and other issues; and I received a
fellowship that allowed me to be able to add this additional work to my
first year of graduate school.
first teaching assignment was in a course called Studio Chemistry. It
turns out that this is an exciting experimental course that is
happening as a direct result of the future faculty development program
because it has allowed a group of people, led by Professor Mark
Banaszak Holl, to implement some new - and complex - ideas about
teaching first year students.
top of getting my research started, I have also been able to get an
incredible experience working with faculty and colleagues on helping to
make some of these new teaching ideas a reality.
Reflection from Professor Joe Krajcik
UM School of Education
the national scene, there have been many efforts to reform teaching and
learning at the undergraduate level but few have been successful.
chemistry program has approached undergraduate curriculum reform as a
truly interdisciplinary activity. For example, my colleagues and I have
adapted our graduate education courses, such as my course on Designing
Science Education Learning Environments, to enable chemistry and
science education graduate students to wrestle with important ideas.
is the only program, as far as I know, that has taken seriously the
principles of good teaching, as well as how students learn. This effort
has allowed us to create course materials and provide professional
development for future (and current) faculty to help undergraduates
understand the discipline better. In short, we have discovered a way to
take the best ideas we have about teaching and learning and translate
them into actual curriculum for Michigan undergraduates.
final perspective that is personally exciting to me is that these new
undergraduate courses are exactly the kind of learning environments
that I would like to see our future K-12 teachers experience so that
they see models of good science teaching practices.
Reflection from Ian Stewart (04/2004)
UM BS 2002
PhD candidate at UC Berkeley
My combined experience in chemistry and chemistry education has given me lots of advantages in graduate school.
time I spent at Michigan as an instructor prepared me in three ways:
First, I had a better understanding of fundamental chemistry concepts
after I spent 3 years helping my own students learn them.
I arrived with lots of teaching experience - including designing my own
teaching materials. Because of this, I was given freedom to adapt some
of the work you've seen this morning to Berkeley's chemistry program.
Finally, developing leadership skills was also an important outcome
from my Michigan experience, and I am currently the student chair of
Berkeley's Graduate Life Committee, which has responsibility for
improving conditions for students in our department.