Making an Impact: Building Transportable and

Sustainable ProjectsWebinar 4 of the

Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Series

Guy-Alain Amoussou & Maura Borrego gamousso@nsf.gov mborrego@nsf.gov

November 8 & 9, 2011

Handout 1 1

Workshop presenters

Maura Borregorotator fromVirginia TechEngineering

Guy-Alain Amoussourotator from

Humboldt State UComputer Science

2

Before you leave, please complete the assessment survey:

http://www.nsflsu.com

Before you leave the Webinar!

3

Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the presenters’ opinions and not an official NSF position.

Local facilitators will provide the link to the workshop slides at the completion of the webinar.

Participants may ask questions by “raising their virtual hand” during a question session. We will call on selected sites and enable their microphone so that the question can be asked.

Responses will be collected from a few sites at the end of each Exercise. At the start of the Exercise, we will identify these sites in the Chat Box and then call on them one at a time to provide their responses.

Important Notes

4

Learning must build on prior knowledge ◦ Some knowledge correct ◦ Some knowledge incorrect – Misconceptions

Learning is ◦ Connecting new knowledge to prior knowledge◦ Correcting misconceptions

Learning requires engagement◦ Actively recalling prior knowledge◦ Sharing new knowledge◦ Forming a new understanding

Framework for the Session

5

Effective learning activities ◦ Recall prior knowledge -- actively, explicitly◦ Connect new concepts to existing ones◦ Challenge and alter misconceptions

Active & collaborative processes◦ Think individually◦ Share with partner◦ Report to local and virtual groups ◦ Learn from program directors’ responses

Preliminary Comments

Active & Collaborative Learning

6

Coordinate the local activities

Watch the time◦ Allow for think, share, and report phases◦ Reconvene on time -- 1 min warning ◦ With one minute warning, refer to Chat Box to see if you will be

asked for a response

Ensure the individual think phase is devoted to thinking quietly and not talking

Coordinate the asking of questions by local participants and reporting local responses to exercises

Facilitator’s Duties

7

The session will enable you to design transportable and sustainable engineering and computer science education projects, based on an understanding of how faculty make decisions about their teaching.

Goal for the Transportable and Sustainable Projects Session

8

After the session, participants should be able to: Discuss the importance of project transportability

◦ Transfer or transmission model◦ Readiness Change model◦ Rational Faculty Model

Discuss key components of institutionalization at home institution ◦ Structural and cultural considerations

Discuss types of transportability and sustainability approaches◦ Enabling, Encouraging, Facilitating, collaborating◦ Greater emphasis on designing for transportability than in the past

Session Outcomes

9

Activity

Your Instructional Change Experience

Reflect on a specific change you have made in your teaching that may have been funded by someone else’s CCLI or TUES project (e.g., active learning, concept inventory, online modules, or any other changes)

◦ How did you first find out about it? ◦ What convinced you to try it? ◦ What aspects of the innovation (would have) made it easy to adopt? ◦ What support from others (would have) made it easy to implement?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

10

PDs’ Response Your Instructional Change Experience

Usually you have a specific problem to solve (students don’t understand X)

You want to adapt or experiment with the change It shouldn’t be too rigid or complicated It should be compatible with your students,

department, academic term, IT systems You need different information at different times

◦ Evidence of student learning◦ Advice on how to implement◦ Help processing “failures”

11Handout 2

Your Instructional Change Experience

Reflect on your own experience to understand your audience and design a plan to ensure others will use your “stuff”

What motivates you to change can◦ Inspire the need for a project◦ Inspire the project transportability and institutionalization◦ Also inspires others to use your “stuff”

12

Traditional Approach to STEM Educational Change

Develop and disseminate model◦ Transfer or transmission model

Developer (change agent)◦ Creates instructional materials and strategies

Significant effort Research-based

◦ Tries to convince other faculty to use them Postings, presentations, publications (the 3 p’s) Short, one-time workshops

13

Underlying Assumptions of Develop-then-Disseminate Model

Two negative manifestations impede success: ◦ An “us vs. them” attitude

Myth # 1 -- Developers think faculty are unaware and unwilling to change

Myth # 2 -- Faculty think developers are dogmatic and judgmental

◦ Neglect of important local factors

Dancy and Henderson, NRC Workshop Report, 2008

14

Change Takes Time Sequential change models

◦ Pre-awareness – Willing to read a one-pager◦ Awareness – Willing to read longer summaries◦ Interest – Willing to read journal or conference publication◦ Search – Willing to attend a 2-4 hr workshop◦ Decision – Willing to attend a 1-2 day workshop◦ Action – Willing to implement ◦ Trial period◦ Decision to continue or discard

Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 1995Froyd, FIE, 2001

15

Change Takes Time

Faculty cannot be moved from Pre-awareness to Action with a single workshop

Change is not an event – it is a process

Froyd, FIE, 2001

16

A Better Approach Matched to how faculty members actually change Dancy and Henderson’s Rational Faculty Model

◦ Provide easily modifiable material Users will customize

◦ Provide research ideas with material Users understand the rationale If not, risk inappropriate adaptation, e.g., clickers for

attendance◦ Make it clear what aspects will transfer under what conditions

Identify critical elements◦ Recommend modification for different situations

Dancy and Henderson, NRC Workshop Report, 2008

17

Can’t transform undergraduate education if TUES projects are not sustained at the home institution after NSF funding ends

This process is called institutionalization“when an innovation or program is fully integrated

into an organization’s structure”

Sustaining TUES Projects

18

Curry, ASHE Report, 1992

Activity Barriers to Institutionalization

What are some common reasons an education project fails to be institutionalized after NSF funding ends?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

19

Enthusiasm wanes after grant ends Money unavailable for personnel, supplies, etc. PI moves on

◦ Other teaching assignments◦ Administrative responsibilities◦ Moves to another institution

Multiple/new instructors less comfortable with format Specially trained TAs graduate Technology changes (equipment outdated, new computers/software) Budget cuts reduce offerings of elective courses Changes to curriculum impact student demand Administrators unaware or not convinced of value

PDs’ Response Barriers to Institutionalization

20

Not just about money

Two aspects◦ Structural

policies, curriculum, teaching load/assignments◦ Cultural

becomes part of normal expectations of how we educate students (in topic X)

The most successful efforts address both structural and cultural

Institutionalization

21

Activity Institutionalization

For an idea you are considering for a TUES proposal, what institutionalization strategies can you pursue that address structural and cultural aspects?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be

asked for a response

22

State learning outcomes and align to curricula and values Collect and distribute convincing evaluation data Publicize successes to deans, chairs, faculty and teaching

assistants Discuss at faculty and curriculum committee meetings Adapt it to work for all students, faculty, departments (as

appropriate) Recruit other faculty to learn about it and use it in their classes

◦ Provide data, advice and moral support Work to secure resources as needed: lab space, staff support Work to integrate it into curricula (as appropriate)

PDs’ Response

Institutionalization

23Handout 3

Questions

“Hold-up your virtual hand” and you will be called upon after we unmute your mike.

BREAK15 min

BREAK1 min warning

Need for Transportability Most NSF education programs require project

transportability Example –Review criteria for TUES Program include:

Projects should produce exemplary materials, processes, or models that can be adopted by other sites

Projects should involve a significant effort aimed at facilitating adaptation at other sites

Projects should have the potential to contribute to a paradigm shift in undergraduate STEM education

In this section we discuss how to address these criteria in a proposal or project

27

Transportability strategiesAs you work on your project (or develop your

proposal) from the very beginning throughout the entire project think about:

Enabling others◦ Designing your “stuff” so that others can use it

Encouraging others◦ Make others aware of and interested in your “stuff”

Facilitating others◦ Help others use your “stuff”

Collaborating with others◦ Engage others in improving your “stuff”

28

Activity Enabling

What should you think about when developing your “stuff” so that the final product can be used by others?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

29

PDs’ Response

Enabling Build in flexibility Consider how the approach could be used:

◦ In other curricular models, other courses, or other disciplines◦ With other teaching styles

State clearly the expected learning outcomes and link to needs Minimize special equipment needs and implementation cost, consider

virtual approaches Collect convincing evaluation data Summarize the approach’s rationale (the research-base, false starts,

etc.) Recruit a few faculty at other sites that teach the course (potential

future users) and ask them periodically to consider◦ How well the approach fits their course and their style◦ How could it be made more compatible◦ What data would convince them

30Handout 4

Activity Encouraging

How do you make others aware of and interested in your “stuff”?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

31

PDs’ Response Encouraging

Use a variety of strategies Post, present, and publish it Present workshops at PI’s institution or at national meetings Post it on more widely accessed sites

◦ Connexions site (cnx.org)◦ National Instruments (ni.com)◦ NSF’s NSDL (nsdl.org)◦ Others?

Use technology◦ Videos◦ Social media (YouTube, Face Book)

Provide a Information package (a “sales brochure”)◦ Statement of need and importance◦ Summary of approach◦ Evaluation data

32Handout 5

Activity Facilitating

How do you help others use your “stuff”?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

33

PDs’ Response

Facilitating Continued support

◦ Organize a support group (a community of practice)◦ Virtual workshops and support group◦ Wikis◦ Series of workshops

Share evaluation instruments and processes Prepare a user’s guide

◦ Pitfalls◦ Alternate approaches

Use “open source” approach

34Handout 6

Activity Collaborating

How do you engage others in improving your “stuff”?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, look at Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

35

PDs’ Response Collaborating

Share control◦ Allow others to develop pieces of the material◦ Enable partners to contribute to the posted material

Develop a common evaluation process and data base

Develop group approaches for engaging and facilitating others

Include collaborators as Co-PIs, advisory board, etc.

36Handout 7

Does your proposal or your project have an effective dissemination plan?

How can you improve it?

Take ---- 4 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 4 min

Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group

Activity

Final Reflection

37

References

Curry, B.K., (1992). Instituting Enduring Innovations: Achieving Continuity of Change in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7

Dancy, M.H. and Henderson, J.C. (2008). Barriers and Promises in STEM Reform. Commissioned paper presented at NRC workshop on Evidence on Selected Promising Practices in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Dancy_Henderson_CommissionedPaper.pdf.

Froyd, J.E., “Developing a Dissemination Plan,” Proceedings, 2001 ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.

Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations.

38

QuestionsHold up your “virtual hand” to ask a

question.

Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guidehttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/

39

To download a copy of the presentation- go to: http://www.nsflsu.com

Please complete the assessment survey-go to: http://www.nsflsu.com

Thanks for your participation!

40