Core Questions - University of Colorado Denver
Responses to Core Questions for RM-MSMSP #0412343
1. The Partnership and Its Management/Governance Plan
1.1-How will higher education mathematics and science faculty be encouraged to attend the professional development sessions that this project will offer them? Will they be required to attend the sessions in order to teach the in-service courses for teachers? Where will these professional development sessions be held?
Higher education faculty who will teach the RM-MSMSP coursework will be required to attend the professional development sessions in order to teach each course. We would like to emphasize that these courses will be part of the regular teaching load for the faculty involved, representing part of the institutional change the project fosters. The sessions will be held predominantly at CU-Denver, but will encompass significant input from the partner districts and will include at least one session in a middle school. Faculty will receive an honorarium for participation in the professional development sessions, and participation will be rewarded as any other professional development activity (e.g. conference attendance), and the contributions of course development and implementation will also be rewarded in the merit evaluation process.
1.2-Please provide additional details about the summer camps. a. How will students be recruited? Will they be selected because of special needs or special interests in math and science?
The CSU and Ft. Lewis residential camps will recruit students through the Colorado Alliance for Minority Participation (CO-AMP), which is an NSF-funded statewide project that has contact with underrepresented students in 14 higher education and 4 tribal partners. We will be recruiting traditionally underrepresented students who will include Native Americans, Hispanics, African Americans, and students of low socioeconomic backgrounds. Middle and high school teachers will help recruit promising students who will benefit from the summer opportunities. Specifically, students will be recruited from the Southern Utes, the Ute Mountains Utes, the Navajos, rural areas around Ft. Collins, Pueblo, and Ft. Lewis, and the Front Range metropolitan areas. The selection process will target both students who have expressed a special interest in math and/or science as well as students for whom a summer experience such as this one could foster such an interest. The latter group will also include students who are high potential but low performing in STEM disciplines, as identified by their teachers and/or school administrators.
Participants in the Metropolitan State College of Denver (MSCD) summer camps will be recruited through the extensive teacher contacts in the database of MSCD’s Center for Mathematics, Science and Environmental Education and our many contacts with Front Range area school administrators. We will also avail ourselves of the free advertising available in area newspapers’ summer camps publications. Teachers, administrators, parents and community group leaders will nominate applicants by letter, and participants will be selected by a committee of faculty members involved in the program on the promise and enthusiasm they show in mathematics and science. Special attention will be given to students from underrepresented and/or economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Included in the application is a statement by the student about interest in science and mathematics and the reasons s/he wants to attend the camp. Interviews can be conducted if too many applications that are judged as being equivalent are received, and space is not available for all applicants.
b. Will parents at Ft. Collins and Ft. Carson drop the campers off each day and pick them up each night, or are these camps residential?
(Ft. Lewis?) The camps are residential. Parents are welcome to visit their children during the camp session as well as attend any activity that they would like to be part of.
c. How will faculty be recruited for work at Ft. Collins and Ft. Lewis? Have any agreed to participate in this activity? What are their fields of expertise?
Faculty will be recruited through CO-AMP contacts at each of the higher education institutions to design the curriculum and develop activities for the students. Many faculty members at both institutions have already agreed to be part of this worthwhile activity. The faculty will be reminded, via email, to sign their one page agreement on designing the curriculum and provide ideas of the activities two months before the camp starts. They will be receiving a stipend for their work, as well as learning about the cultural background of those students who are attending the summer camp so that they will gain professional development and be able to incorporate better practices within the classroom. Faculty fields of expertise are engineering, mathematics, chemistry, computer science, biology, and physics.
d. Please provide a biographical statement for Larry Johnson.
Dr. Johnson’s biographical sketch can be found at the end of this document (page 22).
1.3-Please describe the math, science, and technology program at the Denver Summer Science Institute. How will the project select students to attend? Will financial help be offered to these students?
The selection process is detailed above in the answer to 1.2. The grant will provide financial assistance to cover tuition, transportation, and materials and supplies for middle school students. In addition the program offers a stipend for the participation of high school students (to help offset money the student could earn in a summer job.) In addition monthly bus passes will be made available to the middle school participants to assist with the transportation to campus.
1.4-Drs. Kimbrough and Jacobson are listed as “coordinating mathematics and science activities for higher education faculty.” Please describe what this includes.
As part of their responsibilities coordinating the math and science activities for higher education faculty, Drs. Kimbrough and Jacobson will
• Work with other Arts and Sciences chairs to assign faculty responsible for teaching courses,
• Work with the project director (Bath) and district science and math specialists to organize and implement the professional development sessions for higher education faculty,
• In collaboration with the Executive Director of the Front Range BOCES (Sparks), facilitate the interactions between higher education faculty and district personnel so as to synchronize the curriculum between the two entities,
• Develop course catalog descriptions and obtain course approval from the necessary campus curriculum committees,
• Work with Arts and Sciences department chairs in assigning faculty to courses, scheduling necessary classroom, computer, and laboratory space for course offerings, and in recruitment systems for students in their departments into teaching, and
• Work with the project director and the Front Range BOCES executive director to help the partner districts recruit teachers to participate.
1.5-What particular project management challenges or obstacles, if any, do you foresee in your proposed Partnership? With what consequences? What strategies do you propose to address or manage these challenges/obstacles?
In a project of this magnitude and complexity, challenges will naturally arise due to the many collaborations that are necessary across the numerous institutional boundaries. In our case, the relationships across these boundaries are fundamentally solid and only expected to deepen as the project unfolds. Challenges will likely arise in four fundamental areas: 1) coordinating activities between higher education and district partners; 2) coordinating activities among higher education science and mathematics faculty, district personnel, and education faculty; 3) tackling district interactions and effecting institutional change at district level with respect to curriculum implementation and teacher reward, and 4) translating the proposed certificate process into state-wide endorsement of science and mathematics teachers at the middle school level. To address the first two areas we will rely on the long history of cooperation and interaction fostered by the Front Range BOCES[1], which fosters good working relationships across districts and with institutions of higher education, particularly with CU-Denver’s School of Education (SOE) where it is housed. As an integral part of the Front Range BOCES and as the result of well-established professional development schools in six districts, the SOE has excellent relationships with local school districts. The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS) and SOE also have good relationships both at the administrative and faculty levels, recently enhanced as the two units have cooperated to institute undergraduate teacher education for the first time. CU-Denver’s CLAS faculty have a long history of both formal and informal interactions with local school districts through the CU-Succeed[2] program and numerous science and mathematics outreach projects. Anticipated challenges in the third area (inter- and intra-district) will likely include the cost of training and materials associated with adoption of the evidence-based curricula by a given district as well as the development of the differentiated instruction activities prior to field testing them. We are confident that these challenges are manageable. The cost of some of the materials associated with curriculum reform can be offset by the grant and the “economies of scale” represented by the partnership will make resources available to the partnership districts that would not be accessible if they were attempting this kind of curriculum reform on their own. Similarly, the combined expertise and experience of the collective team of the RM-MSMSP can successfully address the difficulty of developing the differentiated instruction activities. Higher education faculty will work with district specialists in the Jefferson County School District in their implementation and subsequent evaluation. Once this material has been developed and tested, it will be disseminated to the other partner districts (as well as other districts outside the partnership and/or other states) who will benefit from the work done in Jefferson County. Another concern within the partner districts is the “growing pains” associated with changes in the well-entrenched teacher reward system that are fostered by this project with respect to the certificate/endorsement process. As the RM-MSMSP demonstrates that partnership activities enhance student learning and achievement, districts are likely to improve in flexibility.
With its decade-long history of significant institutional change to meet external mandates and community needs, the SOE is ready to take the lead in addressing the fourth challenge (statewide endorsement). In the context of two state organizations that have not historically collaborated effectively (the Colorado Department of Education and the Colorado Commission on Higher Education), the implementation of new state endorsements for Science Specialist and Mathematics Specialist at the middle school level will necessitate some strategic planning and tactical implementation. The RM-MSMSP is up to the challenge, however, in that the School of Education Dean (Rhodes) has a strong positive relationship with various administrators in the two organizations and with a large number of influential educators in the state. This coupled with her understanding of the underlying state politics will facilitate a positive outcome, particularly when the projects’ efforts demonstrate effective enhancement of student achievement in mathematics and science.
2. Teacher Quality, Quantity and Diversity
2.1-Please describe the professional development curriculum for teacher participants in further detail. a. Attach a course outline, along with a list of texts and other references, for at least one such course in math and one such course in science from the summer institute.
Since part of the proposed activities include the development of this curriculum, providing a detailed course outline as well as a list of texts and references would be premature at this time, particularly since the curriculum will in some measure be driven by the information determined from the Teacher Content Inventory (see section 6.1). However we have devised a rough outline of a mathematics course, entitled Problem Solving, and a science course entitled, Atoms and Macroscopic Properties of Matter, which can be found in Tables 1 and 2 on pages 22 and 23. The content could change somewhat as a result of the Content Inventory. We have also developed a draft list of possible courses (Table 3, page 24) in both mathematics and science which includes some of the topics and concepts that could be covered in those courses. All of the science courses listed will have a laboratory component that will be inquiry-oriented and address both the process of science and the open-ended nature of scientific experimentation.
b. Please describe assessment instruments (include samples of assessment materials, as appropriate) used in the courses referred to in your answer to part “a”.
As described above, part of the proposed activities include development of such assessment materials, and a more detailed description will be part of our first annual report. The most effective assessment instrument will likely be the Teacher Content Inventory (TCI). During the Planning Phase, it will be developed and used as a method of garnering baseline data of teacher content knowledge and skills. The TCI assessment is described in detail in Section 6.1 and will rely on the work of Ball (2002) and Weiss (2003) which ties the teacher content knowledge to teaching practices so that teachers can honestly assess their abilities in a non-threatening, non-punitive environment. As teachers take the courses and participate in the Structured Follow Up, they continually revisit those questions (or new variations) and expand their answers to reflect added content knowledge and deepening conceptual understanding. The augmented TCIs will provide important ongoing assessment information and will drive the course revisions as deemed necessary by formative assessment. Additional assessment instruments will include standard coursework (quizzes, individual and group problem sets, presentations, laboratory reports, etc.) and performance-based assessments. During the development phase, we will design rubrics for each course as well as for the Structured Follow Up, which will address various aspects of mathematics and science comprehension (e.g. facts; conceptual underpinnings and interconnectivity; experimental design and implementation; and/or data collection, interpretation, and presentation) as appropriate for each course. Structured Follow Up rubrics will address teachers’ abilities to translate enhanced content knowledge into improved instructional practice and ultimately to the implementation of differentiated instruction.
2.2-Please illustrate how “differentiated instruction” would be used in one of the courses described in question 1 above. a. Select a topic (e.g. the Pythagorean theorem, the theory of evolution of species, or the theory of ionic bonding) and describe activities or materials that would provide appropriate differentiated instruction for each of two or more of the subpopulations of students in the Partnership districts. Explain how the two approaches differ and why the different approaches would be appropriate for these subpopulations.
Differentiated instruction has its roots in the education of gifted and talented students, enabling teachers to tap into the different readiness levels, interests, and learning profiles within a classroom (Tomlinson, 1999). The teacher introduces material in a variety of ways and assesses student understanding through different methods. Differentiated instruction requires that teachers have a deep understanding of the material being taught such that they can assess student readiness and learning styles, design assignments that are appropriate to different levels and learning styles, and recognize and address misconceptions or misunderstandings when they arise. Students work in many patterns in a differentiated classroom. They may work alone on some tasks and in groups on others. Groups are created and recreated to reflect interest, similar readiness, different readiness, and learning styles; students work in different groups both within a single subject and across different subjects, depending upon learning style, readiness, and interest levels. We will implement differentiated instruction in the professional development courses as well since the teachers will come to the project with vast diversity in experience, content knowledge, and comprehension. The professional development sessions for the Science and Mathematics higher education faculty will include significant information about and training in differentiated instruction so that these faculty can model “best practices” in their courses. The example of differentiated instruction (at the middle school level) provided here focuses on an Earth Science lesson. A mathematics example is available upon request.
Earth Science: Scale of Planet Size and Distances in the Solar System (6th grade). The scale of the Solar System is a difficult concept for most students to learn because of the immense sizes and distances compared to everyday objects and distances observed on Earth. Because scale is challenging to teach and students at this age are at various stages along a continuum of concrete thinkers to abstract thinkers, this concept lends itself nicely to a differentiated format.
• All students begin with a practical activity where they use common concrete objects (various size fruits, marshmallows, and seeds that are provided) to identify which object best represents each planet at this scale. Most students know that Jupiter is the largest planet and can easily match it to the grapefruit and Mercury or Pluto to the poppy seed. As students share their current ideas about the Solar System, the teacher uses this lesson as a pre-assessment and learns what misconceptions students presently have about the size of planets.
• Students then make a scale drawing of the planets. The more concrete learners can first trace the objects to represent the planets. Analytical students can move quickly to analyzing a data table of planet statistics and use a given scale (for example, 1cm = Earth’s diameter). These students can use a compass and data table listing the diameters of the planets in multiples of Earth’s diameter to complete their drawing.
• For those students who are more creative in their approach to learning, the teacher leaves the assignment more open-ended allowing the student to choose his/her own scale for making an accurate drawing of the planets in the Solar System. These students are also more likely to include color in their depictions. Students trying this assignment quickly find out the challenges of choosing large scales such as 5cm = Earth’s diameter.
A similar series of differentiated lessons can be used to help students understand distances in the Solar System. Students can make their own scale model using one sheet of toilet paper to represent the distance of the Earth to the Sun (or 1 astronomical unit). When given Solar System distances in astronomical units, students can complete the entire scale with 40 sheets of toilet paper. More analytical students can determine their own scale or walk a scale model of the Solar System and determine the scale that was used. Creative students might use a story, skit or dance to illustrate the differences. In the latter example the teacher must channel the creativity to ensure that the depictions are scientifically accurate.
b. Please give an example of an instrument or method that could be used to assess student learning styles for purposes of choosing which of the differentiated instruction activities mentioned in part “a” would be appropriate for that student. Would the results of differentiated instruction be assessed differentially?
There is an enormous body of literature around the issue of student learning styles. Expecting teachers to address all the possible learning styles and cultural factors that influence learning would leave little time for anything substantive. However some attention should be paid to this aspect in order to improve student achievement for all students. Robert Sternberg and his co-workers, in a series of studies (Sternberg, Toriff, & Grigorenko 1998; Sternberg, & Spear-Swerling, 1996; Sternberg, 1995; Sternberg & Clinkenbeard, 1995) provide evidence to suggest that there should be at least some instruction that would be compatible with almost all students’ strengths and learning, enabling students to capitalize on their strengths and compensate for their weaknesses. These researchers have used a variety of instruments to assess learning styles (e.g. standardized tests of cognitive abilities, Otis-Lennon Intelligence Scales) and then addressed those learning styles in different manners. Today, teachers are using multiple strategies (i.e., interviews, projects, constructed response questions, etc.) to assess student learning—or collecting a “body of evidence” to indicate student growth in both content and process. In one study (Sternberg & Clinkenbeard, 1995), students who were better matched to instruction in terms of their patterns of abilities outperformed those students who were poorly matched. In more recent work they found that a triarchical approach to instruction, one which encompasses activities designed to appeal to analytical, practical, and creative learners was most effective at reaching all students. Thus a teacher presents content and provides activities that are aimed at those three areas. Factual knowledge and to some extent whether a student is at or near expectations for a grade level can be assessed using a simple multiple choice pre-test or past performances. Learning styles can be assessed using classroom observation, self-reporting on a questionnaire, or an analysis of performance on tasks that each focus on analytical, practical, or creative learning (see below for an example). The project team will also examine the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (Sternberg 1993) for its possible inclusion into the curriculum for teachers implementing differentiated instruction. Similarly a variety of assessments, rather than a single measure, would best enable the teacher to determine whether diverse students have mastered the material. In the Scale of Planet Size activity described above, a teacher could use the following assessment ideas to determine the level of student understanding at different stages of learning Solar System scale. Some students may only be successful on the more concrete example while others who came to class with higher mathematics skills or further developed towards thinking abstractly will be able to complete the more complex assessment.
• Students observe a diagram of the planets in their textbook or on a poster. They must explain whether the size of the planets is drawn to scale and to give evidence for their reasoning.
• For students who are more concrete, a teacher chooses pairs of planets—Earth & Jupiter or Mars & Saturn—for the students to compare in size. This assessment is simpler but can still be useful in assessing understanding of relative scale.
• For more abstract thinkers, a teacher can provide a diagram that includes a numerical scale. Using previous data from class and a Solar System data chart, students determine whether the planets are drawn to scale and, if not, to correct the drawings that are not to scale.
Assessments that focus on different learning styles might include:
• List the planets from largest to smallest. If the sun were the size of a large beach ball, how big would each planet be? (practical)
• Pretend you are a giant alien (how big?) and you are in a spacecraft traveling outwards from the sun. Describe what you observe as you pass each planet. (creative)
• Pick one of the planets and pretend it is the size of a ball (you decide what kind of ball, for example a baseball? Soccer ball?). Describe the other planets relative to that ball. (analytical)
2.3-What has been the rate of turnover of middle school mathematics and science teachers in partner districts for the past five years? How effective have these districts been at retaining newly hired middle school math and science teachers? Please explain how this project will influence the ability of partner districts to attract and retain highly qualified middle school math and science teachers.
Several of the school districts have been on spring vacation as we have crafted these responses, so these data will be incomplete, and the reverse site visit team will provide a complete table of information as part of our presentation. In Adams 14, there is a 46 % rate of retention of middle school mathematics and science teachers, while in Mapleton only ~ 40 % retention. In Jefferson County, there is 66 % retention of math and greater than 90 % retention of science teachers. These three districts report various ongoing and planned efforts at improving retention rates. These efforts include instructional coaches, content team support with induction, professional development aimed specifically at middle school, improved mentoring and induction training, improved curriculum that is accompanied by proper equipment and supplies, and exit interviews. Several of the partner districts are extremely concerned about their low retention rates.
A closer look at these data provides information about how this project can help districts attract and retain highly qualified math and science teachers. The retention rate of Jefferson County 7th and 8th grade science teachers is remarkably high (>90%). District representatives attribute this low turnover rate to the professional learning communities that have resulted from district-wide training in research-based curriculum, the rationale behind curriculum decisions, and group analysis of student work to guide instructional practice. For the past seven years, the district has provided induction training for all first and second year science teachers from 7th grade and beyond that includes training in the implementation of curriculum. The RM-MSMSP project will provide similar professional learning communities within and across districts. This is especially important for the smaller and more rural partner districts, which don’t have the critical mass of teacher numbers to accomplish this alone.
3. Challenging Courses and Curricula
3.1-Are there specific plans to revise the math and science curricula in Partner middle schools to make them more effective at challenging particular groups of students? If so, how do those plans relate to the proposed project? If differentiated instruction is included in those plans, please mention how and where.
As mentioned above, more information will be available at the reverse site visit, as by then we will have information from districts currently on vacation. Evidence-based challenging curriculum is in place in some districts and not in others, and in some districts it is in place in either mathematics or science but not both. Part of the RM-MSMSP work will involve fostering interaction among these disparate districts so that they can collaborate and learn from each other’s experiences. For example Mapleton has instituted an intense intervention program in mathematics and science, whereas Jeffco is looking towards differentiated instruction. Brighton is using evidence-based curriculum but is concerned that they are not closing achievement gaps in the process. The RM-MSMSP will help Jeffco implement the differentiated instruction and carefully analyze its effectiveness in addressing achievement gaps, providing valuable information for subsequent dissemination of differentiated instruction. Similarly the examination of the effectiveness of the intervention programs in Mapleton will inform the implementation of the science and mathematics enrichment labs. Another source of information to inform other districts and states that will come out of this project is the summer camp work. Evaluation of the camps will provide rich areas of comparison for students who do and don’t participate, teachers who are and are not involved in incorporation of camp activities in the school year, and teachers who do and do not participate in the professional development courses. These groups will provide a matrix of variables to help address overall factors that positively influence student achievement and achievement gaps in mathematics and science.
3.2-In what ways will the planned professional development curriculum enhance teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical skills to reach all students? To reach those who are traditionally underserved in mathematics/science? To reach those who are mathematically/scientifically gifted?
A study by Haycock, Jerald, and Huang (2001) indicate that long-term, sustained professional development and support for the improvement of teaching has a greater impact on the performance of minority and female students than upon white male students, and that highly effective teachers can produce as much as six times the learning gains produced by less effective teachers. The proposed professional development coursework and follow-up will imbue teachers with the deep and profound understanding of the science and/or mathematics content they are responsible for teaching. Thus the teachers will have the skills to successfully implement evidence-based curriculum, enabling them to teach with comfort, flexibility, and resourcefulness (Singham, 2003; Ma, 1999). The RM-MSMSP will help districts make data-based decisions about curriculum using data that is disaggregated by gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Furthermore, implementation of differentiated instruction enables teachers to effectively engage all students in learning, be they traditionally underrepresented, highly gifted, or in possession of an unusual learning style. A diversity of students will also be served by the summer camps as they will target both students who are traditionally underrepresented in science and mathematics and those who are highly interested in science or math-based subjects.
3.3-Please describe the mathematics and science programs envisioned for the summer camps and include samples of lessons and/or other activities that might be used. What will the typical daily schedule of the summer camps be like? Please describe this in detail, and describe major activities, such as trips, that are part of the program but do not fit the normal schedule.
The residential camps in Ft. Collins and Ft. Lewis will introduce engineering activities as well as mathematics and science projects not usually available to middle- or high-school students. Activities include computer-aided design, data-analysis and graphing, rocket building, bridge design and model construction, a mathematics workshop, geological field trips, surveying and global positioning system applications, web-design, PowerPoint instruction, solar energy experiments, a polarized light project, a project involving testing the senses, study of aquatic invertebrates, a biological mystery, study of astronomy, study of ethnobotany, and a project entitled Adventures in Food. In addition, the Little Shop of Physics program at Colorado State University, will present a traveling science program for students at Fort Lewis College (FLC) to demonstrate the physics activities and to collaborate with the Physics Department at FLC to deliver these hands-on activities. An example schedule is found below. Evening hours will include recreational activities (bowling, swimming, movies, mini-golf, climbing wall, basket- and volleyball) and a barbeque. Culture activities will include introduction of the Native American Elders, Story-Tellers and Pow-Wow, Hispanic dance/cultural demonstration along with role model speakers that will introduce some cultural ideas to the group.
Each session will include several of the activities described above. Initially campers will sample many of the activities and then will focus on a longer term project. The research topics
|Typical daily schedule for residential camps | |
|6:00-7:00 a.m. Students wake up, exercise, and shower. | |
|7:00-8:00 a.m. Breakfast. |1:30-3:00 p.m. Session III. |
|8:30-10:00 a.m. Session I. Students will be working in small groups, |3:00-3:15 p.m. Break. |
|supervised by mentors, teachers, and counselors. |3:15-5:00 p.m. Student work in groups on research projects. |
|10:00-10:15 a.m. Break/snack. |5:00-6:00 p.m. Free time |
|10:15-11:45 a.m. Session II. |6:00-7:00 p.m. Supper |
|12:00-1:30 p.m. Lunch in the cafeteria. Camp staff lunch with the |7:00-9:00 p.m. Recreational activities |
|students to interact socially. |9:30 p.m. Lights out |
for the projects are: engineering, physics, chemistry, biology, environmental science, and geology. Each group of five to six campers will be supervised by a student mentor and advised by a faculty member. Students are required to present their research findings at the end of the two weeks during the award banquet ceremony. The award banquet ceremony is a great opportunity to bring together campers, teachers, mentors, counselors, faculty members, and families to share the students’ achievement and research findings. Students receive an award certificate, camp t-shirt, and a gift crafted by the college as souvenirs. We will encourage the campers to do their presentations again at their respective schools for their peers and teachers and work with teachers to facilitate this. We will also encourage them to present their research at science fairs and any other local conferences and gatherings. Field trips will be scheduled around each particular project and would include sites such as caves for geology, a museum in Denver for science activities, Amoco Gas Corporation, Hewlett Packard, Agilent Technologies, and IBM. Local industries arrange the field trips and provide materials and activities during the field trip that are fitting for middle and high school students.
|Typical daily schedule for Summer Science Institute (Middle School) at MSCD |
|Day 1: Physics |
|8:00-8:30 Kids are dropped off in front of Tivoli Building during this time. |
|8:30 Entire group with Camp Councilors walk to location of today’s activities. |
|9:00 Class convenes in physics laboratory and pendulum exercise is introduced. Hands-on activity with pendulum, materials continues until |
|10:30. |
|10:30 Rocket experiment is introduced and preliminary activity takes place |
|11:00 Students, teachers, camp councilors go outside to conduct rocket activities with rockets fired in a direction away from buildings and|
|towards targets. |
|12:00 Camp councilors and students return to Tivoli Building for lunch in one of food distributors in the building. |
|12:30 Students return to drop off area for parent pick up or bus ride home. |
|Afternoon session is analogous to morning session & the two groups interact over lunch. Similar schedules exist for other disciplines. Day |
|2 Chemistry; Day 3 Meteorology; Days 4 - 5 Web Site Development; Day 6 Math; Day 7 Aerospace Science; Days 8 and 9 Microbiology; Day 10 The|
|Science of Elitch’s Gardens, an all day field trip with both sessions. |
The Summer Science Institute at MSCD is a camp for middle school students interested in math and science. In each ten half-day session, participants will engage in hands-on activities in several science, mathematics and technology disciplines. They will study the physics of rocketry and construct and fly their own rockets, speculating their rocket’s trajectory attempting to adjust their launching data to hit a target a hundred feet away. In chemistry, they synthesize several different materials (e.g. soap, polymers) and study the characteristics of each. In web-site development, they are given an opportunity to build their own websites under the tutelage of a faculty member from the Computer Information Sciences Department. They study meteorology and use their knowledge to forecast the weather. The camp experience culminates in a field trip to a local amusement park. Before this field trip, they forecast the weather for the day of the trip, study the physics and engineering of the rides, learn about the different materials involved in ride construction, and explore the nutrition content of the various foods offered for sale in the park.
3.4-What role, if any, will technology and/or specialized lab equipment play in the new courses and curricula developed and/or implemented by this project? What budgetary provisions have been made for this in the courses for teachers? What funds will there be to support and maintain corresponding changes in Partner district classrooms? In particular, what evidence is there that courses offered remotely using the Tegrity Content Delivery System will be appropriate and challenging for their intended audience? How will the on-line offerings be better than or different from on-line offerings for teachers from other developers?
Both technology and lab equipment will play a significant role in the RM-MSMSP curriculum. The budget will be provide science teachers with lab equipment “kits” and specialized software they can take back to their classrooms. The kits will be used as part of their coursework laboratory experience and subsequently to enhance and support instruction in the classroom. Similarly math teachers will be provided with software, graphing calculators, and/or other tools for implementing challenging curriculum in their classrooms. As part of the Teacher Content Inventory process, teachers will also provide information about current access to supplies and equipment, allowing us to tailor the equipment provisions to teacher needs and to discuss with district curriculum coordinators needed equipment for all classrooms. These materials are included in the “materials and supplies” section of our budget, and each higher education instructor will coordinate the purchase of equipment with the partner districts, within the context of each course’s laboratory content. In addition a FIPSE-funded[3] project at CU-Denver spearheaded the development of a “kitchen chemistry” laboratory curriculum for introductory college chemistry courses offered in a distance learning format. This curriculum utilizes ordinary grocery and hardware store supplies and “chemicals” in chemistry experiments analogous to traditional counterparts. One of the unintended consequences associated with this project is that students who use such familiar materials develop a much better understanding of how chemistry fits into their everyday lives when compared with students who perform analogous experiments in a traditional laboratory (Kimbrough, Reeves, & Heath, 2002). Similar work has been done in Physics (McDermott, 1996). We feel that adapting such an approach for the laboratory portion of these courses is a natural and logical approach to enable middle school teachers the skills and confidence to involve students in science experimentation using readily accessible materials. In addition, it is more likely that this approach of using ordinary materials will be institutionalized in the face of difficult district budgets.
The Tegrity Content Delivery System is a delivery system; the math or science professor teaches the same content as the traditional class while also taping the class for future use by other teachers. Thus the distance-learning versions of the course will be analogous in content to versions offered “live” and will feature the same university instructors who teach the face-to-face classes. Tegrity simply allows streaming of audio (instructor lecture, questions, etc.) and video (instructor face, navigation through a website, etc.) with PowerPoint slides associated with a class. The advantage to the use of Tegrity is that it is available in a variety of formats making it accessible to the participating teachers in a host of computer applications. A teacher can easily access it through any type of Internet connection, or if using an Internet connection is inconvenient (camping or in a car), the lectures can be made available on a CD ROM. The instructor can stop the “lecture” portion at any time to allow time for problem-solving or laboratory activities. Similarly, the camera can be redirected at any time to allow for demonstrations of laboratory procedures or apparatus. The instructor has a tablet PC feature that allows him or her to write directly on the screen for further clarification or to answer specific student questions. Tegrity also has a document camera that allows for “snapshots” of equipment or materials. Audience microphones can even allow for the system to capture a group discussion of a topic. Our team would happily provide a demonstration of a Tegrity interactive lecture to clarify any lingering concerns.
3.5-Please describe how the after school tutoring in “Math Enrichment Labs” and “Science Enrichment Labs” will be arranged. In particular, what credit and/or compensation will the teachers receive, and how will students be encouraged or enabled to participate? Will these be only for students doing poorly? Or will these also be sources of enrichment for students doing well? Will special transportation arrangements be needed for those students? If so, how are the arrangements and any extra costs to be handled?
The science and mathematics enrichment labs will be modeled after an after-school program that is in place at select Denver Public middle schools. Teachers who participated in the Summer Academy will be expected to engage in one of several action research projects as part of the Structured Follow Up (SFU) activities. Participation in the enrichment labs will be one of the options for such a research project and will provide the RM-MSMSP project as a whole useful data about how such interventions should be orchestrated to maximize their effect on both teacher and student learning. Teachers will receive remuneration for their participation at the same level as they do for other activities outside of school time. The enrichment labs will be offered to all students in a particular middle school. Three student groups in particular will be targeted for participation: 1) students who are performing below grade level in math or science, 2) students who are traditionally underrepresented in mathematics and science (minority and female), and 3) students who show a particular aptitude or interest in mathematics or science, regardless of their current level of achievement. In this manner we can carry the philosophy and implementation of differentiated instruction into the enrichment laboratories as well. Transportation in the form of “late buses” will be provided as modeled after the DPS program. These additional costs will be provided by the grant and gradually shifted over to the districts as the program is institutionalized.
4. Institutional Change and Sustainability
4.1-Describe any changes in the current mathematics and science curricula for preservice students at each of the Partner institutions of higher education to be brought about as a result of this project. Include new courses, new programs, certificates, endorsements, or degrees as well as changes in existing programs. Please describe the proposed Middle School Certificate Program at CU Denver. Include names of courses and their descriptions, including prerequisites, to the extent they are known at this time, as well as how the courses are expected to relate to each other.
The proposed courses, which will be implemented for both pre-service and in-service teachers, will be finalized as part of the project activities, but Table 3 (p. 24) lists possible offerings. For the Mathematics Certificate, all seven of the proposed courses will be required, in addition to any math course satisfying the university’s quantitative literacy requirement. The Science Certificate requires six courses and must include at least one course from each of the four categories below:
|Understanding the Cell |Atoms and Macroscopic Properties of |History and Nature of the Earth |Waves, Mech-anics, & Charge |
|Ecology and Evolution |Matter |The Universe | |
|Basic Genetics |Aqueous Environments | | |
The sequence of Mathematics courses will ensure these teachers have the breadth and depth to explore, explain, and expound on any and all of the topics included in the Middle School Mathematics curriculum as well as enabling them to understand where students are in their understanding. It will also give teachers the ability to work with students at all achievement levels, using numerous hands on activities for both enrichment and remediation. The science courses provide the teacher with the broad interdisciplinary overview of science that is required to teach students at the middle school level. It is by design that the course titles are not labeled with the traditional “biology, chemistry, physics, geology” monikers. Although focused in a particular area, the courses will be interdisciplinary. Thus both the Cell and the Genetics courses will contain some chemistry, Ecology will have a geologic component, Aqueous Environments will include nutrition and the aqueous nature of the cell, the Earth course will include biological as well as geological evolution, and Waves, Mechanics, and Charge will also include some chemistry as related to materials. The laboratory activities will reflect the interdisciplinary nature as well. As mentioned elsewhere, these courses will be attended by many students other than the pre-service teachers, who will use them to fulfill core curriculum requirements. Once the certificate programs are established, the RM-MSMSP partnership will move towards negotiation of the proposed State Endorsements outlined in the original proposal. Just as experienced teachers return to the university to earn a Reading Specialist endorsement, they will return to the university to earn a Math Specialist or Science Specialist endorsement. This endorsement will be available at all Colorado institutions that offer graduate work.
4.2-Provide a time line (including approval by appropriate governing bodies and authorities) for expected implementation of the institutional changes described in question 1.
See Table 4, on page 25.
4.3-Please describe the current efforts of each of the Partner institutions of higher education at increasing the quantity, quality, and diversity of students in their programs for preservice teachers of mathematics and science. In particular, describe their recruitment efforts in these areas and how they intend to change those efforts as part of the proposed project.
The higher education partners currently have few programs in place that target pre-service teachers explicitly. The NSF-sponsored Colorado Alliance for Minority Participation and other similar programs recruit traditionally underrepresented groups into science, mathematics, and engineering majors and provide those students support and mentoring, but these programs are not aimed at promoting teaching as a career. The RM-MSMSP will address this problem by working with science and mathematics departments in the partner higher education institutions to identify postsecondary students who demonstrate high ability in required introductory courses. One science and one mathematics faculty member at each partner institution will be identified as pre-teaching careers advisors (analogous to our pre-health careers advisor) to provide students with information about mathematics and science teaching careers, specifically including information about teaching and licensure. At CU-Denver in particular it is common for select undergraduates to be hired as laboratory teaching assistants in math and the sciences, and these targeted students will be recruited into those teaching roles, as well as serving as tutors in the science and mathematics outreach laboratories in the partner districts and counselors in the project’s summer camps. The RM-MSMSP structure will provide the opportunity for these advisors to establish cross-institutional linkages that will connect community college students with teacher education programs at four year institutions. Undergraduates involved in these efforts who elect to pursue licensure, can count their teaching experience as towards the teaching license.
4.4-What are the incentives for recruitment and sustained involvement of STEM college/ university faculty, (e.g., rewards and recognitions, policy changes) into work which will sustain the work of the Partnership?
Faculty recruited for participation in this project will be paid for course development and these courses will be offered within regular teaching loads. The coursework will thus become institutionalized and offered regularly, generating student credit hours as with any other science or mathematics course, and indeed students who are working towards baccalaureate degrees in a variety of majors will take these courses as part of their mathematics or science core curriculum requirements. As the NCLB legislation requirements are enforced and the proposed state-wide endorsement for Science Specialist and Mathematics Specialist is implemented, expectations for a better educated teacher workforce at the middle school level will increase. Furthermore, the endorsements will enhance the teaching profession at the middle school level ensuring that middle school teaching will become a focused career path, rather than the stepping stone to high school as it is often perceived. This project will provide a model for other states and institutions of higher education to emulate the improvement of teacher content knowledge and delivery at the middle school level. Participation in the summer camps will be rewarded by a stipend as well as being viewed favorably in the sense of university service.
4.5-What institutional changes are expected in participating K-12 Partner districts as a result of this project? In particular, will there be any effort to make the math and science enrichment labs permanent? Will there be any effort by the Partner K-12 districts to maintain the summer camps, even if they are no longer subsidized by the Partner Institutions of Higher Education?
The most profound institutional changes at the district level will be 1) improved achievement of partner district 6 – 8th graders in math and science through enhanced teacher content knowledge, implementation of challenging curriculum and enrichment labs and 2) creation of professional learning communities among the participating middle school teachers. The first of these will be reflected in improved CSAP scores and other evaluation indicators (see below). Implementation of the aforementioned Certificate/Endorsement Program will result in higher district expectations for middle school teacher preparation in math and science. This enhanced expectation will be reflected in the marketplace in the hiring and reward system for these newly certified/endorsed teachers. The second major institutional change (learning communities) is particularly important at the middle school level. Research has shown that middle school teachers are less likely to view their school as a learning community than those in elementary and high schools (Meehan, et al., 2003). Professional learning communities provide teachers with the pedagogical support they need to successfully implement challenging curriculum. This increases teacher retention rates and enhances instruction. Every effort will be made to make the math and science enrichment labs permanent as well as continue the summer camps if higher education partners no longer subsidize them; however, these efforts must be tied to enhanced student performance and understanding. As one partner district official put it, “If you can show improvement, the principals will find the money somehow!” Furthermore, once established, the summer camps will work towards long term sustainability by leveraging the current NSF funding from this project and CO-AMP to obtain local funding from state and industry donors.
5. Evidence-based Design and Outcomes
5.1-The project’s stated outcome 1.3.1, “Increased number of highly qualified teachers” is defined (by law, it seems) exclusively in terms of “seat time.” What are your goals for participating teachers in terms of knowledge and skills? How is achievement of these goals to be assessed?
The federal “No Child Left Behind” statute requires that all teachers teaching in core academic content areas meet the requirements for being designated as “highly qualified” by the end of the 2005-6 school year. Core academic content areas include mathematics and science, and, while the federal statute allows a wide definition of the term “highly qualified,” even the more flexible guidelines under current consideration designates “highly qualified” as the equivalent of a bacca-laureate degree (U.S. Dept. Ed., 2004). Thus, the Colorado Department of Education has defined “highly qualified” as a teacher who “shall have passed the CSBE-adopted Secondary, or K-12, content area test(s), in the content area(s) being taught or shall have acquired the equivalent of 24 semester hours in the core academic content area(s) being taught.” (CDE, 2003) However, it has been demonstrated that merely providing teachers with additional content is not enough to improve teaching and learning. Teachers need the skills to implement that content effectively in the classroom. The Teacher Content Inventory will enable the teachers to determine where their needs are with respect to science and mathematics content and will provide the RM-MSMSP personnel with what is effectively a “pre-test” of teacher content knowledge. As that content inventory is maintained through the path of professional development curriculum and Structured Follow-Up, it will provide the project with on-going information about the degree to which content knowledge is enhanced and how effectively that enhancement is translated into improved instruction and the implementation of challenging curriculum. As RM-MSMSP teachers develop deep understanding of their fields of study, they should be better able to assess student understanding of content, recognize and deal with common and uncommon misconceptions, and invoke differentiated instructional methods to improve the achievement of all students. The assessment of the achievement of these goals is addressed below in the section on evaluation.
5.2-The project’s stated outcome 1.3.2 is enhanced middle school student achievement as measured by the Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP). Please clarify the statement, “The RM-MSMSP will have impact on all of these students, as reflected by improved CSAP performance, with a concentrated impact upon at least 60% of the total population.” Specifically, what is meant by a “concentrated effect?”
This statement reflects differences in the partner districts as well as projected longitudinal effects. Specifically, in the largest partner district, Jefferson County (Jeffco) 7th and 8th grade teachers for the most part have secondary certification, and thus have baccalaureate degrees in their content areas, meeting the NCLB designation of “highly qualified”. This is not true of most of the other participating districts. Thus in Jefferson County only approximately one third of middle school students will be directly affected by the RM-MSMSP activities. This is further complicated by the fact that some of the Jeffco schools are not traditional middle schools but hearken back to the older K-6/Junior High model. However, we expect to see a longitudinal effect on students who have improved science and mathematics instruction in their 6th grade year, carrying over that increased achievement into subsequent years. In the other partner districts, far fewer of the 7th and 8th grade teachers are secondary-certified in either mathematics or science, so the “concentrated” or direct impact on students will be greater.
5.3-What evidence is there that planned project activities can close achievement gaps in which certain subpopulations lag behind the rest? What evidence is there that summer camp experiences in math and science for middle school students improves their achievement in math and science?
The planned project activities draw on a host of available evidence to address achievement gaps. Clifford Adelman (1999) has demonstrated that the highest level of mathematics a student has studied is the strongest predictor of baccalaureate degree completion among a variety of factors he examined, more than socioeconomic status, gender, race, or ethnicity. Furthermore his study showed that this effect was far more pronounced for black and Latino students than for others. A strong background in mathematics is fundamental to the study of all sciences, even those that used to be primarily qualitative (biology, medicine, psychology, geography), as they are now becoming more quantitative (Singham, 2003). A study by Alan Schoenfeld (2002) showed that effective implementation of evidence-based curricula in mathematics significantly decreased the achievement gap between whites and underrepresented minority students. Both of these studies indicate that reduction of this gap can be achieved through educational measures that do not directly target the achievement gap (Singham, 2003). Mathematics education is ahead of science education in this arena, but the lessons learned in one are applicable to the other. Additionally these and other data (Haycock, Jerald, & Huang, 2001) indicate that long-term, sustained professional development and support for the improvement of teaching has a greater impact on the performance of minority and female students than upon white male students, and that effective teachers can produce as much as six times the learning gains produced by less effective teachers. Possessing the deep and profound understanding of the science and/or mathematics content and having the skills to successfully implement evidence-based curriculum enables a teacher to teach with comfort, flexibility, and resourcefulness (Singham, 2003; Ma, 1999). The learning communities that will develop as a result of this professional development will also positively influence the achievement gap. A study of 47 elementary, middle, and high schools in Kentucky revealed that schools where staff felt they were part of a professional learning community were best able to positively diminish race/ethnicity- and socioeconomic status-based achievement gaps (Cowley & Meehan, 2002). This study also found that middle school teachers were the least likely to view their buildings as a professional learning communities.
The implementation of differentiated instruction coupled with the intervention associated with the enrichment labs will particularly target narrowing of achievement gaps. This is important for the middle school years where students demonstrate vast differences in their capacity for concrete versus abstract thinking. Instruction that is differentiated with respect to performance and learning style will positively affect the learning of all students. In another Kentucky study (Meehan et al., 2003), achievement gaps were narrowest in classrooms where the teacher used an appropriate pace to cover content, used individualized instruction, related the topics to students’ lives and experiences, rewarded student efforts, conducted a variety of assessments, and reminded students of previously learned material—all tenets of differentiated instruction. In addition, the partner districts with the lowest achievement numbers and most significant achievement gaps (Adams 14, Englewood, Brighton, and Mapleton) specifically requested the implementation of intervention programs as part of the RM-MSMSP initiative in order to target low achieving students. The enrichment laboratories are designed to specifically address this need, and assessment of their effectiveness will provide useful information for other districts and states to emulate.
Summer science and mathematics enrichment experiences improve both attitude and achievement in those areas. Work in the area of literacy has demonstrated significant widening of the achievement gap between students of high and low socioeconomic status as a result of summer vacation (Allington, & McGill-Franzen, 2003; Harris, Cooper et. al., 1996). Involving students in summer activities that foster literacy can mitigate that effect, and one can extrapolate those results into the areas of science and math. Improved achievement was demonstrated among 54 campers who attended either a theatre or a science camp on pre-/post-test results and problem solving ability (Fry, 1990). The summer camps proposed here will provide a coursework/career link, often missing in the psyches of middle school students. Local assessment experiences in past sessions of both the day camp and the residential camp have demonstrated similar results indicating that student attitudes and interest have improved as a result of the experience. A longitudinal study in conjunction with the day camp (MSCD) indicated that that interest was maintained years beyond the program. Native American students who have participated in similar camps at Ft. Lewis and at Colorado School of Mines have demonstrated higher achievement in the classroom, and their parents questionnaires reveal that their children have more excitement, motivation, and eagerness to learn math and sciences after their camp experiences. A follow up study by Michael Boller (1994) found that all of the more than 200 Native American students who attended the NSF Young Scholars program at the Colorado School of Mines returned to their high schools and graduated. This is a remarkable accomplishment as on some reservations the high school graduation rate is as low as 15%.
5.4-In what domains do you expect your project’s formative evaluation to be especially useful in guiding your decision-making? What kinds of data will you need to collect?
The formative evaluation will be useful to each of the three goals and six outcomes described in the project proposal: Goal 1, enhanced teacher quality; Goal 2, access to challenging curriculum; Goal 3, enhanced teacher pipeline. However, it is expected that the formative evaluations will be particularly useful to the planning, implementation, and revision of the professional development courses, Structured Follow-Up, and outreach activities (related to Goals 1 and 2). These efforts are the center of the project and impact the majority of the anticipated outcomes. Thus, the evaluation will imbed a number of data collection instruments directly into the participant’s daily activities allowing for efficient collection of data related to attitudes, successes, difficulties, task completion, reflections, content, and pedagogy. In addition the results of the Teacher Content Inventory, described in greater detail below in section 6.1, will guide the course development and implementation as well as the Structured Follow Up. It will be equally important to collect information from math and science higher education faculty. In a previous project where instructors were separated by distance, such information was collected electronically through a web-based questionnaire at specific points in the project. This method was efficient and effective. We plan to collect feedback in a similar manner, while adding a database for efficient query. The collected data will inform the evaluation team of the project’s progress. This information will then be summarized for the management team allowing them to implement necessary changes or improvements.
6. Project Evaluation
6.1-What are reasonable quantitative benchmarks for gains on the Teacher Content Inventory? The project indicates plans to use this during the Planning Phase, but it does not mention any plans to use this test again and look for improvement in the scores. Please provide the rationale for that decision.
The Teacher Content Inventory (TCI) is an ongoing assessment that will continue through the professional development process of the entire RM-MSMSP project. During the Planning Phase, it will be used as a method of garnering baseline data of teacher content knowledge and skills. The assessment will rely on the work of Ball (2002) and Weiss (2003) which ties teacher content knowledge to teaching practices so that teachers can honestly assess their abilities in an environment that is not threatening or punitive. For example, teachers respond to a series of questions in a given content area, such as “What would you say to a student who asked you why leaves change color in the fall?” Their answers when carefully analyzed will provide informa-tion about their depth of understanding of plant pigments, chlorophyll, photosynthesis, etc., as well as their understanding of the knowledge base and sophistication of their target student audience. Thus the TCI will enable the teachers to determine where their needs are with respect to science and mathematics content and will provide the project personnel with what is effective-ly an in-depth “pre-test” of teacher content knowledge. The professional development curriculum can then address teacher knowledge gaps and/or misconceptions both with respect to content and instructional practice. Each teacher will use his or her TCI to set personal goals for professional growth and development. As teachers take the courses and participate in the Structured Follow Up, they continually revisit those questions (or new variations) and expand their answers to reflect added content knowledge, deepening conceptual understanding, and improved instruct-tional practices in the implementation of challenging curriculum. The development of the TCIs will provide important ongoing assessment information and will drive the course revisions as deemed necessary by formative assessment. The complete set of TCIs for individual teachers will be examined to determine the extent to which their content knowledge has improved and in which specific areas, as related to the professional development coursework. This information will be used in the formative stages to make changes or improvements to the professional development courses and the summative stage to remark on the effectiveness of the professional development courses in improving teachers’ science and mathematics content knowledge.
Setting a quantitative benchmark at this time is not realistic, as the TCI questions have not been developed. We will attempt to obtain field-tested versions in mathematics from the Ball group at Michigan and in science from the Weiss group in North Carolina by the time we are ready to administer the TCIs. However, we know that the TCI will have specific content related questions that are scored on the quality and depth of participant responses. The TCI will be revisited at three distinct points: summer course completion, Structured Follow-Up completion, and end of certification program. At each point, participants will show improvements in the number of questions answered and the quality of the answers stated. In other words, they will be able to answer more questions and at a higher quality level as they progress through the program. In a hypothetical example, for the content outlined in the Atoms and Macroscopic Properties of Matter course discussed above, there may be 10 questions related to the course content, and each answer is scored using a 5 point rubric. A teacher, prior to any course work, is able to answer 6 of the 10 questions. Of the six questions, she is able to answer questions related to measurement and experimental design and phases of matter, scoring a 4/5 or 5/5. However, questions about atomic structure and bonding reveals weaknesses in content knowledge, and she scores between 1 – 3/5 on those questions. Lastly, the participant was unable to answer questions about chemical reactions or polymers and macromolecules. This informs the project team and the teacher that she needs to improve her understanding of atomic structure and bonding, as well as learn about chemical reactions and polymers and macromolecules from scratch. By revisiting the TCI over the course of the project, not only will the evaluation team be able to track her advances in both content knowledge and instructional practice, but the teacher will see improvement in her knowledge and understanding so that she will have the confidence to successfully implement challenging curriculum in the classroom. A reasonable benchmark for this teacher in this area of her TCI would be her ability to answer at least 8 of the 10 questions at a level of four or higher. Such benchmarks would be implemented for each of the science and mathematics courses/content areas.
6.2-Is CSAP performance the only measure of middle school student achievement in math and science that the project will use? In particular, has any thought been given to assessing the impact of the project on student: a) Attitudes toward math & science? b) Achievement in high school? c) Participation in activities like science fairs or Math Olympiads? d) Achievement in middle school as measured by instruments which are not merely multiple choice tests?
The evaluation is arranged to collect data beyond that of the CSAP that will reflect the impact on students. In particular, the evaluation has included student interviews and surveys, as well as collecting student records of practice. A random sample of students from the different districts will be selected for data collection. Interviews will provide information about student attitudes, participation, and achievement information. Interviews will also collect summary level informa-tion and will occur less frequently than other planned instruments. RM-MSMSP participant interviews will add to this data pool. Additional information from underrepresented populations will be collected during outreach sessions. Interviews will be conducted in many venues and will include both structured and unstructured procedures (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Surveys will be used to collect information for specific events. Surveys may include online feedback forms or worksheets that capture student reaction soon after a math or science experience. Records of practice are examples of student work resulting from participation in a particular class. Ball and Cohen (1999) suggest that analyzing such records provide insight into student thinking as well as classroom occurrences. It is anticipated that this project will provide traditional and innovative records of practice that upon analysis will provide evidence of student learning and development. As students progress through the year, under the instruction of a participating teacher, changes in the teacher’s practice as well as student learning will be evident in the type and quality of work that is produced. Records of practice available to the evaluator will include items such as lab reports, graphs, and innovative assessments. Some of the records of practice will be evaluated using rubrics and therefore can be statistically analyzed to determine differences in student performance. Other items will need to be analyzed using qualitative methods.
6.3-What would be reasonable quantitative benchmarks for improvement on CSAP scores that could be expected as a result of project activities? In particular, please explain the “weighted CSAP index” referred to in Appendix 2 and state what would be a reasonable gain to expect in this index as a result of project activities. If possible, cite gains made by other districts or the state as a whole as a basis for comparison with gains which this project sets as goals.
The expected result of project activities on the CSAP scores for mathematics and science in grades 6- 8 is an estimated 5% increase in students scoring in the proficient and advanced categories. This benchmark describes an increase in the number of students testing in the combined categories of proficient and advanced for a participating teacher’s classroom over the course of the project. For example, the project proposal estimates that 85% of the ~160 science teachers and ~170 mathematics teachers will participate in the certificate programs in mathematics and science education initiated through this project. Each year these 280 potential participants teach approximately 35,345 students in 6th -8th grade math and science. A shifting of five percent of this student population from not proficient to proficient/advanced would tally to about 1500 students. As discussed earlier, in the early stages of the project a more concentrated effect may be evident in districts that have a greater number of middle school teachers participating in the project. However, the 5% benchmark will continue to be useful since it is focused on the number of students reaching a higher proficiency level. Eventually, the number (not the percent difference) of students impacted will increase due to RM-MSMSP trained pre-service teachers entering the workforce and dissemination of the project to other districts. The “weighted CSAP index” is a formula derived by the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) to compare performances across schools and districts with different numbers of students (CDE, 2002). At this time we have no examples of gains made by other projects; however, there are four small partnership projects that were recently funded by CDE that will be well established by the time we implement this project, and we can compare our progress to those.
6.4-What would be a reasonable quantitative goal for decreasing achievement gaps on the CSAP, as stated in Outcome goal 1.3.3? What other indicators of decreasing achievement gaps might reasonably be used to demonstrate progress toward shrinking these achievement gaps?
Positively impacting achievement gaps is difficult due to the complex nature of the causes and the limited amount of research evidence that supports particular strategies for improvement (Johnston & Viadero, 2000; Jencks & Phillips, 1998, Northwest Regional Education Lab, 1997). Historically, it is noted that gaps tend to widen in elementary school and remain fixed through high school (Viadero, 2000; NCES 2001). Even in schools where minority students score well above their minority counterparts in other districts, they still tend to lag behind white students (Viadero, 2000). A resurgence of interest in and influence on the achievement gap began in the mid to late 1990s. No conclusive evidence points to any single cause, and potential influences include: poverty, access to curriculum, peer pressure, mobility, teacher quality, parenting, pre-school, ‘summer effect,’ teacher expectations, television, and test bias (Viadero, 2000). Schools that have decreased the achievement gap report that a) solid, consistent implementation of curri-cular programs is more important than the programs themselves; b) long-term leadership with high expectations is important; c) schools must provide access to high-level classes and encour-age more minority students to take them; and d) the academic bar must be raised for students and teachers (Johnston & Viadero, 2000). Each of these items (a-d) is addressed in the activities associated with implementation of the RM-MSMSP, and it is thus anticipated that this project will positively impact the education of underrepresented groups. This positive impact will be evident in increased attendance in science and math courses and related extracurricular activities, improved performance in science and math classes (grades, class participation), continuation of enrollment in science and math classes beyond middle school, and improved performance on the CSAP grade level exams in math and science. The evaluation team will capitalize on every opportunity to collect data to track the trend. Realizing that the achievement gap is difficult to understand and impact, the evaluation team estimates that a reasonable quantitative goal for decreasing the achievement gap on the CSAP would be a 2% difference in the number of underrepresented students scoring differently from the majority. In other words, 2% more of the underrepresented student population being taught by RM-MSMSP participants will score at equivalent levels to the traditional represented groups. Close attention to the performance of students targeted for tutoring and summer camps will assist in determining factors that may impact minority performance in math and science. Appropriate integration of traditional curriculum and camp curriculum will be considered as part of the formative process.
6.5-How will the Summer Science Camps be evaluated?
The summer camp and summer day camp evaluations will be completed by two teams, each of which will be located close to the camps. The residential summer camp evaluation team will: a) monitor the progress of student’s achievements and b) identify the successful approaches and activities that determine student’s successes and their potential for possible project replication in other schools within the surrounding areas. Student development will be identified in the following manner: a) school attendance and retention, b) performance and achievement in math and science classes, c) response and engagement with indigenous and cultural learning activities, d) interaction demonstrated among all the members of the learning communities, e) demonstrated application of techniques in critical thinking and problem solving, f) attendance to science fairs and to local and/or regional workshops/conferences. The above will be measured through formal evaluation procedures and through summative evaluation which indicates the degree of the student’s achievement and performance in math, science, pre-engineering and technology content areas. The summer day camps will be evaluated through: a) direct formal feedback from the students at the end of their experiences, b) feedback from parents and teachers, and c) written staff summaries. The questionnaires will be administered to the students by staff of the Center, not by faculty teaching in the programs. Faculty will receive summary evaluations developed by the Center staff based on the student questionnaires. Decisions on changes in format, staffing, or support processes will be made based on evidence gathered from one or more of these sources. Both sets of camp summaries will be reviewed by the Project Evaluator (Heath). The information will be included in the overall formative and summative evaluation reports. The Project Evaluator will be in close contact with the summer camp evaluation teams to assist with instrument development or data collection methods. Communication among the teams will be on-going so as not to overlap or overlook data collection opportunities. Comparisons between students who participate in the summer activities and students not participating will show the impact of the experience on individual students. This will inform the management team of additional ways to integrate the summer enrichment activities into the academic activities.
6.6-How will the distance-learning versions of the courses be assessed?
The distance-learning (DL) versions of the courses will be assessed in the same manner as the traditional campus courses. The DL courses will be compared to the national and state standards (math and science) by using a checklist that determines the extent to which a course meets the standards in the areas of teaching, assessment, content, and program structure. The checklist will be completed after reviewing instructor and student feedback forms and reviewing the course produced using the Tegrity system. The instrument provides data for the formative evaluation in each of the areas and pinpoints areas of strength and weakness in the course. Teacher Content Inventories will be obtained for DL participants and will provide the project with analogous formative and summative assessment as for the traditional on-campus offerings. In addition, curricular records (course syllabi and assessments) will be collected and organized to provide the evaluation team with a record of the occurrences in each of the courses and venues. This information will assist with the re-creation of events and decisions that instructors made during both the development and implementation of the traditional on-campus university curriculum. Such information will assist with structured interviews of instructors and course developers, as well as the formative and summative evaluations. Finally, courses that include a lab component to the course will compare the lab skills of the online students with traditional students using an on-campus lab practical. The lab practical will consist of open-ended questions and a list of materials to assist the student in answering each question. Lab skills and written work will be scored using rubrics. The data is rich in individual student thinking and skill. This information will be summarized in the formative evaluations and will be used to guide course development and follow-up activities. The standards checklist and lab practical process were successfully implemented as part of the FIPSE sponsored “kitchen chemistry” project mentioned earlier. A version of practical continues to be implemented for all introductory chemistry students at the affiliated university in the FIPSE-funded project (University of North Carolina at Wilmington).
6.7-For each Partner Institution of Higher Education, what would be a reasonable target number of middle school mathematics and science teachers to graduate annually by the end of the project? What would be a reasonable target for each of the project years?
In Colorado, middle school teachers can hold secondary or elementary licensure. However, the “highly qualified” provision of NCLB will raise the standards that middle school principals apply in hiring elementary teachers. In this context, teacher education programs will respond in two ways as part of this grant. First, teacher educators will work with their math and science colleagues to increase the number of students selecting those majors who seek to become teachers; this has been previously addressed with the creation of math and science pre-teaching advisors in each department. This strategy is expected to increase the number of math teachers graduating from each institution from an average of 3 to12 per year and from an average of 11 to 20 per year in science. In addition, elementary teachers in graduate licensure programs at CU-Denver and University of Denver (DU) will be encouraged to complete the requirements for the math or science certificate/specialist as part of their master's degrees. New elementary teachers emerging from undergraduate programs at the three institutions will be recruited for the math or science certificate programs or master’s degrees that include the specialist coursework. In this way, elementary teachers with broad preparation can also become “highly qualified” to teach math or science at the middle school level. The expectation is that 25 elementary teachers from MSCD and CU-Denver will elect this path each year while the smaller DU program will graduate ~10 participants from the elementary ranks. We anticipate that the first implementation of the proposed curriculum, occurring in Year 2 of the project, will target predominantly in-service teachers. However, immediate work will begin in math and science departments to highlight the possibilities of teaching as a career, encouraging entrance into teacher education following completion of a math or science major. By the final year of the grant, we intend to hit our ambitious goals of increasing the new teacher supply in math and science.
6.8-How will the new Certificate Program for Middle School Mathematics and Science Teachers at CU Denver be evaluated? How will this evaluation be used to improve the program?
In its last review for accreditation by the North Central Association for Accreditation and School Improvement, CU-Denver was required to implement outcomes assessment across all programs. The School of Education leads the University in outcomes assessment (performance assessment) because of its National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) accreditation requirements. Since it has begun undergraduate teacher education and is now part of NCATE accreditation, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS) will be increasingly responsible for assessing content knowledge of its students through outcomes or performance assessments. Outcomes assessment plans were submitted for all CLAS departments and degree programs this spring and will be implemented in the upcoming academic year. Within this context, it becomes the collaborative responsibility of the two colleges at CU-Denver (and the other partner higher ed institutions) to develop outcomes assessments at the level of the certificate program (rather than only at the course level) and to create a feedback loop wherein the data on college student learning is the basis for annual review by faculty of certificate program content. Furthermore within the context of the project, the Teacher Content Inventories, which will be updated at the completion of each course, the Structured Follow Up associated with each course, and the entire Certificate Program, will provide significant formative information that can be used to improve course content and delivery.
Biographical Sketch: LARRY S. JOHNSON
Ph.D. Mathematics-University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, 1970
Prof. of Mathematics and Director of Center for Math, Science and Environmental Education, MSCD
Relevant recent presentations and publications
Larry S. Johnson & Peggy O’Neil-Jones, Munich, Germany, “Innovative Mathematical Learning Environments: Using Multimedia to Solve Real World Problems”, August 26, 1999, Also, refereed publication in Educational Technology, 39:5 16-18, 1999.
Larry S. Johnson, Manert Kennedy and Jim Hubbard, "Workshop on Building Collaborations", Conference on School/College Collaboration, America Association for Higher Education, November, 1994.
Larry S. Johnson, "Establishing a Multi-cultural Campus: An Administrative Perspective", National Conference on Race and Ethnic Relations, April, 1992.
Johnson, Larry S., “STEM Capacity Building at Your Institution: Information from the PI/PD Meeting in Arlington, VA”, LS CO-AMP Steering Committee, University of So. Colo., Pueblo, CO, April 25, 2002.
Johnson, Larry S., with James Platt, “The Implications for Training New Teachers from Experience with Teacher Staff Development Projects”, Laramie, WY, MAA Rocky Mtn. Section Meeting, April 13, 2002.
Recent Grant Proposals Funded
“Integrated, Standards-Based Mathematics and Physical Sciences - Phase III Workshops for Teachers”, with Richard Krantz and Lou Talman. $45,000
“More Integrated, Standards-Based Applied Mathematics and Physical Science (MAMAPS) Workshops for Teachers”, with Richard Krantz and Lou Talman. $56,000
“CO-AMP at Metropolitan State College”, Primary writer of this renewal grant from NSF. ~$37,000 per year
“The Mathematics Resource and Training Center”, with Barbara Gregg, $20,000
|Table 1. Course Outline for Problem Solving (mathematics) |
|Course Objectives General: Students will… |
|Learn mathematics constructively through the proper use of manipulatives, models, and diagrams. |
|Acquire confidence in using mathematics meaningfully and be able to apply mathematical thinking and modeling to solve problems that arise not |
|only in mathematical settings but in other disciplines (science, business, art, music and psychology for example.) |
|Design hands-on activities in order to teach a variety of mathematical concepts ranging from counting to algebra for middle school children. |
|Course Objectives Specific Students will… |
|Use problem-solving approaches to investigate and understand mathematical content; |
|Formulate problems from situations within and outside mathematics; |
|Develop and apply a variety of strategies to solve multi-step problems; |
|Model situations using concrete, pictorial, graphical, and algebraic methods; |
|Understand and apply reasoning processes, with special attention to spatial reasoning and reasoning with proportions and graphs; |
|Develop the ablity to construct conjectures, arguments, and proofs; |
|Develop units/lessons addressing 5-8 learning objectives related to mathematical reasoning; |
|(Possible) Textbooks and Ref. Mater.: Mathematics for Elementary Teachers: A Conceptual Approach by Albert B. Bennett, Jr. & L. Ted Nelson. |
|Nat’l Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), Discrete Mathematics Across the Curriculum, K-12, Yearbook of the NCTM, 1991. How to Read and|
|Do Proofs by D. Solow, 3rd Ed., Wiley, 2001. Mathematics for Elementary Teachers: An Activity Approach by Albert B. Bennett, Jr. and L. Ted |
|Nelson. (Student resource book); Investigating Mathematics, An Interactive Approach, Hatfield, Glencoe 1994. |
|Table 2. Course Outline for Atoms and Macroscopic Properties of Matter (science) |
|Course Objective: To develop an understanding of atomic theory and structure, molecular bonding, intermolecular forces, kinetic molecular |
|theory, and how atomic/molecular phenomena give rise to macroscopic properties |
|Possible Text: World of Chemistry by M.D. Joesten and J.L. Wood, (Saunders Coll. Pub.) |
|Laboratory Manual: In-house custom design from Pearson Custom Publishing |
|Classroom Topics |Laboratory |
|Phases of Matter (molecular behavior resulting in macroscopic properties, Kinetic |Safety in the laboratory |
|molecular theory, phase transitions and energy, properties of gases (gas laws), |Application of gas laws |
|properties of liquids and intermolecular forces, phase diagrams |Siphoning of a liquid |
| |Properties of liquids |
|Process of Chemistry (measurements, error analysis, significant figures, units, |Measurement and error experiment |
|experimental design, control experiments, variables, calibration and taring, obtaining|Density experiment |
|& interpreting quantitative data, dependent/independent variables, chemical and |Paper chromatography |
|physical changes, separation of materials, chemical reactions, stoichiometry) | |
|Atomic Structure and Theory and the Periodic Table (basic atomic structure, nuclear |Flame tests of ionic salts |
|chemistry, electro-magnetic radiation and the atom, the Bohr model of the atom |Hydrogen spectrum |
|(historical perspective and flaws), quantum mechanical model of the atom, periodic | |
|table) | |
|Simple Bonding Models (bond energetics, conservation of matter and energy, ions and |Computer application of CHIME and VSEPR model |
|ionic bonding, molecules, compounds, and elements, Valence Shell Electron Pair |Molecular models |
|Repulsion (VSEPR), Molecular polarity and IMAF | |
|Polymers and Macromolecules (monomers ( dimers ( polymers, addition & condensation |Polymer synthesis |
|polymers, physical properties, biological macromolecules |Protein analysis |
Table 3. List of Prototype Courses for RM-MSMSP Teacher Professional Development
|Working Title |Possible Content [State Content Standard Addressed] {Prereq} |
|Geometry |Selected topics from informal geometry, both two- and three-dimensional [4, 5, 6] {none} |
|Arithmetic & Algebraic |Study of the real number system and its subsystems will lead to the introduction of more general algebraic structures and |
|Structures |their applications [1, 2, 6] {none} |
|Problem Solving |Examination and application of problem-solving techniques and strategies. Problems will be drawn from various areas of |
| |mathematics. [1, 2, 5, 6] {Geometry, Arithmetic & Algebraic Structures} |
|Probability and Statistics|A study of probability and statistics through laboratory experiments, simulations, and applications. [2, 3, 5, 6] { Arith. & |
| |Alg. Str., Prob. Solv.} |
|Historical Topics in |A survey of the historical development of topics in mathematics from ancient to modern times, with special emphasis on topics|
|Mathematics |in arithmetic, algebra and informal geometry. [1, 4, 6] {Geom., Arith. & Alg. Stru.} |
|Role of Change in |An introduction to the limit concept and its role in defining the derivative, the integral and infinite series with |
|Mathematics |applications to middle school mathematics. [1, 2, 5] {Geom., Arith. & Alg. Stru., Prob. Solv.} |
|Computing in Mathematics |A study of the role of computing in mathematics with emphasis on the use of modern technology. [3, 4, 5, 6] {Geom., Arith. & |
| |Alg. Stru., Prob. Solv.} |
|Understanding the Cell |A study of the cell from all aspects: biologically important molecules, cellular structure and function, types of cells, cell|
| |cycles, bioenergetics and cellular nutrition. [1, 3, 5, 6] {none} |
|Ecology and Evolution |A survey of ecosystems and biodiversity, interspecific relationships, energy flow, mechanisms of evolution, biological |
| |classification, and speciation. [1, 3, 5, 6] {none} |
|Basic Genetics |A study of DNA and the molecular basis of heredity and protein synthesis, interaction between heredity & environment, |
| |cloning, classical genetics, & cell division. [1, 3, 5, 6] {Understanding the Cell} |
|Atoms and Macroscopic |Study of the history of atomic theory, development of the periodic table and periodic properties, nuclear science, chemical |
|Properties of Matter |reactions, molecules and bonding, phases of matter and phase changes, and molecular explanations for macroscopic phenomena. |
| |[1, 2, 5, 6] {none} |
|Aqueous Environments |A survey of solution chemistry, ionic salts, acid/base chemistry, pH and buffers, solubility of gases, basic redox, |
| |environmental issues (acid rain, heavy metals, groundwater contamination, etc.), and a survey of nutrition. [1, 2, 4, 5, 6] |
| |{Atoms & Macroscopic Properties of Matter} |
|History and Nature of the |Study of the formation of rocks and minerals, how they are identified and classified, plate tectonic theory, geologic time |
|Earth |scale, and a survey of oceanography and weather. [1, 4, 5, 6] {none} |
|The Universe |A survey of astronomy including an historical perspective of the study of astronomy, the origin and structure of the |
| |universe, the sun and solar system, planetary motion and influences, astronomical distances, and space exploration. [1, 4, 5,|
| |6] {none} |
|Waves, Mech-anics, & |A study of the properties of light and sound, the laws of motion, simple machines, energy, gravity, electricity and |
|Charge |magnetism. [1, 2, 5, 6] {none} |
Table 4. Timeline for Higher Education Institutional Change
| |Course Development & Implementation of Certificate Program |Certificate ( Endorsement |
|Year 1|Teacher Content Inventories (TCI) will be derived for groups of district partner teachers who do|While general planning for implementation is accomplished, the SOE Dean will have |
| |not currently meet “highly qualified” designation of NCLB. TCI results will drive the curriculum|initial conversations with CDE and CCHE about the processes for establishing new state |
| |development performed by higher education faculty working with SOE faculty and district |endorsements and will begin to talk with all individuals and groups likely to be |
| |personnel. One science and one mathematics course will be piloted in the spring. Course approval|involved in supporting and approving such endorsements. |
| |forms for this curriculum will be submitted to campus curriculum committees for approval. | |
|Year 2|First summer academy will be held encompassing four mathematics and four science courses. |In collaboration with CDE personnel, the Project Director will hold content planning |
| |Semester-length versions and subsequent courses will be offered in the subsequent fall and |meetings for the state endorsements that include higher education liberal arts and |
| |spring semesters. Structured Follow-Up activities, developed through the summer months will be |education professors in math and science, math and science district curriculum |
| |implemented in the fall for teachers who complete summer courses. Course revisions will occur as|coordinators, well-regarded math and science teachers, and Colorado Education |
| |needed based upon formative assessment. Proposal for Certificate Program developed and forwarded|Association representatives. The end result will be a draft proposal. |
| |to curriculum committee for approval. | |
|Year 3|Certificate programs are established for in-service teachers and as one of two (math or science)|The draft proposal will be discussed in stakeholder groups: The Colorado Council of |
| |Individually Structured Majors in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at CU-Denver for |Deans of Education (who will in turn take it to their faculties for comment), the |
| |pre-service teachers. Distance learning versions of select courses are piloted using Tegrity |Colorado Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the Colorado Council of Teachers of Science|
| |delivery system. Course revision will continue based upon formative assessment results. |Educators, CCHE administrators responsible for program approval, CDE administrators |
| | |especially those responsible for math and science and for teacher licensing and |
| | |endorsements, and so on. The end result will be a final proposal. |
|Year 4|On-campus versions of the coursework are firmly institutionalized by Year 4. Distance versions |The proposal is submitted to CCHE and CDE for formal approval by the CCHE Commissioners |
| |of the coursework are still in development and piloting phase and are offered to in-service |and the Colorado Board of Education. Concurrently, universities can begin working on |
| |teachers in districts outside the partnership (specifically those in rural, isolated districts).|internal curriculum proposals that will permit them to offer course work leading to the |
| | |endorsements. |
|Year 5|Distance learning versions of the coursework is part of the regular CU-Online course offerings. |Universities are approved to offer the endorsements, market them, and begin to offer |
| |Coursework is disseminated further to rural districts in Colorado. |endorsement coursework. |
References
Adelman, C, 1999. Answers in the Toolbox: Academic Intensity, Attendance Pattarns, and Bachelor’s Degree Attainment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Education.
Allington, R., & McGill-Franzen, A., 2003. The impact of summer setback on the reading achievement gap, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 85, No.1, 68-75.
Ball, D.L., Hill. H.C. Rowan, B., & Schilling,S., 2002. Measuring teachers’ content knowledge for teaching elementary mathematics release items 2002. Ann Arbor, MI. Study of Instructional Improvement.
Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K., 1999. Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp.3-32). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Boller, M.J., 1994. Analysis and Evaluation of the Young Scholars Program at the Colorado School of Mines, Masters Thesis. Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO.
Colorado Department of Education, 2003. CDE white paper: Colorado’s Definition of Highly Qualified as submitted 9/03. Full text is available as a .pdf file at
Colorado Department of Education, 2002. The actual formula for the weighted CSAP index can be found at .
Cowley, K.S. & Meehan, M.L., 2002. Student achievement gaps in high performing schools: Differences as a function of the professional staff as a learning community. Paper presented at the January 2003 Hawaiian International Conference on Education.
Fry, L.J., 1990. An Evaluation of Mississippi State University's Summer Scholar Program. Dissertation. Mississippi State University, MS, 1990
Harris, Cooper et. al., 1996. The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: a narrative and meta-analytic review, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66, 227-68.
Haycock, K., Jerald, C., Huang, S., 2001. Closing the Gap: Done in a Decade. Washington, D.C. Education Trust, Thinking K – 16, Spring 2001.
Jencks, C., & Phillips, M. (1998, Sept/Oct). America’s next achievement test: Closing the black white test score gap. The American Prospect. Downloaded April 1, 2004 from .
Johnston, R.C., & Viadero, D., 2000, March 15. Unmet promise: Raising minority achievement. Education Week on the Web. Downloaded April 1, 2004 from .
Kimbrough, D.K., Reeves, J. H., Heath, B. P., 2002. Distance Learning Laboratory Methods: Kitchen Chemistry for Intro Courses. 15th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, July 28 – Aug. 1, 2002, Bellingham, WA.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). NaturalisticIinquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
Ma, L., 1999. Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
McDermott, L.C. and the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington, 1996. Physics by Inquiry, Volumes I & II. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.:New York.
Meehan, M.L., Cowley, K.S., Schumacher, D., Hauser, B., Croom, N., 2003. Classroom environment, instructional resources and teaching differences in high-performing Kentucky schools with achievement gaps. Paper presented at the 12th Annual CREATE National Evaluation Institute, Louisville, KY, July 24-26, 2003.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Educational achievement and black-white inequality: Executive summary. Downloaded April 1, 2004 from .
Northwest Regional Education Laboratory. (1997, May). Closing the achievement gap requires multiple solutions. Downloaded April 1, 2004 from .
Schoenfeld, A. H., 2002. Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher, Jan/Feb. 2002: 13 – 25.
Singham, M. 2003. The achievement gap: myths and reality. Phi Delta Kappan, April, 2003: 586-591.
Sternberg, R. J., Torff, B., and Grigorenko, E. L., 1998. Teaching triarchically improves school achievement. J. Educ. Psych. 90:374-384.
Sternberg, R. J. and Spear-Swerling, L. 1996. Teaching for Thinking, Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Sternberg, R. J., 1995. Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. and Clinkenbeard, P. 1995. A triarchic view of identifying, teaching, and assessing gifted children. Roeper Review, 17:255-260.
Sternberg, R. J. 1993. Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test. Unpublished research instrument available from Dr. Sternberg.
United States Department of Education, 2004. Highly Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation (HOUSSE) policies addressing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as amended by No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Press.
Viadero, D., 2000, March 22. Lags in minority achievement defy traditional explanations. Education Week on the Web. Downloaded April 1, 2004 from .
Weiss, I., Pasley, J., Smith, P.S., Banilower, E., Heck, D. (2003). Looking Inside the Classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
-----------------------
[1] BOCES = Board of Cooperative Educational Services is a is a coalition of the 19 Denver metro area school districts and the University of Colorado at Denver whose mission it is to provide and coordinate professional development for teachers across district boundaries.
[2] CU-Succeed is an academic program that offers college coursework for seniors in local high schools.
[3] FIPSE = Funds for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, a division of the Department of Education.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- state of colorado division of banking
- university of colorado online
- university of colorado calendar 2020
- university of kentucky core requirements
- university of colorado campuses
- university of colorado boulder address
- university of colorado boulder athletics
- university of colorado aurora campus
- university of colorado tuition
- university of colorado aurora
- christian university in colorado springs
- university of colorado career fair