scholarly journals Evolving roles of scientists as change agents in science education over a decade: SFES roles beyond discipline-based education research

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. eaav6403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth D. Bush ◽  
Michael T. Stevens ◽  
Kimberly D. Tanner ◽  
Kathy S. Williams

To what extent have positions for science education specialists as change agents within science departments persisted and evolved over the past decade? We addressed this question by studying a population of Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) first described in 2008. SFES are university science faculty who engage in undergraduate science education, K-12 science education, and/or research in science education. Compared to a decade ago, SFES are now more prevalent and more likely to be formally trained in science education. Many identify as discipline-based education researchers (DBER) but assert that their SFES and DBER roles are nonequivalent. SFES have garnered university administrator support through varied science education activities, and these insights into the evolving role of scientists in science education have implications for many stakeholders.

2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth D. Bush ◽  
Nancy J. Pelaez ◽  
James A. Rudd ◽  
Michael T. Stevens ◽  
Kimberly D. Tanner ◽  
...  

Efforts to improve science education include university science departments hiring Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES), scientists who take on specialized roles in science education within their discipline. Although these positions have existed for decades and may be growing more common, few reports have investigated the SFES approach to improving science education. We present comprehensive data on the SFES in the California State University (CSU) system, the largest university system in the United States. We found that CSU SFES were engaged in three key arenas including K–12 science education, undergraduate science education, and discipline-based science education research. As such, CSU SFES appeared to be well-positioned to have an impact on science education from within science departments. However, there appeared to be a lack of clarity and agreement about the purpose of these SFES positions. In addition, formal training in science education among CSU SFES was limited. Although over 75% of CSU SFES were fulfilled by their teaching, scholarship, and service, our results revealed that almost 40% of CSU SFES were seriously considering leaving their positions. Our data suggest that science departments would likely benefit from explicit discussions about the role of SFES and strategies for supporting their professional activities.


1998 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 344-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marvin Druger ◽  
George Allen

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Perkins ◽  
Michelle Smith

At the University of Colorado at Boulder (CU), several science departments ? including Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology (MCDB) ? are working to improve undergraduate science education as part of the Science Education Initiative (SEI). The SEI is a 5-year project designed to support faculty-led, departmental-wide improvements in students? learning of and engagement in science. In each of the five funded departments, faculty are taking a scholarly approach to transforming their courses and introducing proven teaching practices. An important first step in course transformation has been to define explicit learning goals (also known as ?learning outcomes? or ?objectives?) for each course. In this paper, we focus on the process and benefit of writing learning goals, with specific examples from CU?s MCDB department.


2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. ar29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn I. Danielson ◽  
Kimberly D. Tanner

Scientific research exploring ocean acidification has grown significantly in past decades. However, little science education research has investigated the extent to which undergraduate science students understand this topic. Of all undergraduate students, one might predict science students to be best able to understand ocean acidification. What conceptions and misconceptions of ocean acidification do these students hold? How does their awareness and knowledge compare across disciplines? Undergraduate biology, chemistry/biochemistry, and environmental studies students, and science faculty for comparison, were assessed on their awareness and understanding. Results revealed low awareness and understanding of ocean acidification among students compared with faculty. Compared with biology or chemistry/biochemistry students, more environmental studies students demonstrated awareness of ocean acidification and identified the key role of carbon dioxide. Novel misconceptions were also identified. These findings raise the question of whether undergraduate science students are prepared to navigate socioenvironmental issues such as ocean acidification.


2018 ◽  
Vol 74 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Slim Chtourou ◽  
Mohamed Kharrat ◽  
Nader Ben Amor ◽  
Mohamed Jallouli ◽  
Mohamed Abid

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document