This study compared the relationships of self‐efficacy and reasoning ability to achievement in introductory college biology. Based on the hypothesis that developing formal and postformal reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing self‐efficacy, a significant positive correlation was predicted between reasoning ability and degree of self‐efficacy to complete biological tasks. Further, reasoning ability was predicted to be more highly correlated with course achievement than self‐efficacy. The study involved pre‐ and posttesting 459 introductory biology students. Both self‐efficacy and reasoning ability increased during the semester. As predicted, self‐efficacy and reasoning ability were positively correlated. Depending on the nature of the achievement measure, reasoning ability accounted for some 15 to 30 times more variance in achievement than self‐efficacy. Also, as predicted, reasoning ability was a strong predictor of self‐efficacy, but self‐efficacy was not a strong predictor of reasoning ability. Self‐efficacy estimates and achievement were higher for the concrete tasks than for the formal tasks and higher for the formal tasks than for the postformal tasks. In general, students tended to overestimate their abilities to carry out the concrete, formal, and postformal tasks. Results support the study's working hypothesis that intellectual development continues for some students during the college years, that a postformal level of intellectual development exists, and that reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing both self‐efficacy and achievement. Student overestimation of their abilities may contribute to complacency, lack of effort, and to less than optimal achievement. Consequently, it may be advantageous early in the semester to provide students with particularly challenging tasks that “shock” them out of their complacency and perhaps increase their effort, their reasoning skills, and their achievement. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 706–724, 2007

The Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (ACEPT) Program is one of several reform efforts supported by the National Science Foundation. The primary ACEPT reform mechanism has been month‐long summer workshops in which university and community college science and mathematics faculty learn about instructional reforms and then attempt to apply them in their courses. Previous ACEPT evaluation efforts suggest that, when implemented, the reforms boost undergraduate student achievement. The initial purpose of the present study was to discover whether enrollment of preservice teachers in one or more of these reformed undergraduate courses is linked to the way they teach after they graduate and become in‐service teachers. Assuming that a link is found, a second purpose was to discover whether the presumed positive effect is in turn linked to their students' achievement. In short, the answer appears to be yes, at least among the biology teachers and students surveyed. Compared with controls, the biology teachers who had enrolled in one or more ACEPT reformed course during their teacher preparation program demonstrated significantly higher scores on the measure of reformed instruction and their students demonstrated significantly higher achievement in terms of scientific reasoning, nature of science, and biology concepts. These results support the hypothesis that teachers teach as they have been taught. Furthermore, it appears that instructional reform in teacher preparation programs including both methods and major's courses can improve secondary school student achievement. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 40: 939–957, 2003

No abstract

The METS project-Maricopa Engineering Transition Scholars -is a two-year pilot collaboration between Arizona State University (ASU) and MaricopaCounty Community College District (MCCCD) funded by the National Science Foundation. The project is designed to 1) recruit, 2) retain and 3) graduate engineering transfer students. The project targets MCCCD women and underrepresented minority students.The research-grounded project activities were designed based on analysis of best practices piloted over many years at both MCCCD and ASU. Three of the METS activities include: Be an Engineer event designed to interest students in engineering by allowing them to participate in "hands-on" engineering activities at local community colleges, Pizza with a Professor to allow students to interact with an ASU professor, and METS workshops on survival strategies for students who have transferred from a community college to the ASU Fulton School of Engineering.The paper discusses what we have learned to date about the METS activities which are the most effective to assist community college students who transition into engineering.METS activities also assist community college students transferring from a two-year community college to a 4-year engineering program at ASU. In addition, the paper provides an analysis of community college students seeking engineering degrees by demographics, motivation, and needs and provides trends in enrollment, retention, and graduation.

No abstract