Focus groups are widely used in qualitative research. Recently, focus groups that are held online have become increasingly popular despite the objection by some researchers that the Internet is a poor medium for focus group research. The present study was conducted to reveal differences in the characteristics of focus group discussions in the online and face-to-face formats. Participants in 4 online focus groups and 4 face-to-face focus groups discussed their opinions about several health-related Web sites. Statistical analysis of the transcripts suggested that online participants tended to contribute shorter comments and were more likely to say just a few words of agreement. In the online focus groups, participation levels tended to be more uniform; in the face-to-face groups, some participants tended to contribute a disproportionately large number of words, whereas other participants were relatively silent. The results suggest different roles for online and face-to-face focus groups in qualitative research.

Formal programs that provide research experiences for teachers (RET) have been in existence for more than 20 years. Currently there are more than 70 formalized Scientific Work Experiences Programs for Teachers (SWEPTs) nationwide. The underlying assumption of most RETs is that these intensive summer work immersion experiences, coupled with appropriate follow-up activities during the school year, expand teachers' professional skills and networks, and thereby improve the performance of their students. Many SWEPTs have collected anecdotal evidence indicating their program's positive impact on teachers. Missing from all SWEPT evaluations is quantitative evidence that teacher participation in these programs affects student interest and performance in the subject taught by the SWEPT teacher. As professional evaluators attest, it is difficult to differentiate the roles of teachers and teaching practices in changing student academic interest and performance from other factors (e.g., curriculum, school administration, non-random assignment of students, etc.).This study controls for many of these factors by comparing interest and achievement of students in classes of SWEPT teachers with students in classes of comparison teachers in the same school and teaching the same subject. The study's longitudinal design is commensurate with the philosophy and practices of the participating SWEPTs.

No abstract

The article explores the effect of the engagement of university science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty in the Math and Science Partnership program. The findings suggest that K‐12 teachers benefited from the engagement in terms of improved approaches to teaching and learning, increased knowledge of subject matter content, and increased confidence. STEM faculty benefited from new ideas about teaching and learning, insights into research, more knowledge of the K‐12 education system, and a broader understanding of education overall. Student achievement also improved, although direct attribution to faculty involvement is somewhat unclear. Furthermore, in the short run at least, it appears that few benefits extend beyond those faculty who are direct participants, and few systemic changes have been made in institutions of higher education systems.

No abstract