Numerous studies have documented the infrequent use of learner-centered instruction in college science and mathematics classrooms and its negative effects on undergraduate learning and motivation. The present research deepened understanding of why. Specifically, an Internet survey was constructed that explored obstacles, supports, and incentives for instructional innovation in the classroom and was sent out to college science and mathematics faculty of Louisiana. Results revealed that colleges generally were perceived to assign little or an indeterminate weight to instruction in personnel decision making. Faculty members generally have little training in pedagogy; but when they do, they are more likely to consult sources of instructional innovation and consider teaching an important part of their professional identities. Data concerning the most common sources of instructional innovation information are presented. Several suggestions are made for institutional reform that if enacted might contribute to systemic improvement in the quality of instruction undergraduates receive. ß 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 2007 Several reports over the last decade or so have revealed that college science and mathematics faculty seldom teach undergraduate classes in ways that promote student construction of knowledge, one effect of which has been to reduce the number of students majoring in science

Learner‐centered approaches to science and mathematics instruction assume that only when students are active participants will learning be deep, enduring, and enjoyable, and transfer to contexts beyond the classroom. Although their beneficial effects are well known, the extent to which learner‐centered practices are used in college classrooms may be low. Surveys of undergraduate science and math majors reveal general dissatisfaction with how courses in their majors are taught, and their number is half what it was 2 decades ago. In response, federally funded systemic reform initiatives have targeted increasing the use learner‐centered instruction in science and mathematics courses to improve undergraduate education generally and the training of preservice teachers specifically. Few data exist regarding how effective these initiatives have been or how frequently learned‐centered instruction occurs as assessed from faculty's perspective, which may not corroborate undergraduate perceptions. Accordingly, a survey was developed to assess the use of learner‐centered techniques and was administered to science and math professors of Louisiana over the Internet. The return rate was 28%. Analyses reveal that they are used infrequently, but when used, are applied to all aspects of teaching. Data also suggest that federal funding has been slightly effective in promoting its use. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 40: 566–584, 2003

Demonstrations have been used to communicate ideas in chemistry for many years. In introductory classes they are usually presented to illustrate fundamental chemical principles and to promote discussion relating the macroscopic world of chemistry to the molecular and symbolic realms (1). The traditional demonstration/discussion model breaks the monotony of the traditional lecture format and makes the teaching experience more enjoyable. It also fosters the development of a more personal relationship between the instructor and the students and allows students to make a better connection between lecture and laboratory.Recently we described the use of lecture demonstrations to evaluate conceptual understanding and critical thinking skills of K-12 students in physical science (2). In these "demonstration assessments" students view a short demonstration, record their observations, and explain what they observed. Rubrics are applied to score written student responses and promote class discussion. On the basis of this work, one of us (W.C.D.) developed a series of demonstration assessments for freshman chemistry. The study described below was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the demonstration assessments not only as assessment tools, but also as instruments for developing conceptual understanding and critical thinking.

No abstract

No abstract