Effect of STEM Faculty Engagement in the Math and Science Partnership Program

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.

How facilitating K–12 professional development shapes science faculty's instructional change

“…Because many thousands of science faculty across the nation facilitate teacher PD (Zhang et al, 2011), school–university partnerships like SLP may be a largely unexplored but potentially powerful space of faculty learning, with iterative opportunities for faculty to try out new pedagogies alongside K–12 educators and a community of like‐minded colleagues. That said, we are not claiming that SLP was an ideal space of faculty learning; instead, we believe it is a fruitful space for understanding how faculty learn while situated in the practice of educating teachers.…”

“…Despite a tremendous focus on teacher learning in such faculty‐led PD, relatively few studies have examined the impacts of facilitating PD on the instructional practices of science faculty. Existing studies suggest that leading teacher PD can support science faculty in using inquiry practices (Knowlton et al, 2015; Zhang et al, 2011), applying new ways of explaining content (Olitsky, 2017; Thompson et al, 2002), designing activities for small group interactions, and considering students' prior knowledge (Pomeroy et al, 2011; Zhang et al, 2011). This study also suggests that faculty learning and instructional change is influenced by several individual and contextual factors.…”

“…School–university partnerships, in which higher education science faculty1 facilitate professional development (PD) for K–12 teachers, can serve as an important space for innovation in science teaching for both teachers and faculty. Research indicates that participation in science PD led by university faculty supports content gains among K–12 teachers, spurs improvements in K–12 science teaching, and increases teacher confidence with science instruction (Bae et al, 2016a; Tanner et al, 2003; Zhang et al, 2011). Yet, few studies have examined the impact of facilitating teacher PD on the instructional practices of university faculty (Knowlton et al, 2015; Zhang et al, 2011).…”

“…Research indicates that participation in science PD led by university faculty supports content gains among K–12 teachers, spurs improvements in K–12 science teaching, and increases teacher confidence with science instruction (Bae et al, 2016a; Tanner et al, 2003; Zhang et al, 2011). Yet, few studies have examined the impact of facilitating teacher PD on the instructional practices of university faculty (Knowlton et al, 2015; Zhang et al, 2011).…”

The Graduate Extension Scholars: Communicating Science to the Youth

“…Agricultural education/horticulture middle or high school teacher. School teachers appreciate the expertise and involvement of scientists (Zhang et al, 2011) and university science students in joint teaching and outreach experiences (Bruce et al, 1997). However, most of the time, they are unsure about whom to contact at the higher education institutions closest to them (Dolan et al, 2004).…”