Comments and Questions from Listening Session with Bruce
SMATE is a social science organization, dealing with reform of science/math teaching.
Technology education is in a holding pattern since the faculty member who did technology education retired. Other needs in Eng. Tech prevailed when the position was filled. State is in high need of technology education with STEM push.
Data on NCOP—Science sequence has been developed for teaching ed students. Placed with teacher leaders who have been through NCOS in mentoring relationship.
Still trying to figure out why some students haven’t taken the science sequence. Those students who have taken it have received a really good education.
We’re developing a longitudinal study to help follow graduates.
Teacher education students are very motivated and are very good – see themselves as approaching professional status. Students in some 101 courses not apparently well motivated, but teacher ed students are very good
We have reduced number of elementary ed students – which has problems – but quality is high. The 160 credits requirement is difficult barrier for some.
Secondary science faculty are excellent
In order to work effectively, we try to structure interaction with ed faculty – we need to know what the ed faculty are teaching in the general methods courses. Often time is the barrier rather than motivation or some sort of silo.
SMATE has tried to reach out and departments realize that SMATE has something to offer
Physics may be behind in collaborating with SMATE, but Physics has its own pretty good tradition of dealing with physics ed. Can that model coexist w SMATE model?
Developing a culture that encourages physics (and other science) majors to look to teaching is a challenge.
My colleagues’ eyes glaze over when talk about teacher ed.
Some departmental faculty do mix of research re field and science ed scholarship. Chemistry is pretty receptive, but scholarship related to teacher prep is not always respected in home department.
This hasn’t been big issue in T&P for SMATE faculty, but has potential
In SMATE – the “T” (technology) is on hold, and Math exists wholly in math dept. There is a SMATE faculty member dealing with math, but there isn’t a lot of collaboration, at least around recruiting. It may not be necessary, but genuine collaboration would add to potential of the program.
I would like to know more about the methods differences between math and science methods.
There is concern about the budget.
We have worries about being punished for success. We’ve done well on grants and contracts and have indirect cost money squirreled away to use for development. Hope to preserve it for the unit.
Thanks for the note yesterday about the WSU hate crime. When will Provost be on board?
UW just started institute on math and science ed; next week will have dinner with Gates Foundation. Will probably get money – but they don’t do teacher ed. Their research is good, and we use it, but we do more to improve teacher education.