Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Science 24 April 2009:
Vol. 324. no. 5926, pp. 470 - 471
DOI: 10.1126/science.1170015
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

Education Forum

Professional Development:

Summer Institute to Improve University Science Teaching

Christine Pfund,1,2,* Sarah Miller,1 Kerry Brenner,3 Peter Bruns,4 Amy Chang,5 Diane Ebert-May,6 Adam P. Fagen,3 Jim Gentile,7 Sandra Gossens,1 Ishrat M. Khan,8 Jay B. Labov,3 Christine Maidl Pribbenow,1,9 Millard Susman,10 Lillian Tong,10 Robin Wright,11 Robert T. Yuan,12 William B. Wood,13 Jo Handelsman1,{dagger}

Introductory science courses at large universities in the United States serve as the portals that connect undergraduates to frontiers in research and scientific ways of thinking (1–3). According to the National Research Council report, BIO2010 (4), however, teaching practices have not changed in correspondence with advances in scientific research. Consequently, the gateway through which most students pass is antiquated and misrepresents the interdisciplinary, collaborative, evidence-based culture of science. To provide faculty with the knowledge and skills they need to improve undergraduate teaching, BIO2010 recommended an annual summer institute for biology faculty devoted to teaching and learning. Here, we report the design of such an institute and its impact on participants' teaching practices, challenges faced when they returned to their institutions, and how they disseminated institute practices.

1 Wisconsin Program for Scientific Teaching, Department of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
2 Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
3 National Research Council of the National Academies.
4 Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
5 American Society for Microbiology.
6 Department of Plant Biology, Michigan State University.
7 Research Corporation for Science Advancement.
8 Department of Chemistry, Clark Atlanta University.
9 Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
10 Center for Biology Education, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
11 Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota.
12 Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, University of Maryland, College Park.
13 Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado at Boulder.

* Complete author affiliations are available in the supporting online material.

{dagger} To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: joh{at}bact.wisc.edu

Read the Full Text


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
Effective Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education Part 1: Examining the Evidence.
J. B. Labov, S. R. Singer, M. D. George, H. A. Schweingruber, and M. L. Hilton (2009)
CBE Life Sci Educ 8, 157-161
   Full Text »    PDF »
Jo Handelsman.
L. L. Mays Hoopes (2009)
CBE Life Sci Educ 8, 165-166
   Full Text »    PDF »


To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)