National Research Council National Science Resources Center Math/Science Partnership Workshop Teacher Education for Effective Teaching and Learning Hyatt Regency Newport Beach, Newport Beach, CA and Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center, Irvine, CA February 6-8, 2005 --EXPANDED AGENDA--
February 6, 2005
(Hyatt Regency Newporter Hotel, 1107 Jamboree Road, Newport Beach, CA)
1:00 pm		Opening Remarks—Overview of the National Academies
		Jay Labov, National Research Council
		Overview of the Workshop
		Melvin George, Chair, NRC Steering Committee
1:30 pm		Case Study: Teacher Education for More Effective Teaching and Learning:
		Opportunities and Challenges
		Katherine Merseth, Director of Teacher Education and Senior Lecturer,
		Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
		Dr. Merseth will lead a case study considering the case, “What is Pi?” Participants are asked to read the case and consider the question before coming to the session. This case is from her book Windows on Math Teaching: Cases of Secondary Classrooms, Teachers College Press, 2003.
3:30 pm		Break
3:45 pm		The Quality and Reach of Research on Teacher Education: What We Know and What’s Missing
		Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Associate Dean, Science and Mathematics Education and Outreach, College of Natural Science, Michigan State University
		As a basis for discussing current needs and opportunities in research about teacher education in science and mathematics education, Dr. Ferrini-Mundy will begin with a summary of a research synthesis conducted at Michigan State University (Suzanne Wilson, Robert Floden, and Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Review of Research on Teacher Preparation, OERI/CTP, 2001, at http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/Study14.html), to examine research on teacher education. She will then summarize the state of the research, and discuss the opportunities and directions that might be possible within the MSP community for contributing to the knowledge base on teacher education.   We will discuss in particular issues involved in assessment of teacher knowledge.
5:00 pm		Discussion with the Presenters and Facilitators
5:30 pm		Reception (Cash Bar) - Hotel Poolside
6:00 pm		Dinner for All Workshop Participants – Garden Room
6:45 pm		Dinner Guestspeaker: One Thousand Teachers, One Million Minds: The California Science and Math Initiative
		Lynda Goff, Executive Faculty Associate to the University of California Provost
7:30 pm		Adjourn
		NRC staff, steering committee members, and speakers will meet briefly after dinner
February 7, 2005
(Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center, 100 Academy Drive, Irvine, CA)
7:30 am		Shuttle Bus departs hotel for Beckman Center
7:45 am		Breakfast (Dining Room and Terrace)
8:30 am		The Continuum of Teacher Education—Visions and Recommendations for Integrating Pre-Service and In-Service Education to Improve Teacher and Student Learning
		Paul Kuerbis, Professor of Education, Director, Crown Teaching and Learning Center, The Colorado College
		Herbert Brunkhorst, Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, California State University, San Bernardino
		The vision and recommendations from the NRC report, Educating Teachers of Science, Mathematics and Technology: New Practices for the New Millennium will be shared in the context of new developments in teacher education.
9:30 am		Special Topics: Breakout Sessions: Overview of the Implications and Applications of Research on Teacher Education for MSPs
		Breakout—A
		Kay Merseth, Director of Teacher Education and Senior Lecturer, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
		Technical Aspects of Case Studies How do you help teaching staff to be more comfortable with examining their own teaching practices? This session will discuss why and how case studies can be a useful tool.
		Breakout—B
		Jeanne Harmon, Executive Director, Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession
		Using Professional Standards to Improve Teaching Quality While there is little argument anymore about the importance of quality instruction to a student's academic success, the profession has not yet reached consensus about what constitutes quality teaching and how to measure it. A handful of models of professional teaching standards are being implemented across the country. Systems that have deliberately placed professional standards at the center of conversations about teaching and learning find that teachers become more purposeful in their decision-making, more articulate about the connections between curriculum, instruction and assessment, and more attuned to the needs of students as individuals. In this session, participants will examine a selection of the professional teaching standards in use across the nation and apply those standards to real teaching situations. Participants will measure evidence from teacher writing, student work, and classroom interaction against standards that describe quality teaching. They will then consider the appropriate role of professional teaching standards in the work of their MSP.
		Breakout—C
		Nanette Seago, Project Director, Professional Development in Mathematics through Videocases, WesEd
		Using Video Cases as Opportunities to Improve the Teaching and Learning of Content Improving mathematics and science teaching requires that we have high quality professional education materials. Teachers’ knowledge of mathematics and science for teaching, and of teaching practices that engage students, is central to their capacity to take full advantage of new curriculum materials and rapidly expanding technology. Rooted in the everyday work of teaching, classroom artifacts such as student work, videos or narrative accounts, have become invaluable tools for a practice-based professional development strategy. This session will provide conference participants an opportunity to collectively explore and further our understanding of the benefits and challenges of using practice-based professional development materials to create opportunities for teachers’ to learn content for teaching by engaging firsthand in a video case experience and examining together both what one particular model of video-based professional development might offer teachers the opportunity to learn and what challenges it might bring. The session will begin by engaging participants in a common simulated video case session in order to examine the question, what opportunities does this model offer for teachers to learn for their practice?
10:45 am		Break
11:00 am		Concurrent Sessions I Overviews of the Implications and Applications of Research on Teacher Education on MSPs
		These concurrent interactive sessions will provide overviews and introductions to the afternoon concurrent sessions and how those sessions address specific goals and objectives of this workshop. The advantage of this approach is that it allows people to attend a shorter version of one topic of interest in the morning and a longer session on the same or a different topic in the afternoon. Topics of these presentations are listed in full under Concurrent Sessions II.
		Session I-A: Development of a Teaching and Learning Protocol Lucy Michal, University of Texas, El Paso
		Session I-B: Teacher Education and the Role of STEM Faculty Michael Marder, University of Texas, Austin
		Session I-C: Viewing Teacher Education as a Cyclical Process: Research into Practice Paul Kuerbis, Professor of Education, Director, Crown Teaching and Learning Center, Colorado College Herbert Brunkhorst, Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, California State University, San Bernardino Bonnie Brunkhorst, Geological Science and Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, California State University, San Bernardino
		Session I-D: K-12 as a Partner to Support Teaching and Learning in the K-18+ Continuum Liesl Chatman, Science Innovation Specialist, Saint Paul Public Schools
		Session I-E: Joan Ferrini-Mundy (This discussion will be in the morning only and will focus on research issues raised in previous Sunday session.)
12:00 pm		MSP Teams meet with Facilitators
		Activity: Present summaries of morning concurrent sessions to other team members and decide who will attend each of the concurrent afternoon sessions.
12:45 pm		Lunch (Dining Room and Terrace)
1:30 pm		Concurrent Sessions II (Refreshments for Breaks will be available in the Beckman Center common areas)
		Session II-A: Development of a Teaching and Learning Protocol Lucy Michal, University of Texas, El Paso
		Using existing, published research in teaching and learning mathematics and science, El Paso MSP developed a Teaching and Learning protocol to assist teachers and other stakeholders in creating a vision for teaching and learning. The session will engage participants in the use of the MSP Teaching and Learning Protocol to see how El Paso is using the protocol to focus dialogue and discussion among teachers, staff developers (coaches), department chairs, principals, and district curriculum and instruction personnel. Eight to ten minutes of video from a classroom will be viewed to engage participants in using the protocol for dialogue and discussion. Results from a Teaching and Learning Day in El Paso will be included for participants to plan a similar activity/day at their sites.
		Session II-B: Teacher Education and the Role of STEM Faculty Michael Marder, University of Texas, Austin
		This session will explore some of the perceptions held by science and math workshop participants regarding teacher education at their respective institutions and discussing what contributions SMET faculty might make regarding the improvement of the teacher education programs represented in their MSP projects. Research regarding the role of SMET faculty in teacher education will be shared through examples from the UTeach Program at the University of Texas.
		Session II-C: Viewing Teacher Education as a Cyclical Process: Research into Practice Paul Kuerbis, Professor of Education, Director, Crown Teaching and Learning Center, Colorado College Herbert Brunkhorst, Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, California State University, San Bernardino Bonnie Brunkhorst, Geological Science and Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, California State University, San Bernardino
		This concurrent session develops connections among content knowledge, teacher preparation, and professional development by relating research to practice. Specific practices and instrumentation will be shared with opportunities to consider applications to your own MSP.
		Session I-D: K-12 as a Partner to Support Teaching and Learning in the K-18+ Continuum Liesl Chatman, Science Innovation Specialist, Saint Paul Public Schools
		In many partnership and science education reform documents, a relentless focus remains on the role of scientist or STEM academic community member as expert and content-provider in a unidirectional Provider-Recipient Mode rather than as learner and scientist-educator. Scientists and STEM academicians partnering as learners with K-12 teachers in professional development can develop and improve their own teaching skills, so that both science and non-science majors have increased learning and are better prepared professionals. This approach enables a partnership to move away from the Provider-Recipient Mode to a Mutual Learning Mode in which teachers’ expertise in pedagogy and methods is an asset to the scientist as they teach at the university level. Partnerships between scientists and teachers in a Mutual Learning Model have the potential to integrate more fully the behaviors and habits of mind involved in the enterprise of science with the behaviors and habits of mind involved in science teaching and learning. These partnerships can yield the Hybrid Scientist-Educator. In this session, we will 1) probe the common and uncommon ground between the professional cultures of STEM academicians and K-12 STEM educators, 2) discuss core aspects of effort-based learning that are essential to both STEM research and STEM education such as persistence to confusion and resilience to failure, and 3) explore the intimate connection between scientific inquiry and content learning in the context of adult learning.
		Key Elements of a Professional Development Science Program: Ongoing Collaboration, Committed Scientists and Teachers, and a Permanent Site
		Barbara Schulz, National Research Council Teacher Advisory Council
		The Science Educational Partnership (SEP), a professional development program at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, was co-founded by a mid-career teacher and a staff scientist working together as equals. Through years of formative assessment, the program has evolved to meet the needs of teachers in many ways. This session will look at the needs of science teachers (mostly Biology), and how those needs are being met. SEP boasts a retention rate of former participants who remain active with the learning community of teachers and scientists of 80%. Given time to reflect, intellectual and material support, scientist mentors, and modeling of new strategies in teaching, teachers evolve into confident leaders. Discussion of other successful programs and what makes them unique is welcomed.
4:30 pm		Adjourn (Return to the Hotel by shuttle) Free Evening and Dinner on Your Own
February 8, 2005
(Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center, 100 Academy Drive, Irvine, CA)
7:45 am		Shuttle departs from Hotel for Beckman Center
8:00 am		Breakfast (Dining Room and Terrace) “Birds-of-a-feather” seating and discussion
		Mary Colvard, Consultant, New York State Department of Education, and Steering Committee Member
8:45 am		MSP Teams Meet
		Objective: Based on information and ideas from this workshop, develop up to three action items that will be addressed within 1)two weeks, 2)six months after returning home.
9:45 am		Break
10:00 am		The Signature Pedagogies of the Professions of Law, Medicine, Engineering, and the Clergy: Potential Lessons for the Education of Teachers
		Lee Shulman, President, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Stanford, CA
		Dr. Shulman will discuss the wisdom of practice from the perspective of what we are learning from studying practices in preparing professionals in other fields, e.g., medicine, law, etc. and then connect this knowledge to teaching and teacher education.
11:00 am		Committee Reflections and Participant Discussion Where have we been in Improving Teacher Education: Implications and Opportunities for MSPs
12:00 pm		Box Lunch and Adjourn