EDUCATION FORUM

University Science Participation in K–12 Education: “Change Is Coming, It Really Is!”

On June 29, ASPB participated in a session of the American Physiological Society’s (APS) Seminar Series, “Sharing Strategies in K–12 Education.” This session’s theme was “Improving University Scientist Participation in K–12 Education.” A variety of societies and stakeholders were present, including representatives from NIH, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and NSF.

The following questions framed the focus of the seminar, including the brief presentations:

• What are your organization’s objectives for encouraging scientist participation?
• How are your member scientists involved?
• What are your recruitment methods?
• What are the greatest challenges in improving scientist participation?
• What stakeholders are important in providing support?
• What is your program’s measure of effectiveness or impact?
• What resources are produced?
• What/who are your funding sources?

Four seminar speakers addressed these questions and identified strategies that work in their particular spheres of influence.

First, Jennifer B. Presley, PhD, director, Science and Mathematics Education Policy at the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU), had encouraging information about the depth and breadth of K–12 initiatives her association is supporting on many campuses nationwide. Her presentation included specific program highlights as well as objective data on the progress being made. Jennifer underscored the importance of improvements in both official campus policy and peer-to-peer respect for developing faculty interest in K–12 outreach.

Next, Michael J. Dougherty, PhD, director of education for the American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) presented data on the Geneticist–Educator Network of Alliances (GENA) project. GENA is designed to build a framework of long-term collaborations between educators and scientists within the broad context of genetics.

Michael also invited all participants to review the ASHG’s Statement on the Importance of Participation of Scientists in K–12 Science Education. He stated that ASHG hopes this statement will be “stolen, adapted, and adopted” by other societies as part of the general push to improve K–12 education. In fact, ASPB had already taken these steps and the adapted statement was approved at the July Executive Committee meeting. The statement is available on ASPB’s website.

Katie Engen, MEd, the ASPB Education Foundation assistant, outlined how a core of our members are active in improving K–16 teaching techniques, materials, education policy, and campus-led initiatives in education. See the sidebar “ASPB Outreach Options” on page 36 for more details.

The seminar audience showed great interest in how ASPB supports its members’ efforts in the K–12 arena. Participants stated plans to test some of ASPB’s ideas in their own organizations. ASPB’s education-related awards and grants aligned well with what other participants have learned to be motivating and effective. The options ASPB offers to address education at our annual meetings were also well received.

The fourth presenter, Ida Chow, PhD, Executive Officer, Society for Developmental Biology (SDB), pointed out that a lot could be done even by societies that don’t have a section dedicated to education outreach.

One clever idea from SDB is New Faculty Boot Camp. Experienced boot camp leaders show new university staff great teaching techniques, tenure tricks, networking paths, and career track options. These dynamic boot camp counselors, especially those with some professional cache, make a big difference in promoting K–12 outreach as a rewarding component of any science career. SDB also offers a Re-boot Camp for experienced staff. This version of the camp allows veterans to “delete” inefficiencies, consider “alt” options, and gain “control” of other relevant activities. Both camps strive to convey that overall professional development (the main focus) is greatly enhanced by learning to do effective classroom teaching and outreach.

Seminar organizer Mel Limson, of the APS Education Office, compiled the best practices and innovative strategies into a cross-cutting operational tool for designing, improving, and evaluating how to encourage university scientist participation in K–12 education. View this resource.

Following the presentations, speakers and audience members quickly turned to the critical importance of the science of teaching and learning. Everyone agreed that researchers, educators, policy makers, and funding agencies all need data to show that outreach and direct contact with schools does have a positive impact. These same groups also want data on the specific practices that work the best. In short, while everyone appreciates upbeat case studies of successful teaching or outreach, the group concurred that aggregate results will be the best leverage for funding major changes in education policies on campus and through public outreach. ASPB member Erin Dolan’s article, “Publishing Your Teaching Scholarship” in the July/August 2009issue of the ASPB News, offers helpful insight on effective ways to prepare and share such data. This article will be shared with the APS seminar attendees.

As the seminar discussion continued, the group wholeheartedly agreed that not much will happen in terms of activating a large portion of faculty into doing K–12 outreach unless university and department leaders prove that such activity is a valued part of campus tradition and policy. Professional respect, official recognition of outreach activities as part of the tenure-seeking process, adjustment of teaching or committee duties, and, of course, financial compensation were noted as potentially effective motivators for increasing university scientist participation in K–12 education. Positive feedback and supportive attitudes from professional peers (both in formal meetings and at the water cooler) were deemed equally critical to individual scientists choosing to become and stay involved in outreach and off-campus education. In other words, K–12 outreach has to seem professionally rational and even “cool.” Finally, intentional professional development for improving scientists’ general teaching skills was identified as an effective conduit for improving science education efforts both on campus and through outreach. Scientists partnering with the education specialists at their own institutions should develop a confident, well-informed staff of university instructors. Such a staff will not only inspire the campus student body to pursue science, education, or both, this staff also will be prepared to pursue and succeed at more diverse, off-campus teaching opportunities.

The APS seminar concluded with brief consideration of the idea that “nothing” changes without national teaching standards. This notion was quickly overruled by cheerful assertions from most of the group that “change is coming, it really is!”