Presentations: Session J

The development of reflective practitioners has been identified as one of four dominant change strategies in the STEM education literature. Reflective writings, wherein instructors document their thoughts, actions, and plans surrounding different situations, are often utilized as a component of professional and intra-departmental reviews. However, despite the apparent interest and increasing advocacy, little research concerns the content and depth of instructors' reflections. Thus, it remains unclear whether instructors are achieving critical reflection: the depth of reflection which centers on the political, moral, and ethical implications of their teaching. Before professional development programs can effectively incorporate reflective writings as a tool for introspection and personal improvement, it is necessary to first understand the current state of instructors' reflections. To accomplish this goal, 46 physics instructors were recruited from a new faculty professional development workshop. The participants followed a scaffold to guide their reflection on a self-identified challenging teaching experience wherein the situation is detailed, emotions are explored, contributing factors are identified, and alternative actions are considered. Responses are analyzed using established frameworks which capture the content and depth of written reflections. Preliminary results indicate that few participants engaged with topics such as gender, accommodations, and cultural differences. Furthermore, less than half reflected upon their relationships with themselves or with their students. Overall, the depth of reflection remained low, indicating that instructors do not readily engage in the type of reflection that would lead to meaningful instructional, departmental, and institutional change. Therefore, the current standard, where reflections are simply required by professional reviews, is not expected to lead to pedagogical reform. Before developing reflective practitioners can be more effectively and broadly used as a change strategy, individual instructors must be trained in reflective practices.

The Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (cwsei.ubc.ca) transformed teaching and learning in the mathematics and science departments at the University of British Columbia (UBC) over the period of 2007-2017, with a core mechanism of the change being the introduction of discipline-based education specialists. These specialists were embedded in departments to partner with faculty on bringing research-informed teaching practices into courses and evaluating their impact on student learning. While aspects of this model at UBC and the University of Colorado Boulder have been shared at previous Transforming Institutions meetings, this presentation will add to these by highlighting a series of key outcomes from the UBC initiative, including: Teaching Transformation, with substantial uptake among our faculty and new practices sustained to a high degree; Student Outcomes, with longitudinal improvement in grades and retention in STEM programs; and Broader Impact beyond UBC, via research publications, meaningful career trajectories for the specialists, and the adoption of this model at a number of other institutions. Post-initiative activities at UBC include a paired teaching program to incorporate subsequent hires and an evolution of the embedded specialist model on our campus and elsewhere. Approaches to evaluation in each of these areas as well as high-level estimates of costs versus impact will be discussed.

The Mathematics Teacher Education Partnership (MTEP) is a national networked improvement community (NIC) seeking to transform secondary mathematics teacher preparation, centering principles of equity and inclusion. Using a NIC-within-a-NIC structure, local NICs are composed of at least one university-based secondary mathematics teacher preparation program and one K-12 school district. NIC members also work in a number of cross-cutting research action clusters to help generate, test, and propagate transformation strategies. MTEP members include faculty and administrators in both Colleges of Education and Mathematics Departments; high school teachers, administrators, and other school district personnel; and other involved personnel such as state mathematics leaders. MTEP was launched in 2012 to transform secondary mathematics teacher preparation using a first iteration of the NIC design: improvement science methods married with a networked design. The MTEP NIC was guided by national recommendations, particularly the Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators' 2017 Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of Mathematics, which present "a set of comprehensive standards describing a national vision for the initial preparation of all teachers Pre-K–12 who teach mathematics" (p. xiv), including an integrated focus on access and equity that builds candidates' equitable use of effective mathematics teaching practices. We have a current grant whose focus is to scale up and study our NIC, and thus will share some of our strategies for managing a longitudinal change project. In this new effort, we are putting more supports in place for local NICs, including targeted change leader professional development and change coaches. In this 10-minute presentation, we will share a concise overview of MTEP, and spend most of our time discussing how we are developing and supporting change leaders to lead local transformation efforts.