Maria Araceli Ruiz-Primo

Impact of Undergraduate Science Course Innovations on Learning

Despite revealing some positive impacts, studies too often suffer from weak design and inadequate reporting. At many colleges and universities, the traditional model of science instruction—a professor lecturing a large group of students—is being transformed into one in which students play a more active role in learning. This has been attributed to mounting evidence that traditional lectures, recitations, and laboratory sessions do not guarantee that students develop deep understanding of critical concepts (1–5).

Lessons Learned from the Process of Curriculum Developers' and Assessment Developers' Collaboration on the Development of Embedded Formative Assessments

Our project to embed formative student assessments in the Foundational Approaches in Science Teaching curriculum required a close collaboration between curriculum developers at the Curriculum Research & Development Group (CRDG) and assessment developers at the Stanford Educational Assessment Laboratory (SEAL). This was a new endeavor for each organization, and throughout the project, many lessons were learned about embedding assessments and about the collaboration process. In this article, we discuss what we learned about the strengths and weaknesses of the collaboration up to the beginning of the randomized experiment. What we found comported with the literature on research collaborations. For example, past collaborations between CRDG and SEAL facilitated moving the project forward and sustained the collaboration. That said, the physical distance between the groups gave rise to some misunderstandings and led to a commitment to meet face-to-face on a regular basis; we found that conferencing software did not suffice. Moreover, in our zeal to implement formative assessments, the voices of teachers and teacher trainers got muffled until a pilot study confirmed their advice.

Critical Friends’ Perspectives on Problems of Practice and Inquiry in an EdD Program

Conversations continue to evolve within the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) regarding the nature of the dissertation in practice and the associated inquiry skills/coursework (Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate, 2012). Questions abound, for example, regarding the nature, scope, impact, and format of the dissertation in practice. Because the approach to this culminating project diverges across institutions of higher education involved in the CPED consortium and because there is a commitment to allow flexibility to institutions to address their unique contexts, it is unclear what research/inquiry experiences and coursework are needed to support Doctor of Education (EdD) students to carry out the dissertation in practice with rigor and in a manner that truly develops scholarly practitioners who contribute to advancing problems of practice in contexts such as schools, districts, and community-based organizations.