Course Descriptions

Course:1

Teaching Creative Thinking to Enhance Critical Thinking
SIDNEY J. PARNES, Buffalo State College, Creative Problem Solving Institute, NY
June 6-8, 2002 in Memphis, TN
Apply: CBU

        Undergraduate students who will become professional physical or social scientists, engineers, mathematicians or teachers must learn how to actualize goals, visions and dreams into reality. In this short course, instructors of these students learn and practice strategies to train their students to do this by using creative and critical thinking skills. Participants will be guided in preparing plans for helping students attain a creative outlook as they develop and use more of their thinking abilities.
         The course focuses on opportunity-making with respect to wishes and desires of individuals, their organizations, and the society in which they live. It helps participants uncover productive new ways to view, define and approach challenges, desires, or dilemmas in order to achieve effective implementable resolutions.
         Too often a problem solver examines what exists and chooses the least of available evils without much satisfaction. Ultimately the Osborn/Parnes model results in creative decision-making in which one speculates on what "might be," then chooses and develops the best alternative with satisfaction.
         Participants will be introduced to creative/innovative processes that have been applied successfully in every academic discipline. These processes have also been applied by business executives desiring more creativity and innovation from their managers and employees. The short course provides participants the opportunity to experience the processes themselves and this helps enable them to effectively integrate these methods into their courses.
        Participants will learn a new version of the Osborn/Parnes model. Many other proven techniques for stimulating both imagination and judgment are incorporated eclectically within the Osborn/Parnes model. The principles and processes presented have been derived from more than fifty years of research and practice in improving both imagination and judgment.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Parnes is Professor Emeritus and Founding Director of the Center for Studies of Creativity and its Master of Science degree program in Creative Studies at Buffalo State University College. The College presented its first "President's Award for Excellence" to Dr. Parnes in recognition of his outstanding contributions in research, scholarship and creativity. His latest book (1997) is entitled OPTIMIZE The Magic of your Mind. It will be provided to each participant. Among a number of his other books on creativity are Visionizing: State-of-the-Art Processes for Encouraging Innovative Excellence (1988) and Source Book For Creative Problem-Solving (1992) . The Source Book is a 50 year anthology of creative problem-solving techniques and processes. Dr. Parnes is a Lifetime Trustee on the Board of the Creative Education Foundation, which presented him its highest award for "Outstanding Creative Achievement" in 1990. He also serves on the Foundation's Advisory Board of the Journal Of Creative Behavior.

Cognition and Teaching: Part 1
RUTH S. DAY, Duke University
May 13-15, 2002 in Durham, NC
Apply: TUCC

         Many professors are delightful outside the classroom. They are fluent, clear, and engaging. However, some undergo a peculiar transformation when they enter the classroom. In the worst cases, they may become confusing and even downright boring. Why? Although many factors may be involved, we will examine cognitive aspects of college teaching, according to the following plan. Day #1 – overview of cognitive psychology (including pattern recognition, attention, memory, and comprehension) and key concepts that have specific implications for teaching (including information load, chunking, coding, memory capacity, schemas, and levels of processing). Day #2 – the role of "lecture notes" in helping or hindering good class presentations and discussions, teaching with and without technology, small-group discussions. Day #3 – systematic individual differences in cognition and their implications for both instructor and student.
         Throughout the course, we will acknowledge that there is no one "best" way to teach. For example, some successful professors use verbatim text as lecture notes while others use outlines or spatial maps. We will examine the cognitive consequences of using each of these alternative forms of representation; to do so, participants will give 5-minute "mini-talks" based on material from their own classrooms.

For college professors of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: be scheduled to teach at least one lecture course during the current or next academic year. Individuals with all levels of teaching "ability" are welcome.

Dr. Day has done extensive research in cognitive psychology, including Basic Cognition (perception, memory, comprehension, mental representation, problem solving, knowledge structures, linguistic coding, individual differences), and Everyday Cognition (including medical cognition and courtroom cognition); for more information see http://www.duke.edu/~ruthday. Her forthcoming book, Cognition and Teaching, incorporates some of the material from this course. She was on the faculty at Stanford and Yale before going to Duke and was also a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford. She was designated one of the "Ten Best Teachers" at Yale, "Distinguished Teacher" at Duke, and "All Star Teacher" by the Smithsonian Institution/Teaching Company.

Changing Science Courses to Promote Critical Thinking
CRAIG E. NELSON, Indiana University
June 5-7, 2002 in Dayton, OH
Apply: DAY

         Mature critical thinking is a prerequisite to understanding science and to applying it appropriately. We will begin with an examination of the relations between understanding the nature of science and thinking critically. Mature critical thinking (unlike accurate reasoning, one of its components) can only be done for topics perceived as uncertain and requiring judgment. The continuing history of fundamental change in science, and its resulting dynamic and tentative nature, show that science must be fundamentally uncertain. We will examine the sources of this uncertainty and the various criteria, starting with probability, that allow scientists to decide which theories are (presently) preferable. These decisions are in turn based on various value judgments. (Consider the rationale for a 5% rather than a 1% or a 10% acceptance level.) The second (and main) focus of the workshop will ask the participants to design segments of their courses to help students understand mature critical thinking and apply it to science. The basics include: drawing out uncertainty, articulating the alternatives to which each theory is being compared, making explicit the criteria that discriminate among these alternatives and the values reflected in the choice of those criteria, and using gradations that distinguish among degrees of support and among levels of sufficiency. Our considerations will include both the ways particular topics are presented and some other aspects of course structure. These will include topic choice, presenting the instructor's own history of changing ideas and brief historical overviews, and the use of techniques such as structured small group discussion to increase comprehension, synthesis and application.
         Participants should bring with them lecture notes and other teaching materials for some course segments where critical thinking seems especially desirable. A summary of Dr. Nelson's approach is given in his On the Persistence of Unicorns: The Tradeoff between Content and Critical Thinking Revisited , in The Social Worlds of Higher Education: Handbook for Teaching in a New Century, B. A. Pescosolido and R. Aminzade, Eds. (Participants in Dr. Nelson's Chautauqua on Creation/Evolution should consider this course an expansion of the opening segment of that workshop in deciding whether to apply for this one.)

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Nelson is an evolutionary ecologist at Indiana University who has won major awards for his teaching of evolution and has been named a Carnegie Scholar for 2000-01 by the Carnegie Foundation. He also has participated in several debates with scientific creationists. He has been an invited participant at major sessions on evolution and belief, including those at meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Society for the Study of Evolution. He wrote Creation, Evolution, or Both? A Multiple Model Approach, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Science and Creation, R. W. Hanson, (ed.) in 1986 (reissued in 1999). His most recent relevant chapter, Effective Strategies for Teaching Evolution and Other Controversial Subjects was published in 2000 in The Creation Controversy and the Science Classroom by the National Science Teachers Association. (Both chapters will be distributed during the course). Critical Thinking has also been a central component in the other Chautauqua Short Courses he has offered recently. In recognition of Nelson's contributions to the improvement of undergraduate teaching, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching honored him as its U.S. Research and Doctoral Universities Professor of the Year 2000.

Calibrated Peer Review: A Writing And Critical Thinking Instructional Tool
ARLENE RUSSELL, UCLA
July 17-19, 2002 in Los Angeles, CA
Apply: CAL

Note:         Please check http://davinci.csun.edu/~scnet/chaut.html for any updates on this course.

         Calibrated Peer Review™(CPR), a new, discipline independent, instructional (Web-based) management tool enables an instructor to make frequent writing assignments that probe student understanding of concepts without increasing the instructor's "grading" load. In CPR assignments, students "write-to-learn." CPR instructors can choose materials from the growing library of field-tested CPR assignments in chemistry, biology, and economics, or they can create their own assignments. In a CPR assignment, students write short essays on a specific topic. Guiding questions focus both the direction that students should take in organizing their thoughts for the essay and encourage critical thinking about the topic. After electronic submission of the essays, the students review "calibration" essays that are exemplary, contain misconceptions, or include common errors. When students demonstrate they are competent reviewers, they review three anonymous essays written by their peers and finally their own essays. To launch a "CPR assignment," an instructor selects an assignment, creates a class list, and sets the due dates for essay submission and assignment completion. At the workshops, participants will: Experience an actual "CPR assignment," taking one as a student, Learn how to "launch" and monitor an assignment, Learn how to assess the rich set of feedback information on group or individual student progress and performance that is available at a "click of a mouse." Learn how to become proficient in developing new and creative CPR writing assessments for students.

For college teachers of: undergraduate science, math, technology and social science courses, and graduate students interested in an eventual teaching career. High school teachers are also welcom on a space available basis.Prerequisites: none, but potential proposers of NSF CCLI grants in any science area are encouraged to attend this workshop. To use CPR assignments at an institution, students will need to have regular access to computers with Internet capability. More information may be obtained from the Calibrated Peer Review web page: http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu.

Dr. Russell, a Senior Lecturer at UCLA in both the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and in the Department of Education, is a co-developer of the Calibrated Peer Review ™ (CPR) program, a product of the Molecular Science P roject–an NSF systemic reform initiative.

Constructive Processes in Learning and Teaching
DIANE L. SCHALLERT, The University of Texas at Austin
May 23-25, 2002 in Austin, TX
Apply: TXA

         It is easy for college teachers to operate "on automatic" when it comes to their teaching duties. True, they are likely to be devoted to incorporating the latest disciplinary knowledge in their lectures. However, in the press of everything else they have to do, worrying about the best way to present that information or about how their students' minds and emotions will be affected is often a low priority for college teachers. This course is intended to provide an opportunity for reflection on some of the latest insights that scholars and researchers interested in the process of learning and teaching have to offer.
          Taking first a cognitive perspective, we will discuss how students think, how they use their existing knowledge to filter and interpret everything they observe, hear, and read, and how they change their existing knowledge. We will consider how learning is always a social and cultural experience, reflecting the context in which it occurs. We will then explore the emotional and motivational side of learning, the point of intersection between affect and cognition.
         Throughout our discussion of the learning process from cognitive and socio-constructivist perspectives, we will refer to what practitioners and scholars have had to say about the teaching process. Thus, course participants should come away with a better understanding of their students and of how to teach them more effectively.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Schallert is a Professor of Educational Psychology at The University of Texas at Austin where she teaches a course on learning, cognition, and motivation in the undergraduate teacher preparation program, and graduate courses in learning and cognition, psycholinguistics, models of comprehension, and theories of writing. Her most recent research interests have been focused on how affect intersects the thought-language transaction in learners, readers, and writers.

Engaging Students in Learning Science and Mathematics-The Process Workshop Classroom
DAVID HANSON AND TROY WOLFSKILL, State University of New York at Stony Brook
June 20-22, 2002 in Stony Brook, Long Island, NY
Apply: SUSB

Note:   Low cost housing is available on the Stony Brook campus.

         A process workshop is defined as a classroom environment where students are actively engaged in learning a discipline and in developing essential skills by working in self-managed teams on activities that involve guided discovery, critical thinking, and problem solving, and that include reflection on learning and assessment of performance. The term process is used because the focus is on developing skills in key learning processes, and the term workshop is used because students are given tasks to complete as the active agents in the classroom. The essential skills, which we think most appropriate for a science workshop, lie in the areas of information processing, critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, communication, management, and assessment. Performance skills in these areas, just like skills in laboratory work and athletics, can be developed, strengthened, and enhanced through practice. These skills therefore need to be included explicitly in university-level courses, not only to help students be successful in these courses, but also to prepare them for the workplace and for life in general.
         In a process workshop, students work in teams to acquire information and develop understanding through guided discovery. They accomplish tasks and examine models or examples, which provide all the information central to the lesson, in response to critical-thinking questions, which we call key questions. The key questions compel the students to process the information, to verbalize and share their perceptions and understanding with each other, and to make inferences and conclusions, i.e. construct knowledge. They then apply this knowledge in simple exercises and to problems, which require higher-order thinking involving analysis, synthesis, transference, expert methodologies, and integration with previously learned concepts. The teams report their results to the class, assess how well they have done and how they could do better, develop strategies for improving their skills, reflect on what they have learned, and submit a written report.
         The course will model a process-workshop classroom appropriate for introductory science courses in specific disciplines such as chemistry, biology, and physics. Teaching strategies that help make it successful will be reviewed, and both text- based and computer-based materials that support this learning environment will be examined. The process-workshop format is being developed through grants from the National Science Foundation.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Hanson is a Professor of Chemistry at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He is an established research scientist with over 125 publications, has served as Chair of the Department, and currently is Chair of Stony Brook's Learning Communities Program. He graduated from Dartmouth College and received a Ph.D. from the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Wolfskill is a Lecturer in the Department of Chemistry and an Instructional Support Specialist in Stony Brook's Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching. He has taught at the college level, developed process-oriented cooperative learning activities, and currently is developing a computer-based learning system, LUCID (Learning and Understanding through Computer-based Interactive Discovery). He graduated from Albright College and received a Ph.D. from the University of Virginia.

Improving Student Learning Using Classroom Assessment Techniques
JON SRATTON, Walla Walla Community College
July 18-20, 2002 in Seattle, Washington
Apply: UWA

         With the current national emphasis on assessment, many college faculty feel the need to understand and employ effective assessment of student learning and of their own classroom teaching. Classroom assessment techniques (CATs) are very well suited to meet this need. CATs are ungraded, anonymous feedback instruments used to evaluate and improve both student learning and faculty instruction.
        This course will focus on discussion and hands-on assessment opportunities. Initially, participants will review the rationale for classroom research and assessment. After completing a teaching goals inventory, they will examine, practice, and evaluate specific CATs, with an eye to adaptation in their own courses. Participants will practice interpreting actual student feedback data, and will practice various techniques.
         At the simplest level, CATs are used to discover how well students have learned what teachers want them to learn on a given day. After examining the results, teachers can modify instruction accordingly. For example, a teacher solicits from each student an anonymous written response to the question, "What is the most important thing you've learned today?" Reviewing the results provides the teacher with reactions to two (at least) important questions: How well did the students learn what the teacher thinks is "the most important thing" taught today? What clues for improving instruction in this specific class are contained in the responses?
        Participants On a more complex level, CATs are context- dependent, interactive, multiple-focused, formative, largely qualitative assessments. They are "conversational" rather than "standardized," "personal" rather than "disengaged."
         Participants will work from Classroom Assessment Techniques, by Thomas A. Angelo and K. Patricia Cross.

For college teachers of: of all fields. Prerequisites: none.

Jon Stratton is an Instructor in Philosophy at Walla Walla Community College and an adjunct in the graduate Department of Education at Walla Walla College in Washington State. Dr. Stratton has given presentations in Classroom Assessment Techniques at several Outcomes Assessment Conferences and Abilities Institutes in Washington. He presented CATs workshops at the National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development at the University of Texas (NISOD) in 1997 and 1998. He was awarded the NISOD Excellence Award for teaching in 1998, and the Exemplary Status Award from the Washington State Community College Humanities Association in 1997. Dr. Stratton has led a number of workshops for college faculty in outcomes assessment with an emphasis on critical thinking. He is the author of Critical Thinking for College Students (Rowman and Littlefield, 1999).

Making Ethics Relevant for Science and Engineering Majors
THOMAS STOEBE, University of Washington
July 11-13, 2002 in Seattle, WA
Apply: UWA

         From the Challenger disaster to more mundane faulty fasteners, ethics applied to science and engineering has attracted increasing attention in recent years. Students are increasing interested in ethical issues, and engineering curricula are required to have ethics components for ABET accreditation. Yet science and engineering instructors seldom have any training in ethics, having focused their backgrounds on technical issues.
         This short course provides a new, participatory approach to introductory ethics that is both practical and accessible. Practically-oriented ethics modules are introduced that can be included in existing technical or scientific courses or used to develop a stand-alone seminar on the topic, depending on need. Lecture material and case studies are presented in areas such as conflict of interest and environmental awareness, along with resolution of ethical conflicts, applications to justice, and a variety of related topics. Classical virtue theory is used to provide a time-tested, simple and easily remembered basis for ethical reasoning.
         The cases used are oriented to settings that will be familiar to students, including those arising in part-time and summer jobs. Suggested texts and reference materials are presented to assist the instructor in adapting the needed modules to be used in their courses, or in developing a new seminar course. Course preparation material will be provided to each participant prior to the course, and course materials may be directly used in classroom teaching and learning.

For college teachers of: science and engineering at college or high school level, and for graduate students interested in teaching at these levels. Prerequisites: none.

Thomas Stoebe has taught ethics as a subject for engineers for many years in his courses, and has developed a seminar series that incorporates communication, professional responsibility, leadership and quality, all as related to ethical principles and practice. Dr. Stoebe is a Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at the University of Washington, has over 100 technical publications in both materials science and in education, is active in preparation of secondary teachers to teach science, and has developed numerous outreach programs for students and faculty in engineering and the sciences. He also works on means for enhancing the general scientific knowledge of the general populace.

Revitalizing and Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Science: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Teaching
JEFFREY POMMERVILLE and MARIA HARPER-MARINICK, Maricopa Community Colleges
June 20-22, 2002 in Austin, TX
Apply: TXA

         Many of today's university and college science and non-science students in 100 level general science courses report that they find these courses uninteresting and, as a result, they are "turned off" by science. Reasons cited include difficulties students have in trying to transfer knowledge from one course or solution to another and deficiencies instructors see in student research, writing and oral skills; that is, they lack the basic skills science requires. However, to meet these challenges, faculty often are not prepared sufficiently, or are inadequately trained in the use of instructional technology, to address the diverse learning styles seen in today's students. Many science groups and organizations, including the National Science Foundation, have stated that an interdisciplinary approach that integrates science, math, engineering, technology (SMET) disciplines is one way to address and help solve the issues mentioned above. To this end, we have pioneered a science reform project that brings together collaborative groups of SMET instructors from within their institution to develop interdisciplinary materials and practices that will revitalize and improve undergraduate science teaching.
         This course provides the fundamentals for designing, developing, and field-testing an interdisciplinary approach to curriculum content. After an introductory discussion that identifies and reviews the diverse learning styles of today's students, the course moves on to explain how an interdisciplinary approach to science can promote student inquiry and facilitate the development of critical thinking skills. Participants then will be involved in designing interdisciplinary activities and developing interdisciplinary materials and practices ("modules"), adapted from their current science curricula, that emphasize active learning in entry-level (100 level) science courses/laboratories. The course also looks at the critical role of assessment in developing the interdisciplinary materials and approaches to teaching. Importantly, such products developed by participants in the course could be field-tested or implemented at their own institutions. Therefore, consideration also will be given to obstacles likely to be faced by faculty who want to incorporate these changes into their course curriculum as a way to better prepare themselves and their peers to teach today's wide range of students.

For college teachers of: all science, math, and engineering disciplines. Interdisciplinary groups from a college/university are urged to apply. Prerequisites: at least one year of classroom teaching.

Dr. Pommerville is a biologist with over 20 years experience in research and teaching. For the past 10 years, he has been involved with initiatives to improve college science teaching through active learning. He is currently Program Director of Systemic Reform in Science, a 2-year NSF-funded project to change the way 100 level science courses are taught in the community college classroom/laboratory. Project web page: http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/syris. Dr. Harper-Marinick is an Instructional Designer who has been involved in the design, development, and evaluation of curriculum materials and programs for different educational levels for two decades. She has taught courses in instructional design and conducted workshops for college faculty in a variety of teaching methodologies, including active learning strategies. She provides design, assessment, and evaluation support to Systemic Reform in Science.

Creating a Learning Community: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Teaching College Science and Mathematics to Liberal Arts Students
GERARD L'HEUREUX and ILEANA VASU, Holyoke Community College
May 29-31 2002 in Memphis, TN
Apply: CBU

         Participants design an interdisciplinary team-taught learning community (LC) to interest Liberal Arts students in science and mathematics. This LC integrates science and mathematics to explore the mysteries of the universe. Students contrast inductive vs. deductive reasoning in order to develop an understanding of how we know what we know. They develop a scientific perspective by discussing natural phenomena as dynamic rather than static systems. Physical and chemical changes, energy flow and chaos – weather patterns and global warming, volcanic and seismic events – are among the topics developed. Students learn how to assess the validity of qualitative and quantitative interpretations of their data through logic, probability, quantitative analysis, and statistics.
         The primary focus of this LC is on student-active learning that engages students in the learning process. Initially, students attempt to place the universe of scientific and mathematical knowledge within a historical and philosophical context. Learners are challenged to respond to fundamental issues involving the nature of knowledge. The limits of sensory knowledge are considered through the allegory of "Plato's Cave" (video format). Then the profound changes brought about by the scientific revolution are discussed. Students explore these topics and more by reading from Capra's The Turning Point –Science, Society, and the Rising Culture (scientific revolution) and Web of Life (fractal geometry), Tom Stoppard's Arcadia (fractal geometry), Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland (logic), and Edwin Abbott's Flatland (space and dimension).
         Chautauqua participants will become actively involved in small-group discussions, fishbowl interactions, problem based learning, jigsaw-puzzle strategy, seminaring, observation and hypothesis development, and other presentations. Participants will construct models of the Platonic solids and of other polyhedra and create sequences of images leading to fractals. They will also be involved in creating a team-taught learning community and in formulating pedagogical strategies for other disciplines. Learning communities provide an excellent opportunity for interdisciplinary integration of different disciplines. There emerges a "marriage of true minds." New ideas are born. A community is built. Being part of an LC is an amazing experience for both students and faculty. No one should miss it.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Ileana Vasu is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Holyoke Community College in Massachusetts. At HCC, she explores the connections between math and other disciplines, particularly science and literature. She team teaches with Professor Gerry L'Heureux the LC "Math, Mind and Matter", a course integrating mathematics with science. Ileana is a member of the AMS and of the MAA. Gerard L'Heureux is Professor of Chemistry at Holyoke Community College and also teaches geology, oceanography, and Topics in Science. He serves as the HCC Coordinator for STEMTEC (The N.S.F. Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, Teacher Education Collaborative) grant. He is also a member of the FIPSE Learning Community Leadership Team at Holyoke Community College and has been active in the National Learning Communities Dissemination Project with the Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education. He has taught numerous learning communities that include "Old Myths and New Paradigms in Science and Literature" that integrates Language & Literature with a lab science course as well as "Math, Mind and Matter." Gerard L'Heureux is the 2000-2001 recipient of the Elaine Marieb Faculty Chair for Teaching Excellence at Holyoke Community College.

Teaching Dendrochronology (Tree-Ring Analysis) in College-Level Courses
THOMAS W. SWETNAM and PAUL R. SHEPPARD, University of Arizona, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
May 16-18, 2002 in Tucson, AZ
Apply: UAZ

         Dendrochronology, or tree-ring science, is the study of annual growth bands of trees to better understand environmental conditions and human behavior of the past. Dendrochronology has been applied as a research tool in many distinct scientific disciplines, including forest ecology, geomorphology, climatology, environmental studies, and archaeology. Because of its broad application and interdisciplinary nature, dendrochronology can fit in as a topic in many courses typically offered at universities. Students often find dendrochronology interesting and enjoyable to learn about because it relates to many fascinating phenomena in the real world, from volcanic eruptions and forest fires to the abandonment of ancient cliff dwellings. Dendrochronology also affords opportunities for students to experience hands-on activities with specimens and data in the field and in the laboratory.
         The purpose of this course is to provide college teachers with a basic understanding of dendrochronology principles and applications. The course will provide various tools and ideas for teaching dendrochronology as part of an existing course in environmental sciences or archaeology. The course will include overviews of applications of dendrochronology plus benchmark examples, hands-on experiences of lab and computer activities, and a trip to the nearby Santa Catalina Mountains to experience fieldwork techniques and to see examples of environmental issues to which tree rings apply. Participants will carry home hand outs that will be helpful in the classroom for teaching dendrochronology.

For college teachers of: natural, geological, anthropological, or environmental sciences. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Swetnam is Professor of Dendrochronology and Director of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research at the University of Arizona. He specializes in forest ecology and has studied forest fires and climate change in the western U.S. Dr. Sheppard is Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research who has applied dendrochronology to various environmental questions. He also has developed computer-based modules specifically to aid in teaching dendrochronology at many academic levels.

Science and Pseudoscience: A Primer in Critical Thinking About Why People Believe Weird Things
MICHAEL SHERMER, Publisher, Skeptic Magazine, Columnist, Scientific American
June 20-21, 2002 in Philadelphia, PA
Apply: TUCC

         This seminar is based on Dr. Shermer's best-selling books Why People Believe Weird Things, How We Believe, Denying History, and The Borderlands of Science. He will teach the principles of critical thinking through numerous real-world examples of investigations he has conducted over the past decade on ESP and UFOs, cults and conspiracy theories, creationism and Holocaust denial, the witch crazes of the 16th century and the modern sex abuse panics such as the McMartin case and the recovered memory movement of the late 20th century. Summarizing his years investigating extraordinary claims, Dr. Shermer will speculate on the psychology of belief, showing that there may very well be evolutionary reasons for why people believe weird things. Also covered will be the neurophysiology, psychology, and anthropology of religious beliefs and spiritual experiences.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Michael Shermer is the publisher of Skeptic magazine, the director of the Skeptics Society, and the host of the Skeptics Lecture Series at Caltech. He writes a monthly column in Scientific American, hosts a radio show on NPR's KPCC in Los Angeles, and was the co-host and co-producer of the Fox Family 13-hour mini-series Exploring the Unknown. He taught for 17 years at Occidental College and Glendale College. In his Foreword to Why People Believe Weird Things, Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote: Michael Shermer, as head of one of America's leading skeptic organizations, and as a powerful activist and essayist in the service of this operational form of reason, is an important figure in American public life.

Science Vs. Pseudoscience: Where Reality Ends and Illusion Begins
CHARLES M. WYNN, Eastern Connecticut State University and ARTHUR W. WIGGINS, Oakland (Michigan) Community College
June 6-8, 2002 in Austin, TX
Apply: TXA

Note:    Participants will be responsible for all costs and fees associated with transportation, lodging, and meals. A portion of the application fee is used to offset processing, mailing, phone charges, duplication of course materials, and refreshments.

         Enhanced scientific literacy is one of the most important goals of a college education. Unfortunately, achievement of this goal is impeded by the adherence of many college students to a variety of beliefs that are antithetic to those of most scientifically literate people. These include belief in paranormal powers such as ESP and psychokinesis, paranormal experiences such as astral (out-of-body) projection and near-death experiences, paranormal entities such as ghosts and spirits, extraterrestrial beings arriving in "UFOs" as well as abductions by these beings, astrology and other divination techniques such as numerology, palmistry and Tarot cards, and alleged scientific evidence for "scientific" creationism. Such false- or pseudo-scientific beliefs (theories claimed to be scientific when they are not scientific) are so well entrenched that it is essential to confront them in a forthright manner and in the context of the nature of science.
         This course will begin by reviewing a scientific method of inquiry in which observations or problems suggest hypotheses, hypotheses generate predictions, predictions are checked by experiments, and, when experiments do not bear out predictions, hypotheses are modified or discarded. The method will then be used to evaluate the above mentioned beliefs.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Wynn is Professor of Chemistry at Eastern Connecticut State University. He is listed in the National Directory of Science Literacy Consultants of the Society for College Science Teachers. Arthur Wiggins is Professor of Physics and Department Head of Physical Sciences at Oakland Community College in Michigan. He is co-author with Dr. Wynn of The Five Biggest Ideas in Science and Quantum Leaps in the Wrong Direction: Where Real Science Ends and Pseudoscience Begins.

Building Student Project Teams in Engineering and Science: Practice and Pitfalls
LINDA SCHMIDT and JANET SCHMIDT, University of Maryland
June 23-25, 2002 in Memphis, TN
Apply: CBU

         Traditionally, engineering and science faculty taught the technical mastery needed by future engineers and scientists by focusing on basic science competence and the engineering "product" or "system to be designed." Today, due to changes in industry, expectations of ABET EC 2000, as well as the increasingly multidisciplinary nature of real world problems (e.g., pollution, energy shortages, etc.), faculty are faced with teaching future engineers and scientists a new skill set. Indeed some have suggested that technical competency is only the first step to a successful professional career: expertise in "people skills" such as the ability to listen, manage conflict, and work in teams, are also necessary to advance. In the case of teamwork, most faculty lack experience with project teams, either personally as a member of a project team, or academically in terms of actual training in the teamwork skills that can be used in the undergraduate classroom.
         This Chautauqua Short Course introduces engineering and science faculty who would like to use student project teams in their teaching to a comprehensive and developmental model of team training called BESTEAMS (Building Engineering Student Team Effectiveness and Management Systems). Recently funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the BESTEAMS curriculum addresses development of three key aspects of team functioning: personal effectiveness, interpersonal effectiveness, and project management.
         The first domain critical to successful teaming is "Personal Effectiveness" or knowledge of one's own skills and abilities. Individuals must know their own strengths and weakness to work most effectively as a part of a well functioning team. The second key domain to successful teamwork is "Interpersonal Effectiveness" or the ability to communicate well with others, negotiate group dynamics, and solve conflicts. Finally, the third domain is "Project Management". This refers to the fact that engineers and scientists often work on team projects that are quite complex. This domain provides tools to assist in managing multi-faceted, long-term projects.
         Besides focusing on three key domains of team functioning identified above, the BESTEAMS curriculum is designed to progress from the freshman year to the senior or "capstone" experience. To that end, each of our domains or tracks has three levels (introductory, intermediate, and advanced). Ideally, team training would take place throughout the student's course curriculum moving from introductory to advanced training in each domain.
         Each one of the blocks represents a lecture-sized module. There are multiple ways a student could receive the material depending on the desires of the faculty member and constraints of a particular curriculum. Freshman Year includes: Learning Style; Learning in Groups, Giving and Receiving Feedback; Individual Time Management; Mission Adoption. Middle Years include: Intermediate Identity Development, Critical Self-evaluation, Human Resource Management, Group Dynamics, Communication Skills; Project Organization, Decision Management. Senior Year includes: Emotional Intelligence; Conflict Resolution, Negotiation; Performance breakdown: Resolution/Completion.
         In addition to the module training and introduction to Module Implementation Module (MIP) materials, participants will engage in the following interactive sessions: typical problems of teams, knowing your students, team training versus teaching content.

For college teachers of: undergraduate students in engineering, science, and technology. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Linda C. Schmidt is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Maryland and has a Joint Appointment with the Institute for Systems Research. She is cofounder of the BESTEAMS partnership with four institutions of higher education which has trained over 300 engineering students in 20 different upper-level classes and 1000 freshmen and directed faculty workshops. She is on the organizing committee of the NSF Open Workshop on Decision-Based Design which is one of the first on-line workshops. Her publications relate to decision-based design and retention of engineering majors and student team performance issues. Dr. Janet A. Schmidt as an Educational Psychologist is Director of Engineering Student Research and served as Director of Institutional Research at the University of Maryland. Her publications relate to development in College Students, undergraduate experience of African American students, and a careers course for returning students.

Helping Students Learn Engineering Design
ANGELA LINSE and ROBIN ADAMS, University of Washington
June 26-28, 2002 in Seattle, WA
Apply: UWA

         Design learning is a crucial element in engineering curricula. It crosscuts all engineering disciplines and is a central element of professional engineering practice. The goal of this workshop is to help faculty develop strategies for teaching engineering design that are appropriate for their students and that match their own teaching style. Participants will exchange information about design teaching and learning with colleagues, discuss research in engineering design learning, and explore the practical implications for teaching engineering design to a diverse student population. The workshop will help participants 1) understand the learning difficulties students experience in design courses, and 2) apply teaching techniques that help students meet design learning challenges. This workshop may also be useful for faculty designing courses to meet new accreditation standards(ABET Engineering Criteria). ABET accreditation currently requires that engineering programs produce graduates who can "design a system, component, or process or product to meet desired needs."
         By the end of the workshop, participants will be able to describe the components of effective engineering design teaching and learning. Participants will articulate explicit design learning outcomes for students and review and select methods for documenting student learning in their design courses. This workshop will be most successful if participants focus on a specific engineering design course and bring to the workshop a syllabus and other course materials (e.g. assignments, course notes, exams, etc.).

For college teachers of: engineering and science, particularly faculty responsible for teaching engineering design courses; graduate students interested in teaching engineering at the college level. Prerequisites: none.

Angela Linse, Ph.D. is responsible for delivering the faculty development program for the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington. As CELT's Instructional Consultant, Dr. Linse works with engineering faculty and Teaching Assistants to improve their teaching effectiveness and enhance engineering student learning. She works with individual instructors to incorporate teaching methods that help students retain what they learn and encourage their active participation in the learning process. Dr. Linse also facilitates workshops and seminars for departments, the College, and the larger engineering education community. Robin Adams, PhD., is a Research Scientist for the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington. Dr. Adams' research and publications focus on cognitive processes in design behavior, iteration in design activity, designing tools for assessing engineering student learning, and expanding the research-informed approach to engineering education. Dr. Adams has been involved in the evaluation of the National Science Foundation's Engineering Coalition of Schools for Excellence in Education and Leadership (ECSEL) since the inception of the program.

Mechatronic System Design: Integrating Mechanical, Electrical, Control, and Computer Engineering
KEVIN CRAIG, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
June 19-21, 2002 in Troy, NY
Apply: RPI

         Today, cost-effective electronics, microcomputers, and digital signal processors have brought space-age technology to appliances and consumer products. Systems with hearts of precision sensors and actuators have increased performance by orders of magnitude over what was once possible. What sets these new, highly reliable, cost-effective, high-performance systems and devices apart from those of the past? Is it more than just technological advancement? There are many designs where electronics and control are combined with mechanical components, but with little synergy and poor integration they become just a marginally useful, error-prone, expensive conglomeration. Synergism and integration in design set a mechatronic system apart from a traditional, multidisciplinary system.
         Mechatronics is the synergistic combination of mechanical engineering, electronics, control systems, and computers. The key element in mechatronics is the integration of these areas through the design process. In order to design and build quality precision consumer products in a timely manner, the present-day engineer must be knowledgeable (both analytically and practically) in many different areas. The ability to design and implement analog and digital control systems, with their associated analog and digital sensors, actuators, and electronics, is an essential skill of every engineer, as everything today needs controls!
         In this two-day short course, the subject of mechatronics will be introduced through hardware demonstrations and complete dynamic system investigation case studies. Hardware systems that will be used in include:
   •    Spring Pendulum Dynamic System
   •    Two-Mass, Three- Spring Motor-Driven Dynamic System
   •    Magnetic Levitation System
   •    Pneumatic Actuator PWM Closed-Loop Position Control
   •    DC Motor Closed-Loop Analog and Digital Speed Control
   •    Hydraulically-Balanced Beam System
   •    Rotary Inverted Pendulum System

For college teachers of: any engineering discipline, particularly suited for mechanical, electrical and computer engineering. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Craig teaches and performs research in the areas of mechatronic system design, control systems, modeling, dynamics, and the study of active materials and their application in design. He has developed the Mechatronics Program at Rensselaer which includes an extensive teaching and research laboratory, two senior-elective/1st-year graduate courses, Mechtronics and Mechatronic System Design, and the graduate course Sensors and Actuators in Mechatronics.

A Better Understanding of the USA Space Program
STEVEN DUTCEK, NASA Kennedy Space Center and GILBERT YANOW, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
August 5-8, 2002 at the Kennedy Space Center
Apply: CAL

Note:  There may be an additional course fee of $50 for transportation with this course. Please check http://davinci.csun.edu/~scnet/chaut.html for any updates on this course.

         From almost the very start of the US space program, the major center for our getting into space has been the area around and at Cape Canaveral Florida. Today, adjacent to the Air Force Base at Cape Canaveral is the NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC). To truly appreciate our space program, one must understand the careful preparation that spacecraft must undergo, the extensive launching and tracking facilities and the multitude of major companies and competent people that must be coordinated to make our space program be the success it has been. This course will examine in detail all of these aspects at both the Air Force and KSC facilities. Experts in their fields will discuss the jobs that must be done. Tours will be taken of both KSC and Cape Canaveral. We will have a panel to discuss aspects of the fascinating history of the US Space Program. The people who are on this panel were there when this amazing history was being made.

For college teachers of:undergraduate science, math and technology courses and graduate students in the sciences interested in an eventual teaching career. High school teachers are also welcome on a space available basis. Prerequisites: none.

Steven Dutcek has been at KSC for many years. He is currently the head of the K-12 program area. He has worked with key engineers, scientist and astronauts in relation to a large number of major space programs at our country's prime space launch site. Dr. Gilbert Yanow is the outreach coordinator for the Genesis Project, and in that capacity was recently deeply involved in the efforts that prepared this space mission for launch at KSC. He is also the Director for the CAL Chautauqua Field Center.

Nanotechnology and Nanostructured Materials and Devices
RICHARD W. SIEGEL, PULICKEL M. AJAYAN, JONATHAN S. DORDICK, PAWEL KEBLINSKI, LINDA S. SCHADLER, and MICHAEL SHUR, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
June 27-28, 2002 in Troy, NY
Apply: RPI

         The past decade has seen explosive growth worldwide in the synthesis and study of a wide range of nanostructured materials, the building blocks of nanotechnology. A variety of scientifically interesting and technologically important nanomaterials have now been synthesized and investigated. These have included metals, ceramics, and composites made by means of a number of experimental methods. While these new materials have been synthesized most elegantly from either atomic or molecular precursors, those made from bulk precursors have yielded important results as well. The structures and properties of nanostructured materials have now been elucidated in a number of important areas and a fundamental understanding of the relationships among these areas is beginning to unfold. Most important among these is (1) an understanding of the atomic-scale structures of the nanocale building blocks and their interfaces and (2) the important role of spatial confinement on material properties in general, when the sizes of the nanoscale building blocks become smaller than the critical length scale for any particular property. Investigations of mechanical, chemical, electrical, magnetic, and optical behavior of nanostructured materials have demonstrated the possibilities to engineer the properties of these new materials through control of the sizes of their constituent building blocks and the manner in which these constituents are assembled. It is now very clear that through nanostructuring we can access novel material properties and unique device functions. In this short course, a comprehensive overview of nanoscience and nanotechnology and their relationship to nanoscale materials and devices will be presented in six lectures by leading researchers and educators at Rensselaer. These lectures will be offered within the context of the 2001 U. S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (http://www.nano.gov) and a large number of examples from our own research results in this exciting new area will be discussed.

For college teachers of:physics, chemistry, biology, materials science and the various related engineering disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Richard W. Siegel is past Chairman of the International Committee on Nanostructured Materials and chaired the WTEC worldwide study on nanostructure science and technology that led to the National Nanotechnology Initiative. He has authored about 200 publications in the areas of defects in metals, diffusion, and nanophase metals, ceramics and composites, presented more than 330 invited lectures worldwide, and edited nine books on these subjects. He was listed by Science Watch as the fourth most highly cited author worldwide in materials science during 1990-1994. He is an Associate Editor of Materials Letters and was a founding Editor of Nanostructured Materials. Dr. Siegel is a founder and Director of Nanophase Technologies Corporation, and his early work with them was recognized by a 1991 Federal Laboratory Consortium Award for Excellence in Technology Transfer. He is an Honorary Member of the Materials Research Societies of India and Japan, a 1994 recipient of an Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Senior Research Award in Germany, and presented the 1996 MacDonald Lecture in Canada. Dr. Shur is Patricia and Sheldon Roberts Professor of Solid State Electronics, Professor of Physics, Professor of Information Technology, and Acting Director of the Center for Integrated Electronics and Electronics Manufacturing at RPI. He is an expert in microelectronics and nanoelectronics devices design, modeling, simulation, and characterization. Jointly with Professor Eastman, he introduced a concept of ballistic transport. He was one of the inventors of complementary compound semiconductor technology used in wireless applications. He has published technical papers and books, won several awards, and holds over 25 patents on solid-state devices. Dr. Jonathan S. Dordick is Chair of the Department of Chemical Engineering where he is also the Howard P. Isermann Professor of Biochemical Engineering. He received the NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award in 1989, the 1989 University of Iowa Faculty Scholars Award, and the 1998 Iowa Section Award of the American Chemical Society. Presently he serves on the Scientific Advisory Boards for several biotechnology companies. Dr. Dordick has published over 130 papers and is an inventor/co-inventor on 20 patents. Dr. Schadler is an Associate Professor in the Materials Science and Engineering Department at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Her research interests primarily are in the mechanical behavior of traditional polymer composites and nanocomposites. Dr. Keblinski was a recipient of an Alexander von Humboldt Fellowship. Professor Keblinski is an author or co-author of 40 scientific articles on topics ranging from mesoscopic-level modeling of vapor deposition and phase separation to atomic-level structure and property relationships computer simulations of metals, covalent materials and ceramics. Dr. Ajayan is an Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and is a pioneer in the field of carbon nanotubes. He has worked on the synthesis, characterization and modification of nanotubes for almost a decade and has published over 100 papers in this field. He is also an expert in electron microscopy techniques.

Award Winning Programs for Minority, Women and Students with Disabilities
PATRICIA MACGOWAN and SHERYL BURGSTAHLER, University of Washington
July 25-27, 2002 in Seattle, WA
Apply: UWA

         The development, implementation and funding of 3 award- winning programs at the University of Washington will be presented in a hands-on format that will provide the essential information needed for participants to develop similar programs. Each of these programs, Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement (MESA), Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) and Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking and Technology (DO-IT), have received the U.S. Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering mentoring.
         This course will provide key strategies for recruiting and retaining women and minorities in non-traditional areas of study. Specific information on resources for developing effective mentoring programs and national best practice models will be covered. The development of assistive technologies that allow people with disabilities to perform tasks independently, along with the increasing use of technology in science fields, open career opportunities that were once unavailable to people with disabilities. Programs like DO-IT employ successful strategies for increasing the representation of people with disabilities in challenging career field such as those in science, engineering and technology. However, minority, women and students with disabilities are still a minority in academic programs and careers in the sciences, mathematics and engineering.
         This short course will provide concrete examples of programs that are highly effective. Subject covered include programs that can be developed at secondary school feeder institutions, projects that work with incoming freshmen and that continue working to enhance student achievement throughout the college career. The importance of mentoring will be emphasized with corresponding assessment results. Access issues and solutions for students with disabilities will be included, along with summaries of legal issues, and a listing of available resources. Means will be discussed for faculty members to work most effectively with campus services and students with disabilities to select accommodations that maximize access, independence and success. Videotapes and handouts that can be used with instructors on any campus will be shared with participants.
         Program funding mechanisms and agency information will be shared along with successful proposals. Student experiences in these programs will be presented by student participants. Evaluation and assessment of the programs will be presented along with innovative ideas for future program development.

For college teachers of: the sciences and mathematics, along with potential program directors for programs for minorities, women and students with disabilities. Prerequisites: none.

Patricia MacGowan is the State Director of the Washington MESA (Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement) Program. This partnership program serves 4,100 pre-college students in 71 schools in 16 school districts. MESA partners include 4 Universities, 42 industries and businesses, and 38 community organizations. She is past chair of the National Association of Precollege Directors Association, and serves on the Teachers Recruiting Future Teachers Advisory Board, the Washington Science Teachers Equal Opportunities Committee, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory Education Advisory Council, the LASER (Leadership Assistance for Science Education Reform) Steering Committee, and the Center for Gender Equity Leadership Team at the Washington Research Institute. Sheryl Burgstahler is director of the Science Foundation-funded DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking and Technology) project at the University of Washington. DO-IT promotes the success of students with disabilities in postsecondary programs and careers, and sponsors programs that increase the use of assistive technology and promote the development of accessible facilities, labs, electronic resources, web pages, etc. Dr. Burgstahler has published many articles and delivered presentations at national and international conferences that focus on the full inclusion of individuals with disabilities in postsecondary education, distance learning, work-based learning and electronic communities. Dr. Burgstahler is Assistant Director of Information Systems and Affiliate Associate Professor in Education at the University of Washington.

Increasing the Retention of Under-Represented Groups--And the Learning of All Groups--In Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Courses
CRAIG E. NELSON, Indiana University
May 1-3, 2002 in Dayton, OH
Apply: DAY

         This course will make your semester. If you are one of the minuscule minority of science, mathematics, engineering and technology (SMET) professors whose classrooms are really free of discrimination, you will go away feeling deeply affirmed (and will have been a resource of immense help to the rest of us). If not, you will go away with clearer ideas as to how bias is unintentionally built into (virtually) every SMET professor's classroom practices and content (yes, even into the content). More importantly, you will have some strategies to make your classes fairer without sacrificing learning. Indeed, several of the procedures radically increase learning.
         Specifically, we will explore opportunity and bias in our classroom practices. Key questions and examples will include: How has calculus been taught so as to eliminate Fs without sacrificing content? How have D and F rates for African-Americans been reduced from 60% to 4% in some SMET courses, again without sacrificing content? What changes in pedagogy are most important in radically increasing learning? How can the development of more sophisticated modes of thinking be used to make our address to diversity more effective? And: How do assessment and grading practices often unfairly bias SMET courses? As time allows, we will experiment with some additional questions and examples that may help us learn to see both opportunity and bias in aspects of content such as word-choice, metaphors, and questions asked and not asked. Brief development of these ideas and examples will help the participants provide additional examples, discuss applicability to their own teaching, and design specific ways to implement these approaches.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Nelson is a Professor of Biology at Indiana University, where he has been since 1966. He has been named a Carnegie Scholar for 2000-01 by the Carnegie Foundation and has received several major teaching awards from IU as well as nationally competitive awards from Vanderbilt and Northwestern universities. He has been a Sigma Xi National Lecturer, an honor that emphasized his scholarship on college pedagogy, and has directed Chautauqua Short Courses on fostering critical thinking in science for many years. He has been invited to present workshops on dealing with diversity at major meetings on college teaching both in the US and in the United Kingdom. His 1996 article from the American Behavioral Scientist ( Student Diversity Requires Different Approaches To College Teaching, Even In Math And Science) will be distributed in the course. Recently, in recognition of Nelson's contributions to the improvement of undergraduate teaching, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching honored him as its US Research and Doctoral Universities Professor of the Year 2000.

Women and Minorities in the Sciences: A History of the Past and Strategies for the Future
CATHERINE DIDION, Association for Women in Science
May 16-18, 2002 in Washington, D.C.
Apply: SUSB

         After examining from an historical perspective the contributions of women and persons of color to scientific fields, this course will offer and discuss strategies for encouraging and retaining women and minorities in science. Not only will we study the lives and work of women and minority scientists (i.e. Rachel Carson, Donna Shirley and Benjamin Carson), but we will also explore why the research of these women and minority scientists has gone unnoticed, and why there exist so few women and minority scientists. Our focus will be on evaluating current methods and devising new programs to increase the numbers of women and minorities in the sciences. Readings will include accounts by women and minority scientists. The course will include feminist and minority critiques of some scientific research. Other readings will include resources for science educators on encouraging underrepresented populations to participate in the sciences. We will explore the fields of science, engineering, and medicine, and discuss to what extent the climate of these fields allows women and persons of color to participate. In addition, we will analyze issues of science education and representation of women and persons of color in scientific academia.
         Possible readings include: Journey of Women in Science and Engineering: No Universal Constants , 1997. A Hand Up: Women Mentoring Women in Science, 1995. Love, Power, and Knowledge: Towards a Feminist Transformation of Sciences, 1986. Women Scientists from Antiquity to the Present: An Index, 1986. Minorities '93: Trying to Change the Face of Science, 1993. Sage: A Scholarly Journal on Black Women, 1989.

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Didion has been Executive Director of the Association for Women in Science since 1990. She is a frequent speaker on issues important to women in science and writes the bimonthly column Women In Science for the Journal of College Science Teaching. Currently she is chair of the Environment and Science Task Forces for the Coalition for Women's Appointments. As one of the official representatives for AWIS to the U.N., she headed the delegation to the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, and she co-chaired the first science and technology caucus at a U.N. women's conference.

Merging Mathematical Modeling with Secondary Mathematics Teaching Methods
JOHN DOSSEY and SHARON MCCRONE, Illinois State and FRANK GIORDANO, Mathematical Competition in Modeling University
March 8-10, 2002 in Tucson, AZ
Apply: UAZ

         A hands-on course for teachers of secondary mathematics methods courses. The workshop will address the NCTM standards, CBMS recommendations for the mathematical education of middle and secondary school teachers of mathematics, along with outlining a modern methods course for pre-service middle and secondary school teachers of mathematics built around mathematical modeling. Specific focus will be given to meshing methods content with modeling experiences to illustrate the ways in which these methods of teaching secondary school mathematics can be realized in the students' future classrooms.
         Participants will have the opportunity to share features of their methods courses, participate in modeling activities appropriate for the secondary methods classroom, and discuss the roles of content, pedagogy, and clinical experiences in such a methods course. Participants are requested to bring 30 copies of their methods course syllabi to share with other participants.

For college teachers of: mathematics teaching methods for pre-service secondary (grades 7-12) teachers of mathematics. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Dossey is Past President, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Department of Mathematics at Illinois State University. Dr. Giordano is coauthor of several texts in mathematical modeling, Director of MCM, The Mathematical Competition in Modeling. Dr. McCrone, is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Illinois State University.

Software in the Science Classroom: "Mathematica"
FLIP PHILLIPS, Skidmore College
May 19-21, 2002 in Memphis, TN
Apply: CBU

         This course will address the use of the software Mathematica in the science classroom. More than just a tool for teaching mathematics, Mathematica is a complete scientific computing environment with applications available in a broad range of disciplines, including pure and applied math, physics, chemistry, astronomy, economics, statistics, computer science, and the biological and social sciences. In this course we will address the basic design philosophy of "Mathematica" and conduct a survey of its many uses, including but not limited to technical problem solving, programming, and document preparation and presentation.
         This course will have segments that will appeal to a wide array of prior Mathematica knowledge. Initial sessions will address a series of usage and programming techniques. Subsequently, attendees will receive hands-on experience with various discipline specific add-on packages and with the publicly available material from MathSource, the Mathematica notebook repository. We will also survey current classroom and teaching laboratory uses of Mathematica

For college teachers of: with a science background. Prerequisites: curiosity.

Dr. Phillips is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Skidmore College. He also is the editor of The Mathematica Journal. His background is very diverse, ranging from a five year stint at the computer animation company Pixar to experience as a professional musician. His academic background originates in the fine arts and he currently teaches and does research in quantitative and experimental methods, shape perception, and space perception. When trying to avoid faculty meetings he can typically be found in his rowing shell on the Fish Creek. Dr. Phillips' home page is http://www.skidmore.edu/~flip .

Calculus and Precalculus: An Integrative Approach
ROBIN GOTTLIEB, Harvard University and ERIC BRUSSEL, Emory University
June 17-19, 2002 in Cambridge, MA
Apply: HAR

         Many students enter college with some exposure to precalculus but little working knowledge. Some of these same students have an exposure to a bit of calculus, but again with little working knowledge. They have ‘forgotten', often meaning they ‘learned' through memorization. For many students in a college precalculus course, much of the material has a familiar ring to it. They have studied lines and solved quadratic equations in high school, and yet they are not entirely the masters of this material. We typically put students fitting this profile into a precalculus course for a term and in the following term require them to learn the calculus that many of their counterparts learned over the course of an entire year in high school. The success rates are often discouraging.
         This workshop focuses on the construction of a revitalized sequence: a year-long, integrated precalculus / calculus course. The goals of this curriculum include:
   •    giving students an entire year to digest the concepts of calculus while at the same time solidifying their foundational skills
   •    promoting reflective thinking - encouraging thinking about underlying concepts and connections
   •    promoting communication skills - written, oral, and listening
   •   restructuring students' view of learning and doing mathematics.
         This is not the "just-in-time" model for integrating precalculus and calculus. By integrating the material we will approach some standard topics of precalculus from a completely different viewpoint - a viewpoint that reinforces basic notions of calculus and enlivens instead of rehashes old material. Workshop participants will be asked to rethink some standard notions and will take home some new strategies, structures and problems to experiment within their classrooms.

For college teachers of: mathematics. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Gottlieb teaches in the Mathematics Department at Harvard University. Her focus is on the teaching of entry-level courses. One of her projects has been developing an integrated precalculus and calculus course. Dr. Brussell is a professor of mathematics at Emory University. His research interests include a branch of noncommulative number theory involving division algebras over arithmetically interesting fields.

Abandoning Dead Ends: Presenting the Heart of Mathematics to All Students
MICHAEL STARBIRD, The University of Texas at Austin
May 23-25, 2002 in Austin, TX
Apply: TXA

         Question to typical college graduate majoring in the liberal arts: You graduated from college 15 years ago. What was the final mathematics course you took? Former student: Pre-calculus. Interviewer: What was your final literature course? Former student: Pre-Shakespeare.
         Students study the best paintings, the most glorious music, the most influential philosophy, and the greatest literature of all time. Mathematics can compete on that elevated playing field, but we must offer all students our grandest and most intriguing ideas. Infinity, fractals, and the fourth dimension; topology, cryptography, and duality--these ideas and many more can compete well with any other subject for depth and fascination. In addition, the powerful methods of analysis that generated these fabulous ideas can enrich every student's ability to think. Unfortunately, instead of grappling with culturally significant high points of mathematics, students are often asked to struggle up the first few rungs of a long ladder they will never climb. We should abandon educational strategies that lead to dead ends. Mathematicians have a great story to tell and that story could and should be an important part of the education of all students. Participants in this short course will develop effective ways of presenting intriguing, deep ideas in mathematics to all students and the general public.

For college teachers of: mathematics. Prerequisites: none.

Michael Starbird is University Distinguished Teaching Professor in Mathematics at The University of Texas at Austin. He is a member of the Academy of Distinguished Teachers at UT and has won many teaching awards. Among them are several student-selected awards that were awarded largely in response to his required liberal arts mathematics course, thus proving that, in the minds of students, mathematics can compete well with any subject at the university. With co-author Edward B. Burger, he has recently published The Heart of Mathematics: An Invitation to Effective Thinking, a textbook based on his and his co-author's 12 years of experience in developing lively mathematics courses for students who are not technically inclined.

Teaching Differential Equations from a Dynamical Systems Viewpoint
ROBERT L. DEVANEY and PAUL BLANCHARD, Boston University
June 17-19, 2002 in Boston, MA
Apply: PITT

     This course will give an overview of the presenters' approach to teaching a modern version of the sophomore level differential equations course. The traditional version of this course consisted of a series of analytic methods for solving specific types of differential equations. This was natural in ancient times (pre 1985) when computers were not readily available. Now computers and especially computer graphics, when coupled with qualitative techniques from dynamical systems theory, change this course completely. The goal of this course is to acquaint participants with many of the new topics that can now be introduced into the differential equations course, as well as how standard topics may be taught from a different point of view. A major focal point will be the use of computer technology in the classroom and in a laboratory setting. Each topic will be accompanied by on-site computer investigations. The course will be of interest to teachers of lower level courses in mathematics (calculus) who wish to see how the changes in the differential equations course impacts prior courses.

For college teachers of: mathematics. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Devaney is Professor of Mathematics at Boston University. His research interests are in dynamical systems and include work in complex dynamics, Hamiltonian systems, and computer experiments in mathematics. He is author of 7 books on dynamical systems theory. With Paul Blanchard and Glen Hall, he is also the author of Differential Equations, published by Brooks-Cole. The course will be based on material in this last book. Dr. Blanchard has taught college mathematics for almost twenty-five years, most at Boston University. In 2001, he won the Northeast Section of the Mathematical Association of America's Award for Distinguished Teaching of Mathematics. He has coauthored or contributed chapters to four different textbooks. His main area of mathematical research is complex analytic dynamical systems and the related point sets---Julia sets and the Mandelbrot set. Most recently his efforts have focused on reforming the traditional differential equations course, and he is currently heading the Boston University Differential Equations Project and leading workshops in this innovative approach to teaching differential equations.