Course Descriptions

Calibrated Peer Review: A Writing and Critical Thinking Instructional Tool
ARLENE RUSSELL, UCLA and TIM SU, City College of San Francisco
June 19-21, 2006 in Los Angeles, CA
Apply: CAL

          Calibrated Peer ReviewTM (CPR), a web-based, discipline-independent, instructional 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 many disciplines 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 are trained as reviewers using "calibration" essays. When students have completed the training, 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 workshop, participants will first experience a CPR assignment as a student does and then learn how to implement the program in a class. The group will review the rich set of assessment information that the CPR program can acquire on student performance and learn how to customize the information to specific needs. Participants will then work on the creation and development of new assignments for use in their own classes. Learn how to become proficient in developing new and creative CPR.

For college teachers of: undergraduate science, math, technology and social science courses, graduate students interested in an eventual teaching career. High school teachers are also welcome 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 ReviewTM (CPR) program, a product of the Molecular Science Project, an NSF systemic reform initiative.

The POGIL Classroom: Engaging Students and Developing Learning Skills
DAVID HANSON AND TROY WOLFSKILL, Stony Brook University
June 5-7, 2006 at Stony Brook
Apply: SBU

Note: Board (non-residence hall) and room (residence hall) will be provided by the NSF-supported POGIL project. The NSF grant does not allow payment of other travel expenses, i.e. transportation. For information about the POGIL project, go to www.pogil.org. Registration at both the Chautauqua and POGIL web sites is required.

          POGIL (Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning) is a student-centered method of instruction that is based on recent developments in cognitive learning theory and results from classroom research that suggest most students experience improved learning when they are actively engaged, working together, and given the opportunity to construct their own understanding. POGIL emphasizes that learning is an interactive process of thinking carefully, discussing ideas, refining understanding, practicing skills, reflecting on progress, and assessing performance. In a POGIL classroom or laboratory, students work on specially designed guided-inquiry materials in small self-managed groups. The instructor serves as a facilitator of learning rather than as a source of information. The objective is to develop learning skills as well as mastery of discipline-specific content simultaneously.
          This Chautauqua course models the POGIL classroom appropriate for introductory science courses in disciplines such as chemistry, biology, mathematics, and physics. The philosophy and principles of process-oriented guided inquiry learning are discussed. Text-based and computer-based materials that support this learning environment are examined. Teaching strategies that help make it successful are demonstrated. Activities suitable for use in participants' courses are designed, and plans for implementing POGIL, either to replace or supplement lectures, are developed and shared. In the POGIL classroom, students work in teams to acquire information and develop understanding through guided inquiry. They accomplish tasks and examine models or examples, which provide all the information central to the lesson, in response to critical-thinking questions. These 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. In this environment, key process skills in the areas of information processing, critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, communication, self-management, and self-assessment are nurtured. These skills, just like skills in laboratory work and athletics, can be strengthened through practice, and including them explicitly in courses not only helps students be successful but also prepares them for the workplace and for life in general.
          The POGIL format is being developed and disseminated through grants from the National Science Foundation and has been described in several publications: J.N. Spencer, J. Chem. Ed. 76, 566-569 (1999); J.J. Farrell, R.S. Moog, and J.N. Spencer, J. Chem. Ed. 76, 570-574 (1999); D. Hanson and T. Wolfskill, J. Chem. Ed 77, 120-130 (2000) and 78, 1417-1424 (2001).

For college teachers of: science and mathematics. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Hanson is a Professor of Chemistry at Stony Brook University. He is an established research scientist with over 125 publications, has served as Chair of the Department and 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 and Education Specialist in the Department of Chemistry at Stony Brook. He has taught at both the college and university levels, conducted workshops for undergraduate and graduate teaching assistants and faculty nationwide, developed process-oriented guided-inquiry 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.

Advanced POGIL Workshop: Writing Materials and Improving Classroom Facilitation
RICK MOOG, Franklin & Marshall College, ANDREI STRAUMANIS, College of Charleston, & RENEE COLE, Central Missouri State University
June 9-11, 2006 in Allendale, MI
Apply: GVSU

Note: There is no application fee for this course. Application for this workshop must be made via the POGIL online application form at http://www.POGIL.org/events/GVSU6.php. This course is cosponsored by the POGIL project and is offered at Grand Valley State University in Allendale, MI. The POGIL project support includes complementary on-campus lodging for Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights and all meals from breakfast on Friday to lunch on Sunday. For information about the POGIL project, go to http://www.POGIL.org.

          POGIL (Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning) is a student-centered method of instruction that is based on recent developments in cognitive learning theory and results from classroom research that suggest most students experience improved learning when they are actively engaged, working together, and given the opportunity to construct their own understanding. POGIL emphasizes that learning is an interactive process of thinking carefully, discussing ideas, refining understanding, practicing skills, reflecting on progress, and assessing performance. In a POGIL classroom or laboratory, students work on specially designed guided-inquiry materials in small self-managed groups. The instructor serves as a facilitator of learning rather than as a source of information. The objective is to develop learning skills as well as mastery of discipline-specific content simultaneously.
          This workshop is specially designed for people who have prior experience with POGIL and are interested in writing classroom materials and/or developing their classroom facilitation skills. Additional information concerning the expected experience of participants this workshop is available from http://www.POGIL.org/events/GVSU6.php. Please contact the POGIL Office (pogil@pogil.org) with any questions.

For college professors of: science and mathematics. Prerequisites: see preceding paragraph.

Dr. Moog is currently Professor of chemistry at Franklin & Marshall College. He is the Project Coordinator for the Middle Atlantic Discovery Chemistry Project (MADCP) and is Principal Investigator for the NSF-funded National Dissemination project in Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). He is the coauthor of materials used for guided inquiry instruction in general chemistry and physical chemistry, and has developed numerous guided inquiry experiments for use in the general chemistry laboratory. He has organized numerous symposia at national ACS and BCCE meetings concerning active learning throughout the chemistry curriculum, and has given over 40 presentations, posters, and workshops on guided inquiry and group learning. Dr. Straumanis is an Assistant Professor at the College of Charleston. Previously he was a post-doctoral fellow at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, NM. Dr. Cole is an associate professor of chemistry at Central Missouri State University, and an active member of the POGIL project. She received a B. A. in Chemistry in 1992 from Hendrix College and a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from the University of Oklahoma in 1998. She was a post-doctoral fellow with John W. Moore at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, studying the impact of computer-based homework and tutorials on student achievement and attitudes. Recently, her research has focused on the impact of innovative materials on student learning and attitudes. She has made several presentations at regional and national meetings concerning her implementation of POGIL, and has also facilitated numerous POGIL workshops.

Practical Considerations for Developing Science Process Skills in the Natural Sciences: Providing a Foundation for Inquiry
WILLIAM J. STRAITS, California State University Long Beach and R. RUSSELL WILKE, Angelo State University
July 13-15, 2006 in Austin, Texas
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.

          Inquiry learning is often presented in a fashion that mirrors the scientific method, proceeding from identification of a problem to reporting of findings. In post-secondary settings, these scientific-method inquiry exercises typically serve as the primary source of science process skill development. There are, however, shortcomings of this approach. (1) Teaching inquiry via the scientific method can be logistically difficult, requiring much planning and class time, particularly in college science classes where lecture is still the primary means of instruction. (2) Not every important process skill can be included in one scientific-method inquiry exercise. (3) Inquiry is used to teach science process skills, yet science process skills are the tools by which inquiry is conducted; to ensure student success, individual science process skills must be developed before proceeding to full-scale investigations.
          Specific science process skills can be individually targeted and developed by focusing on a single component of scientific inquiry. This provides instructors with the advantage of teaching a skill without employing an entire scientific-method inquiry exercise, thereby requiring less time to develop and implement. This allows a greater variety of individual skills to be taught and helps to ensure that more students master these skills. The independent teaching of these skills can be accomplished through the modification of active-learning strategies, which require limited preparation and class time. As such, inquiry-based instruction is ideal for instructors appreciative of the outcomes, yet weary of the demands of inquiry learning.
          This workshop will help instructors (particularly those of introductory courses) identify, prioritize, and develop science process skills appropriate to all sciences and learn a variety of active-learning techniques modified to reflect inquiry-based instruction to develop these skills in the lecture setting. In addition participants will:
• learn the fundamentals of instructional design,
• identify appropriate outcomes of inquiry learning, including goals and objectives for developing science process skills,
• construct simple inquiry activities appropriate for use in traditional lecture settings, and
• design meaningful assessments for each of their courses.
          Participants will also receive a compendium of inquiry-based resources for college teaching. If you are a "traditional lecturer" interested in incorporating science process skills without sacrificing course content, come learn how inquiry-based strategies can help you achieve your course goals.

Dr. Straits is an assistant professor of Science Education at California State University Long Beach, in southern California. Dr. Wilke is an assistant professor of Biology at Angelo State University in western Texas. They have devoted the past several years to collaboratively developing, implementing, and disseminating inquiry-based, science process skill instructional tools. As active members of the Society of College Science Teachers and National Association for Research in Science Teaching they have provided faculty development workshops and presentations throughout the United States.

Pseudo-Science, Scientism, and Science: Fallacies in the Logic of Scientific Testing
GARY MAR, Stony Brook University
May 25-27, 2006 in Midtown Manhattan, NYC
Apply: SBU

           The modern sciences are among the most remarkable of human achievements yet science has been taken hostage in culture wars. Although we live in the most scientifically-impacted societies of all time, there are many popular misunderstandings about the nature of science and the logic of scientific testing. Ideological conceptions of science abound in the culture wars between creationists and Darwinists, between old school logical positivists and prophets of New Age science, between advocates of strong Artificial Intelligence and those of quantum mechanical conceptions of the mind. The purpose of this short course is to equip college teachers with tools for identifying fallacies of theory testing and to have a model of a good scientific test of a theory. This will be done through three case studies.
•   Science Held Hostage to Culture Wars: Darwinism, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
          Today in courts and school boards across the nation, the debate between Darwinism and Creationism continues. Is Intelligent Design a scientific alternative to evolution? Why did Daniel Dennett accuse Stephen Jay Gould of misunderstanding Darwinism and why did Gould accuse Daniel Dennett of being a “Darwinian Fundamentalist” (e.g., see the heated exchange in the New York Review of Books between Stephen Jay Gould and Daniel Dennett and Robert Wright at http://www.nybooks.com/nyrev/ ). Does a commitment to the naturalistic methods of science presuppose a commitment to philosophical naturalism?
•   New Age Science: the 100th Monkey Phenomenon and the Evolutionary Theories of Morality
          Whereas religious fundamentalists are seem to be at odds with science, the New Age scientists such a Lyell Watson (Lifetide, 1979) enthusiastically affirm evolution and want to reinterpret science according to Eastern mysticism in order to give spiritually satisfying answers to such contemporary problems as materialism and the looming threats of ecological catastrophe and nuclear holocaust. What is the scientific basis for the Lyell Watson’s discussion of the 100th Monkey Phenomenon? Richard Dawkins (The Selfish Gene, 1989), on the other hand, popularized the idea that altruistic behavior at the level of individual organisms could be explained evolutionarily as a means by which the underlying “selfish genes” maximize their “self-interest” by self-replicating in future generations. Has science shown, in the words of Michael Ruse (“On the Significance of Evolution,” 1991), that “…morality [is] no more than an epiphenomenon of our biology”?
•   Quantum Science: Penrose’s Refutation of AI, Gödel’s Theorems, and the Philosophy of Mind
          Respected mathematician and scientist Roger Penrose (in his The Emperor’s New Mind (1990) and Shadows of the Mind (1994)) claims to refute the mechanistic claims of strong artificial intelligence (AI) using Gödel’s theorems. Nobel physicist Eugene Wigner claimed that quantum theory is incompatible with the idea that everything, including the mind, is made up solely of matter: “[While a number of philosophical ideas] may be logically consistent with present quantum mechanics, materialism is not.” Do Gödel’s theorems refute strong AI? Is quantum mechanics incompatible with materialism?
The purpose of this course is not to debunk certain worldviews as pseudo-science and to bestow the seal of science on others, but to equip teachers with the logical tools and philosophical distinctions to decide these issues for themselves and to have the tools for addressing these issues in a less ideological and more logically informed and fair-minded manner.

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

Gary Mar is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University. He is the coauthor of the second edition of the classic textbook by Kalish and Montague, Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning. Professor Mar is director of the Philosophy Department Logic Lab and his research on fractal images in the semantics of paradox has been discussed in Scientific American (1993), published with colleagues in The Philosophical Computer by MIT Press (1998), and included in Logic, Meaning and Computation: Essays In Memory of Alonzo Church (2001). Gary Mar is a winner of the President's and Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Teaching, the Outstanding Professor Award from the Alumni Association, a Pew Scholars Fellowship, and recently co-taught a seminar with Noam Chomsky through Stony Brook University’s Rotating Stars Program.

Inquiry Based Instruction: Enhance the Way You Teach and the Way Your Students Learn
THOMAS LORD, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, TEDDIE PHILLIPSON-MOWER, Indiana University, SHAROLYN BELZER, Idaho State University, KERRY CHEESMAN, Capital University, and KELLY BOHRER, University of Dayton
June 12-14, 2006 in Dayton, OH
Apply: DAY

          Current science education reforms are based on new cognitive understandings of how people learn. Most educational theorists support the belief that attentive people endeavor to make sense of what they are experiencing by applying it to their preconceived understandings. Once meaning of a novel experience is realized, new knowledge is attained. Implicit in this action is that learners attempt to discover new information themselves. Gaining new understandings is an active, rather that passive, accomplishment; inquiry, therefore, is an important key to learning.
          Studies on effective science instruction conducted by AAAS, NAS, NABT and NSTA support this notion. Each of these organizations has strongly endorsed the use of inquiry in the teaching of science. Many science faculty, however, are concerned about the efficiency and effectiveness of the teaching methods as outlined in the reform documents. In contemporary surveys, science teachers at all levels – professors on down – have expressed that they would be better able to teach with inquiry and other reform methods if they could only see it happening.
          This interactive course will help instructor-participants "see" reform-based teaching. "Modeling" is important, so we will start off with finding out the participant's ideas and possible misconceptions that may or may not result in barriers to their own professional growth. Using this as a starting point, we will build the presentation. How do their ideas fit in with current research and the intent of the reform movement? How would they describe their own teaching? Several examples of reform and more traditional teaching will be shown. Participants will work in groups to discover specific instances that reflect reform and traditional teaching practices. Instrumentation often used in professional development, including the Reform Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) developed by the ACEPT group at Arizona State University, the 5-E instructional strategy conceived by Roger Bybee at BSCS and the Secondary Teaching Analysis Matrix (STAM) constructed by Jim Gallagher and Joyce Parker at Michigan State University, will be presented. Participants will discuss the instruments as well as reflect on the implications that they have for their own practice. Groups will choose, practice, and demonstrate a shift from traditional to reform teaching on various items in the instruments.
          This course will encourage communication between and among participants to construct ideas and understanding, equal participation by all, exploration prior to presentation, respect for what all individuals have to say, convergent thinking, participant determination of focus and direction of the discourse, and connection with other content disciplines and/or real world experiences.

For college teachers of: all science, science education, and related fields. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Lord, a biologist at IUP, is a long-time supporter of inquiry-based instruction. After numerous publications, recently he coauthored Understanding Potentials: Spatial Reasoning for the National Federation for Educational Research in the United Kingdom. Ms. Phillipson-Mower is a doctoral candidate in Science Education at Indiana where she has received various awards for teaching and research in undergraduate education. Dr. Belzer is a biologist at Idaho State where she conducts educational research on inquiry-based teaching and learning. In a recent NSF grant she designed an inquiry-based introductory biology lab and is currently evaluating it. Dr. Cheesman is a biochemist at Capital where his current work centers around inquiry-based courses. Kelly Bohrer is the biology lab coordinator at Dayton where she is developing inquiry-based labs and environmental modules for non-majors. All of the presenters are members of the Faculty Development Committee of the four year section of the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT).

Classroom Management: How To Teach Like A Pro
DELANEY KIRK, Drake University
(A) June 8-10, 2006 in New York City, NY
(B) August 3-5, 2006 in Des Moines, IA
(C) January 4-6, 2007 in St. Petersburg, FL
Apply: UWA

Note: In your application, please specify at which one of the three venues you wish to attend.

          While most teachers are comfortable with the course content of what they are teaching, many do not feel they have been prepared in "how" to teach. Especially lacking is how to manage a classroom (how to handle absenteeism, tardiness, cheating, difficult students; how to set classroom expectations; how to write an effective syllabus).
          This three-day workshop will focus on various issues of classroom management beginning with the first day of class, and will address issues such as:
·   How to establish and maintain your credibility as the instructor from day one
·  What to do that first crucial day of class to set class expectations
·  How to convince students that your class is critical to their future success
·  How to motivate students to take responsibility for their success or failure in class
·  What classroom policies to include in your syllabus
·   How to deal with those difficult students who come in late, disrupt class, sleep in class, dominate the class discussion, turn papers in late, etc.
·  Pros and cons of using teams; how to assign teams, grade assignments, and deal with complaints that team members are not doing their share
·  How to prevent cheating and how to handle it if it does occur
·  How to get responsible and useful feedback from students to improve your teaching
          In addition, participants of this interactive workshop are encouraged to bring their questions about classroom management. At the end of the workshop, you should feel more confident about your ability to manage your classroom.

For college instructors of: all disciplines. The workshop would be particularly useful to those faculty members who are beginning their teaching careers, new faculty in the first few years out of their educational programs, or experienced faculty with questions as to how to manage this "new" generation of college students. In general, if you want to improve your classroom evaluations and become a better classroom manager, this workshop is for you. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Kirk is a Professor of Management at Drake University with 25 years of teaching experience (learned the hard way sometimes) in both large and small, public and private universities. She has conducted numerous teaching workshops and attended many academic conferences. She was the featured expert for the Chronicle of Higher Education’s online chat on classroom management on September 15, 2004, and has earned the prestigious Drake University Board of Governor’s "Excellence in Teaching" Award. Her recently published book Taking Back the Classroom: Tips for the College Professor on Becoming a More Effective Teacher is recommended reading for this course.

Classroom Management II: Tips to Help You Become an Even More Effective Teacher
DELANEY KIRK, Drake University
July 13-15, 2006 in Seattle, WA
Apply: UWA

          This workshop is a continuation of Dr. Kirk’s very popular Classroom Management: How to Teach Like a Pro, although it is not necessary to take the first class in order to benefit from this one. This program will be useful to both new and experienced faculty who are struggling with how to manage this “new” generation of college students. In general, if you want to improve your classroom evaluations and become a better classroom manager, this workshop is for you. This scenario-based training workshop will include topics such as:
·  How to get, interpret and incorporate feedback from your students so you can improve your teaching and your student evaluations
·  How to get your students to be engaged in the class
·  How to work with students of all ages and motivations
·  How to use cases to facilitate class discussion
·  How to use humor in the classroom
·  How to talk one-on-one to that difficult student to get him or her to “buy into” the class and your policies
·  Tips for managing teaching, research and committee work so you can still have a life!

For college teachers of: all disciplines. Participants in this interactive workshop are encouraged to bring and share their own particular questions about classroom management. Prerequisites:none.

Dr. Kirk is a Professor of Management at Drake University with 25 years of teaching experience (learned the hard way sometimes) in both large and small, public and private universities. She has conducted numerous teaching workshops and attended many academic conferences. She was the featured expert for the Chronicle of Higher Education’s online chat on classroom management on September 15, 2004, and has earned the prestigious Drake University Board of Governor’s “Excellence in Teaching” Award. Her recently published book Taking Back the Classroom: Tips for the College Professor on Becoming a More Effective Teacher is recommended reading for this course.

Using Case Studies to Teach Science--A Workshop
CLYDE FREEMAN HERREID, University of Buffalo/SUNY, National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science
June 26-28, 2006 in Midtown Manhattan, NYC
Apply: SBU

          Case Studies have been used to teach students in law and business schools for over a hundred years. These cases are stories with an educational message. Case study instruction has been used in medicine under the terminology of Problem Based Learning where each patient is a case to be diagnosed and treated. The value of the case approach in the classroom is that it puts the subject matter in context rather than presenting the material as a series of isolated facts and abstract principles. When information is put into story form it is easier to learn and remember. It has particular appeal for students put off by science taught in the traditional lecture style.
          The purpose of the Case Study Workshop is to teach faculty about the different types of case study methods of instruction along with their strengths and weaknesses, how to teach with case studies, and how to write cases and teaching notes so that other individuals can use them This is a highly interactive workshop where participants experience case study teaching from the student's viewpoint first, then they will write their own cases which they can take home and use in their classes. An independent survey of several hundred faculty who have attended our case study workshops indicates that virtually all instructors report higher student satisfaction with this method of presentation compared to traditional lecture method, as well as greater student attendance, and higher grades.

For college teachers of: all science and engineering disciplines. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Herreid holds the State University of New York's title of Distinguished Teaching Professor. He was trained as a biologist at Johns Hopkins University and Pennsylvania State University, and he has held positions at the University of Alaska, Duke University and the University of Nairobi. He has won every major teaching award at the University at Buffalo, and he established the university's Teaching Assistant Training Program. In addition to teaching the large introductory Biology class, he regularly conducts small seminar courses on case studies in science to Honors Students. Dr. Herreid is the Academic Director of the university Honors Program and founding director of The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science. The National Science Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts have supported the Center for many years. Its web site is located at http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.html where there are 200 peer-reviewed cases published in all science disciplines including engineering and math. Dr. Herreid writes a regular column on case teaching in the Journal of College Science Teaching. Many of these articles are also published on the web site for The National Center.

The Five Biggest Unsolved Problems in Science: An Interdisciplinary Perspective
CHARLES M. WYNN, SR., Eastern Connecticut State University and ARTHUR W. WIGGINS, Oakland (Michigan) Community College
May 22-24, 2006 in Manhattan, NY
Apply: SBU

          Scientific methodology, the underlying theme of most interdisciplinary science courses, is usually presented through a discussion of the evolution of scientific knowledge from ancient Greece to the present. This forum presents a future-oriented extension of this perspective: an interdisciplinary science course that focuses on The Five Biggest Unsolved Problems in Science. In the true spirit of science, and in contrast to the rumored "end of science," it provides an open-ended view of the pursuit of knowledge by physics, chemistry, biology, geology, and astronomy. Discussions begin with an overview of what we know about each (including its most comprehensive idea) and then proceed to what we don't know (including its biggest unsolved problem). Demonstrations as well as teaching strategies will be provided.

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, Quantum Leaps in the Wrong Direction: Where Real Science Ends and Pseudoscience Begins, and The Five Biggest Unsolved Problems in Science.

Peer-Led Team Learning: The Workshop Model
PRATIBHA VARMA-NELSON, Northeastern Illinois University and CHRISTOPHER F. BAUER, University of New Hampshire
June 22-24, 2006 in Fullerton, CA
Apply: CAL

          Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) is a model of teaching that has been tested and successfully implemented in chemistry, biology, physics and mathematics courses at a wide variety of institutions. The course addresses the needs of all science and mathematics disciplines beginning a PLTL program. The PLTL model actively engages students in the learning process by having them solve carefully structured problems in small groups under the direction of a trained peer leader. Peer-led workshops are an effective way to engage large numbers of students with course material and each other. Improved performance and retention, development of communication and team skills, higher motivation and course satisfaction, and increased interest in pursuing further study in science are among the benefits of the PLTL approach.
          The purpose of this course is to introduce the theoretical and practical elements of the PLTL model and prepare participants to implement PLTL programs in biology, chemistry, mathematics, and physics. In addition, the course will provide a Workshop experience and will give participants an opportunity to develop Workshop materials. Students who have served as peer leaders will be actively involved in the course and will discuss their experiences with the PLTL model. Recruiting and training of peer leaders will also be discussed as will faculty roles and responsibilities and issues surrounding the implementation and institutionalization of PLTL. Participants will be provided a guide for the implementation of workshops, a handbook for workshop leaders, and workshop materials for chemistry, biology, and physics. We encourage faculty members to assemble a team, which includes a learning specialist and a potential student leader, to participate in this course.

For college teachers of: physical and biological sciences and mathematics at two and four year colleges and universities, graduate students in the sciences interested in an eventual teaching career. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Varma-Nelson is a Professor of Chemistry and Chair of the Department of Chemistry, Earth Science and Physics at Northeastern Illinois University. She teaches Organic Chemistry, Biochemistry and Capstone Seminar to chemistry majors. Since1995, her professional activities have revolved around the development, implementation and dissemination of the Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) model of teaching. She was an active partner of the Workshop Chemistry Project, one of the five NSF supported systemic reform projects in Chemistry and Co-PI of three NSF supported National Dissemination grants. In addition, she has co-authored several publications and manuals about the PLTL model. Dr. Varma-Nelson is director of the Workshop Project Associate (WPA) Program, which provides small grants to facilitate implementation of PLTL. In addition, Dr. Varma-Nelson is the Co-PI of the first NSF funded Undergraduate Research Center (URC), Center for Authentic Science Practice in Education.(CASPiE). Dr. Bauer is a Professor of Chemistry and Chair at the University of New Hampshire and is the 1992 recipient of the University's Jean Brierley teaching award. Early in his career he did research in environmental analytical chemistry. Research interests now address college-level science instruction -- student misconceptions, student attitudes about learning and courses, discovery-based college chemistry curricula, and faculty beliefs and practice. He directs the General Chemistry program at UNH, teaches in the Preparing Future Faculty program, was a co-editor of the Chemical Education Research feature of the Journal of Chemical Education, and just comleted an NSF CCLI grant "Integrating the Chemistry Systemic Initiatives". He has been directing PLTL at UNH since 2000.

Introduction to Peak Oil
REX L. BERNEY, ROBERT J. BRECHA, and BRUCE A. CRAVER, University of Dayton
May 22-24, 2006 in Dayton, OH
Apply: DAY

          Peak Oil is the name given to the period when world oil production reaches a maximum and subsequently begins an irreversible decline. Should this occur in the near future, the consequences for all aspects of our society will be immense. In this course we will look first at the historical background of the peaking concept as originally put forth by M. King Hubbert in the 1950's with respect to US oil production. We then extend these ideas to other countries and the world. Participants will work with simple computer models and carry out web research on oil and other fossil-fuel-related issues. The emphasis in the course will be on gathering and analyzing publicly available data and on doing "back-of-the-envelope" calculations and modeling to try to understand this complex problem.
          This course will also look at other energy sources and how they may impact various oil depletion scenarios. Particular emphasis will be given to the concept of Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROEI) and to implications for climate change predictions. We will also compare the underlying assumptions made by scientists, economists, government agencies and corporations as they pertain to oil depletion.
          Historically, many other developed countries have consumed less energy per capita than have we in the United States, or are starting to make plans for the transition to a world with less oil. Other countries have already been forced to deal with reduced fossil fuel supplies. We will look at some of these different cases and try to determine if there are lessons to be learned for the US. Finally, we will summarize the information we have gathered and the scenarios we have developed and discuss the most likely outcomes.

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

Dr. Berney is an Associate Professor of Physics at the University of Dayton. He has long been involved with the application of microcomputers in the undergraduate laboratory. He has served as the Course Director for some two dozen Chautauqua courses on microcomputer interfacing. He has attended several peak oil conferences and believes that peak oil education will help with the transition to the post peak world. Dr. Brecha is an Associate Professor of Physics and Electro-optics at the University of Dayton where his research centers on diode laser spectroscopy. He has a growing interest in investigating the issue of peak oil and its broader societal and environmental implications. He has attended conferences on the subject of peak oil, and given lectures and hosted public discussions on the topic. Dr. Craver is an Associate Professor in Physics at the University of Dayton where his research has been in nonlinear optics. He has been interested in global climate change for many years and peak oil for the last two. He has attended two conferences on peak oil and been introducing these topics in classes for non-science majors.

Energy Development in the Arctic
JOHN KELLEY, University of Alaska Fairbanks and GILBERT YANOW, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, ret.
June 7-9, 2006 Anchorage AK
Apply: CAL

          Advances in energy development in the arctic primarily related to oil and gas exploration will be described through a series of lectures and filed trips. The course will begin in Anchorage, Alaska with orientation and lectures provided by British Petroleum Exploration (Alaska), Inc. staff and university of Alaska faculty. Lectures will cover problems associated with drilling for oil ad gas in permafrost and off shore in ice covered seas, design and engineering technologies, geology of the region and environmental concerns. A one-day field trip will be taken to Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean coast of the North Slope of Alaska, where visits will be made to the production facilities, Trans Alaska pipeline and the offshore Endicott drill site. Research associated with the extraction of oil and gas will be described including environmental studies and revegetation activities. The Course will terminate in Anchorage.

For college teachers of: undergraduate science, math and technology courses and graduate students in the sciences interested in an eventual teaching career. Secondary Teachers will be allowed to take the course on a space available basis. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Kelley is Professor of Marine Science in the School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences. He has conducted research on trace gases and contaminants related to climate, hydroacoustics. Dr. Yanow was the Outreach Coordinator for the Genesis and Orbital Carbon Observatory Missions until his retirement. Dr. Yanow is currently the Director for the California Chautauqua Field Center.

Alternative Energy and Energy Mangement
GILBERT YANOW, NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory, ret.
May 29 - June 1, 2006 in Diamond Bar, CA
Apply: CAL

          At the present time, the U.S.A. economy is based on fossil fuels. However, these are not in endless supply, as shown by their continual price escalation. At the same time the use of fossil fuels (coal, oil, gasoline, etc.) is a polluting factor of the environment. As time goes on, we will be forced into a wider spread use of not only better energy management, but also more extensive use of alternative fuels.
          This course will examine alternative energy, and the possible future use of these energies in our lives, including transportation. We will briefly examine the history of alternative energy. We will examine the possible uses of Solar Energy, both the system design (solar electric and solar thermal) and manufacture of photovoltaics. This year the course will also spend some time examining a range of other alternative energy sources such as bio-energy production and co-generation. We will visit wind farm and solar electric generating facilities. A final part of this course will look at the application of alternative energy sources for transportation, the Fuel Cell, etc.

For college teachers of: undergraduate science, math and technology courses and graduate students in the sciences interested in an eventual teaching career. Secondary Teachers will be allowed to take the course on a space available basis. Prerequisites: none.

Dr. Yanow was the Outreach Coordinator for the Genesis and Orbital Carbon Observatory Missions until his recent retirement, He was at JPL for 29 years. He was a member of the Photovoltaic Lead Center when JPL was conducting extensive research into the utilization of alternative energy. Dr. Yanow is currently the Director for the California Chautauqua Field Center.

Mechatronic System Design: Integrating Mechanical, Electrical, Control, and Computer Engineering
KEVIN C. CRAIG, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
June 12-14, 2006 in Troy, NY
Apply: RPI

          Mechatronics, as an engineering discipline, is the synergistic combination of mechanical engineering, electronics, control engineering, and computers, all integrated through the design process. It involves the application of complex decision making to the operation of physical systems. Mechatronic systems depend on computer software for their unique functionality. Synergism and integration in design set a mechatronic system apart from a traditional, multidisciplinary system.
          This three-day course studies mechatronics at a theoretical and practical level; balance between theory/analysis and hardware implementation is emphasized; emphasis is placed on physical understanding rather than on mathematical formalities. A case-study, problem-solving approach, with hardware demonstrations and hardware lab exercises, is used throughout the course. Topics covered include mechatronic system design, modeling and analysis of dynamic systems, control sensors and actuators, analog and digital control electronics, continuous controller design and digital implementation, interfacing sensors and actuators to a microcomputer / microcontroller, and real-time programming for control. These are the fundamental areas of technology on which successful mechatronic designs are based. Throughout the coverage the focus is kept on the role of each of these areas in the overall design process and how these key areas are integrated into a successful mechatronic system design.
          Starting at design and continuing through manufacture, mechatronic designs optimize the available mix of technologies to produce quality precision products and systems in a timely manner with features the customer wants. If winning designs are to be produced in today's environment, it is imperative that electronics and computer control be included in the design process at the same time the basic functions and properties are defined. The real benefits to industry of a mechatronic approach to design are shorter development cycles, lower costs, and increased quality, reliability, and performance.
          Hardware Systems used throughout the course include:
• Spring-Pendulum Dynamic System
• Two-Mass, Three-Spring, Motor-Driven Dynamic System
• Magnetic Levitation System
• Rotary Inverted Pendulum System
• Pneumatic Actuator Closed-Loop Microcomputer Position Control
• Temperature Computer Control System (Heater and Fan)
• DC Motor Closed-Loop Analog and Digital Speed Control

For college teachers of: any engineering discipline; particularly suited for mechanical and electrical engineering professors. 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, Mechatronics and Mechatronic System Design, and the graduate courses Sensors and Actuators in Mechatronics and Advanced Mechatronics. Over the past several years, he has conducted hands-on, integrated, customized, mechatronics workshops for practicing engineers at Xerox, Pitney Bowes, Dana, Procter & Gamble, Plug Power, NASA Kennedy Space Center, U.S. Army ARDEC, and for the ASME Professional Development Program. Since coming to Rensselaer in 1989, he has graduated 28 M.S. students and 19 Ph.D. students. He is the author of over 30 refereed journal articles and over 50 refereed conference papers, Emphasis in all his research is on a balance between modeling/analysis/simulation and hardware verification/implementation. He is a member of the ASME, IEEE, and ASEE.

Nanotechnology, Nanostructured Materials and Devices
R. W. Siegel, P. M. Ajayan, J. Dordick, S. Garde, P. Keblinski, L. S. Schadler, and E. F. Schubert - Rensselaer Nanotechnology Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
June 12-13, 2006 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 include metals, ceramics, and composites synthesized elegantly from either atomic or molecular precursors, as well as those made from bulk precursors.
          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 nanoscale building blocks and their interfaces and (2) the important role of spatial confinement on material properties when the size of the nanoscale building blocks become smaller than the critical length scale for a particular property.
          Investigations of mechanical, chemical, electrical, magnetic, and optical behavior of nanostructured materials have demonstrated that it is possible to engineer the properties of nanostructured 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 seven lectures by leading researchers and educators at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. These lectures will be offered within the context of the United States National Nanotechnology Initiative (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. 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. Ajayan is the Henry Burlage Chaired Professor in Materials Science and Engineering (RPI). 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. Dr. Dordick is 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. Garde is an assistant professor of chemical and biological engineering at RPI. He works on a broad range of problems in the areas of bio and nanotechnologies using the techniques of statistical mechanics and molecular simulation. In particular, he is interested in understanding the role of water in biomolecular structure, function, and interactions. Dr. Garde received the CAREER award from the National Science Foundation in 2001. He has published over 35 papers in scientific and technical journals. Dr. Keblinski is an Associate Professor in Materials Science and Engineering and is a recipient of an Alexander von Humboldt Fellowship. Professor Keblinski has authored or co-authored over 80 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. Schadler is a professor at RPI and has co-written and published several papers, and has won numerous outstanding honors and awards of excellence. Dr. Schubert is Senior Constellation Chair of the Future Chip Constellation at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He has made pioneering contributions to the field of compound semiconductors. He is co-inventor of about 25 US patents and co-authored about 190 publications. He authored books on doping in III-V semiconductors (1992), delta doping in semiconductors (1996), and light-emitting diodes (2003). He is a Fellow of the APS, IEEE, OSA, and SPIE and has received several awards.

Increasing the Retention of Under-Represented Groups--And the Learning of All Groups--In Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Courses
CRAIG E. NELSON, Indiana University and ROBERT GROSSMAN, Kalamazoo College
May 11-13, 2006 in Dayton, OH
Apply: DAY

         This course will make your semester. If you are one of the minuscule minority of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) 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 STEM 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.
         Key questions will include: (1) What changes in pedagogy are most important in radically increasing equity, retention and learning overall while maintaining or raising standards? (How has calculus been taught so as to eliminate all Fs without sacrificing content? How have D and F rates for African-Americans been reduced from 60% to 4% in some STEM courses, again without sacrificing content?) (2) How do assessment and grading practices often unnecessarily and unfairly bias STEM courses against students from underpowered backgrounds (rural whites, African-Americans, etc.)? (3) How can White faculty provide feedback and other mentoring in ways that increase trust, academic motivation, and achievement among students of color (and, indeed, most students)? In addition to providing strong evidence for changes that are typically effective we will explore a series of frameworks that explain why ineffective and biased practices have tended to persist including: attribution theory, hidden differences between novices and experts, and “dysfunctional illusions of rigor.” 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. Throughout, participants will be invited to provide additional examples and to design specific ways to apply these approaches in their courses and programs.

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

Dr. Nelson is Professor Emeritus of Biology at Indiana University (on faculty 1966-2004). He taught diverse courses in biology, intensive freshman seminars, great books and other honors courses, and several collaboratively-taught interdisciplinary courses. One regular offering was a graduate course on Alternative Approaches to Teaching College Biology. Dr. Nelson has presented invited workshops on critical thinking and on diversity at numerous national meetings and individual institutions on four continents. His publications include 27 on pedagogy (and even more on evolutionary biology). He was founding president of the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. His awards include several for distinguished teaching (from IU, Vanderbilt and Northwestern), Carnegie Scholar, Outstanding Research And Doctoral University Professor Of The Year 2000 and, in 2001, the President's Medal for Excellence (the highest honor bestowed by Indiana University). Dr. Grossman is a Professor of Psychology at Kalamazoo College who has been using case studies and other cooperative learning techniques in his college teaching for the past thirty years. His specialty in psychology is in the clinical area though his doctoral research was in Physiological-Experimental Psychology at Michigan State University. He did his post-doctoral clinical internship at the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Cognitive Therapy in a program supervised by Aaron Beck, M. D. In 1993-94 he did a sabbatical leave with Craig Nelson studying innovations in college science teaching. Dr. Grossman was awarded the Florence J. Lucasse Lectureship for Excellence in Teaching at Kalamazoo College in recognition of both his outstanding teaching and his work with pedagogy at the college.

Women and Minorities in the Sciences: How Faculty Can Make a Difference
CATHERINE DIDION, International Network of Women Engineers and Scientists (INWES) and JAMES H. STITH, American Institute of Physics
June 15-17, 2006 in Washington, DC
Apply: SBU

          This course, after a brief review of the current status of women and minorities in scientific fields, will emphasize how one can develop effective strategies for recruiting and retaining women and under-represented minorities students in all scientific disciplines. This course is highly interactive and was developed to be a resource for science educators on encouraging under-represented populations to participate in the sciences. We will explore the role of mentoring in developing future scientists and engineers, the current research on women and minority scientists, and how it can have an impact on one's teaching style and strategies. Our focus will be on evaluating current methods, and on devising solutions to increase the number 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. We will analyze a series of actual case studies on faculty-student interactions as a tool to review how one can encourage all students in the classroom. Participants are encouraged to bring examples of courses, programs, and other activities they have developed to address women and/or minorities in science. This course will use external speakers, including young scientists of color, to share their experiences and give feedback on how faculty can make a difference.
          Possible readings include: Nobel Prize Women in Science; Journeys of Women in Science and Engineering; Minorities: Trying to Change the Face of Science; and a collection of case studies on faculty interaction with their students.

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

Dr. Didion is the Director of the International Network of Women Engineers and Scientists (INWES). Previously she was the Executive Director of the Association for Women in Science (AWIS) for 14 years. During her tenure at AWIS, she developed an award winning mentoring program and was the principal investigator for several studies on the academic climate for women faculty and students. She is a frequent speaker on women in science, has provided testimony on several occasions to Congress, and wrote a bimonthly column Women in Science for the Journal of College Science Teaching for over a decade. 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. Didion works closely with the European Commission's Women in Science Unit and was appointed as an international member of the South African Ministry of Science and Technology's Reference Group on Women in Science. She is a fellow of AWIS (2001) and of AAAS (2006). Dr. James H. Stith is the Vice President, Physics Resources for the American Institute of Physics. He directs a broad portfolio of programs and services that includes AIP's Magazine Division, the Media and Government Relations Division, the Education Division, the Center for the History of Physics, the Statistical Research Division and the Careers Division. His Doctorate in physics was earned from The Pennsylvania State University, and his Masters and Bachelors in physics were received from Virginia State University. A physics education researcher, his primary interests are in Program Evaluation, and Teacher Preparation and Enhancement. Throughout his career, he has been an advocate for programs that ensure ethnic and gender diversity in the sciences. Dr. Stith was formerly a Professor of Physics at The Ohio State University and also spent 21 years on the faculty of the United States Military Academy at West Point. He has also been a Visiting Associate Professor at the United Air Force Academy, a Visiting Scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a Visiting Scientist at the University of Washington, and an Associate Engineer at the Radio Cooperation of America. He is a past president of the American Association of Physics Teachers, past president of the National Society of Black Physicists, a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a Fellow of the American Physical Society, a Chartered Fellow of the National Society of Black Physicists, and a member of the Ohio Academy of Science. Additionally, he serves on a number of national and international Advisory Boards and has been awarded a Doctor of Humane Letters by his alma mater, Virginia State University.

Connecting Mathematics with Engineering and the Sciences
BERND SCHROEDER, Louisiana Tech University
July 20-22, 2006 in Ruston, LA
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.

          This workshop focuses on connecting mathematics courses on calculus and differential equations to concurrent and later classes in science and engineering. The main focus will be on freshman and sophomore courses, but integration in the later years also is a possibility. We start by exploring disciplinary recommendations (CUPM, ABET, etc.) as well as educational and quantitative psychological arguments in favor of systemic curriculum integration. Differences and similarities in the involved disciplines' approach, philosophy, terminology, goals and constraints will be explored. Key topics that lend themselves to interdisciplinary presentation will be identified and successful strategies will be showcased. The participants will then analyze the curriculum at their own and other institutions and determine their individual needs and reasonable goals for first steps towards cross-disciplinary integration. Concrete examples can be derived from Louisiana Tech University’s integrated engineering and science curricula and through conversations with Louisiana Tech faculty in mathematics, engineering and the sciences.

For college teachers of: mathematics, engineering, physics, chemistry, biology and related fields. Prerequisites: Interest in closer interdisciplinary ties at all undergraduate levels, experience in teaching undergraduate courses with potential for such ties.

Bernd Schroeder has eight years experience in building integrated engineering and science curricula at the freshman and sophomore levels. He is the principal architect of the mathematics course sequence for these curricula at Louisiana Tech University and he has authored an integrated precalculus-calculus-differential equations text that connects these courses to their counterparts in engineering and the sciences. Aside from his educational work he has authored over 30 research papers, mostly on ordered sets (centered around fixed point theory and reconstruction), but also in graph theory, computer science, probability theory and harmonic analysis. He serves as program chair for the program of mathematics and statistics at Louisiana Tech University and he was named the Edmondson/Crump professor in 2004. For more information on curriculum integration at Louisiana Tech University, please consider http://www.coes.latech.edu/isc/index.php.

Pedagogy and Methodology of Using Maple in the Classroom
ROBERT LOPEZ, Maplesoft, Inc.
May 12-14, 2006 in Allendale, MI
Apply: GVSU

          This course will address the pedagogical aspects of bringing the computer algebra system Maple into the math and science classroom. The full power of Maple in education is attained when it is used to explore and enlighten, not just to reproduce calculations done by hand. Learning to use Maple as an effective educational tool certainly requires a certain expertise with Maple, and this course will provide that.
          But more, this course will show how to use Maple to enrich the mathematical experiences of math, science, and engineering students. The curriculum will include an introduction to Maple's ease-of-use and syntax-free features that let students begin using Maple before having to master a great deal of syntax. Then, by means of specific examples in calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, vector calculus, boundary value problems, complex variables, and numerical analysis, we will demonstrate how Maple can make teaching both more effective and more efficient.

For college teachers of: mathematics, physics, engineering, and any other subject that uses mathematics routinely. Prerequisites: basic computer literacy and an interest in using Maple in the classroom.

Dr. Lopez is classically trained applied mathematician, recently retired from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology where he pioneered the use of Maple in the classroom. For thirty months in 1992 through 1995, he was on leave from RHIT and was the leading Maple Ambassador, giving numerous seminars, invited addresses, and workshops in the use of text, supported by 273 Maple worksheets, and a solution manual with Maple solutions to all 7,000 exercises in the text, was published by Addison Wesley. He presently works full time for Maplesoft, Inc., in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

Abandoning Dead Ends: Presenting the Heart of Mathematics to All Students
MICHAEL STARBIRD, The University of Texas at Austin
May 25-27, 2006 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.

          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.

Dr. 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 published The Heart of Mathematics: An Invitation to Effective Thinking, a textbook based on his and his co-author's 15 years of experience in developing lively mathematics courses for students who are not technically inclined.