Curriculum Development Annotated Report Excerpts

Excerpt 1 [American Institute of Physics]

Evaluation Questions

The goals of the evaluation were sharply focused and rather limited. Questions that the evaluation sought to address included:

• Were realistic implementation of the courses successful in integrating this material, rather than simply treating modern and contemporary topics as "add-ons" to a standard course or "inserts" here and there within a standard curriculum?
• Did students seem prepared to grapple with some of the difficult concepts inherent in modern physics and to appreciate some of the subtleties?
• Did the students achieve a nontrivial mastery of material related to modern/contemporary topics?
• Did the presentation of such topics appeal to students or enhance their motivation to study physics?

Excerpt 2 [Anonymous 1]

Evaluation Purposes:
Describes relation between evaluation and project areas

The evaluation itself was designed to assess the extent to which the integrated mathematics/physics course addressed the following areas:

1. "Mathematics is relevant to other academic disciplines and real life experiences."
2. Perceived ability/confidence: "I am good at mathematics."
3. Accessibility: "If I work at it, I can succeed at mathematics."
4. Cognitive (how do I do math): "What’s really important in learning mathematics is how I put it together."
5. Math Instruction (how math is taught to me): "Mathematics can be taught in an interesting way."
6. Technology: "Technology is a valuable component of learning mathematics."
7. Affect: "Doing mathematics helps me develop personally and professionally."

Excerpt 3 [American Institute of Physics]

Evaluator Credibility

Evaluation Purposes

The evaluation of the curricula was independent; that is, it was not linked to the model developers or to the sites, nor was it directly implemented by the group that sponsored the project, the Introductory University Physics Project. At each site, we set out to study both "model" and "comparison" sections of the introductory physics course. There was a pre- and post-test, and some limited use of in-class questionnaires. Faculty members and roughly 10% of the students were asked to keep journals. Each test site was visited by an evaluator at least twice during each academic year.

Excerpt 4 [University of Colorado, Denver]

Evaluation Purposes

We respectfully submit our report on the evaluation of a National Science Foundation project to analyze the results of a significant number of surveys to 1) assess the learning effectiveness and impact of using science, technology, and society studies (STS) methods in teaching interdisciplinary undergraduate courses in the area of science, technology, and culture; and 2) to provide data and analysis on student beliefs about STS issues to help teachers increase their effectiveness in teaching these issues.

The objectives of this study, "Results and Implications of Pre and Post Tests on Undergraduate Student Beliefs on Science, Technology, and Culture, with an Emphasis on Race, Gender, and the Individual," are to: 1) determine the effect STS courses with cultural diversity content have on student beliefs on science, technology, and culture; 2) determine if student group differences based on gender, discipline, and age exist in beliefs about science and technology and society; and 3) empirically describe undergraduate student beliefs concerning issues related to science, technology, and culture.

Excerpt 5 [Oregon State University]

Stakeholder Involvement

Before beginning the evaluation, the advice of the high school calculus teachers was solicited. Teachers were surveyed and asked what types of questions they would like addressed and researched in helping them implement calculus reform. Due to their everyday contact with students, curriculum materials, and calculators, the teachers were in an excellent position to be used as action researchers.