Collaborators

Collaborators with the Chemistry Education Research Focus Group include faculty & staff from OSU’s School of Teaching & Learning and College of Engineering,  and the Evaluation & Assessment Center at Miami University.

Kathleen Harper, OSU College of Engineering

Jane Butler-Kahle, Miami University

  • Research Interests: Gender issues in science and mathematics and the effectiveness of large-scale reform efforts in science and mathematics education.

Robert Griffiths, OSU Digital Union

  • Research Interests: ELearning Resources

Lin Ding, OSU School of Teaching and Learning

  • Research Interests: Students’ conceptual learning, problem solving and scientific reasoning, curriculum development and assessment design

Hui Jin, OSU School of Teaching and Learning

  •  Research Interests: Students’ informal reasoning, particularly as it relates to core science topics such as matter and energy. Her current research focuses on understanding how students progress in learning about socio-ecological systems.

Ross Nehm, OSU School of Teaching and Learning

  • Research Interests: Scientific thinking and problem solving; knowledge measurement and assessment; science misconceptions and conceptual change; multicultural science education; science textbooks and knowledge representation; and evolution education.

Melinda Rhoades, OSU School of Teaching and Learning

  • Research Interests: Art education, use of technology.

Karen Irving, OSU School of Teaching and Learning

  • Research Interests:  Preparation of technology-enriched preservice science teachers.

 

Recent Posts

Hello world!

Posted on by

Have you tried these chemistry simulations from PhET and Tom Greenbowe?

Have you browsed any of these resources for improving your teaching, managing the first day of class, designing better exams, using clickers to understand concepts (a short video), assessing student learning, or keeping students engaged?

Have you read any of these articles describing research based instruction?  The May 2011 article from Science (volume 332, pages 862-864) is extremely provocative.

Must universities change?  The author thinks that “a substantial body of research demonstrates conclusively that the problem (shortcomings at the university-level) is frequently caused by poor undergraduate teaching in physics, chemistry, biology, math, and engineering, particularly in the freshman and sophomore years. Students are consigned to large lecture courses that offer almost no engagement, no monitoring, and little support and personal attention.  The combination of poor high school preparation and uninspiring freshman and sophomore pedagogy has produced a stunning dearth of science and engineering majors in the U.S.”.  Needed changes include…“to alter faculty incentives by making undergraduate teaching at least equal to research and graduate teaching in prestige, evaluation, and reward. And we need to do research-based teaching that takes account and advantage of the latest findings of cognitive science, which are extensive, on how students learn. In brief, they learn by doing, not by just listening to someone else; they learn by solving problems, not by passively absorbing concepts; they learn best in groups of peers working things out together.“