Pre-Service Education Working Group
Notes from July 12, 2007 PSEWG Telecon


Jim Lochner
Bill Waller
Stephanie Shipp
Stephanie Parker
Denise Smith
Jennifer Grier
Tim Slater
Laurie Ruberg
Rick Pomeroy
Anita Krishnamurthi
Mike Odell
Guest of Mike Odell--Christin Trampas (sp?)

Discussion focused on the draft of the White Paper that Stephanie had circulated.  It is to inform NASA Science Mission Directorate of the work of the Pre-Service Education Working Group: what we feel they should know to inform future decisions, based on what we have learned.

  • Initial discussion was that the white paper contains the same conclusions as most of the research out there already on pre-service – and that this was a re-assuring thing.
  • One point that may need to be further emphasized is the value of leveraging pre-service; that those who work with pre-service faculty are leveraging their efforts to work with hundreds of teachers and hundreds of thousands of students. The information about how we calculate the numbers of students reached needs to be included.
  • Another point that may need further emphasis is working with professional societies who are engaged in teacher preparation.  Working with stable on-going societies may provide some stability for the efforts, in a climate of shifting priorities for education funding, with NASA’s multi- and changing foci.  
  • Paying attention to diverse and underserved audiences has been a key strategy of the PSEWG.  Representatives from  institutions (community colleges and Historically Black, Hispanic, and Tribal colleges/universities) that include large numbers of diverse and underserved pre-service faculty and students should be considered when planning future PSEWG programs.  
  • The needs and goals of future teachers for science education varies across populations and often require adaptations and changes in pedagogy, content , scope, and delivery format in order for the professional development to be successful.
  • There was discussion as to whether we should include those teachers returning to the university setting for professional development and master’s degrees in our considerations; we determined that they should not be included in the white paper, regardless of future working group decisions.
  • The NASA EPO community has a need for a large pre-service program that missions can contribute to, similar to the way in which other missions have contributed to Navigator's partnership with the CAPER team to provide professional development for introductory astronomy faculty.
  •  EPO specialists are a separate audience that needs professional development in addressing pre-service, and assistance with making connections to the pre-service community.
  • There was discussion on changing the emphasis in the “Working Group Findings” section to 4 big ideas instead of 7 (Program planning should begin… Advocacy of science… Professional development, and Significant and sufficient), and finding ways of incorporating the other thoughts where appropriate.
  • The key working group findings need to be listed earlier without the detailed explanations, to highlight them.
  • The advisory group needs to include both long-term steering members and as-needed participants, to maintain flexibility and inclusiveness

Stephanie will circulate a new draft based on these comments sometime this week.

Christine and Stephanie intend to place a draft of the Menu of Opportunities on a Web site for the PSEWG members to examine and suggest changes to in the near future.

Discussion of the PSEWG Game Plan will wait until the next telecon.