The authors performed a cluster analysis using observational data from 269 class periods and including 73 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty from 28 research universities. They used eight of the 25 Classroom Observation Protocol in Undergraduate STEM codes to produce 10 clusters of instructional styles across a range of Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol scores. A description of the clusters and their distribution across various STEM courses are provided.

With recent attention to improving scientific workforce development and student achievement, there has been a rise in effort to understand and encourage student engagement in physical science. This study examines the association of family influence and initial interest in science through multiple and logistic regression models. Research questions addressed include Controlling for demographic variables, are physical science doctoral students or scientists who report family as a primary source of interest in science, as opposed to those that do not, more likely to develop an early interest in science? And what specific forms of family support are associated with doctoral students or scientists who report family as a primary source of initial interest in science? The study uses survey data from Project Crossover (n = 4,285), a sequential mixed methods study that examines factors influencing entrance into physical science doctoral programs as well as the transition from graduate students to independent researcher. Results suggest that family interest in science facilitates earlier initial interest in science. Further analyses show that family influence shifts from parental occupation as the primary source of interest for the older generation of scientists to one of three influences (occupation, diversion or hobby, and encouragement) among doctoral students. © 2013Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 97:395–409, 2013

Postsecondary chemistry instructors typically have received little pedagogical training as graduate students and postdoctoral research assistants. Moreover, professional development opportunities are often limited at their own institution. This lack of training has resulted in a gap between the instructional strategies enacted in chemistry courses and the results of discipline-based education research. Members of the Cottrell Scholars Collaborative initiated the New Faculty Workshop (CSC NFW) program in 2012 in order to address this gap. This annual, two-day workshop provides newly-hired chemistry assistant professors from research-intensive universities with training on evidence-based instructional practices. This article presents the results of a longitudinal, quasi-experimental design study that evaluates the short and long-term impacts of the workshop. Online surveys were collected immediately before and after the workshop, as well as one year later from CSC NFW participants and a control group that consisted of newly-hired chemistry faculty who did not participate in the workshop. Surveys measured faculty's awareness and use of evidence-based instructional practices, teaching self-efficacy, and beliefs about teaching. Classroom video recordings were also collected during the fall semester following the workshop and two years later. These data were triangulated with the Student Evaluation for Educational Quality (SEEQ) survey, which was collected from students in the observed classrooms. Findings indicate that, in the short-term, the CSC NFW was successful in raising workshop participants' self-efficacy, shifting their teaching beliefs toward student-centered teaching, and increasing their use of interactive teaching. Longitudinal data demonstrate that further pedagogical support is required in order for these impacts to be sustained.

The Cottrell Scholars Collaborative New Faculty Workshop (CSC NFW) is a professional development program that was initiated in 2012 to address absences in the preparation of chemistry faculty at research universities as funded researchers and educators (i.e., teacher-scholars). The primary focus of the workshop is an introduction to evidence-based teaching methods; other topics including mentoring, work-life balance, time management, and grant writing are also addressed. A longer-term aim of the workshop is to develop lifelong teacher-scholars by encouraging workshop participants to engage with teaching-focused faculty learning communities through the CSC NFW and at their institutions. The workshop also provides a platform to investigate the adoption of student-centered pedagogies among new faculty, and a study of that process was initiated concurrently. Thus, the aim of the workshop program is to address professional development needs as well as understand the efficacy of that effort. ) is a professional development program that was initiated in 2012 to address absences in the preparation of chemistry faculty at research universities as funded researchers and educators (i.e., teacher−scholars). The primary focus of the workshop is an introduction to evidence-based teaching methods; other topics including mentoring, work−life balance, time management, and grant writing are also addressed. A longerterm aim of the workshop is to develop lifelong teacher−scholars by encouraging workshop participants to engage with teachingfocused faculty learning communities through the CSC NFW and at their institutions. The workshop also provides a platform to investigate the adoption of student-centered pedagogies among new faculty, and a study of that process was initiated concurrently. Thus, the aim of the workshop program is to address professional development needs as well as understand the efficacy of that effort. Keywords

MD–PhD training takes, on average, 8 years to complete and involves two transitions, an MD-preclinical to PhD-research phase and a PhD-research to MD-clinical phase. There is a paucity of research about MD–PhD students’ experiences during each transition. This study examined transition experiences reported by 48 MD–PhD students who had experienced at least one of these transitions during their training. We purposefully sampled medical schools across the United States to recruit participants. Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis; items focused on academic and social experiences within and outside their programs. Using a phenomenological approach and analytic induction, we examined students’ transition experiences during their MD–PhD programs. Five broad themes emerged centering on multiple needs: mentoring, facilitating integration with students in each phase, integrating the curriculum to foster mastery of skills needed for each phase, awareness of cultural differences between MD and PhD training, and support. None of the respondents attributed their transition experiences to gender or race/ethnicity. Students emphasized the need for mentoring by MD–PhD faculty and better institutional and program supports to mitigate feelings of isolation and help students relearn knowledge for clinical clerkships and ease re-entry into the hospital culture, which differs substantially from the research culture.