NSF Review of TELS

As part of its mid-project review of all the Centers for Teaching and Learning, a Blue Ribbon Panel organized by NSF held a "Reverse Site Visit" in Arlington, VA on April 28th, 2005. As part of the review, the TELS project was asked to respond in writing to 11 questions. The responses to these questions provide a good overview of the first year and a half of the TELS project.

The questions were divided into six generic questions asked of all centers, and five that were specific to the TELS Center. These questions are listed below and linked to our answers. Following the questions is a bibliography.

The NSF asked all projects being reviewed the following general questions:

1. What progress have you made toward addressing your center's research agenda?
2. What progress have you made in developing the leadership cadre in your field in terms of:
   1. Recruitment of a diverse group of doctoral students;
   2. Providing appropriate research opportunities for these students;
   3. Offering specific experiences to develop leadership potential?
3. What effect is your center having on the community of practitioners (teachers, administrators, etc.) with whom you are working?
4. What are the contributions being made to the center by STEM disciplinary faculty (or non-faculty researchers) and their departments?
5. What information has your evaluation provided your center about impact, changes needed, and effectiveness?  How have you used this information?
6. What evidence do you have that your project is becoming a Center?  (e.g., the degree to which the partners are coalescing around your CLT mission, policy changes and new structures that will persist, connections with other innovative projects-including other CLT's)

The NSF also submitted five TELS-specific questions:

1. The TELS project relies on baseline data so the effect of interventions can be measured and understood.  What is the status of that data collection? Since the types of interventions that can be investigated are limited by the parameters included in the baseline data collection, explain these constraints.
2. The analogy of the national lab depends on a review board to screen for important ideas that can be tested in the lab.  What is the status of the national board?  Describe the process they have used or will be using.
3. Describe the technologies that are being merged with Pedagogica and WISE and the trajectory for these technical innovations. You described the combination s "essential to creating classroom-ready learning experiences that realize the potential of models and tools."
4. Among the promised outcomes are that "TELS will create a large body of research that provides new and stronger evidence of the benefits and pitfalls of technology-based innovations for student learning in diverse settings" and "TELS will create a community of informed and able researchers who understand how technology can enhance learning. Describe progress or revisions in your thinking on these points.
5. One of the innovations of TELS is that you will codify "design knowledge in the design principles database and [test] its value for developers and customizers."  What progress is being made on this front?

Bibliography for NSF and TELS Questions

Berge, O., & Slotta, J. D. (in press). Learning technology standards and inquiry-based learning. In A. Koohang & K. Harman (Eds.), Learning Object Standards, Metadata, Repositories, & LCMS Category: Informing Science Press.

Chiu, J. (2005, April 11). Enhancing Chemistry Understanding through Models and Reflective Prompts.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Clark, D., Sampson, V., & Lemanowski, V. (2005, April 11). Technology Opening Diverse Opportunities for Science (TODOS):  Discourse Participation in Thermodynamics.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Davis, E. (2003). Knowledge Integration in Science Teaching: Analysing Teachers' Knowledge Development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21-53.

Fauvre, L., Harrison, C., & Bowyer, J. (2005, April 11). Scaling Up TELS-Responses of School Administrators.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Gobert, J. (2005, April 11). Leveraging on Affordances of Technology Enhanced Models in Science.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Higgins, T. (2005, April 11). Strengthening Integration between Professional Development Experiences and Classroom Practice.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Hoadley, C., & Rajan Sockman, B. (2005, April 11). Responding to Teachers' and Researchers' Information Needs about Technologies for Learning Science.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Holmes, J., & Linn, M. (2005, April 11). Supporting Authors of Technology Enhanced Curricula for Science.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Lee, H.-S., Husic, F., Liu, L., & Hofstetter, C. (2005, April 11). Assessing Knowledge Integration in Technology Enhanced Learning in Science.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Linn, M. (in press). Knowledge integration. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.

Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B.-S. (in press). Science Education. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, Teachers, Peers: Science Learning Partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Linn, M., & Slotta, J. (2005, April 11). Technology Enhanced Learning in Science (TELS).Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (Eds.). (2004). Internet Environments for Science Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Liu, L., Lee, H.-S., & Hofstetter, C. (2005, April 11). Item Response Analyses of Benchmark Assessments in Technology Enhanced Learning in Science.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

McElhaney, K. (2005, April 11). Using Dynamic Models to Understand Students' Models of Motion Graphs.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Ronen-Fhurmann-Fuhrmann, T., & Kali, Y. (2005, April 11). Designing Technology-based Curricula Using the Design Principles Database.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Slotta, J. D. (2004). The Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE): Scaffolding Knowledge Integration in the Science Classroom. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet Environments for Science Education (pp. 203-232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Slotta, J., Aleahmad, T., & Zimmerman, T. (2005, April 11). Scaffolding Interactive Learning: The Case for a Rich Interoperability Framework.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Tate, E. (2005, April 11). Hanging with Friends, Velocity Style!-Learning from multiple representations of velocity.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Varma, K. (2005, April 11). Supporting Teachers Enacting Inquiry Based Technology: An Emergent Professional Development Model.Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.