2007 ANNUAL REPORT - cosmos - Bowling Green State University

Back to top
Goal 3 – Evaluation Question 1: How have BGSU faculty contributed to the body of
knowledge on how people best learn science and mathematics and/or on the
barriers and enablers related to current reform efforts?
A total of 28 BGSU faculty participated in at least one of the 15 meetings of the Research
Community held in the fall of 2006 and 27 participants attended at least one of the 14 meetings
in the spring of 2007 (see Table 18). The highest number of the meetings attended by a
Research Community member in the fall was 11, with the average of 6 meetings; on the
average, there were 12 participants per meeting, with the range from 8 to 17. The highest
number of the meetings attended by a Research Community member in the spring was 8, with
the average of 5 meetings; on the average, there were 11 participants per meeting, with the
range from 8 to 16. The participants made a total of 26 presentations, with 12 of these in the fall
and 14 in the spring. Off these, six were turned into manuscripts for publication, pointing to the
success of the idea of a Writing Community that evolved in summer of 2006.
Table 18. Research Community Participation
2005 2006
# Participants 33 28
# Meetings n/a 29
Average # Meetings Attended
by a Participant
n/a 5-6
Average # Participants per
n/a 11-12
Meeting
# Presentations 19 26
# Publications n/a 6
# Submitted Grants n/a 2
Back to top
Goal 3 – Evaluation Question 2: What do faculty believe about the utility of the
Research Community as a faculty development opportunity that serves to
enhance the research efforts of the university in mathematics and science
education?
Based on the evaluations provided by 20 Research Community participants, the overall
usefulness of the Research Community was rated very high - 4.75 on a 5-point Likert scale (see
Table 19). The ratings of the specific aspects of the Research Community ranged from 4.2 to
4.65, with the average of 4.5 and the highest rating being given to the usefulness of the
Research Community in developing professional knowledge of research in science and math
education. These findings are consistent with the last year’s results. The participants also noted
a good organization of the Research Community meetings.