Schedule at a Glance

Wednesday, June 21st

8:30 – 9:30 a.m.

Welcome Breakfast/Opening Remarks

10:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Workshop Session #1

12:30 – 2:00 p.m.

Keynote Speaker #1

2:30 – 5:00 p.m.

Workshop Session #2

Thursday, June 22nd

8:30 – 9:30 a.m.

Breakfast

10:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Workshop Session #3

2:30 – 3:30 p.m.

Keynote Speaker #2

4:00 – 5:30 p.m.

Poster Session Reception

Friday, June 23rd

9:00 – 10:00 a.m.

Poster Session

10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Reflection Session

Presentations

Presenter

Date & Time

Presentation Information

Natasha Turman

nturman@umich.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

10:00 – 11:30 a.m. ET

Title: Integrating Critical Perspectives into STEM Education

Type: 90-minute workshop

Abstract:

Cultivating a critical perspective as a STEM educator, whether faculty, researcher, or staff is foundational to engaging in work that is dynamic, inclusive, and rooted in justice. How you do your work and what is present in the content of your work suggests what is important. Fostering a critical perspective is the key to advancing STEM education that is mindful of the ways in which power, privilege, context, and identities shape STEM experiences. This session will provide a foundational exploration of critical social theories and the utility of cultivating critical perspectives to examine STEM education and practice. Participants will learn the art of Deconstruction and Reconstruction and apply those tools to various STEM educational contexts and scenarios, to challenge dominant norms and discover how to engage in STEM education grounded in equity, justice, and inclusion. This workshop will include interactive media, individual reflection, small group discussions, interactive activities, and action plan creation to engage in topical content.

Primary Presenter

Matthew Kaplan

mlkaplan@umich.edu

Additional Presenter(s)

Denise Galarza Sepúlveda

galarzad@umich.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

10:00 – 11:30 a.m. ET

Title: The Ecosystem of Large Foundational Courses: Lessons

Type: 90-minute workshop

Abstract:

Over the past 5 years, UM’s Foundational Course Initiative, housed in University of Michigan’s Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT), has engaged in a multi-year course redesign process with 25+ courses enrolling over 25,000 students. An important lesson we have learned is that the complexity of working with these large foundational courses presents unique challenges different from typical redesign efforts. While pedagogical elements like alignment, syllabus design, and evaluation play a key role in FCI’s work, we have also seen the critical importance of navigating the complex web of relationships, motivations, and constraints at the individual instructor, departmental, and school/college level. These factors (e.g., departmental staffing models, instructor rank and position in the department, concerns about enrollment, beliefs about individual faculty vs. departmental ownership of courses) act more like components of an ecosystem, and understanding their role is essential for creating long-lasting change. In this workshop, we will present a model for making visible these often unseen but critical aspects of large course redesign along with a brief overview of FCI’s approach to attending to these factors. We will then open a discussion among participants to answer questions about the model and get ideas for refining it. Finally, participants will work in small groups to discuss how they can apply the model to foundational course redesign projects on their own campuses.

Emily Bonem

ebonem@purdue.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

11:50 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: Finding the light: Bright Spots pilot project

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Nate Emery

Abstract:

Update on pilot analyses for Bright Spots project.

Nate Emery

nemery@ucsb.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

11:50 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: From courses to curricula: Integrating data science skills into life science education

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Nate Emery

Abstract:

The Biological and Environmental Data Education (BEDE) Network’s (NSF-RCN) main objective is to support instructors as they integrate data science skills across undergraduate biology and environmental science curricula, through instructor training, curricular maps, and a network of supportive colleagues. BEDE will cultivate a diverse active community of educators that lasts beyond training workshops. Continued engagement will prolong interactions and facilitate greater self-efficacy, potentially changing attitudes about teaching data science in biology and environmental sciences courses more broadly. We will be sharing the results of our recent publication in Bioscience on instructor needs and barriers to data science instruction. Our results indicate that instructors use, teach, and view data management, analysis, and visualization as important data science skills. Coding, modeling, and reproducibility were less valued by the instructors, although this differed according to institution type and career stage. The greatest barriers were instructor and student background and space in the curriculum. Additionally, we will be sharing the themes that emerged from conversations at our first annual meeting focused on the intersection of inclusive teaching practices and data science education.

Tati Russo-Tait

tati@uga.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

12:40 – 2:10 p.m. ET

Type: Keynote Speaker

Biography:

Dr. Russo-Tait is an Assistant Professor in the Cellular Biology department at the University of Georgia, where she leads the ACCESS Lab (Advancing Critical Consciousness, Equity, and Social Justice in STEM). Her research currently involves three strands: STEM faculty beliefs and practices; the experiences of students from minoritized backgrounds in STEM learning environments; and science and social justice curriculum and instruction.

Dr. Russo-Tait earned a BA and MS in Cell Biology and a PhD in STEM Education. Her lived experiences as a biology student, and her subsequent work with underrepresented and minoritized students in STEM motivated her to pursue scholarship in the field so that she could contribute to the larger body of knowledge and national conversation on using asset-based and justice-oriented approaches to best support STEM students and prepare STEM educators.

Nita Tarchinski

nitaked@umich.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

2:30 – 3:30 p.m. ET

Title: STEM Equity Learning Communities at SEISMIC

Type: 60-minute panel

Moderator: TBD

Panelists: TBD

Abstract:

Facilitators of SELC teams come together to share plans for the project.

Lalo Gonzalez

eduardo.gonzalez@lifesci.ucsb.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

2:30 – 3:30 p.m. ET

Title: Perspectives on Barriers to Office Hours Engagement

Type: 60-minute panel

Moderator: TBD

Panelists: Jeremy Hsu, Vanessa Woods, Rachael Barry, Jesse Lewis, Lekeah Durden

Abstract:

Office hours are a common instructional practice across higher education, including STEM courses, intended for student-instructor interaction outside the required class time. Despite research that suggests multiple benefits associated with attending office hours, most students do not take advantage of these opportunities. Furthermore, our preliminary data suggests that there are disparities in office hours usage among students from diverse, historically marginalized backgrounds in STEM. The low attendance at office hours and the discrepancies in usage among students suggest a complex interplay of barriers that prevent students from making full use of this resource. Therefore, understanding students and instructors’ perceptions of barriers to student engagement in office hours provides an opportunity to gain insight that can be used to reformat the structure and praxis of office hours in ways to increase equity.

In this session we will share our mixed methods data regarding two parallel efforts to understand students and instructors’ perceptions of these barriers to office hours engagement. We will share survey data from the first study that speaks to both instructors’ and students’ motivations for, and barriers to, office hours attendance in STEM courses at a primarily undergraduate comprehensive university. We will also present both survey data and qualitative analysis of our second study, aimed at identifying themes in students reported barriers for office hours attendance in biology courses from a large research intensive university. We will highlight the similarities we saw across our data sets with respect to barriers. In addition, we will discuss the implications of this for office hours structure and praxis with the goal of increasing student engagement and creating equitable STEM spaces. Based on these observations, we will share strategies regarding the marketing, design, structure and implementation of office hours to combat the hidden curriculum and increase student engagement.

Primary Presenter

Kyle Small

ksmall@umich.edu

Additional Presenter(s)

Ben Hayward

haywardb@umich.edu

Holly Derry

hderry@umich.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

2:30 – 3:30 p.m. ET

Title: ECoach Part 1: How to Personalize Support in Large Foundational Courses

Type: 60-minute workshop

Abstract:

ECoach Overview: We will provide an overview and demo of the ECoach platform and share updates on features, research, and the future of ECoach.

Learn how the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan is building technology (ECoach) to support students in their largest and most difficult courses, while providing a research and data analytics framework for experimenting with, evaluating, and iterating courses.

ECoach is a personalized web-based coaching tool that supports students in large foundational courses, where one-on-one communications between instructors and students is otherwise impossible.
ECoach gives students course tips about how to best approach the course, personalized feedback on how they’re performing, and tools to help them succeed, like to-do lists, exam playbooks, and a grade calculator.
The platform is integrated with campus data ecosystems and deploys tailored surveys, emails, text messages, and in-platform messages to deliver individualized, timeline advice.
New features
New student interface
New features and insights for instructors
Improvements to content management
Even more sophisticated grade calculator

This session is open to all SEISMIC participants and potential ECoach partners.

Emily Bonem

ebonem@purdue.edu

Wednesday, June 21st

4:00 – 5:00 pm ET

Title: Enhancing STEM teaching through student partnership

Type: 60-minute panel

Moderator: TBD

Panelists: TBD

Abstract:

In this panel discussion, we will share initial experiences with Purdue’s Student Pedagogy Advocates (SPA) program, which is designed to provide real-time student feedback to instructors through pairing instructors with student consultants. These students are not enrolled in the course, nor have they completed the course previously. They instead serve as catalysts in helping faculty think through various aspects of a course through collecting student feedback and conducting classroom observations. Some examples of the types of assistance provided by SPAs can include:

Detailed maps of participation patterns and how instructor actions influence student participation.
Strategically developing activities to support feelings of belonging in a full class or group setting, including in response to specific events or challenges.
Sharing input on the experience in different locations in a classroom including ability to hear, see, and engage fully.
Mid-semester feedback through surveys, focus groups, and/or interviews help make and communicate class adjustments and/or add transparency to class practices.

Our panel will provide a variety of perspectives on the SPA program including a faculty member, a student pedagogy advocate, the SPA program facilitator, a researcher and a moderator. We will focus on a variety of aspects of the SPA program including:

How the SPA program is structured;
Faculty perspectives of the value of having an SPA;
Student perspectives of working as an SPA; and
Our IUSE grant-funded project examining the effectiveness of the SPA program.

Additionally, we will share plans for program expansion and invite those from other SEISMIC partners to consider opportunities for future collaboration in larger cross-institutional experiments and studies.

Kyle Small

ksmall@umich.edu

Additional Presenter(s)

Ben Hayward

haywardb@umich.edu

Holly Derry

hderry@umich.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

10:00 – 11:00 a.m. ET

Title: ECoach Part 2: Partner Success Stories – How to Personalize Education on Your Own Campus

Type: 60-minute workshop

Abstract:

ECoach Success Stories: Hear from our ECoach collaborators at five other institutions about their ECoach journey. They’ll share how they use ECoach, present findings, and share advice for new users. Attend the “Potential User Power Hour” to ask existing partners questions, if you’re considering adopting ECoach.

This session is open to all SEISMIC participants and potential ECoach partners. Attending the ECoach Part 1 session on Wednesday 6/21 is highly encouraged but not required.

Kameryn Denaro

kdenaro@uci.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

10:00 – 11:00 a.m. ET

Title: Effect of a Concurrent Enrollment Preparatory Course on Student Achievement and Persistence in General Chemistry

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

A concurrent preparatory course was developed for a university-level general chemistry course to replace prerequisite classes and online exercises implemented in previous years. The concurrent preparatory course was structured with 3 hours of active learning class time. Lecture content was delivered asynchronously online. Topics were chosen on the basis of fundamental topics needed to succeed in general chemistry. Topics included both those typically found in a preparatory chemistry class as well as some simpler topics being taught in the first course of general chemistry. Two cohorts of students in a program designed to facilitate minoritized student achievement in biological sciences were compared. In the initial year of this study, a prerequisite online homework module was required. In the following year, the concurrent preparatory course was required. Students who took concurrent preparatory course did significantly better on the common final exam than those who did not.

Madeleine Gonin

mgonin@iu.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

10:00 – 11:00 a.m. ET

Title: Designing and building equitable large classes using student feedback

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

We will discuss how ecological belonging interventions can be adapted and implemented in STEM classes to make them more equitable and inclusive. These types of interventions are short, requiring less than one hour of regular class time even though they have the potential to impact student outcomes significantly—especially for underrepresented students in physics classes. We will present data from large introductory physics and biology courses showing the efficacy of such interventions.

Sean Garrett-Roe

sgr@pitt.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

10:00 – 11:00 a.m. ET

Title: Toward Student-Centered Assessment in Large-Enrollment General Chemistry

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

While substantial progress has been made toward student-centered classrooms, the assessment of student learning has remained mired in teacher-centered approaches for many reasons. New approaches to the assessment of student learning based on aligned core principles are emerging. Enacting these principles will be illustrated with our recent implementation of Mastery-based grading in a large-enrollment, first-term general chemistry course.

In fall 2021 and 2022, the assessment and grading schemes of a large-enrollment General Chemistry course were transformed: the assessments were aligned to explicit learning objectives; the objectives are categorized according to Marzano’s Taxonomy (Retrieval, Comprehension, Analysis, or Knowledge Utilization); students’ responses were scored as proficient or not proficient (no partial credit); and students had three attempts at each learning objective. The data show that the assessment scheme increases student’s motivation to study for the course (self-report) and that students improve based on multiple opportunities.

To achieve this intervention at scale, a question bank with hundreds of question templates was developed to programmatically generate randomized questions.

We envision this platform as a tool for instructors looking for a high-quality database of assessment questions that are aligned and validated at different levels of Marzano’s taxonomy. We hope to use this tool as a basis for further research to identify what helps students learn to be resilient and develop a growth mindset (rather than a grade mindset).

The potential areas for collaboration will be highlighted, including disseminating the transformation to other institutions and measuring the impact on student motivation and mindset.

William Nicholas Bork Rodriguez

borkwill@msu.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

11:20 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: Digital Backchannels and Student Belonging in Undergraduate STEM Courses: Early Findings and Potential Actions

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

Many students in first-year STEM courses struggle with their sense of belonging. This phenomenon is more acute for students from traditionally underrepresented groups in STEM courses (e.g., women, international students, etc.). The use of an anonymous digital backchannel may help to bolster students’ sense of belonging by providing them with an avenue to engage with their content, instructors, and classmates without the influence of the public gaze. This study investigates how an anonymous backchannel influences sense of belonging. The study design is quasi-experimental, whereas instructors taught one control semester without a backchannel followed by an intervention semester using the backchannel. Data were collected from 3 campuses and 9 courses. The study is ongoing with future data collection semesters scheduled for Fall 2023. However, early results are available for a subset of the data. This 20-minute research talk presents these early results and what implications they may have for STEM instructors.

Becky Matz

rlmatz@umich.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

11:20 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: Behavioral nudges in introductory STEM courses

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Becky Matz

Abstract:

This presentation will report on quantitative outcomes from the use of behavioral nudges in introductory STEM courses implemented via ECoach, a learner-centered software tool that offers tailored feedback to students. Behavioral nudges can provide information, structure, or assistance for making decisions, and they tend to be low-cost, non-coercive, and easy to ignore. Nudges within ECoach take a variety of forms, from multi-dose emails that encourage students to make multiple attempts at mastery-based assessments and projects to interactive visualizations of points and grades that may encourage students to make decisions more actively. We will report on this range of outcomes across introductory STEM courses as well as opportunities for the implementation of new nudge interventions.

Chandralekha Singh

clsingh@pitt.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

11:20 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: Ecological belonging interventions to improve equity and inclusion in STEM courses

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

Jill Robinson

jirobins@iu.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

11:20 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: The effect of multiple assessment opportunities on student success and equity in a large general chemistry course

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Madeleine Gonin

Abstract:

General chemistry I at Indiana University is often the first chemistry course taken by students and can be an overwhelming experience due to the rigorous content and large class size ( >650 students). While active engagement with the material and multiple opportunities to demonstrate content mastery are beneficial to student learning, implementing these pedagogical methods in a large enrollment course is challenging. In this course, the structure was changed to increase active engagement using 1-2 flipped learning sessions per week. Undergraduate teaching interns were introduced to lower the instructor-to-student ratio to promote effective facilitation of these sessions. The practical implementation of the course restructuring and additional assessments (exam retakes) will be described. The effect of these changes on student success, equity, and sense of belonging over two semesters will be discussed.

Corrin Clarkson

cjclarks@indiana.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

11:20 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. ET

Title: Targeted messaging to promote participation in academic support program

Type: 20-minute research talk

Chair: Becky Matz

Abstract:

Creating effective academic support programs requires both creating something that is beneficial to students and convincing students to participate. This study focuses on the latter challenge for the Indiana University PASS program.

The PASS program offers small peer-led study sessions for students in a variety of introductory mathematics courses. This program uses the well-established Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) model which has been shown to increase student success generally and can be especially effective for students from marginalized groups. Previous studies of the IU PASS program showed a positive association between PASS attendance and end of course grades. However, PASS session attendance data also reveal a significant drop off in attendance after the first exam in week four of the term.

In a Fall 2022 pilot study, targeted mid-semester email messages promoting the PASS program were sent to students in specific sections of finite mathematics. The effectiveness of this intervention was measured using both PASS attendance data and course grades.

This session will present the findings of this research and how the results are being used to inform messaging in future semesters. We will also present a holistic approach that IU is taking with program assessment – using a variety of methodologies such as distance-based matching methods, mixed-effects models, and business process analytics to create a data-informed feedback loop to support the continuous improvement of programs like PASS.

Archie Holmes

aholmes@austin.utexas.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

2:20 – 3:30 p.m. ET

Type: Keynote Speaker

Biography:

Archie Holmes joined The University of Texas System as Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs in October 2020. He provides oversight and guidance for the eight UT System academic institutions, who enroll more than 240,000 students.

Prior to joining U. T. System, Archie was the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs at the University of Virginia and was a faculty member at both the University of Virginia and The University of Texas at Austin. As Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, he served as chief advisor to and representative of the executive vice president and provost in academic matters related to the curriculum and general health and welfare of the academic units. Over this career, Archie has co-authored over 110 referred technical articles and 70 conference presentations and received numerous awards for his teaching and advising activities.

Dr. Holmes received his bachelor’s and PhD degrees, both in electrical engineering, from the University of Texas at Austin and the University of California at Santa Barbara respectively.

Ryan Sweeder

sweeder@msu.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. ET

Title: How does a cohort-based program support STEM students with fewer systemic advantages?

Type: Poster

Abstract:

Through the support of several NSF S-STEM grants, Lyman Briggs College at Michigan State University built a decade-long program designed to support STEM students in career exploration. The SPRING program supported students by providing financial aid, facilitating peer support, guiding them in exploring career options, and developing professional skills. The program focused on students with high academic potential and demonstrable financial need. The majority of scholars also were members of historically marginalized students (e.g., woman, first-generation). A quantitative analysis of the outcomes for our 97 scholars indicated that the percentage of SPRING scholars completing STEM degrees was 12 percent higher than a comparison population.

For first-generation students, the SPRING scholars remained in STEM retention at higher rates, yet the graduation rates remained unchanged. The program also led to an increase in the graduation and STEM retention rates for both majority and minority students. To understand how the program caused these increases, we undertook a qualitative assessment of the student experiences. Through exploring three student case studies, we noted that the primary mechanisms included (1) developing psychological attributes (e.g., self-efficacy), (2) providing material resources, (3) creating a sense of belonging with supportive relationships, and (4) knowledge acquisition.

The synthesis of our quantitative and qualitative findings led us to the development of the Determination of STEM Retention Model of student retention. This model highlights that students’ social capital and social cohesion are critical considerations in understanding the impact of a program. Our model may be helpful for those who are interested in developing or adapting programs to better support students from less privileged backgrounds.

Nate Emery

nemery@ucsb.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. ET

Title: P3: A pilot STEM postdoctoral training program to support early-career scientists

Type: Poster

Abstract:

Postdoctoral researchers in the sciences are increasing in number while the traditional career route to tenure-track faculty positions stagnates. Given the breadth of career options available, but often limited training, postdocs are challenged by a system that is not built to help them succeed. Across academia, postdocs could benefit from complementary training and career preparation that empowers them to accomplish their career goals in a variety of fields and disciplines. At UC Santa Barbara, unlike many other research-focused institutions, we do not have a dedicated office to advocate and implement programming and support for postdocs. They often have to take advantage of graduate student programming for professional development and career preparation, despite being at a very different professional and personal life stage. This year we designed, vetted, and implemented a program to promote postdoc progress and prepare STEM postdocs for a variety of career options. The curriculum focuses on skills that are complementary to their research training such as teaching, mentoring, collaboration, and project management, and guides them through the development of job application materials and approaching job interviews. The pilot program occurred this past spring (April-June) of 2023 and we will be sharing some of the preliminary results and outcome from program participants.

Sarah Castle

gadysara@msu.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. ET

Title: Leveraging Computational Science Students’ Coding Strengths for Mathematics Learning

Type: Poster

Abstract:

The nebulous relationship between mathematics and computation in education has led to questions surrounding computational science students’ experiences in mathematics courses. However, many of these conversations are framed in terms of students’ misconceptions or their ‘poor mathematical skills’. In contrast, I propose leveraging student’s computational strengths as a pedagogical approach for creating relevant and engaging mathematics experiences. In order to build an understanding of the ways in which computation affects student’s experience and understanding of mathematics, I adapted a framework designed to link student’s computational experiences and attitudes by adding explicit linkage to these mathematical experiences. Then I developed a series of Jupyter notebooks focused on introducing linear algebra through computing. This study followed computational science students as they worked through the modules in small groups across six weeks. They completed weekly reflections, and pre/post-study interviews. The theoretical framework was operationalized as an analytical framework to link student experience and attitudes. Results highlighted the shift in students’ views of the nature of mathematics, their abilities, and the interplay between disciplines. The computational environment enabled students to naturally consider multiple solution paths, develop resilience, and enhanced their ability to explore mathematical concepts in a novel way. This was in contrast with students’ initial views that framed mathematics as a set series of steps and formulas to follow. This study both provides a novel perspective in the discourse surrounding research on computational students’ experiences in mathematics and highlights the pedagogical power of computing as a novel environment for learning mathematics.

Ashley Atkinson

atkinash@umich.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. ET

Title: Institutional Posters

Type: Poster

Abstract:

One poster will be created for each institution, focusing on how that campus interacts with SEISMIC. Every poster will have information on SELCs and Weeks of SEISMIC and then the rest of each poster will focus on what that campus’s members have done. Members of that institution will be asked about which activities they want to highlight. Posters will have a cohesive theme combining both SEISMIC and institutional colors. These posters may not be in the poster session itself, but could be hung in a hallway to help direct attendees or allow them to browse during a different part of the meeting.

Ashley Atkinson

atkinash@umich.edu

Thursday, June 22nd

4:00 – 5:30 p.m. ET

Title: Transforming Institutions Through STEM Equity Learning Communities: Details on the new SEISMIC Collaboration NSF IUSE Grant

Type: Poster

Abstract:

This project aims to serve the national interest by improving STEM education outcomes using a department-level approach to address systemic inequities that create barriers to student success. Introductory STEM courses consistently reproduce inequities for historically marginalized students. However, it is common among those involved in STEM education, including faculty, administrators, and even students themselves, to view these inequities as resulting from student deficits. This “blame-the-victim” mindset creates a significant barrier for STEM education reform as attempts to address inequities often focus on “fixing” the students, rather than on creating systemic change in courses and departments. This project will test a department-oriented approach for changing the student-deficit mindsets present in faculty, administrators, and undergraduate students. By guiding participants in recognizing the structural role that courses and departments play in student success, and documenting the process in the form of a guide, this project will allow new and different institutions to adapt this field-tested approach for their local contexts, driving dialogue in STEM departments on approaches for examining student academic outcomes through an equity lens. Leveraging the existing relationships and past work of the multi-institutional Sloan Equity and Inclusion in STEM Introductory Courses (SEISMIC) collaboration, this project plans to develop and share a standard menu of equity measures that should provide a benchmark for universities seeking to measure equity in their courses and departments. The overall objective of this proposal is to establish STEM Equity Learning Communities (SELCs) in universities across the U.S. that will foster impactful approaches for engaging faculty, department leaders, and undergraduate students in equity-minded discussions of their STEM courses.The project hopes to generate knowledge on how well and in what context SELCs can develop equity-mindedness in faculty, department leaders, and undergraduate students across ten large, public, R1 universities and can empower them to promote this mindset in their departments.

Tim McKay

tamckay@umich.edu

Friday, June 23rd

10:20 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. ET

Title: Creating SEISMIC Change: Lessons From our First Five Years

Type: Talk

Abstract:

When SEISMIC launched late in 2018, our collective goal was to set a new national standard for foundational STEM courses that are inclusive introductions to STEM disciplines and that embody equitable classroom practices. Since then, each of our campuses has used participation in SEISMIC as a tool for advancing our practice both together and on our own. This panel will bring together some long-standing SEISMIC members to reflect on building a national collaboration, transforming our understanding of equity and inclusion, navigating a global pandemic, driving change on each campus, and imagining the future.