Home
Ethnography & Evaluation Research (E&ER) is an independent research unit at the University of Colorado Boulder with a distinguished history of building knowledge aboutÌýscience, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and careers, and a tradition of communicating this work effectively with practitioners. Our workÌýhas helped to shape reforms in undergraduate STEM education for over 30 years.
Collectively, our research team is multi-disciplinary, STEM-savvy, andÌýskilled in conducting and sharing research and evaluation to help faculty and institutionsÌýimprove their STEM education practices. E&ER team members have also studied issues in health, social justice,Ìýthe workforce, and the legal system.
To expand our capabilities and connect our findings to practice, E&ER draws on a network of colleagues and collaborators in education, government, research, and evaluation. Our work has been supported by the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Research Corporation for Science Advancement, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Noyce Foundation, the Camille & Henry Dreyfus Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, and the Educational Advancement Foundation, and through contracts with colleges, universities, laboratories, and other organizations. At CU Boulder, E&ER is housed within theÌýCenter to Advance Research and Teaching in the Social Sciences (CARTSS).
New from E&ER
August 2024: CU Boulder has changed platforms for all websites. Many links on our site, to downloadable documents in particular, are currently broken. If there's something you need, please let us know by email and we will prioritize getting that to you. We apologize for the inconvenience.
October 2023: Together with colleagues from the , Sandra Laursen contributed to about online professional development for future STEM faculty, through two MOOCs on evidence-based teaching. We analyzed participation, self-reported outcomes, and the affordances of the MOOC-centered learning communities for supporting learners.Ìý
March 2023:Ìý Thrilled to share this on analyzing classroom observation data from segmented and holistic protocols, led by Tim Weston.ÌýCheck it out in the International Journal of STEM Education!ÌýÌý
December 2022:ÌýWe have a chapter in the newly published . Our chapter, "The Cycle of Inquiry: Building Effective Evaluation Relationships to Support Continuous Improvement of Faculty Development Initiatives," was led by Chuck Hayward. The handbook has an impressive author list and a lot of great topics; check it out at the link and read our chapterÌýhere.Ìý
June 2022:Ìý on two-year college (2YC) biology classes: ÌýWhat evidence-based instructional practices benefit 2YC students, which approaches do 2YC instructors use, and what supports or barriers do they encounter in doing so? Sarah WiseÌýand colleagues offer some answers from literature and instructor interviews.
May 2022: ÌýWorth the wait!ÌýE&ERÌýcollaborated on thisÌý on inquiry-based learning for math educators. told you that these workshops work; here Yoshinobu et al. (2022) explain why.
May 2022:ÌýThe of the ADVANCE Journal celebratesÌýtwo decades of this ground-breaking program to advance gender equity on STEM faculties. Sue Rosser and Sandra Laursen reviewedÌýthe ADVANCE program's accomplishments, progress, and challenges for the future inÌý.
April 2022: ÌýDelighted toÌýannounce a led by Tim Archie in PLOS One! ÌýDrawing on a ten-year data set, we use a structural equation model based on the theory of planned behavior to see how professional development influenced teaching practice. Participation in a significant, multi-day workshopÌýwas theÌýmajor influence on instructors' uptake of research-based teaching practices, with a boost fromÌýsome contextual factors too.
July 2021:ÌýOur new paper, led by Tim Weston, examines the importance of time sampling in using classroom observations to study teaching practice. ÌýTurns out it takes a lot of observing to fairly characterizeÌýteaching across a whole course—Ìýespecially when instructors use active learning approaches, which make class time more variable.ÌýCheck out in the American Journal of Evaluation (Online First).
May 2021:ÌýWe are pleased to share new results from analyses led by Tim Archie on the outcomes of professional development workshops on inquiry-based learning for college math instructors. Well-designed intensive workshops make a difference! Pick your format: Ìý at the STEM for All Video Showcase, at the AIBL website, poster from the AAC&U 2020 STEM ed conference, and from the 2021 Joint Math Meetings. ÌýMore good stuff coming soon!
November 2020: ÌýCheck out our new book,ÌýBuilding Gender Equity in the Academy: Institutional Strategies for Change,Ìýby Sandra Laursen and Ann E. AustinÌýfromÌýJohns Hopkins University Press.ÌýThis handbook is based in research about ADVANCE Institutional Transformation effortsÌýandÌýaimed at busy academic leadersÌýwho seek evidence-based strategies to improve institutional environments for academic women.ÌýWe are excited about theÌýpotential for this work to reach people in positions to lead strategic institutional change! ÌýCheck outÌýmore resources related to the bookÌýhere.Ìý
September 2020: The coauthored volume,ÌýÌýis now available from Springer. This work is a follow-up study of STEM majors' switching and persistence, conductedÌýat five of the original sites studied two decades ago inÌýTalking about Leaving (1997).
June 2020: Ìý:ÌýAn overview of research by Sandra Laursen and E&ER colleagues about learning and teaching in college mathematics classrooms that use inquiry-based learning (IBL) approaches.ÌýThis Ìý(23 min.) places our team'sÌýworkÌýin context with other literature about active learning and equitable classroom environments, in support of instructors new to inquiry-based mathematics education (IBME).
August 2019:Ìý Ìýis now available! ÌýThe report draws on scholarly reviews and practitioner discussions toÌýcapture a snapshot of the current state of research-based reform in undergraduate STEM instruction. It identifiesÌýkey levers for change usedÌýto reach this state, and it suggests additional leversÌýfor fostering further change in the next decade. The project was led by Sandra Laursen for AAAS, with support from NSF and HHMI.
February 2019: ÌýCheck out the two-volume special issue of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, with a raft of good papers on the NSF ADVANCE program (, ). ÌýSandra Laursen and Kris De Welde, College of Charleston, have a paper analyzing .Ìý
February 2019:Ìý Excited to have a Ìýwith Chris Rasmussen, San Diego State,Ìýappear in IJRUME!
November 2018: ÌýÌýis out this month. ÌýSandra Laursen and collaborator Ann Austin of Michigan State have a chapter in this volume.
September 2018:ÌýWe're proud to have chipped in on the collaborative project that produced the new volume,Ìý. ÌýCheck it out!
July 2018: We have two new papers out this summer, both on communities formed around inquiry-based learning in mathematics: ÌýHayward & Laursen on after an IBL workshop, and Haberler, Laursen & Hayward on . ÌýCheck 'em out!
June 2017: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released its report on E&ER's Sandra Laursen was a plenary speaker at this workshop, with Paul Hernandez of West Virginia University.
April 2017:ÌýWe're honored to have our piece on fundamental tensions of undergraduate research included in a new compilation of "greatest hits" fromÌýChangeÌýmagazine,ÌýÌýEdited by long-time Change editor Peg Miller, this volume focuses on experiences that change college students' lives. Check it out!
February 2017: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released its report onÌý. E&ER's Heather Thiry was part of the committee that prepared this report.
March 2014: ÌýThe StratEGIC ToolkitÌýhas launched! ÌýThe ToolkitÌýoffers research-based advice about strategic interventions useful in organizational change to enhance the representation, involvement and success of women scholars in STEM fields.
Fall 2013:ÌýWe contributed to a new publication from AAAS onÌýÌý(2013). The report discusses the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches to measuring undergraduate teaching practices, including faculty and student surveys, faculty interviews, classroom observations, portfolios, and other artifacts.
