This paper describes the development and preliminary validation of a new spatial ability instrument that is designed to be accessible non-visually. Although additional work is needed to finalize the test, preliminary analysis indicates that the test has high reliability and validity.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Sarah LopezWade GoodridgeIsaac GouglerDaniel KaneNatalie Shaheen
This paper seeks to illustrate the first steps in a process of adapting an existing, valid, and reliable spatial ability instrument – the Mental Cutting Test (MCT) – to assess spatial ability among blind and low vision (BLV) populations. To adapt the instrument, the team is developing three-dimensional (3-D) models of existing MCT questions such that a BLV population may perceive the test tactilely with their hands.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Tyler AshbyWade GoodridgeBJ CallSarah LopezNatalie Shaheen
This paper discusses the development of the Tactile Mental Cutting Test (TMCT), a non-visually accessible spatial ability instrument, developed and used with a blind and low vision (BLV) population. Data was acquired from individuals participating in National Federation of the Blind (NFB) Conventions across the United States as well as NFB sponsored summer engineering programs. The paper reports on a National Science Foundation funded effort to garner initial research findings on the application of the TMCT. It reports on initial findings of the instrument’s validity and reliability, as well
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Natalie ShaheenAnn HuntDaniel KaneWade Goodridge
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is the executive summary of report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is a report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and
Each year, the National Alliance for Broader Impacts (NABI) seeks to understand the current state of broader impacts (BI) in the national context. In 2017, NABI convened two forums to identify needs and solicit recommendations. The first event was a 90-minute town hall session with 120 participants facilitated by Jamie Bell at the April 2017 BI Summit. The second event was a two-day convening facilitated by Goose Creek Consulting at NSF headquarters in May 2017 of stakeholder groups including university administrators (e.g., provosts, associate provosts, vice-presidents of research)
In late 2012, COMPASS received NSF grant number 1255633, “A Workshop to Explore Building Systemic Communication Capacity for Next Generation Scientists.” Known in shorthand and on twitter as #GradSciComm, the work comprises three major components, culminating in this report: (1) To assess the current landscape of science communication workshops, courses, and trainings available to graduate students in the STEM disciplines; (2) To convene a workshop of science communication trainers, scholars, science society leaders, funders, administrators, and graduate students; and (3) To provide concrete
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Liz NeeleyErica GoldmanBrooke SmithNancy BaronSarah Sunu