The purpose of this paper is to explore results from a qualitative study of how high school aged BLV youth used spatial language during a virtual engineering experience administered by the National Federation of the Blind (NFB). Findings from this study can provide recommendations to enhance language in curricula that better reflects BLV students' content and may ultimately encourage more BLV students to pursue careers in STEM fields.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Gary TimkoNatalie ShaheenWade GoodridgeTheresa GreenDaniel Kane
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
"Conectando Saberes" united experts and learners from diverse backgrounds to explore the current landscape, amplify voices, and identify priorities for equity and transformation in STEM learning among Latiné youth and families.
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
This is a report from Workshop IV, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement workshop series. Workshop IV was held May 2-3, 2018 at the Monterey Bay Aquarium in Monterey, CA. In this study, researchers sought to explore and understand the mechanisms, motivations, and outcome metrics utilized by individuals and organizations that facilitate scientists’ communication with the public. To capture the full range of engagement methods, facilitators from a wide variety of organizations were contacted and interviewed. After contacting 30 leaders the realm of science
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
This list of terms and definitions was produced by the GENIAL (Generating Engagement and New Initiatives for All Latinos) project, which convened Ia Summit on June 5-6, 2017, in San Francisco, California.
The goals of the GENIAL Summit were to:
- Identify needs and opportunities for Latinos in informal science learning (ISL) environments.
- Facilitate and strengthen professional relationships.
- Identify recommendations and actionable insights with an outlook toward the future.
- Contribute to a more informed ISL field.
A total of 91 participants, a mix of practitioners, community
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)