Economic, academic, and social forces are causing undergraduate schools to start a fresh examination of teaching effectiveness. Administrators face the complex task of developing equitable, predictable ways to evaluate, encourage, and reward good teaching in science, math, engineering, and technology. Evaluating, and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics offers a vision for systematic evaluation of teaching practices and academic programs, with recommendations to the various stakeholders in higher education about how to achieve change. What is good undergraduate teaching? This book discusses how to evaluate undergraduate teaching of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology and what characterizes effective teaching in these fields. Why has it been difficult for colleges and universities to address the question of teaching effectiveness? The committee explores the implications of differences between the research and teaching cultures-and how practices in rewarding researchers could be transferred to the teaching enterprise. How should administrators approach the evaluation of individual faculty members? And how should evaluation results be used? The committee discusses methodologies, offers practical guidelines, and points out pitfalls. Evaluating, and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics provides a blueprint for institutions ready to build effective evaluation programs for teaching in science fields.

The hearing, opened by Rep. Ray Thorton of Arkansas, addressed the perceived imbalance between teaching and research among university professors and the concern that the quality of undergraduate science education within the United States has deteriorated. Witnesses were called to examine factors that contribute to establishing an appropriate balance between research and teaching responsibilities for professors and factors that improve the quality of undergraduate science education. Witnesses included Dr. Charles M. Vest, President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts; Dr. Karl S. Pister, Interim Chancellor, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California; Dr. E. Fred Carlisle, Senior Vice President and Provost, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia; Dr. Pamela A. Ferguson, President Grinnell College, Grinnell, Iowa; Dr. Homer A. Neal, Chairman, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Dr. Samuel Ward, Professor and Department Head, Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, and Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona; Dr. Jack R. Lohmann, Associate Dean, College of Engineering, and Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia; and Dr. Denice Denton, Associate Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. Topics discussed by the witnesses included faculty evaluation and promotion; the interaction of teaching and research; the Virginia Tech plan for undergraduate education and faculty rewards; the need for continued research funding; and faculty incentive systems. A copy of "America's Academic Future: A Report of the Presidential Young Investigator Colloquium on U.S. Engineering, Mathematics, and Science Education for the year 2010 and Beyond" is included. (MDH)