Assessing Precollege Science Education Outreach Initiatives: A Funder's Perspective-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Assessing Precollege Science Education Outreach Initiatives: A Funder's Perspective

Published:2004-09 Issue:3 Volume:3 Page:189-195
ISSN:1536-7509
Container-title:Cell Biology Education
language:en
Short-container-title:CBE

Author:

Felix Debra A.¹,Hertle Mark D.¹,Conley Jill G.¹,Washington Lori B.¹,Bruns Peter J.¹

Affiliation:

1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Precollege Science Education Program, Chevy Chase, MD 20815

Abstract

We describe an assessment of the collective impact of 35 grants that the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) made to biomedical research institutions in 1999 to support precollege science education outreach programs. Data collected from funded institutions were compared with data from a control group of institutions that had advanced to the last stage of review but had not been funded. The survey instrument and the results reveal outcomes and impacts that HHMI considers relevant for these programs. The following attributes are considered: ability to secure additional, non-HHMI funding; institution buy-in as measured by gains in dedicated space and staff; enhancement of the program director's career; number and adoption of educational products developed; number of related publications and awards; percentage of programs for which teachers received course credit; increase in science content knowledge; and increase in student motivation to study science.

Publisher

American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB)

Subject

Cell Biology,Education

Reference8 articles.

1. Chubin, D.E. (1995). Education program evaluation at NSF: What difference does it make? In: Innovating and Evaluating Science Education: NSF Evaluation Forums, 1992–94. http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehrPublications.cfm (accessed 13 July 2004).

2. Daniels, S., McIntosh, W., and Leonard, J. (1996).Process or outcome ? Foundation News & Commentary (March–April), 46-48.

3. Easterling D. (2000). Using outcome evaluation to guide grant making: Theory, reality, and possibilities. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 29,482 -486.

4. Fine, A.H., Thayer, C.E., and Coghlan, A. (1998).Program Evaluation Practice in the Nonprofit Sector . A study funded by the Aspen Institute Nonprofit Sector Research Fund and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Washington, DC: Innovation Network.

5. Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R., and Worthen, B.R. (2004). Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines, 3rd ed., Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Cited by 15 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Critical pedagogy of place to enhance ecological engagement activities;Conservation Biology;2023-02-02

2. A Course-Based Teaching Experience for STEM Undergraduates Improves Student Perceptions of Teaching Self-Efficacy and Attitudes Toward Teaching Careers;CBE—Life Sciences Education;2022-03

3. STEM initiatives matter: results from a systematic review of secondary school interventions for girls;International Journal of Science Education;2020-04-29

4. An outreach program with hands-on, physiology-based exercises generates questions about STEM career expectations;Advances in Physiology Education;2019-06-01

5. Pre-College Computing Outreach Research;Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education;2017-03-08