Workshop

FORMAT This workshop is will be held in a hybrid format. On Wednesday, March 16, the workshop will be at MSRI. On Thursday and Friday, March 17-18, the workshop will be at the Brower Center in Downtown Berkeley. Simultaneously, the workshop will be livestreamed via Zoom. COVID POLICIES All visitors are required to provide proof of full vaccination, including the booster shot (vaccination card, image of card or virtual pass).  Participants are also required to provide proof of a negative COVID-19 test taken within the 24 hours prior to arrival at the conference.  Wearing facemasks is required for all indoor activities. DESCRIPTION The world is changing, along with perceptions. Many call for the improvement of mathematics teaching and learning, for both citizenry and STEM preparation. To achieve sustainable change, though, the focus needs to extend from individuals to systems. It is not enough to change one classroom or one course. Transformation requires change at all levels: in teaching, programmatic practices, and institutions. This workshop will bring together teachers and researchers from universities, community colleges, and K-12 schools to explore the reasons for and processes by which change in university mathematics departments is initiated, promoted, and sustained and lessons learned from change efforts in K-12. It will review what we know about change at all levels and reflect on stories of failure and success. Four guiding questions: Putting Educational Equity at the Center of Change:  What does it mean for issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion to be central to improving mathematics teaching and learning at the undergraduate level?  What data could departments collect and utilize to inform improvement efforts and improve student outcomes?  What lessons have been learned from K-12 that could inform post-secondary work?   Pedagogical Change:  What are the attributes of learning environments that have proven effective from the perspective of student learning in mathematics and educational equity? Can we illustrate the parallels between students engaging in inquiry-based or active learning and the practice of mathematical research to make such classroom practice more natural and approachable to faculty?  How can departments and professional organizations help individual faculty adopt pedagogies that are effective and that suit their own teaching style?  Where has this been done successfully? What lessons have been learned from K-12 that could inform post-secondary work? What exemplars exist?   Structural Change:  What departmental or institutional structural changes have proven effective from the perspective of student success (e.g., deeper engagement in mathematics, persistence in STEM) and educational equity?   What are systemic, historical, and structural barriers to change? What are the “normal operating procedures” that occur in faculty offices, classrooms, departments, and university services that disproportionately and negative impact on historically underserved communities. What roles do class size, classroom size and set up, co-requisite support, peer mentoring, in-class interventions from advising, counseling, or financial aid play in student learning?  What are the obstacles to changing these?   Effecting Change: What change levers are most crucial to incorporate in transformation efforts of undergraduate mathematics? In what ways are these change levers context-dependent? How can improvements be sustained?  How can mathematicians and other stakeholders in undergraduate mathematics teaching and learning be empowered as change agents to guide effective transformation efforts (initiation, implementation, sustainability) to improve mathematics teaching and learning in undergraduate courses? How do people become change agents? What professional development do individuals and departments need in order to position change agents effectively?  How should we understand theories of change with respect to the unique contexts of mathematics departments in higher education? What concepts from organizational change, or experiences from K-12 change, are helpful and can be translated to the contexts and culture of mathematics departments in higher education? How should we understand change efforts at different grain sizes (e.g., classroom, faculty, course, department, university,