There is a lot going on in introductory undergraduate science classrooms. Students bring their culture, background, and previous science experiences; instructors bring their knowledge, attitudes, and experience in science and in teaching. Students are there for a variety of reasons, and a substantial proportion will become K-12 teachers: that introductory course may be their primary science experience as an adult learner. How future teachers learn science is of critical importance to how they teach science, but few college science classes reflect the vision of the 2012 Framework for K-12 Science Education, in which “students actively engage in scientific and engineering practices in order to deepen their understanding of crosscutting concepts and disciplinary core ideas” (p. 217). The vision of the Teaching with Investigation and Design in Science (TIDeS) project is that future teachers will learn science as undergraduates the way they are expected to teach science in the K–12 classroom: engaging all students in science investigation and engineering design in a discourse-filled, context-rich, inclusive learning process. TIDeS seeks to catalyze transformation of introductory science courses by supporting faculty in the development and implementation of high-quality, rigorously tested, inclusive curricular materials that focus investigation and design. The project has two broad research questions: (1) How do the beliefs and practices of instructors change with developing and/or implementing new curricular materials? (2) What is the impact of the use of these new materials on diverse students? To address these questions, the TIDeS team developed a suite of research probes aligned with the project’s guiding principles and with each other (see figure). The probes include a semi-structured, pre-/post- faculty interview, a quantitative and qualitative classroom observation protocol, a pre-/post- student survey, a syllabus rubric, and rubrics for the curricular materials and student readings. Our preliminary data suggest that, in combination, the probes will provide a holistic picture of what teaching with investigation and design in introductory college-level science courses looks like, how it differs from an active learning classroom, and how it can support the preparation of future teachers.

The National Geoscience Faculty Survey (NGFS) was designed to probe how faculty teach in undergraduate geoscience courses, learn about pedagogy and instructional content, and participate in the geoscience education and research communities. The survey has been administered four times in 2004 (n = 2207), 2009 (n = 2874), 2012 (n = 2466), and 2016 (n = 2615). The original survey was developed as part of On the Cutting Edge, a National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded professional development program for geoscience faculty sponsored by the National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT). The 2016 survey was developed by a research team involving leadership of On the Cutting Edge, InTeGrate, and SAGE 2YC, with support from their NSF grants. The NGFS dataset is a unique and valuable longitudinal resource. One of our strategies for providing access to NGFS data is to publish a free-to-download report with response frequencies for all questions in order to make aggregate, baseline data available to the community and to place the NGFS in the context of other national datasets. The report consists of five chapters: 1) An introduction to the survey, including how it was designed and administered; 2) A description of survey respondents, including demographic data, the type and amount of teaching they do, and how they engage with the geoscience education and research communities; 3) The characteristics and topics of courses taught; 4) The teaching strategies used in introductory geoscience courses and courses for geoscience majors; and 5) How and why instructors learn about and change their teaching practices. Our demographic data suggest that the 2016 survey respondents represent about 25% of the population of college-level geoscience instructors in the US. The 2012 and 2016 respondents are a representative sample of the range of disciplines, institution types, and geographic locations of the larger population, but slightly overrepresent more senior faculty (professors and associate professors). Our analyses highlight differences in the nature of teaching and classroom practices between introductory and majors-level geoscience courses, and differences in participation in the geoscience community between instructors at different institution types (two-year vs. four-year).