Appendix 2. Resources and References

Annotated References

Accelerating Systemic Change Network. Retrieved from

The Accelerating Systemic Change Network (ASCN) is a network of individuals and institutions, formed with the goal of more quickly advancing STEM education programs. The website includes literature resources, a blog, and other information about higher education reform.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., Norman, M. K., & Mayer, R. E. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Outlines major principles for how students learn.

Bailey, J. M., & Lombardi, D. (2015). Blazing the trail for astronomy education research. Journal of Astronomy and Earth Sciences Education, 2(2), 77.

Describes the growing availability of disciplinary education experts available to serve as DBESs.

Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives, and…tensions with professional identity? CBE-Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339-346. doi:

This article considers that a scientist’s research identity may be at odds with their development of a teaching identity.

Bush, S.D., Pelaez, N. J., Rudd, J.A., Stevens, M.T., Williams, K.S., Allen, D.E., & Tanner, K.D. (2006). On hiring Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) for your science (not education) department. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5(4), 297-305.

Hiring DBESs is increasingly common; this article discusses their potential roles and integration into departments.

Bush, S.D., Rudd II J.A., Stevens, M.T., Tanner, K.D., & Williams, K.S. (2016). Fostering change from within: Influencing teaching practices of departmental colleagues by science faculty with education specialties. PLOS ONE, 11(3), 1-20.

This article found that DBESs tend to affect the instructional practices of their colleagues.

Bush, S.D., Stevens, M.T., Tanner, K.D., & Williams, K.S. (2017). Origins of science faculty with education specialties: Hiring motivations and prior connections explain institutional differences in the SFES phenomenon. BioScience, 67(5), 452-463.

This and the two following articles in this bibliography discuss the hiring of disciplinary education faculty, who may act as DBESs.

Carey, S. J. (Ed.). (2015). Navigating institutional change for student success in STEM. Peer Review, 17(2).

This special issue, sponsored by the PKAL institutional change project, provides guidance for campus leaders on developing local capacity, assessment, and strategic planning—including a readiness tool for assessing capacity for change.

Chasteen, S. V., Perkins, K. K., Beale, P. D., Pollock, S. J., & Wieman, C. E. (2011). A thoughtful approach to instruction: Course transformation for the rest of us. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(04).

Early paper describing the SEI model of course transformation, similar to Chasteen and Perkins (2014).

Chasteen, S. V., Wilcox, B., Caballero, M. D., Perkins, K. K., Pollock, S. J., & Wieman, C. E. (2015). Education transformation in upper-division physics: The Science Education Initiative model, outcomes, and lessons learned. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 11, 020110.

Describes the CU SEI outcomes of transformations in upper division physics in the most detail.

Chasteen, S., & Perkins, K. (2014). Change from within: The Science Education Initiative. In M. McDaniel, R. Frey, S. Fitzpatrick, & H. L. Roediger (Eds.), Integrating cognitive science with innovative teaching in STEM disciplines [E-reader version]. Retrieved from

Gives a step-by-step approach to course transformation with an upper-division physics course as a concrete example.

Chasteen, S.C., & Otero, V. Teaching with learning assistants. Science Education Resource Center. Retrieved from

Brief, user-friendly description of learning assistants and how they can best be used.

Dancy, M., & Henderson, C. (2010). Pedagogical practices and instructional change of physics faculty. American Journal of Physics, 78(10), 1056-1063.

This article finds that physics faculty are interested in making instructional changes, but lack time and knowledge to implement innovations.

Dolan, E. L., Lepage, G. P., Peacock, S. M., Simmons, E. H., Sweeder, R., & Wieman, C. (2016). Improving undergraduate STEM education at research universities: A collection of case studies. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation for Science Advancement. Retrieved from

Includes a chapter by UBC Dean of Science Simon Peacock on the SEI in which he describes how the UBC CWSEI dealt with university policies (such as teaching evaluations) and how UBC required first year courses to develop learning goals as a support for SEI efforts.

Duhigg, C. (2012). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in life and business. New York, NY: Random House.

This book about how habits are formed can help you think about how to coach faculty to develop new instructional habits.

Eckel, P., Green, M., Hill, B., & Mallon, W. (1999). On Change III: Taking charge of change: A primer for colleges and universities. An occasional paper series of the ACE Project on leadership and institutional transformation. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

A practical guide to leading change within an institution, including strategies and information on supporting change agents.

Elrod, S., & Kezar, A. (2016). Increasing student success in STEM: A guide to systemic institutional change. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities.

A step-by-step guidebook for campus leaders at the department or institution level for improving student achievement in undergraduate STEM.

Evergreen, S. D. (2016). Effective data visualization: The right chart for the right data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

A delightful book about data visualization that can help you think about what you want to communicate and to whom, and how to do it effectively using the right charts.

Evergreen, S. D. (2018). Presenting data effectively: Communicating your findings for maximum impact (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

A useful “how to” book about data visualization and communication.

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2016). Teaching and learning STEM: A practical guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

A practical and readable guide to instructional design and implementation in STEM, full of useful examples.

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

A practical classic for instructional design, including course planning, learning goals, and instructional approaches.

Fry, C.L. (Ed.). (2014). Achieving systemic change: A sourcebook for advancing and funding undergraduate STEM education. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from

A practical sourcebook that discusses the rationale for change in higher education, building institutional capacity, changing faculty practices, and tracking and sustaining improvement.

Gawande, A. (2011, October 3). Personal best. The New Yorker. Retrieved from

Describes the importance of peer coaching in professional improvement.

Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2006). Scientific teaching. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.

Describes the scientific approach to teaching, which underlies the SEI model.

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. New York, NY: Random House.

This book about how to communicate ideas to make them ‘stick’ can help you think strategically about communicating with department faculty.

Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 8(2), 020104.

Article discussing issues on sustainability of instructional changes made by faculty.

Huber, M., Hutchings P., (2014). Bay View Alliance case study #2, research action cluster 1: The Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative in Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences.

Case study on one of the most successful SEI departments.

Ingram, E. L., House, R. A., Chenoweth, S., Dee, K. C., Ahmed, J., Williams, J., et al. (2014). From faculty to change agent: lessons learned in the development and implementation of a change workshop. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 24.630.1-24.630.12. Retrieved from:

Outlines lessons learned from a long-standing workshop for the professional development of change agents.

Jones, D. J., Madison, K. W., & Wieman, C. E. (2015). Transforming a fourth year modern optics course using a deliberate practice framework. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 11, 020109.

This paper describes a course transformation project, with an explicit focus on deliberate practice.

Kezar, A. (2009). Change in higher education: not enough, or too much? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 41(6), 18-23.

Discusses the challenge of change in college campuses, using insights from studies on change leadership. Also discusses the importance of change agents.

Kezar, A. (2014). How colleges change: Understanding, leading, and enacting change. New York, NY: Routledge.

A more detailed scholarly volume on the topic of leadership and academic change.

Kober, N. (2015). Reaching students: what research says about effective instruction in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

This resource identifies the department as the unit of change (albeit using the SEIs as an example) and provides general methods about instructional effectiveness. Chapter 7: “Creating Broader Contexts That Support Research-Based Teaching and Learning” is particularly relevant to SEI-like initiatives.

Kotter, J. (2012, November). Accelerate! Harvard Business Review, 45-58.

Describes eight processes that can help organizations accelerate change, such as developing a sense of urgency and strategic vision.

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Describes eight change strategies for leading top-down change within an organization. This model informed the SEI approach, and there are many short articles describing the general approach. While not fully accounting for emergent change, this is a useful model.

Otero, V., Pollock, S. & Finkelstein, N. (2010). A physics department’s role in preparing physics teachers: The Colorado learning assistant model. American Journal of Physics, 78 (11).

Describes the learning assistant program and how it has improved student learning.

Sakulku, J. (2011). The impostor phenomenon. International Journal of Behavioral Science, 6(1), 73-92.

Reference describing the phenomenon of women believing that they may be exposed as intellectual frauds, despite high achievement.

Stains, M. et al. (2018, March 30). Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468-1470. doi:10.1126/science.aap8892.

Analysis of COPUS course observation data across a wide variety of STEM courses.

Walter, E. M., Beach, A., Henderson, C., & Williams, C. T. (2015). Describing instructional practice and climate: Two new instruments. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (Eds.). Transforming Institutions: Undergraduate Stem Education for the 21st Century. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

Describes the Survey of Climate for Instructional Improvements (SCII), a tool which can be used to measure department-wide attitudes and norms regarding instructional practice.

Walter, E. M., Henderson, C. R., Beach, A. L., & Williams, C. T. (2016). Introducing the Postsecondary Instructional Practices Survey (PIPS): A concise, interdisciplinary, and easy-to-score survey. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15(4).

PIPS is an instrument which may be used to measure instructional practice and change.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Discusses the importance and practice of supporting professional communities to connect activities and knowledge across an organization.

Wieman, C. (2007). Course transformation case study. Retrieved from

One of the earliest course transformation projects, undertaken by Wieman and McKagan, focusing on modern physics.

Wieman, C. (2017). Improving how universities teach science: Lessons from the Science Education Initiative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Authoritative resource on the SEI model and its impacts, including a detailed description of the rationale for the SEI, lessons learned, and data on departmental outcomes.

Wieman, C., & Gilbert, S. (2014). The Teaching Practices Inventory: A new tool for characterizing college and university teaching in mathematics and science. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 552-569.

The Teaching Practices Inventory was used to measure instructional practice and change in the SEI.

Wieman, C., Deslauriers, L., & Gilley, B. (2013). Use of research-based instructional strategies: How to avoid faculty quitting. Phys. Rev. ST Pkys. Educ. Res., 9, 023102.

Describes how the use of DBESs enhanced faculty’s sustained use of instructional strategies.

Wieman, C., Perkins, K., & Gilbert, S. (2010). Transforming science education at large research universities: A case study in progress. Change, 42(2), 7-14.

An early discussion of the SEI model and progress.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

The original ‘backwards design’ model of instruction which inspired SEI course development approaches.

Williams, C. T., Walter, E. M., Henderson, C., & Beach, A. L. (2015). Describing undergraduate STEM teaching practices: A comparison of instructor self-report instruments. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 18.

A review of instruments which may be used to measure instructional practice and change.


Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

The Science Education Initiative Handbook Copyright © 2018 by Stephanie V. Chasteen (University of Colorado Boulder) and Warren J. Code (University of British Columbia) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.