1. 1 Vanderbilt University Name: Vanderbilt TAR Fellows Program Persons responsible: Thomas R. Harris, Derek Bruff, Jean Alley Time Commitment: Introductory workshop, course in college instruction and attend periodic meetings, peform 1-semester TAR project, present a poster and a report of their results at the end of the semester. # times offered: 3 Primary Audience: Senior graduate students and postdocs Participants per offering: 5-6 Total participation: 20 Program Details

2. 2 Vanderbilt University Goals: 1. To provide future faculty members with basic knowledge regarding effective methods for teaching STEM subjects. 2. To provide selected students with the opportunity to design, implement and evaluate teaching innovations in a STEM classroom for one semester. 3. To have students present the results of these studies to a broad audience. CIRTL Learning Outcome Level: Practitioner (Medium) Program Goals & Learning Outcomes

3. 3 Vanderbilt University Evaluation Questions: 1. Was the preparation in the program enough to allow participants to perform a useful project? 2. How did the project affect their knowledge base and their motivation regarding teaching? 3. Did the project engage faculty interest in educational reform? Evaluation Methods: Pre-post satisfaction survey; post amount-learned survey; expert evaluation of poster presentations; in-depth interviews Evaluation Questions, Methods, Instruments

4. 4 Vanderbilt University Evidence & Evaluative Claims Figure 1: Pre-post scores on TAR Fellows response to project. Figure 2: Post survey of amount learned during TAR project. Figure 3: Assessment of poster presentations

5. 5 Vanderbilt University Evidence & Evaluative Claims

6. 6 Vanderbilt University 1. The program attracts candidates from a wide range of STEM disciplines with a preponderance of engineering participants. 2. TARF participants benefit from the larger CIRTL-like program especially courses and workshops given at Vanderbilt and through the Network. This community influences the quality of their projects and designs for improvement. 3. TARF tend to develop substantive projects with changes in teaching that can influence student learning. 4. The program attracts candidates with strong pre-existing interests in teaching but also attracts (about 50% of total) a group of students doing TAs that want to improve their courses. 5. Faculty are generally engaged and make substantial contributions to study design but less so to analysis. 6. Staff support by the Center for Teaching (Dr. Bruff) was extremely helpful in designing and analyzing studies. 7. The TARF group constituted a learning community which supported individual efforts. Evaluative Claims

7. 7 Vanderbilt University Evaluative Claims (Cont’d) 8. TARF participants developed a heightened awareness of student diversity and learning problems that previously did not exist. 9. TARF participants developed a strong concept of the links between research and teaching, especially on the roles of data in teaching improvement. 10.TARF participants replace a previous concept that teaching skill was something that one is “born with” with the concept that good teaching can be planned, studied and improved. 11. All participants gained confidence in their abilities to teach. 12. All participants increased their interest in faculty careers. 13. Pre-post studies showed : 5 of 7 Fellows indicated improved communication skills as a result of participation; 6 of 7 Fellows indicated that participation in the program had a neutral or positive effect on their disciplinary research (i.e. participating in the program generally didn't slow down a student's ability to get research done.); 14. Fellows (a) become more confident in their ability to do well in job searches; (b) increased in their knowledge about campus cultures around teaching and research; (c) increased their abilities to balance teaching, research, and service; and (d) saw more value in talking about their teaching with others in their departments or disciplines.

8. 8 Vanderbilt University Students need to be prepared about teaching methods earlier. Faculty mentors need to be more fully engaged. This program has a significant impact on the preparation of its participants for faculty careers. What has been learned from your evaluation results that will improve future learning outcomes, programming and evaluations?

9. Vanderbilt University 2006 Weintraub, David, Faculty, Physics, VU PI Molly Bolger, Post doc, Pathology, Director Porter, Andy, Faculty, Teaching and Learning. Local CIRTL Team, 2006 & 2011 Vanderbilt University 2011 Harris, Thomas, Faculty, BME, VU PI Alley, Jean, Staff BME, Project Director Stassun, Keivan, Faculty, Physics. Mahadevan-Jansen, Anita, Faculty, BME Pingree, Allison, Director, Center for Teaching Bruff, Derek, Center for Teaching, Faculty, Mathematics Harris, Alene, Faculty, Teaching and Learning, Evaluation Liaison

10. Vanderbilt University Increased awareness of graduate students and faculty of the issues and importance of educating future faculty in STEM teaching and the CIRTL Pillars. In-depth training of 20 future faculty candidates. Involvement of 214 graduate students and postdocs in CIRTL events over 3 years. Increased co-operation between the Center for Teaching and STEM faculty. Development and teaching of two graduate courses in STEM teaching methods. Engagement of 37 faculty members across STEM disciplines in mentoring students in Teaching as Research projects and other events. Support of training grants and CAREER awards. Impact of CIRTL on VU

11. Vanderbilt University Increased awareness of graduate students and faculty of the issues and importance of educating future faculty in STEM teaching and the CIRTL Pillars. In-depth training of 20 future faculty candidates. Involvement of 214 graduate students and postdocs in CIRTL events over 3 years. Increased co-operation between the Center for Teaching and STEM faculty. Development and teaching of two graduate courses in STEM teaching methods. Engagement of 37 faculty members across STEM disciplines in mentoring students in Teaching as Research projects and other events. Support of training grants and CAREER awards. Impact of CIRTL on VU

12. Vanderbilt University Formation of executive committee to oversee CIRTL activities Incorporation of some CIRTL activities into the Center for Teaching Program Proposal to Graduate School for institutional funding to support TAR fellows. Evidence of Institutionalization

13. Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt has a graduate enrollment of 2,200 of whom about 800 are STEM graduate students and another 400 are in the pre-clinical departments of the School of Medicine. About 180 STEM Ph.D.s are awarded each year, including biomedical sciences, and 30-40 of these graduates end up (after postdoctoral training) in academic positions usually in Research 1 institutions. Thus the CIRTL program is moving toward a good penetration of the potential STEM faculty produced at Vanderbilt and hence positively affecting the preparation of STEM faculty in key institutions. Impact on the future teaching and learning of the national STEM faculty