1. Educational Research Mini-Grant Report
Compiled by the Center for Educational Research and Teaching Innovation (CERTI)

2. Mini-Grant Project Participants
Twenty-six current Missouri S&T faculty did educational research mini-grant projects in their classrooms through CERTI over a five-year time span from Of these, 18 agreed to do interviews and discuss 20 unique research projects.
At the time of the funding, they were comprised of:
11 projects were from the College of Arts, Sciences & Business and 9 were from the College of Engineering and Computing.
6 full professors
6 associate professors
6 assistant professors
1 lecturer
6 non-tenure track faculty
11 tenured or tenure-track faculty

3. The participants, cont.
11 departments were represented; 1 project was multi-disciplinary
Department
Number of projects
Biological Sciences 3
Engineering Management & Systems Engineering 2
Business & Information Technology
English & Technical Communications 1
Chemical Engineering
Mathematics & Statistics
Chemistry
Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering
Civil, Architectural & Environmental Engineering
Physics
Economics
Multi-Disciplinary*
*The departments of engineering management and systems engineering; civil, architectural and environmental engineering; and mechanical and aerospace engineering collaborated.

4. How Instructors Were Affected By The Projects
Increased satisfaction in teaching
New collaborations developed
Improvement in end of course evaluation scores
New insights about how students learn
Papers, publications, presentations and grant proposals
Introduction to a new field of study (educational research)
Unexpected outcomes
Click on the boxes to read about PI experiences or scroll through the PowerPoint to see the highlights.

5. How Students Were Affected by the Projects
Improved student learning
Increased engagement with instructors and peers
Click on the boxes to read about the student experiences or scroll through the PowerPoint to see the highlights.

6. How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: Increased satisfaction in teaching the course
“I would say that my level of satisfaction before was about a 3 to 4; now it’s from a 9 to 10.” – Yinfa Ma
“My satisfaction has gone way up because it is my goal for every student to get as much out of the course as they possibly can.” -- Greg Story
“Doing active learning ‘re-sets’ me. I always feel better when I have a chance to do those things in class.” – Eric Showalter
“I have good reflections on the course. That’s why I’m writing a book so more students can benefit. The book is a very strong justification of my satisfaction (with the project).” – Xiaoming He
“Students enjoy it, and I enjoy it because there was so much creativity and originality coming in with their projects…” -- Fiona Nah
“I am much more satisfied in teaching this way. The student experience is very different, much more effective.” – Dave Westenberg

7. With a professional society With other colleagues
How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: New Collaborations Developed
Faculty developed collaborations with industry, publishers, other colleagues, students and staff as a result of their projects.
With a professional society
With staff
With publishers
With other colleagues
With undergraduates outside of the course

8. Evaluations jumped on average 1.1 points from mid-2’s to more than 3.5
How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: Improved End of Course Evaluations Scores
Jossalyn Larson, assistant teaching professor, English
Evaluations jumped on average 1.1 points from mid-2’s to more than 3.5
Beth Cudney, associate professor, engineering management & systems engineering
Evaluations rose from 3.1 and 3.2 to 3.7 and 3.8
Nishant Kumar, associate teaching professor, mechanical engineering
Evaluations have gone up half a point since he started doing the mini-grant projects to

9. How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: New Insights About How Students Learn and How to Teach Them More Effectively
Katie Shannon: “I think doing educational research impacts what I am doing in the classroom, so that I can assess what is working and what is not and help students as much as I can.”
Jossalyn Larson: “I went from a liberal arts background to a STEM school. Students were different. The educational research helped me understand those differences and serve students better.”
Greg Story: “I learned so much … I could find out for any given subject, what the student misconceptions were.”
Dave Westenberg: “I think a lot more about the student perspective … students don’t ‘need’ me in the same way (in the lab). I can trust them to figure things out.”
Susan Murray: “When I first taught, I assumed everyone had the same learning style as me. I realize now … things that don’t matter very much to me can matter very much to another person.”

10. How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: Introduction to a New Field of Study
“I never thought I was going to get into this. I ventured into a very foreign territory … Now I am educating myself as much as I can.” – Daniel Forciniti
“It was really educational for me. I learned how to do an IRB and how to design an experiment in education, which is really different than doing stuff in a lab … It was really helpful for me.” – Katie Shannon
“There were things that I wasn’t even aware of and that I never would have been exposed to (without the grant program.) – Beth Cudney
“For me it opened my eyes to the body of research that was available. It opened my eyes to other ways of thinking. I’m a total convert.” – Kellie Grasman

11. How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: Papers, Publications, Presentations and Grant Proposals
NSF grants
Two PIs pursued NSF educational research grants.
eFellows grants/ed research internal grants
Sixteen PIs pursued campus eFellow grants
Three PIs did multiple campus educational research mini-grants
Papers, publications and presentations
Nine PIs produced one or more of the following: conference presentations, refereed journal papers, refereed conference papers, poster presentations, a textbook, material, and digital resources for a textbook.

12. How Instructors Were Affected by the Project: Unexpected Outcomes
Professional development opportunities for faculty, especially non-tenure track
Video library of student study aids
Student communities inside and outside the classroom
Six Sigma Green Belt certification
Game Fair
Peer to Peer Journal

13. How Students Were Affected by the Projects: Improved Student Learning
Students who participated in the treatment group in Principles of Economics performed better on exams by one-half a letter grade on average.
Dramatic improvements in test scores relative to homework scores have been seen in Modern Physics, even though tests have been made increasingly more difficult.
In a Research and Writing course, the average final grade increased by almost 8 points after the redesign; the standard deviation in grades went down dramatically.
Students scored 8-10 points higher on increasingly more difficult exams in Engineering Management 4710 after the course was redesigned.

14. How Students Were Affected by the Projects: Increased Engagement with Instructors and Peers
Qualitative surveys from Principles of Economics showed more than 70% of students preferred the game project as an assignment to help them in their learning.
“The benefit that I wasn’t expecting was allowing the students to get to know each other. Comments on the evaluations said that they made friends, felt more like they belonged.” – Katie Shannon
“At the end of the day, students say, ‘Dr. Kumar, I found those practice problems really helpful in understanding the material,’ or ‘The concept problems helped me in the FE exams.’” – Nishant Kumar
“Because of the structure of the class, I feel that you know me better than any of my other professors.” – STEM student’s comments to Jossalyn Larson in her Writing and Research course