�鶹ӰԺ

We have studied active, collaborative, and inquiry-based teaching approaches in a variety of disciplines, including mathematics, computing, and biology, in different institutional contexts.

• A comprehensive evaluation of a four-campus course development project examined student outcomes and classroom experiences of inquiry-based learning (IBL) in undergraduate mathematics. More about inquiry-based learning in college mathematics.
• In collaboration with the , E&ER has conducted evaluation-with-research studies for , an alliance of seven Hispanic-Serving Institutions that seek to recruit, retain, and advance Hispanic students into computing careers through reform initiatives targeting specific stages of higher education. More about the transformation of pedagogy and curricula in undergraduate computing.

Additional studies of active teaching and learning approaches include

• Laursen, S. (2024). On the ground with active and collaborative learning in STEM gateway courses: Findings from classroom observations, Year 6. [Report to George Mason University Gateway 2 STEM Project] �鶹ӰԺ. [report]
• Laursen, S., & Archie, T. (2025). Not-so-secret watchers: What students can tell us about teaching. 27th Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, Alexandria, VA, February 27-March 1. [Conference paper]
• Wise, S. B., Archie, T., & Laursen, S. L. (2022).��Exploring two-year college biology instructors’ preferences around teaching strategies and professional development.��CBE—Life Sciences Education,��21(2), ar39.�� (open access)

Some of our collaborative work examines strategies for teaching students and teachers about how science works as an intellectual and human process.

• Laursen, S. L., & Brickley, A. (2011). .��Journal of Geoscience Education 59, 126-138; doi:10.5408/1.360482 [Abstract] [author accepted MS]
• Laursen, S., & Brickley, A. (2011). . In J. B. Jensen, J. G. Manning, & M. Gibbs (eds.),��Earth and Space Science: Making Connections in Education and Public Outreach, ASP Conference Series vol. 443, 116-124. [Abstract]
• Upward and Outward: Scientific Inquiry on the Tibetan Plateau (20-minute documentary film, written by Roslyn Dauber and Sandra Laursen).
• Laursen, S. L. (2006). .��Astronomy Education Review, 5(1), 162-177.��[Fulltext]

E&ER researchers have studied the transfer process for STEM students who begin at community colleges and transfer to four-year institutions.��

• Harper, R., & Thiry, H. (2022). .��Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 1-20.  []
• Holland Zahner, D. G. (2022). .��Community College Journal of Research and Practice. DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2022.2135041  
• Holland Zahner, D. G. & Harper, R. P. (2022).�� among underrepresented undergraduates in STEM majors: Comparison of former transfer and non-transfer students.��Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice. DOI 10.1177/15210251221146119.  

Talking about Leaving Revisited: Persistence, Relocation and Loss in Undergraduate STEM Education explores the extent, nature, and contributory causes of switching both from and among STEM majors and what enables students' persistence to graduation. The book reflects on what has and has not changed since publication of Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences (1997), drawing on data from a five-year, mixed methods study at original study sites. Results from five component studies are interwoven in order to address key questions about patterns of persistence, relocation and loss in undergraduate sciences.��

• Seymour, E., & Hunter, A.-B. (Eds.) (2019).��Talking about leaving revisited: Persistence, relocation and loss in undergraduate STEM education. Springer Nature: Switzerland AG.

The loss of capable students from STEM majors is a persistent problem in U.S. undergraduate education. E&ER’s seminal study examined root causes of this problem through interviews with two groups of talented undergraduates, matched by test scores, who entered college planning a STEM major: those who declared and completed STEM majors, and those who switched to a non-STEM major. The findings belie the common explanation that switchers “can’t cut it” in STEM fields; rather, switchers and non-switchers alike reported poor teaching, dull introductory courses, and lack of encouragement. However, switchers had less tolerance for these problems and were more likely to change to a major where they did not perceive the same issues.

• Seymour, E. & Hewitt, N. M. (1997).��Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. �鶹ӰԺ, CO: Westview Press.

Inquiry-based Learning Community. We are interested in how people, structures, and ideas are important to the past development, current growth, and future sustainability of an educational community that promotes inquiry-based learning in college mathematics.

• Laursen, S. L., & Rasmussen, C. (2019)..  International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education,��5(1), 129-146.��  [Author accepted manuscript]
• Haberler, Z., Laursen, S. L., & Hayward, C. N. (2018).��. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 4(3), 415-441.��DOI 10.1007/s40753-018-0079-4.  [Author accepted manuscript]
• Haberler, Z., & Laursen, S. (2015).�� Research Memo: IBL Community History.�� The value of the annual Legacy of R. L. Moore—IBL Conference. Ethnography & Evaluation Research, �鶹ӰԺ.��

This work reveals opportunities and challenges for the IBL Math community in defining itself. In addition to a , we summarized these findings for community members and others, and we collected some responses from community members with their ideas and suggestions of how to act in response.

• Laursen, S., Haberler, Z., & Hayward, C. (2017).��The past, present, and future of the IBL community in mathematics.�� �鶹ӰԺ, CO: �鶹ӰԺ, Ethnography & Evaluation Research.��

Go to the IBL community page

The study of the IBL Math community is supported by the National Science Foundation under award 1347669. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in these reports are those of the researchers, and do not represent the official views, opinions, or policy of the National Science Foundation.

Levers for Change.  This national assessment report draws on scholarly reviews and practitioner discussions to capture a snapshot of the current state of research-based reform in undergraduate STEM instruction in six clusters of STEM fields: biological sciences, chemistry and biochemistry, engineering and computer science, geoscience, mathematical sciences, and physics and astronomy.��The project combines literature reviews by scholars with assessments of change as observed and carried out by people working on instructional change across a wide range of settings.��It identifies key levers for change used to reach this state, and it suggests additional levers for fostering further change in the next decade. The project was led by Sandra Laursen for AAAS, with support from NSF and HHMI.

• Laursen, S., Andrews, T., Stains, M., Finelli, C. J., Borrego, M., McConnell, D., Johnson, E., Foote, K., Ruedi, B., & Malcom, S. (2019).�� . Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Reform Movements in STEM Education. These chapters examine what is known about the progress and process of change in undergraduate STEM education, based on interviews with 'expert witnesses' with long experience in such change efforts.

• Seymour, E., & De Welde, K. (2016). Why doesn't knowing change anything? Constraints and resistance, leverage and sustainability. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (eds.),��Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century (pp. 462-484). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
• Seymour, E., & Fry, C. L. (2016). The reformers' tale: Determining progress in improving undergraduate STEM education. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (eds.),��Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century (pp. 441-461).West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

This analysis traces historical shifts in the locus of STEM education reform efforts from earlier emphasis on developing the best and brightest to sustain the U.S. technological workforce, to the current notion of “science for all.” Likewise, attention has shifted from an emphasis on teaching to an emphasis on learning. Several past and current theories of change used in STEM change initiatives are examined and their strengths and weaknesses elucidated.

• Seymour, E. (2002). Tracking the processes of change in U.S. undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology.��Science Education 86, 79-105.