Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
1
August 17, 2006
TO:
Robert Mrtek, Chair
Senate Committee on Educational Policy
FROM:
Midge Grosch
Director, Programs and Academic Assessment
I am submitting for review and action by the Senate Committee on Educational Policy the
attached Proposal to Establish the PhD in Learning Sciences.
This proposed program is sponsored by the Colleges of Education, Engineering, and
LAS. It was approved by the College of Education Educational Policy and Programs
Committee on February 23, 2006; the College of Engineering Educational Policy
Committee on February 20, 2006, by the College of LAS faculty on February 28, 2006;
and by the Graduate College Executive Committee on April 14, 2006.
Attachment
Cc:
C. Hulse
C. Comer
P. Banerjee
V. Chou
S. Laxpati
C. Sima
J. Teitelbaum
S. Goldman
V. Tunnicliff
T. Silva
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM REQUEST FOR
A GRADUATE PROGRAM IN LEARNING SCIENCES
CONFERRING PH.D. DEGREES
University of Illinois at Chicago
December, 2005
Proposers and Members of the Executive Committee:
Susan Goldman (sgoldman@uic.edu)
Kimberly Gomez (kimwillg@uic.edu)
Tom Moher (moher@uic.edu)
James Pellegrino (pellegjw@uic.edu)
Steve Tozer (stozer@uic.edu)
Phil Wagreich (wagreich@uic.edu)
Donald Wink (dwink@uic.edu)
2
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
3
REQUEST FOR A NEW UNIT OF INSTRUCTION
BACKGROUND
1. Name of Institution: University of Illinois at Chicago
2. Title of Proposed Program: Ph.D. in Learning Sciences
3. Contact Person: Dr. Charles Evans
3.1. Telephone: (217) 333-3079
3.2. E-mail: cevans4@uillinois.edu
3.3. Fax: (217) 244-5763
4. Level of Proposed Unit
__ Undergraduate Certificate (1-2 years)
__ Undergraduate Certificate (2-4 years)
__ Associate
__ Post-Baccalaureate Certificate
__ Post-Master’s Certificate
__ First Professional Certificate
__ Baccalaureate
__ Masters
__ First Professional
_X_ Doctorate1
5. Requested CIP Code (6-digits) _________
6. Proposed Date for Enrollment of First Class: August, 2007
7. Location Offered2: On-Campus __x_
Off-Campus ___: Region Number(s)______ or Statewide___
1
To assist staff in specialized areas of instruction, IBHE will retain two outside consultants to review all
new doctoral program proposals.
2
Institutions may request approval to offer a program, simultaneously, on- and off-campus, including
statewide. However, assessments of program objectives and outcomes should be developed that address all
of the locations and modes of delivery for which the institution is seeking approval. Note that “on-campus”
approval extends to the entire region in which the main campus is located. New off-campus programs to be
offered outside the institution’s region require approval.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
4
MISSION, OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES
8. Program and Institutional mission
8.0 Introduction and Overview
What is Learning Sciences? The Learning Sciences focus on questions concerning how
people learn through interaction with the objects and people in their environments. A key
assumption of Learning Sciences research is that what and how an individual learns are
as much a function of the social, cultural, and environmental contexts of learning as they
are a function of the characteristics of the individual. Its theoretical and methodological
grounding draws on multiple disciplines, including anthropology, computer science,
education, linguistics, psychology, and sociology. Learning Sciences research attempts to
develop evidence-based claims about how people learn that are relevant to theoretical as
well as practical problems (e.g., how to take students’ common sense understanding of
chemical reactions into account when teaching organic chemistry). Implicit in much of
the field’s work is the goal of understanding and improving educational opportunities and
outcomes for diverse learners. Understanding and improving environments for learning
demands the awareness that learning becomes visible through various artifacts (traces in
objects, writing, or other physical form) of the processes and products of learning,
including written and oral discourse as well as tangible and electronic semiotic artifacts.
Where did Learning Sciences come from? Learning Sciences, as a field, emerged in the
late 1980s and early 1990s as cognitive scientists, educational and instructional
psychologists, and computer scientists attempted to move principles of learning and
research methodologies based in laboratory research to research on learning in
classrooms and work settings. Over and over again, researchers found that
methodologies that worked perfectly well in the laboratory (precise control over
variables, random assignment of subjects to experimental conditions, quantitative
dependent variables) and learning principles that were clearly demonstrated in the
laboratory (e.g., interference effects, skill acquisition trajectories, strategy training)
simply did not hold up in the worlds of real children, teachers, classrooms, and
workplaces. And learning technologies that seemed to hold great promise for solving
education's problems (at least to those in Artificial Intelligence who developed them)
repeatedly made their way to the unused recesses of classrooms and schools.
Gradually, learning researchers recognized that new theoretical and methodological
orientations were needed to productively study learning, instruction, and roles for
technologies in formal and informal educational settings. Several major shifts in
orientation from traditional paradigms marked the emergence of the Learning Sciences:


From the passive learner to whom knowledge is transmitted to the active learner
who consciously builds knowledge,
From learning as an individual, in-the-head activity, to a learning as a social
activity where interaction with others and the environment play a crucial role, and
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006

5
From attempts to isolate and control variables extraneous to the experimental
hypotheses to acceptance of the multiple dimensions and variables operative in
naturally occurring learning environments and the creation of systematic ways to
study and understand them.
Over the past 15 years, the theory and methods have coalesced and there is a recognized
field called the Learning Sciences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences has been in
existence since 1990, and in 1994 the first International Conference of the Learning
Sciences was held in Chicago at Northwestern University. In 2002, the International
Society for the Learning Sciences was formed and now has a membership of over 300.
According to a recent National Science Foundation description of the field of Learning
Sciences (National Science Foundation, 2004), it is “extending understanding of learning
and connecting learning research to the scientific, technological, educational, and
workforce challenges of our time.”
Why a Learning Sciences Ph.D. program at UIC? The University of Illinois at Chicago’s
commitment to high quality teaching, research, and service to the community is evident
throughout its various departments, centers, and institutes in the activities of the faculty
and staff. UIC’s Great Cities Commitment also calls upon us to work on problems of
critical importance to urban areas. This, along with our land grant status, indicates that
UIC should also pay attention to serving Illinois and the region in one of our most
pressing challenges: education. Faculty in all of UIC’s colleges are invested in improving
the quality of learning and instruction both for UIC’s students and in the city of Chicago.
In various departments in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, faculty participate in
educating future teachers of secondary school students (e.g., English, Mathematics,
Chemistry, Physics, History). Faculty in the Colleges of Medicine and Dentistry are
pursuing innovative forms of professional preparation for doctors, dentists, and other
health professionals. In the College of Engineering, computer scientists develop and test
innovative technologies for enhancing the instructional experiences of K-12 students.
Some of the issues that faculty in cognitive psychology and instruction are investigating
include the ways that students monitor their learning and their strategies for making sense
of information presented in electronic environments such as the world wide web. The
many programs in the College of Education address the needs of current and future
education professionals through research, direct service activities in the Chicago Public
Schools, and through its various degree programs, including teacher preparation and
advanced degrees in subject-matter specialties and administrator preparation.
In fact, the breadth and depth of activity at UIC related to Learning Sciences rivals or
surpasses that of most other universities in the nation. Due at least in part to hiring and
reward strategies instituted as part of the Great Cities program, a multi-disciplinary
learning sciences community has begun to form at UIC, and the collaborations growing
out of that community have already borne significant fruit in the form of grants and
publications. In the course of these activities, questions arise repeatedly about how people
learn and effective ways to foster and develop habits of inquiry and critical thinking in
learners from pre-K to post-graduate education. Typically, questions focus on issues
including the structure of knowledge, methods of inquiry, developmental phases of
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
6
learning, effective instructional practices, methods and types of assessments, and roles for
technology in supporting learning and making opportunities for learning more widely
accessible. It is the field of Learning Sciences, with its interdisciplinary theoretical
perspectives and methods that can address these questions and prepare future generations
of researchers to make these questions the focus of their work. UIC needs an initiative in
Learning Sciences that will generate new knowledge around these questions and work
collaboratively across the many units of the university to enhance the work of faculty and
staff.
Specifically, as part of such an initiative we are proposing an interdisciplinary Ph.D.
program whose primary objective is to prepare researchers who are equipped with the
knowledge and inquiry skills necessary to address questions fundamental to how people
learn specific subject matter areas such as mathematics or chemistry. Addressing subjectmatter learning questions requires an understanding of three bodies of knowledge:



General issues of learning, instruction, and assessment – typically the purview of
cognitive and educational psychology;
The instrumentality of technologies for enhancing and supporting learning,
instruction, and assessment – typically the focus of computer scientists;
The structure and content of the specific disciplines that people are learning typically the purview of faculty in individual disciplines.
The Ph.D. program in Learning Sciences at UIC intends to create a unique program that
brings together these three knowledge bases and methods of inquiry to create a
community of scholarship and research that will focus on learning in the disciplines. In
doing so, this effort reflects the existing interests and investment of faculty across the
many colleges of the university. A sample of questions of interest to the faculty and
graduate student members of the UIC Learning Sciences program would include:





How knowledge of the development of cognition can aid in the analysis and design of
effective literacy, mathematics, or science instruction.
How general principles of cognitive development and principles of domain-specific
knowledge and expertise are enacted in designed learning environments.
How the social and cultural dimensions of learning manifest themselves in both formal
and informally designed learning environments and how these can be systematically
assessed and understood.
How the human capacity for embodied, multi-modal learning interacts with the various
technologies available for fostering learning.
How new forms of assessment can feed back into the teaching and learning
process to continually inform and enhance instructional processes.
Why should a Learning Sciences Ph.D. program be interdisciplinary? UIC has recently
made important strides to support interdisciplinary research, teaching, and service efforts.
This recognizes that new knowledge often emerges best when two or more traditional
disciplines join to study a particular problem. In addition, interdisciplinary work is often
the way to support new fields of endeavor. In the case of Learning Sciences, it is clear
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
7
that both of these ideas apply. As mentioned, there are problems in learning that are
addressed only when there is careful consideration of the content.
There are also educational reasons for an interdisciplinary degree. Many problems in
teaching and learning would benefit from individuals trained to consider teaching and
learning in general and in a specific context. As is discussed in more detail in Section 8.2,
such individuals are much needed in all sectors of the educational system, both in
traditional settings and in the private sector. It may be possible to address some of these
broad needs within traditional disciplines. But the Learning Sciences Graduate Program
will actually address these needs in different areas simultaneously and with greater effect.
Consider, for example, these three cases, each of which illustrates a particular problem
that has occurred in our traditional graduate programs already:



Computer scientists are hampered in efforts to plan and implement science
education lessons within a computer science program; an interdisciplinary
approach that uses work in K-8 science learning will remove this barrier.
Chemists interested in knowing better the steps that occur as a college student
come to a thorough understanding of mechanism; interdisciplinary training that
incorporates educational psychology perspectives will address this.
Someone looking to train for a leadership position in training high school teachers
in inquiry teaching of science needs to know the science well; an interdisciplinary
program would provide expertise in learning and in science.
The interdisciplinary Learning Sciences Graduate Program will do more than provide
overlapping training to these different students (a well coordinated cross-listing plan
might do that). By housing these and other students in a single program, each individual
graduate will learn much more about the problem of how to apply education, psychology,
and computer science to learning of specific content, for each person will see how this
general problem is solved in different ways.
The constitution of the Learning Sciences Ph.D. program as an interdisciplinary unit will allow
the Program to incorporate the findings from several different fields. Participating program
faculty (current and anticipated) represent disciplines and areas of inquiry such as literacy,
cognition, the natural sciences, instruction and assessment, linguistics, mathematics,
measurement, computer science, communication, visual arts, and human development. These
faculty will inform the program and will also make it much easier for research to be applied
where it is most needed: in the specific content and educational programs found across UIC’s
many colleges. The program will be directed by a Coordinating Committee of three faculty,
selected by the core faculty in the Learning Sciences who represent the multiple colleges and
disciplines contributing to the program and approved by the Deans of the Graduate College,
College of Education, College of Engineering, and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The
Coordinating Committee, in consultation with the core faculty, will provide leadership, define
the overall goals of the program, and encourage the submission of training and
interdisciplinary grants that support the goals of the program. Admission of candidates to the
program and the monitoring of student progress will be performed by the Director of Graduate
Studies (DGS) of the Learning Sciences program, a position appointed by the Dean of the
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
8
Graduate College in consultation with the Graduate Studies Committee.3 The Coordinating
Committee, in consultation with the DGS and the Graduate Studies Committee, will monitor
the academic curriculum for the students, proposing revisions for approval by the core faculty
as appropriate. Initial approval of the academic program and subsequent revisions to the
program will undergo review and approval processes that apply to all Ph.D. programs, except
that the Educational Policy Committees of three colleges (Education, Engineering, and Liberal
Arts and Sciences) will be involved in this process. This program will not supplant the ongoing
training programs of the traditional degree-granting Departments. Instead, this interdisciplinary
program will expand the outreach of these programs, provide new courses and activities that
will enhance the traditional programs, promote interactions between investigators and students
in these programs, attract more high-quality students ot UIC and increase funding opportunities
for UIC faculty through the development of interdisciplinary training and research grants.
By way of summary, the proposed Graduate Program in Learning Sciences is intended to
achieve the following objectives:





Produce graduates with demonstrated strength in the application of learning sciences to
the theoretical and practical design and analysis challenges found within and across
disciplinary contexts.
Establish a community of faculty and graduate students in pursuit of common
interdisciplinary interests in learning sciences, thereby enhancing UIC’s capacity to
address significant interdisciplinary questions at the nexus of research and practice.
Prepare scholar/researchers who are equipped with the unique disciplinary and
methodological knowledge necessary to conduct rigorous research on fundamental
issues of learning across diverse populations.
Prepare cohorts of scholars/researchers/teachers who in their own practice can integrate
deep disciplinary content learning and the assessment of that learning in environments
that foster active and engaged learners.
Enhance the intellectual infrastructure and context at UIC for researching and
improving Undergraduate, Master’s, and Ph. D. level educational programs by assisting
faculty in applying the learning sciences knowledge base to the design, implementation
and evaluation of learning experiences that serve a diverse study body within a
Research I academic institution with a strong urban education mission.
In the remaining sections of this proposal we elaborate on the ways in which the
proposed interdisciplinary Learning Sciences Ph.D. program at UIC addresses the
University and campus missions, the needs of the State of Illinois, and is distinctive from
extant efforts in the Learning Sciences. We then describe the structure and content of the
program, faculty involvement, resources, and criteria for program evaluation.
8.1.
3
University and campus mission
“In programs involving several units, the chairperson of the coordinating committee appointed by the
Dean of the Graduate College serves as director of graduate studies for that program.” UIC Graduate
College Director of Graduate Studies Manual
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
9
The objectives of the proposed Graduate Program in Learning Sciences promote many
different priorities of UIC as well as the missions of several of its different colleges. Primary
among these is the development of knowledge at the highest level. Consistent with the UIC
mission and focus statements, and as recently explicated in the UIC 2010: Strategic Thinking
document (February, 2005), “new knowledge, as never before, … requires openness to
crossing disciplinary and institutional boundaries where interdisciplinary, inter-institutional
and cross cultural sites of discovery will be the platform for future invention, research, and
creativity.” (pg. 9). Further, collaboration plays a central role in achieving “new levels of
interdisciplinary scholarship, new avenues of problem-solving.” In both teaching and research,
the mission of UIC includes an emphasis on the generation of new knowledge that places
“different epistemologies and sets of knowledge in a new dialogue that produces unique
perspectives, solutions, and understanding of our lives, society, and the natural world” and
addresses “important real world questions” (pg. 7 UIC 2010: Strategic Thinking, February,
2005). Learning Sciences is defined as a Cluster of Excellence in the UIC Strategic plan (draft,
October, 2005). Clusters of Excellence build on existing strengths at UIC and through strategic
investment and hiring across units propel ground-breaking, interdisciplinary work.
Scholarship in the Learning Sciences will also have a profound effect on UIC’s educational
mission. The UIC campus is one that is “rich in cultural differences” with scholars in many
disciplines committed to exploring the interactions of culture and learning and implications for
undergraduate and graduate education as well as education of pre-college learners. The
academic community thus serves as the focal point for investigation of the challenges and
problems facing the region, the State of Illinois, and the society at large, both today and in the
future.
The Graduate Program in Learning Sciences enhances the ability of the majority of colleges on
campus to realize the learning sciences dimensions of their research, teaching, and service
missions more productively. The proposers of this program - seven faculty from three colleges
will directly participate in graduate teaching and research mentoring of Learning Sciences
degree candidates. The collaborative quality of the planning and implementation of the
Learning Sciences program will further stimulate the interdisciplinary aspects of ongoing and
future work among these faculty. The existence of a Learning Sciences graduate program will
create a collaborative, intellectual nexus open to faculty from across the university who are
concerned with issues of instruction, learning, and assessment. Such collaborations will add
much-needed support to their work. For example many instructional improvement grant
programs require serious specification and assessment of how student learning will be
enhanced. Collaborations with colleagues in Learning Sciences around these questions will
intellectually and methodologically strengthen such proposals. In the case of NSF, research
grant recipients are required to demonstrate that their grants have “broader impacts” beyond
their own research area. In many cases, this requirement can be met by linking the research
with a broader learning community to develop outreach ideas. Collaborations with the
Learning Sciences program will be an excellent way for these researchers to develop successful
outreach ideas based on the most current research in their field, as well as the most current
research on discipline-specific learning, teaching, and assessment. These collaborations are
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
10
likely to lead to increased levels of interdisciplinary collaborations on new projects and
initiatives.
The core courses associated with the Graduate Program in Learning Sciences will be an
important mechanism for extending the knowledge base of the learning sciences throughout the
campus because they will be open to other graduate students (and faculty). They will be an
excellent way for other UIC faculty and graduate students to learn more about how to
incorporate learning sciences in their own work. Other Learning Sciences program
requirements will enable particular graduate students to enhance their training in the use of
disciplinary and technical knowledge in the solution of problems associated with learning.
Participation of Learning Sciences graduate students in discipline-specific courses and
electives will further enhance interdisciplinary collaboration and initiatives.
As noted earlier, the concept of the Learning Sciences encompasses all forms of learning.
Therefore, over time the Program is expected to impact all UIC programs that involve human
learning. This is most obvious in areas of conventional classroom-based instruction, whether it
involves teacher preparation and education or the design of new educational materials. Of
course, the program will also enable units that provide instruction to UIC students to improve
their teaching. But we also anticipate an important impact in the areas of learning associated,
for example, with diverse UIC programs such as patient education and community
empowerment efforts. Thus the UIC Learning Sciences program can contribute to UIC’s goals
and priorities to strengthen economic, social, and educational vitality locally, statewide, and
nationally.
8.2 Regional and State needs
The problem of learning lies at the heart of many different needs for the nation, Illinois, the
Chicago area, and for broad sectors of the economy. The role of State and local institutions in
education means that they are in particular need of answers about how to teach effectively,
including how to teach individuals from different cultures and in challenging socioeconomic
settings. Learning is also critical to the development of the companies and their workers,
especially in an era of strong integration of technology throughout the economy. Finally,
problems of public health often require new strategies for educating patients and the
community about the how to prevent and, when needed, treat diseases and other health
problems.
In all of these contexts it is clear that learning rarely occurs in a disconnected, abstract fashion.
Instead, learning is keyed to particular needs of a school, a company, or a patient. Therefore,
multiple sectors of the Illinois community will benefit from individuals trained in a Learning
Sciences program that links particular disciplines to the most recent research in teaching and
learning. Learning Sciences graduates will be ready to address pressing questions about how
individuals and groups learn in different contexts, how technology can facilitate learning, how
to design instructional materials and training programs, how to assess the products of learning
and how to use that information to improve outcomes. Most importantly, they will know how
to approach these issues from a content-specific perspective.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
11
In this vein, the Graduate Program in Learning Sciences and UIC’s Learning Sciences
Research Institute4 are very well suited to address five of the six goals found in the A Citizens
Agenda for Illinois Higher Education, The Illinois Commitment (Illinois Board of Higher
Education, 1999):





Higher education will help Illinois business and industry sustain strong economic
growth.
Higher education will join elementary and secondary education to improve teaching
and learning at all levels.
Illinois will increase the number and diversity of citizens completing training and
education programs.
Illinois colleges and universities will hold students to even higher expectations for
learning and will be accountable for the quality of academic programs and the
assessment of learning.
Illinois colleges and universities will continually improve productivity, cost
effectiveness, and accountability.
The different goals of the Illinois Commitment make clear how higher education should serve
multiple parts of the community and economy of the State and the Chicago region. Because of
the pervasiveness of education in the needs of Illinois’ citizens, communities, and economy,
the proposed Graduate Program in Learning Sciences is very well positioned to help UIC fulfill
critical parts of the Commitment. This is not just true of what happens in our own classrooms,
for graduates of the Learning Sciences Program will be well trained to impact educational
settings found throughout the economy.
The following examples are illustrative of how the Learning Sciences program contributes to
meeting regional and State needs:
Improved instructional design in K-12 schools, higher education, and the private
sector. Student learning is heavily dependent on how instruction is designed. A key element in
this is an understanding of how people learn well, and how to deliver good instruction
efficiently. This is easily recognized in the context of traditional classrooms. But it is also the
case that the private sector must make enormous efforts to maintain and update the skills of its
employees. Efficient learning in the workplace is therefore vital to Illinois business and labor.
Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will have expertise in instructional
design, learned in an environment where they see how those principles are applied to specific
content problems. They will be able to provide Illinois educators with additional knowledge
resources to use in their own practice of education.
Integration of technology in instructional design and practice. A subset of
instructional design focuses on the problem of integrating available technologies into
instructional practices in schools, colleges, and the private sector. This is a key component of
both increasing the effectiveness and lowering the cost of instruction. In addition, technology
4
As a parallel and complementary effort, UIC is working to establish an interdisciplinary and cross-campus Learning
Sciences Research Institute that brings together faculty, staff and students to focus on problems in the Learning
Sciences. The LSRI will serve to support the proposed graduate training program.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
12
itself has become an important element of education, especially to prepare the workforce for a
highly technological economy. Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will
develop considerable expertise in the use of technologies both as learning tools and research
tools. They will be able to assist in the proper integration of technology into a wide variety of
educational problems that are critical to the health and well-being of Illinois and its citizens.
Student and program assessment in K-12 schools and higher education. One of the
reasons that low-performing schools and districts persist is because methods and technologies
of assessment are rarely used productively for the improvement of existing educational
delivery systems. Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will be trained in how
to develop and use innovative, responsive, and compelling approaches to assessment of
learning and of educational programs. Illinois educational systems will benefit from a new
source of well-trained individuals to help solve specific assessment problems.
Quality of undergraduate education. Illinois is right to be proud of the broad reach
of its post-secondary institutions in educating students. However, these institutions face many
challenges as shifts occur in the content and applications of knowledge in different fields.
Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will be able to provide leadership in
colleges and universities around issues of improving undergraduate education. This is
especially true because our graduates will have major concentrations in home disciplines,
allowing them to be full-fledged faculty members in sciences, social sciences, and humanities.
Illinois’ institutions of higher education will benefit from their in-depth preparation in learning
sciences that addresses how instruction in the disciplines is best designed and achieved.
Education of diverse learners. Illinois has a particular strength in the diversity of its
population and this is particularly true for the Chicago area. However, this also presents a
challenge in ensuring that instruction is delivered in ways that are responsive to different
cultures and that education succeeds in bringing diverse groups into full participation within a
knowledge-based economy. Graduates of the Learning Sciences Program will be trained in the
latest research about how Illinois’ diverse learners can be accommodated in instruction, and
how to address particular learning initiatives to the challenge of inclusion.
Teacher and administrator preparation for K-12 settings. Illinois continues to have
pressing needs for high-quality teachers and school administrators. The most effective way to
meet these needs is through expanded and improved preparation programs that impact courses
in education and in the arts and sciences content areas that teachers and administrators must
also master. Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will be able to impact these
students as a result of coursework in the disciplines that will model leading edge instructional
and assessment methods for practicing teachers and administrators in Illinois’ K-12 programs.
Improved patient and community health education efforts. Learning about health is
critical to the well-being of Illinois’ residents both for the sake of prevention and treatment.
This requires effective dissemination of current information to those most affected, whether
this occurs in a health practitioner’s office, a clinic, or in a community information event.
Graduates of the Learning Sciences Graduate Program will be valuable in support of the health
practitioners who need to use innovative education methods and technology in providing
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
13
detailed information to their patients and the community. The content specificity of the
Learning Sciences Program will be critical in helping Illinois’ health educators link learning
with highly specific and sometimes very complex material.
8.3 Comparison with similar programs
The proposed UIC program would be unique in state supported institutions and constitute the
newest of three degree-granting Learning Sciences Ph.D. programs in the U.S. The other two
are housed at Stanford and Northwestern and are the primary points of comparison for our
proposed program at this time.5 The Northwestern program accepted its first students in 1992
and Stanford accepted its first class in 2002. Thus, the proposed UIC program will be part of
the leading edge of an emerging line of scholarly inquiry and advanced doctoral training. As
should be expected, the UIC program will have features that overlap with the two existing
programs but it will also be distinctive in several respects. Below we identify some of the
common and distinctive features among the cluster of three Ph.D. programs.
As noted at the beginning of this document, Learning Sciences programs reflect a convergence
of psychological, educational, and computational science perspectives on problems of learning
and the design and evaluation of instructional settings. This is a shared feature of the Stanford,
Northwestern, and proposed UIC programs, as well as other such Ph.D. programs under
development across the country. However, a critical differentiating component of the UIC
program is its strong emphasis on the study of learning in specific disciplines and content
areas, as contrasted with the study of learning and instructional design as general problems.
The influence of multiple disciplinary perspectives in the proposed UIC program is reflected in
the involvement of faculty from multiple disciplines in developing, designing, and delivering
the core courses; in apprenticeship research training experiences wherein students participate in
multiple research groups; and by the multidisciplinary makeup of the program faculty who
span psychology, education, computer science, mathematics, the natural sciences, and other
disciplines. A key feature of the proposed UIC program is that students will be required to
develop a graduate-level understanding of a specific discipline or content area. This will be
combined with rigorous methodological and research design training. Given the field’s current
state of understanding about learning and instruction, the development of a Learning Sciences
program must be done with explicit attention to studying the similarities and differences in the
ways that knowledge is created and used in specific disciplines and content fields. Content
knowledge and the context of its use are intimately related to the way learning is accomplished
and the way that instruction should be designed. (Details of these program features are
provided in Section 9.) Furthermore, the training of doctoral students in relation to specific
disciplines enhances their future employment prospects in settings such as higher education
and their capacity to contribute to multidisciplinary research and development efforts. Thus,
we have attempted to insure that the proposed program has the full support of multiple
disciplinary departments and programs, including the natural sciences, mathematics, literacy,
and computer science, with appropriate faculty participation.
5
Indiana University, the University of Wisconsin, and the University of Michigan are currently developing their own
Learning Sciences graduate programs and all are starting from a base within a College of Education but the degree
status remains unclear.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
14
In light of the multidisciplinary focus and faculty composition of the proposed UIC program,
another unique feature is that the program would be administered as an interdisciplinary
program rather than within a single college or disciplinary department This cross-college
organization contrasts with both the Stanford and Northwestern programs (as well as other
programs under development), both of which are housed in Colleges of Education. The latter
organizational arrangement is understandable given the strong influence of Psychology,
Education and Instructional Technology in the evolution and design of these two programs.
However, housing a Learning Sciences program in a single college is a very limiting choice.
Inevitably this tends to define the application of the learning sciences too narrowly while
simultaneously reducing incentives for participation among faculty from other disciplines (e.g.,
the social and behavioral sciences, natural sciences, mathematics, and engineering) who do not
identify their research and teaching with an applied “educational” agenda. Given that the UIC
program will draw upon faculty resources from at least three separate colleges (Education,
Engineering and Liberal Arts & Sciences) and multiple academic departments, as well as its
clearly stated emphasis on discipline-based learning issues, it makes sense to preserve the
interdisciplinary character of the program in its administrative structure and housing (see
section 9.1) At the present time in the emergence of Learning Sciences Ph.D. programs, the
UIC program would be the only Ph.D. program of this type in the country.
An area of both similarity and difference between our proposed program and the Stanford and
Northwestern programs (and other graduate programs such as Georgia Tech and the University
of Michigan offering students opportunities for learning science coursework and research within
traditional Ph.D. programs) is the specific emphasis on the creation and use of ubiquitous
technologies in the design of educational tools or materials that alter the teaching and learning
environment. The technology and design focus is clearly a critical and distinguishing feature of
the curricula and research emphases of the non-UIC programs. While this area of scholarly
inquiry will be important in the UIC program, we would be distinguished by less emphasis on
the ubiquitous design issues in the creation of such systems and tools and more emphasis on
understanding how such tools support or inhibit thinking and learning in specific domains of
learning.
A final and very important feature of the UIC Learning Sciences program relative to other
programs is the explicit recognition of the centrality of language as a “tool” in learning and
communicating in specific disciplines as well as an object of study in and of itself. If learning
environments are to support and foster complex cognition in specific disciplines, they must be
designed so that linguistically and socially diverse learners across the life span can learn the
“language of the discipline.” They need to understand what that language is, why it is that way,
how to “read it” and how to communicate with it. The UIC program will place a special
emphasis on studying the role of language and communication, of both general and discipline
specific forms, in the processes of learning and instruction.
In summary, Learning Sciences at UIC will be distinguished from other Learning Science
programs in four major ways:

Its emphasis on content learning in the disciplines and across the life span.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006



15
Its status as an interdisciplinary Ph.D. program, administered jointly by the multiple
academic units contributing faculty to the program.
Its emphasis on understanding how technology-based tools can support or inhibit
thinking and learning, especially among linguistically and culturally diverse learners.
Its emphasis on language as an object of study within specific disciplines as well as on its
function as a tool for learning.
In response to the question of possible impact on the only other such program in the State of
Illinois, it is assumed that there will be minimal negative impact on the Northwestern program
since the two programs are both small, and will have very clearly defined differences. They are
likely to draw students with different educational backgrounds and career goals, with the UIC
program being preferred by those with a strong interest in disciplinary based learning and
teaching whereas Northwestern’s program will continue to attract those with interests in
technology-based systems and design. Having two premier programs in this emergent field of
scholarship and research within the State of Illinois will not only add prestige to the State’s
higher education system it should serve the state well in terms of meeting the state’s needs for
highly trained personnel who can address teaching and learning issues across the K-20 spectrum,
including corporate settings. In fact, the concentration of programs (Northwestern, UIC) and
proposed programs (Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan) in the Midwest both promises to promote
interaction and collaborations among these groups6 and geographically positions UIC as a likely
center for regional meetings.
8.4.
Future employment opportunities
Graduates of Learning Sciences programs are qualified for positions in institutions of higher
education as faculty, research staff, or program evaluators and may find positions in a range of
different departments, including educational psychology, cognitive studies, organizational
leadership, mathematics and science education. Most such positions are postsecondary teaching
and research positions. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “employment of
postsecondary teachers is expected to grow much faster than the average (36% or more) for all
occupations through 2012” (2005, bls.gov/oco/ocos066.htm). Although these data are not
specific to the Learning Sciences they do indicate that the postsecondary education market is
expanding faster than employment opportunities in other fields. Generally, this bodes well for
graduates of doctoral programs, including those in the Learning Sciences. These projections are
for teaching positions in postsecondary educational institutions and thus do not take into account
postdoctoral research positions. These are typically funded by “soft” money that comes from
extramural grants and contracts. In addition, new Ph.D.s in Learning Sciences from UIC will
have the knowledge and skills to assume positions in nonprofit foundations (e.g., program
officers) and for-profit businesses, especially those that offer online courses or develop and
market educational materials. For example, employment of software publishers and multimedia
designers is expected to increase 68% between 2002 and 2012.
Evidence of employment opportunities for graduates of Learning Sciences Ph.D. programs and
their high degree of employability in the higher education environment is readily found in the
6UIC
learning scientists have especially strong relationships—and numerous collaborative projects—with the Learning
Sciences program at Northwestern and learning science faculty at Michigan.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
16
employment history of graduates from extant programs. Of the two extant Learning Sciences
Ph.D. programs (section 8.3), only one has been in operation long enough to provide data on
employment of their graduates. Northwestern University’s program, initiated in 1992, graduated
its first Ph.D. in 1995. As of 2004, 28 Ph.Ds had graduated from the program. Of these,
employment information is available for 24. More than one third of these graduates currently
hold tenure-track positions at major universities, including the University of Michigan (Associate
Professor); Pennsylvania State (Associate Professor); University of Pennsylvania (Assistant
Professor); University of Wisconsin, Madison (Assistant Professor); University of California at
Berkeley (Assistant Professor), UC at Davis (Assistant Professor), and UC at Irvine (Assistant
Professor); Ben Gurion University (Assistant Professor); Rutgers University (Assistant
Professor); and Simon Fraser University (Assistant Professor). Two more are research professors
at major universities; three are working in the private sector for a technology and design
innovation company; and the remainder are either Research Scientists or Research Associates at
centers dedicated to innovative research on learning, instruction, assessment, and organizational
change. Furthermore, several of the Northwestern graduates play major leadership roles in the
International Society for the Learning Sciences, inaugurated in 2003.
9
Program Description
9.1. Narrative description of the program and administrative structure of the program
As indicated in the Introduction and Overview (section 8.0), the proposed Graduate Program in
Learning Sciences is intended to achieve the following objectives:





Produce graduates with demonstrated strength in the application of learning sciences to
the theoretical and practical design and analysis challenges found within and across
disciplinary contexts.
Establish a community of faculty and graduate students in pursuit of common
interdisciplinary interests in learning sciences, thereby enhancing UIC’s capacity to
address significant interdisciplinary questions at the nexus of research and practice.
Prepare scholar/researchers who are equipped with the unique disciplinary and
methodological knowledge necessary to conduct rigorous research on fundamental
issues of learning across diverse populations.
Prepare cohorts of scholars/researchers/teachers who in their own practice can integrate
deep disciplinary content learning and the assessment of that learning in environments
that foster active and engaged learners.
Enhance the intellectual infrastructure and context at UIC for researching and
improving Undergraduate, Master’s, and Ph. D. level educational programs by assisting
faculty in applying the learning sciences knowledge base to the design, implementation
and evaluation of learning experiences that serve a diverse study body within a
Research I academic institution with a strong urban education mission.
Consistent with these overall objectives, the primary academic objective of the Graduate
Program is to produce graduates with demonstrated expertise in the application of Learning
Sciences to the theoretical and practical design and analysis of challenges found within and
across disciplinary and institutional contexts. These contexts include, but are not limited to,
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
17
significantly improving student learning in urban school districts, institutions of higher
education, families, health education professions, and other settings in which human learning is
intended. Components of the program include:
a) A multi-disciplinary course of study attractive to candidates from a variety of
disciplinary backgrounds (e.g., mathematics, chemistry, psychology, computer science)
and professional domains (e.g., teaching, research, human relations) who intend to
become specialists in how human learning occurs, how it is studied, and how knowledge
about human learning is applied in various learning organizations. Students share a
common core of courses in which examples are drawn from multiple disciplines and
specialize in a specific discipline, as described below.
b) Selective admissions criteria and processes that ensure a high-quality student body
representing a diverse mix of professional and disciplinary interests and reflecting the
cultural diversity of the state of Illinois, the region, and the nation.
c) A required sequence of eight core courses in Learning Sciences, newly developed for
this program, that focus on such literatures as the multi-disciplinary nature of the learning
sciences, the scientific foundations of inquiry into learning from multiple disciplinary
perspectives, methods of learning sciences research, and applications of learning sciences
in the design and modification of learning environments. Teaching responsibilities for
these courses will be distributed over the core faculty (at full strength 11 positions, 4 new
positions and 7 existing ones). Planning of each course will be done by at least two
faculty from different disciplines, with a goal of having the teaching done by more than
one faculty member as well. The courses will be offered so that each cohort of students
can complete them in their first five semesters in the program. To do so, each course will
be offered once a year. The distribution of courses over semesters for each of four cohorts
is provided in Appendix A.
d) A journal-review seminar (2 credit hours) that students will take five times during their
course of study, beginning in the second semester. The seminar will create a learning
community focused around new and recent journal publications of particular interest or
importance or that report unusual findings in the Learning Sciences or related fields.
Students and faculty will participate in this seminar and engage in critical review,
analysis, and discussion of the articles.
e) A required area of disciplinary specialization in which students take advantage of
courses offered through existing doctoral programs at UIC, for example in Chemistry;
Cognitive Psychology; Computer Sciences; Mathematics or Mathematics Education;
Literacy, Language, and Culture; or Urban Educational Leadership). The specialization
will be selected in consultation with the student’s Learning Sciences academic advisor
and an advisor in the disciplinary specialization. A minimum of 12 hours of
specialization course work is required.
f) A minimum of 16 hours of electives to enroll in additional graduate courses in the
disciplinary specialization, research methods, other disciplines, or special topics courses
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
18
offered periodically in the Learning Sciences program. These courses will be selected in
consultation with the student’s advisor in the Learning Sciences program and in
consultation with the course instructor to determine relevance and appropriateness of
course content to the student’s program goals and academic preparation for the course.
g) A required supervised research component of 30 hours, to include research
apprenticeship experiences as well as thesis research.
Program Structure, Course and Credit Hour Requirements
For students entering the program with Bachelor’s degrees, the doctoral program in Learning
Sciences will require a minimum of 96 semester credit hours, distributed over the program
components described above and detailed in the chart shown below. For students who apply
having earned a Master’s degree in another institution or program, the admissions committee will
consider the content, experiences, and intellectual products of that degree. In collaboration with a
faculty member in the applicant’s desired specialization area, the admissions committee will
indicate appropriate modifications to the requirements for completing the Learning Sciences
Ph.D. Applicants will be apprised of these modifications prior to making decisions about
enrolling in the Learning Sciences Ph.D. program. These decisions will, of necessity, be made on
a case by case basis.
Requirements of Learning Sciences Interdisciplinary Ph. D.
Course Requirements
Core: (38 hours)
LRSC 500: Introduction to the Learning Sciences
LRSC 501: Research methods in the Learning Sciences I
LRSC 502: Research methods in the Learning Sciences II
LRSC 503: Foundations of Scientific Inquiry
LRSC 511: Analysis of Interactions in Teaching and Learning
LRSC 512: Design of Learning Environments
LRSC 513: Change in Individuals and Organizations: Implementing and
Institutionalizing Change
LRSC 540: Journal Review (2 credits each semester for 5 semesters)
Specialization in Discipline (12 hours)
Three, 500-level courses in a discipline (e.g., Chemistry; Mathematics or
Mathematics Education; Computer Science; Cognitive Psychology;
Literacy, Language and Culture; Urban Education Leadership)
Electives (16 hours)
LRSC 594: Special topic seminar in the Learning Sciences – varied topics.
Graduate courses (500 level) courses in other departments (requires
approval of advisor and course instructor)
Research (30 hours)
LRSC 590: Research Apprenticeship (variable 2 – 8 hrs.)
LRSC 599: Thesis Research (variable 0 – 16 hrs.)
Total: 96
Time Frame
Semester 1
Semester 2
Semester 3
Semester 2
Year 2 or Year 3
Year 2 or Year 3
Year 2 or Year 3
Beginning in semester 2
Beginning in semester 1;
beyond that, no time specified
No time specified
Beginning in semester 1
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
19
Note: Course titles corresponding with LRSC course numbers on this table are listed on the page following the
Catalog Statement below. See Appendix A for brief descriptions of the content of each of the Learning Sciences
core courses.
Catalog Statement for Proposed Ph.D. in Learning Sciences
Proposed Ph.D in Learning Sciences
Ph.D. in Learning Sciences
Mailing Address:
Campus Location:
Telephone:
Curriculum Code:
E-mail:
Dean of the Graduate College: Dr. Clark Hulse
Director of Graduate Studies:
The UIC Graduate College offers an interdisciplinary program of academic work leading to the Doctor of
Philosophy in Learning Sciences. This doctoral degree complements and draws on expertise in learning
sciences research conducted in several academic departments and degree programs on the campus, including
those in Chemistry, Computer Science, Education, Mathematics, Psychology, and others. Consult the
appropriate chapters in this catalog for information on degree programs in these related disciplines.
Admission Requirements
Applicants are considered on an individual basis. Transcripts for all undergraduate and any graduate work
must be submitted. In addition to the Graduate College minimum requirements, applicants must meet the
following program requirements:
Baccalaureate Field: No restrictions.
Master’s degree optional
Grade Point Average: At least 4.00 (A=5.00) or 3.25 (A = 4) for the final 60 semester hours (90 quarter
hours) of baccalaureate study and for all post-baccalaureate course work.
Tests Required: GRE
Minimum TOEFL Score: 550 (paper-based); 213 (computer-based); new TOEFL iBT total score of 80 and
subscores of 21 in Writing, 20 in Speaking, 17 in Listening, and 19 in Reading.
Letters of Recommendation: Three required, attesting to potential for success in rigorous doctoral program
in Learning Sciences.
Personal Statement: Required. Statement must identify and explain applicant’s career objectives and
qualifications for pursuing doctoral degree in Learning Sciences.
Deadlines
The application deadline for this program is the same as campus Graduate College deadline.
Degree Requirements
In addition to the Graduate College minimum requirements, students must meet the following program
requirements:
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
20
Minimum Semester Hours Required: 96.
Note: For applicants holding a Master’s degree, the admissions process includes an evaluation of the
applicant’s record, desired specialization, and a decision regarding any modifications to the Learning
Sciences program requirements.
Course Work
Required courses for candidates: LRSC 500, LRSC 501, LRSC 502, LRSC 503, LRSC 511,
LRSC 512, LRSC 513, LRSC 540, LRSC 590, and LRSC 599.
Examinations
Students will be required to submit an Annual Reviewa, following a template provided by the Learning
Sciences program, to show evidence of academic and professional progress. Required courses specify
examination requirements.
Comprehensive qualifying examination: Required portfolio examination. In each core course, students
will generate at least one product or document that contributes to a portfolio of student progress. Upon
completion of the Core courses or the required portfolio items the student will orally defend the
contents of the portfolio before a committee of LS faculty who will determine passing or failing of the
comprehensive exam.
Preliminary Examination: Required. The preliminary exam is an oral defense of the completed
dissertation proposal and is taken after successful completion of the comprehensive qualifying exam.
The primary purpose of the preliminary examination is review and approval of the thesis research
proposal and admission of the student to the dissertation research stage of degree candidacy.
Thesis Research: Required. The completed thesis research must be defended orally and publicly before
a thesis committee.
a
Annual Review Required: While it is not, strictly considered, an examination, an annual student assessment will
constitute the first step in a two-step student assessment process, of which the comprehensive written exam is the
second part. In the first part, each student will submit an annual review to the doctoral advisor, consisting of a record
of progress through the program, relevant professional experiences, and, importantly, candidate self-assessment of
academic and professional progress. Failure to submit annual review upon repeat notification to students will
constitute evidence of insufficient progress through program, leading to consideration of dismissal from the program.
Due process will be observed to protect student rights and program integrity
Administrative Structure of the Program
The Learning Sciences Graduate Program will be directed by a Coordinating Committee
of three faculty, selected by the core faculty in the Learning Sciences who represent the
multiple colleges and disciplines contributing to the program, and approved by the Deans
of the Graduate College, College of Education, College of Engineering, and College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences. Core courses in the Learning Sciences will have their own
rubric, with the Graduate College serving as the sponsoring unit. The Coordinating
Committee, in consultation with the core faculty, will provide leadership, define the
overall goals of the program, and encourage the submission of training and
interdisciplinary grants that support the goals of the program. Admission of candidates to
the program and the monitoring of student progress will be performed by the Director of
Graduate Studies (DGS) of the Learning Sciences program, a position appointed by the
Dean of the Graduate College, in consultation with the Graduate Studies Committee. The
Graduate Studies Committee will be selected by the Learning Sciences core faculty.
Admission to the Learning Sciences graduate program will require that the student
demonstrate the ability to do graduate-level work in a discipline or content area beyond
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
21
Learning Sciences per se. This competence will be assessed by review of the student
application by the appropriate disciplinary unit. As well, the applicant will participate in
any placement assessments administered by that disciplinary unit to candidates for the
Ph.D. in that discipline. Students will also be considered for assistantships within those
disciplinary units, as appropriate to the resources available.
The Coordinating Committee, in consultation with the DGS and the Graduate Studies
Committee, will monitor the academic curriculum for the students, proposing revisions
for approval by the core faculty as appropriate.
Oversight for the academic integrity, governance, and fiscal management of the Learning
Sciences Graduate Program will be provided via an internal advisory board consisting of
the Deans, or their designees, of the Graduate College, the Colleges of Education,
Engineering, and Liberal Arts and Sciences. Oversight and review will also be sought
from an external advisory board, appointed by the Provost with membership
recommendations from the core faculty of the Learning Sciences Program.
9.2
Student Outcomes
Competencies that students would be expected to develop within the UIC Learning
Sciences Graduate Program are indicated below. These are indices of the skills developed
as part of course work, in the research lab or in the field, and in association with the
student’s mentor.








Adopt an interdisciplinary perspective on important issues, applying relevant
educational psychology, social science theory, learning sciences, and educational
design theory and research.
Establish and defend a personal research agenda that is grounded in the
foundational assumptions of the learning sciences.
Prepare a research grant proposal that responds to the research agendas of
governmental agencies and foundations and advances the learning sciences.
Apply research methods to critically inquire into claims about teaching and
learning.
Determine and conduct proper analyses for complex data sets derived from
authentic contexts.
Present research in written and oral form to effectively communicate to various
publics the rigor, merit, and usefulness of the research.
Demonstrate facility with a broad range of hardware and software technologies
required to support practice and research in learning sciences.
Design and develop learning environments to reflect and advance theory.
 Integrate the principles of the learning sciences within authentic instructional
contexts.
 Effectively participate as a member of an interdisciplinary, collaborative research
team.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
22
 Effectively participate in learning sciences and specific disciplinary communities
of practice
 Adopt an action orientation or disposition that treats service work as an important
component of one’s professional agenda.
Student Outcomes will be manifest in a variety of artifacts.
Artifacts (written, tangible, electronic, etc.) produced for courses
Portfolios of specific assignments and tasks
Comprehensive qualifying exam
Preliminary Examination
Doctoral Thesis
We will track the job placements of LS graduates and indicators of success in these
careers.
9.3
Strategies to promote student learning
Community of Practice: The Learning Sciences program is committed to fostering a
sense of community as students participate in numerous formal and informal
collaborations. Students will participate in a journal seminar where they will read,
analyze and critique contemporary research literature in the Learning Sciences. They will
work in research groups for extended periods of time, moving from novice apprentice to
core member; in an annual cross-departmental conference, critiquing colleagues and over
time presenting their own work; in working circles, being responsible for critiquing
articles from colleagues and contributing one’s own work during matriculation; and with
learning science faculty, real-world practitioners, content experts, and other students to
understand, implement, and advance learning science principles with respect to realworld problems.
Apprenticeship Learning: This graduate training model has students participating in
a focal research group from the first semester onward. In addition, during their first and
second years in the program students will engage with at least two different research
groups to gain an appreciation for the work of each of these groups. Knowledge is shared
among the students followed by students writing individual analyses that compare the
different types of research being conducted within each group. These analyses become
part of the portfolio. Consistent with research on socialization into a community of
practice, students will progress from peripheral participation in the research groups to
being core participants as they acquire the skills, knowledge, and tools needed for full
participation. By the third year, students should be prepared to collaborate on grant
proposals, and contribute to research reports. Prior to completion of the program, students
are expected to assume the role of lead author on one or more submitted manuscripts.
Interdisciplinary Inquiry: The problems targeted by the Learning Sciences are
complex and require interdisciplinary collaborations if real progress is to be made. The
core courses are designed to introduce students to the knowledge base on how people
learn (a knowledge base that reflects the contributions of a variety of disciplinary
perspectives), and an interdisciplinary context in which to think about learning, its
assessment, and its support through tools. The core courses are designed to help students
23
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
gain interdisciplinary knowledge and skills associated with being a successful learning
scientist.
Resources
10. Student enrollment projections for the new Ph.D. program show our expectation of
6 new candidates enrolled annually. Graduate students enrolled in other Ph.D. programs
may enroll in Learning Sciences core courses with the permission of the course
instructor. However, we have not included non Learning Sciences students in the
enrollment projections shown in Table I.
Table I
STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS FOR THE NEW PROGRAM
Number of Program Majors (Fall
headcount)
Annual Full-Time-Equivalent
Majors*
Annual Credit Hours in EXISTING
Courses
Annual Credit Hours in NEW
Courses
Annual Number of degrees Awarded
Budget
Year
6
2nd
Year
12
3rd
Year
18
4th
Year
24
5th
Year
30
6
12
18
24
30
48
96
144
192
240
84
180
252
324
468
6
NB: Target is a cohort of 6 students per year and assumes 5 years, on average, to
complete the degree. Credit hours in existing courses are based on estimating that each
LS student takes 2 currently existing courses (500 level) per year at 4 credits each. For
short descriptions and credit hours for new LS courses, see Appendix A.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
24
11. Table II and Narrative Budget
Table II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TOTAL RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW UNIT
Current
Budget
3rd
4th
Year 1
Year 2
Year
Year
Total Resource
$293,000 $462,000 591,000 $720,000
Requirements
Resources Available from
Federal Sources1
$96,750 $193,500 $290,250 $387,000
Resources Available from
Other Non-State Sources1
$32,250 $64,500 $96,750 $129,000
2
Existing State Resources
0
$164,000 $204,000 $204,000
Resources Available
through Internal
Reallocation3
$164,000 $40,000
0
0
New State Resources
Required4
0
0
0
0
Breakdown: New State
Resources Required
FTE Staff5
Personal Services
5th
Year
$849,000
$483,750
$161,250
$204,000
0
0
.
9
Equipment and
Instructional Needs
10 Library
11 Other Support Services6
1
These lines reflect funds available (not incremental funds) from non-state sources in any given year
2
Existing state resources in each successive year are equal to the sum of the previous year’s existing state
resources (line 4); plus resources made available through internal reallocation (line 5); plus new state
resources (line 6). If state resources allocated to a program in any given year (line 4) exceed state resource
requirements needed to support the program in the following year, state resource requirements should be
reduced with a negative dollar adjustment on line 5. The sum of lines 2 through 6 will always equal line 1.
3
Numbers can be either positive (allocated to the program) or negative (allocated away from the program).
4
Reflects the level of state funding requested in the referenced year. Dollars reported are incremental.
5
Reflects the number of FTE staff to be supported with requested funds. Not a dollar entry.
6
Other dollars directly assigned to the program. Do not include allocated support services.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006


25
Projected increments in total resource requirements (line 1) in terms of projected staff
requirements, equipment and instructional materials, library requirements, and contractual services
for internships, practica, or clinical placements.
Explanation of required new state resources (line 6) in the budget year in terms of assumptions and
factors used to construct line items 7 through 11. If resource requirements in the budget year
include non-recurring costs (e.g., one-time equipment purchases), describe how these resources
will be reallocated in subsequent years.
BUDGET NARRATIVE
Course Coverage and Faculty Resource Allocation
COURSES IN THE LEARNING SCIENCES PROGRAM. The full complement of Learning
Sciences core courses is 8. In addition to the 8 core courses, each student is required to
enroll a minimum of 12 hours in a disciplinary specialization and in 16 hours of elective
courses. The specialization and elective courses are to be drawn from courses offered by
existing graduate programs. Appendix A illustrates the way in which core courses will
come “on line” as the Learning Sciences program becomes operative. It shows the
courses that each successive cohort would take over the course of their life as a Ph.D.
candidate. The goal is to enroll a cohort of six students in the Learning Sciences program
each year.
SOURCES OF FACULTY RESOURCES TO OFFER THE COURSES. Seven UIC faculty
members constitute the Learning Sciences Initiative Executive Committee. These seven
individuals plus four new positions constitute the core faculty of the Learning Sciences
Ph.D. program. The four new positions in Learning Sciences are sufficient to cover the 8
core courses. Core faculty provide additional courses in the Learning Sciences through
seminars that they currently offer as part of their regular teaching loads. Additional
faculty can become members of the core faculty by submitting a statement of their areas
of interest and teaching to the Coordinating Committee who will bring the request to the
existing core faculty. A majority of the existing core faculty must approve the request.
The four new positions reflect the Provost’s commitment to hire four new faculty
to support the creation of a Graduate Program in the Learning Sciences (see Appendix
B). Recruitment for the first two positions is underway during AY 2005-2006; the third
position will be recruited during AY 2006-2007 and the fourth during AY 2007-2008.
Fifty percent of the funding for these positions comes from the Provost’s Office and the
other 50% comes from one of three colleges, Liberal Arts & Sciences (2 positions),
Education (1 position), or Engineering (1 position). Commitments have been made by the
Deans of each of these colleges to fund 50% of these positions. Half of the teaching load
of each of these faculty positions is committed to Learning Sciences courses, with the
other 50% being determined by the department to which the faculty member is appointed.
Costs for the Learning sciences positions are shown in Year 1 (AY2007-2008) as internal
reallocation (line 5): 50% of three Learning Sciences faculty. Year 2 shows the fourth
Learning Sciences faculty hire as Internal Reallocation (line 5), estimated at 50% of an
$80,000 full time position or $40,000. From Year 3 onward, program costs from existing
state resources are $204,000.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
26
Student Support
Tuition is estimated at $4,000 per semester and stipends at $13,500 for nine
months. The assumption is a normative 5 years to complete the program. Consistent with
Table I, 6 students per year for each of 5 years form the basis for the calculations. Table
II shows the cost of supporting the students being distributed 75% to Federal funds
(research and training grants); 25% Non-State funds (Foundation grants and Indirect Cost
Recovery).
Program Administration and Operations
COORDINATING COMMITTEE. The program will be directed by a Coordinating
Committee of three faculty, selected by the core faculty in the Learning Sciences, and
approved by the Deans of the Graduate College, College of Education, College of
Engineering, and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The Coordinating Committee will
provide leadership, define the overall goals of the program, and encourage the submission
of training and interdisciplinary grants that support the goals of the program.
Coordinating Committee recommendations in these areas will be submitted for approval
to the core faculty serving as a committee of the whole.
DIRECTOR OF GRADUATE STUDIES. This role will be filled by one of the new
Learning Sciences faculty hires.
STAFF SUPPORT. A 1.0 FTE staff position is needed to handle office operations,
interactions with existing students and applicants, processing of paperwork, registration,
and degree requirement monitoring. This position serves as the day-to-day interface for
students with the program. Funds for this position are estimated at $36,000. The costs for
this position are shown in Table II as internal reallocation in Year 1.
OFFICE OPERATIONS. Costs for administering the Learning Sciences program are
estimated at $8,000 per year, shown as internal reallocation in Year 1. These funds will
be used to cover advertising, website development/support, production of program
materials, and communications. Equipment needs will be met through the resources of
the Learning Sciences Research Institute and no funds are allocated for this category of
expenses.
12. Institutional Resources
Faculty Resources
A critical determinant of program quality is the availability of faculty resources
with expertise in the learning sciences who are dedicated to its graduate training and
professional development goals. In addition to the four new faculty who will be recruited
to UIC specifically to develop and staff this program, there is already a dedicated core of
seven UIC faculty with an intellectual commitment to the program and an appropriate
balance of scholarly expertise. These individuals presently constitute the Executive
Committee for the Learning Sciences Initiative. Thus, 11 faculty constitute the Core
Faculty for the Learning Sciences program. As well, 30 faculty from a variety of UIC
departments have indicated support for, and interest in, the Learning Sciences program. A
listing of these individuals is provided in Appendix C. We anticipate interest from
additional faculty as the program develops.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
27
Executive Committee of the Learning Sciences
Brief biographies of the seven faculty constituting the Executive Committee of
the Learning Sciences are provided here. Abbreviated Curriculum Vitae are appended to
the proposal (Appendix D). Complete Curriculum Vitae are available at the UIC
Learning Sciences website (http://litd.psch.uic/learningsciences)
Susan R. Goldman, PhD, is Distinguished Professor of Psychology and Education at the
University of Illinois at Chicago and Co-Director of UIC’s interdisciplinary Center for the Study
of Learning, Instruction, and Teacher Development. She is a member of the Cognitive Division
in Psychology and of the Language, Literacy, and Culture and Educational Psychology programs
in the College of Education. Prior to UIC, she was Co-Director of the Learning Technology
Center at Vanderbilt University for 12 years, and a Professor in the Psychology Department.
Dr. Goldman’s interests are in learning and assessment in subject matter domains such as
literacy, mathematics, history, and science and roles for technologies in supporting assessment,
instruction, and learning. She uses a variety of methodologies in her research, including
discourse analysis, experimental designs, and design studies. Current work includes research on
a web-based diagnostic reading assessment system, learning from multiple information sources,
and use of virtual agent systems to support language development in kindergarten and first grade
children from both English and Spanish language backgrounds. Past accomplishments include
research and development of several technology-based environments for learning and
assessment, including the mathematics problem solving series The Adventures of Jasper
Woodbury, and The Little Planet Literacy Series.
For over a decade, Dr. Goldman has been collaborating with educational practitioners to bridge
research and practice. Currently, she is a major participant in Partnership READ, a reading
demonstration project funded by the Chicago Community Trust and Chicago Public Schools.
READ is working with over a dozen elementary schools to support high quality teaching and
student learning in literacy through whole-school reform. She also heads the evaluation of a
teacher enhancement grant, Supporting Teachers Supporting Teachers, a partnership between
UIC’s College of Education and Chicago Public Schools. Over the years, her research and
development activities have been funded by federal agencies, including the National Science
Foundation and the Department of Education, and a number of foundations, including the
Spencer Foundation, the James S. McDonnell Foundation, and the Chicago Community Trust.
Dr. Goldman is widely published in discourse, psychology, and education journals and presently
heads the Society for Text and Discourse. She is an associate editor on the journals Discourse
Processes, Cognition and Instruction, and Learning and Instruction, and serves on the editorial
board of Developmental Psychology. Goldman was a founding member and served on the board
of the International Society for the Learning Sciences. In recognition of her role as a leader in the
field of learning and instruction, Goldman served in the position of Vice President of Division C:
Learning and Instruction (2000 – 2002) of the American Educational Research Association.
Kimberley Gomez is a learning sciences researcher whose research efforts are focused
on helping children of color experience more equitable opportunities to learn in K-12 urban
public schools. At the center of her research and design efforts is the support of literacy to
achieve equity which is reflected in three interrelated lines of work: (1) access to rigorous, state
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
28
of the art learning materials that meet students’ literacy and language needs and scaffold and
transform their learning; (2) access to engaging and motivating learning environments; (3)
interaction with teachers who have knowledge, training, and skills that can meet literacy and
learning needs. Her currently funded research projects include a study of the relationship
between reading achievement and science achievement in 9th graders in urban high schools and
an analysis of proposed charter school instructional models, with a particular focus on reading
instruction and technology integration plans, in gentrifying communities in Chicago. Her work
has appeared in the Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, The Journal of Negro Education,
The Journal of Child Development, a Consortium on Chicago School Research Public Report on
parent participation in Local School Councils, The Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology,
and in Play in practice: Case studies in Young Children’s Play which describes black middle
class mothers’ views of play as an educational opportunity for their children published by
Redleaf Press.
Tom Moher is Associate Professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at
Chicago, and also holds an adjunct position with the College of Education. For the eight years,
his research has focused on the design and field-based evaluation of computational and
interactive technologies intended to support learning in classrooms, particularly within the
context of group or whole class activity. Most of his work has revolved around the use of
technologies to deliver simulated phenomena that may be visualized, probed, and controlled by
collections of students. His virtual ambient environments research investigated the use of large
multi-user displays to create shared spaces for student investigations. His more recent work in
embedded phenomena explores the learning opportunities associated with binding technology
affordances to the environment to represent windows—simulated instruments or visualizations—
into extended simulations of phenomena imagined to be unfolding in the physical space of the
classroom. Dr. Moher has published over 50 refereed articles including the work in learning
technologies as well as earlier work in cognition and programming and software engineering. His
work is funded by grants from the National Science Foundation.
James W. Pellegrino is Liberal Arts and Sciences Distinguished Professor of Cognitive
Psychology and Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
He also serves as co-director of UIC’s interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Learning,
Instruction, and Teacher Development. Prior to UIC, he was the Frank W. Mayborn Professor of
Cognitive Studies at Vanderbilt University where he also served as co-director of the Learning
Technology Center from 1989-1991 and as Dean of Vanderbilt’s Peabody College of Education
and Human Development from 1992-1998.
Dr. Pellegrino's research and development interests focus on children's and adult's thinking and
learning and the implications of cognitive research and theory for assessment and instructional
practice. Much of his current work is focused on analyses of complex learning and instructional
environments, including those incorporating powerful information technology tools, with the
goal of better understanding the nature of student learning and the conditions that enhance deep
understanding. A special concern of his research is the incorporation of effective formative
assessment practices, assisted by technology, to maximize student learning and understanding.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
29
Dr. Pellegrino has served as head of several National Academy of Science/National Research
Council study committees. These include chair of the Study Committee for the Evaluation of the
National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, co-chair of the NRC/NAS Study
Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice, and co-chair of the NRC/NAS Study
Committee on the Foundations of Assessment which issued the report Knowing What Students
Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. He was a member of the
NRC/NAS/NAE Study Committee on Improving Learning with Information Technology and
recently chaired the NRC/NAS Panel on Research on Learning and Instruction for the Strategic
Education Research Partnership. He is currently a member of the NRC/NAS Study Committee
on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement. He is a lifetime National Associate of the
National Academy of Sciences and a member of the Board on Testing and Assessment of the
National Research Council. Dr. Pellegrino has supervised several large-scale research and
development projects funded by agencies such as NSF, ONR, AFOSR, NIH, and private
foundations. He has authored or co-authored over 220 books, chapters and journal articles in the
areas of cognition, instruction and assessment and has made numerous invited presentations at
local, state, national and international meetings and at universities throughout the world.
Steve Tozer is a Professor in Policy Studies in the College of Education at the University
of Illinois at Chicago. After receiving his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education at University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, he remained there on faculty from 1982 to 1994, and from 1990
to 1994 was Head of the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. Since moving to University
of Illinois-Chicago in January 1995, Dr. Tozer has become active in professional preparation
reform at the state and national levels. As Chair of the Governor’s Council on Teacher Quality in
Illinois, he led changes in teacher certification laws in Illinois in partnership with the National
Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. Beginning in 1997, he led the funding and
design of the first system-wide program of new teacher mentoring and induction for new
teachers in Chicago Public Schools. He is currently extending that work with a funded initiative
to provide intensive new teacher support in one of Chicago’s hardest-to-staff West Side
neighborhoods. In partnership with Chicago Public Schools, Dr. Tozer led the design and
implementation of a doctoral program in Urban Education Leadership to produce transformative
leaders for low-performing urban schools.
Dr. Tozer’s research interests have focused on the significance of social context knowledge in
teacher preparation programs. He is currently engaged in a two-year research study to compare
performance differences of teachers prepared in alternative certification programs and those
prepared in standard undergraduate and graduate programs. His work in reform of the
professional preparation and development of teachers and school leaders has been funded by
Joyce Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, McDougal Family Foundation, Chicago Community
Trust, and the Chicago Public Education Fund, among others. In 1999 he received the Stevenson
Award from the Association for Teacher Educators for leadership and dedication to the
education profession. Dr. Tozer is past President of the Council for Social Foundations of
Education and President-elect of the American Educational Studies Association. His book,
School and Society: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, is now entering its fifth edition
with McGraw Hill, and he is lead editor of The Handbook of Research in Social Foundations of
Education, forthcoming in 2006 from Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
30
Philip Wagreich is Director of the Institute for Mathematics and Science Education and
Professor of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science at the University of Illinois at
Chicago. He received his Ph.D. in Mathematics from Columbia University in 1967. He was a
Lecturer at Brandeis University from 1966 to 68, a Member of the Institute for Advanced Study,
Princeton, from 1968 to 70, and an Assistant Professor at the University of Pennsylvania from
1968 to 1973. Since 1973 he has been a faculty member in the Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science at UIC, first as an Associate Professor and since 1978 as a
Professor. He has published 15 research articles on algebraic geometry and 7 articles on
mathematics education and is one of the principal authors of the TIMS Elementary Mathematics
Curriculum, which has been published as Math Trailblazers.
Prof. Wagreich is Project Director/Principal Investigator of the TIMS (Teaching Integrated
Mathematics and Science) Project which has been supported by numerous Teacher Enhancement
and Curriculum Development NSF grants, the most recent being a 5 year project, starting in
2003, for “Research and Revision of the TIMS/Math Trailblazers Elementary Mathematics
Curriculum.” He is a co-Director of the Mathematicians and Education Reform (MER) Forum.
He was PD/PI for the UIC - Community College Collaborative for Excellence in Teacher
Preparation and for an NSF Proof-of-Concept curriculum development grant to develop modules
for pre-service elementary teachers mathematics courses. In 1992 he was awarded the
Excellence in Integrated Mathematics & Science Award by the School Science and Mathematics
Association and in 1996 he received the Max Beberman Award from the Illinois Council of
Teachers of Mathematics for contributions to mathematics education in Illinois and the nation.
From 1997 to 2000 he was a member of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’
Principles and Standards for School Mathematics writing team that developed national standards
for mathematics curriculum, teaching, and evaluation in Grades K-12.
Donald J. Wink is Professor and Head in the Department of Chemistry at the University
of Illinois at Chicago. He has engaged in several materials and curriculum development projects
since he arrived there for a faculty position as Coordinator of General Chemistry in 1992. Prior
to that he was an assistant professor at New York University engaged in research in theoretical,
synthetic, and applied organometallic chemistry. He was trained at the University of Chicago
(S.B.) and at Harvard University (Ph.D.). His current projects are diverse but share a theme of
crossing boundaries, often using student pathways as a source of inspiration and direction. His
first UIC project joined preparatory chemistry and intermediate algebra curricula in a curriculum
development and research project that demonstrated gains for student outcomes in later
chemistry classes (Wink et al 2001) and the publication of a new "math-aware" preparatory
chemistry text, The Practice of Chemistry. A later project, discussed in this paper, involved
faculty from other departments that require general chemistry in the development of scenariobased laboratory instruction. His most recent work focuses on issues of teaching in K-12 settings,
including a collaborative for teacher preparation that brought together UIC and area community
college and an NSF GK-12 project for intervention in schools. As part of the latter project he is a
regular participant in activities at Crane Tech Prep High School on Chicago's West Side, where
he works with a community of administrators, teachers, and students addressing some of the
most challenging teaching and learning issues of urban schools. Not surprisingly, he relies on a
network of valuable colleagues and coauthors within the greater Chicago area.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
31
Thus, the program will have a minimum of 11 UIC faculty, representing diverse disciplines and
multiple colleges, who will invest substantial portions of their time in advancing the goals of the
program. In addition to these 11 FTE, UIC faculty from a variety of departments have indicated
courses they offer that would be relevant as electives and specialization courses for Learning
Sciences Ph.D. students.
Faculty Evaluation and Rewards
With regard to faculty evaluations and rewards, all program faculty will have their primary
appointments in current academic departments (Psychology, Mathematics, Computer Science,
Education, Chemistry, etc.) and will be evaluated within those home departments using the
tenure, promotion and annual merit review criteria appropriate to that academic unit. In the area
of teaching, the Executive Committee of the Learning Sciences Program will provide input to the
home department regarding contributions of the faculty member to the Learning Sciences
program.
Library Resources
The University Library estimates that it currently spends $64,000 per year for resources that
support work in the area of Learning Sciences. These resources include 43 core journals in the
field and the two major bibliographic databases. The Library also acquires over 200 books each
year in this area and provides access to books from academic libraries throughout Illinois and the
rest of the United States. Learning Sciences and Library faculty find that current resources are
adequate, so no additional University Library funding will be necessary.
In addition to the library resources currently available at UIC in the fields constituting the
Learning Sciences, all of the program faculty maintain extensive journal and book collections
that will be available to students in the program. A part of that collection includes an extensive
library of journals in education, psychology, instructional design, technology, and curricular
materials within UIC’s current Center for the Study of Learning, Instruction and Teacher
Development and the Institute for Mathematics and Science Education. Both will serve as core
components of the new Learning Sciences Research Institute (LSRI). In addition, LS will work
with Library staff to identify reference collections, particularly on-line collections, that would
enrich the program as it continues to develop. The LSRI will also support program goals in the
area of research and development by providing access to administrative support staff for research
projects and technical staff in the areas of computer programming and multimedia development.
In addition, the LSRI will make available laboratory and meeting space as well as computers,
printers, copiers and other equipment. These resources will be available for the use of students in
the program as part of their research training.
Student Support Resources
Responsibility for supporting the academic program side of students’ lives will be in the hands of
the Director of Graduate Studies and managed on a day-to-day basis by a Graduate Studies
administrative assistant (staff position). The Director of Graduate Studies will convene an
informational exchange meeting for the students at least once per semester and communicate via
email and the program website throughout the year.
Resources to Assure Program Quality
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
32
A quality assurance process will be set in place for the program’s training and instructional
processes. It will include multiple components. All Learning Sciences courses will be
regularly evaluated using the end-of-course evaluation forms routinely provided by the
university. In addition to these forms, we will deploy a more focused and web-based
formative and summative evaluation tool that probes several components of a course’s
instructional design as well as students’ learning processes and outcomes. This tool has been
used by one of the current Learning Sciences faculty in other UIC courses and has proven
effective as the basis for course design improvements. The program faculty will conduct a
yearly program review that includes the solicitation of detailed feedback from all of the
program’s students as to their perceptions of the efficacy and quality of specific course and
program requirements, the research mentorship process, and general management of the
program. As part of the yearly program review, all students will be required to indicate yearly
and cumulative research accomplishments including presentations at national meetings,
publications, and research awards. These data will be examined by program faculty to
evaluate the effectiveness of the program’s components in advancing the scholarly efforts of
individual students as they move through the program and the program as a whole. Both types
of data will be reviewed and discussed by the program director and program faculty at an endof-year program review and the results will be included in reports provided to the program’s
advisory committees.
QUALITY ASSURANCE7
13. Program/Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
Program Objectives and Student Learning Outcomes
As noted earlier in this proposal (section 8), the proposed Graduate Program in Learning
Sciences has the following overall objectives:
 Produce graduates with demonstrated strength in the application of learning sciences
to the theoretical and practical design and analysis challenges found within and across
disciplinary contexts.
 Establish a community of faculty and graduate students in pursuit of common
interdisciplinary interests in learning sciences, thereby enhancing UIC’s capacity to
address significant interdisciplinary questions at the nexus of research and practice.
 Prepare scholar/researchers who are equipped with the disciplinary and
methodological knowledge necessary to conduct rigorous research on fundamental
issues of learning across diverse populations.
 Prepare cohorts of scholars/researchers/teachers who in their own practice can integrate
deep disciplinary content learning and the assessment of that learning in environments
that foster active and engaged learners.
 Create the intellectual infrastructure and context at UIC for researching and improving
Undergraduate, Master’s, and Ph. D. level educational programs by applying the
learning sciences knowledge base to the design, implementation and evaluation of
7
Quality assurance processes are those ongoing reviews that maintain program and instructional standards.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
33
learning experiences that serve a diverse student body within a Research I academic
institution with a strong urban education mission.
With regard to individual students, the following are the competencies that students would be
expected to develop within the UIC Learning Sciences Graduate Program. These are indices of
the skills developed as part of the required and elective coursework, in the research lab or in the
field, and in association with the student’s mentor.








Take an interdisciplinary perspective on important issues, applying relevant educational
psychology, social science theory, learning sciences, and educational design theory and
research.
Establish and defend a personal research agenda that is grounded in the foundational
assumptions of the learning sciences.
Prepare a research grant proposal that responds to the research agendas of
governmental agencies and foundations that advances the learning sciences.
Apply research methods to critically inquire into claims about teaching and learning.
Determine and conduct proper analyses for complex data sets derived from authentic
contexts.
Present research in written and oral form to effectively communicate to various publics
the rigor, merit, and usefulness of the research.
Demonstrate facility with a broad range of hardware and software technologies required
to support practice and research in learning sciences.
Design and develop learning environments to reflect and advance theory.
 Integrate the principles of the learning sciences within authentic instructional contexts.
 Effectively participate as a member of an interdisciplinary, collaborative research team.

Adopt an action orientation or disposition that treats service work as an important
component of one’s professional agenda.
The sections that follow describe the mechanisms that will be in place to formatively and
summatively evaluate whether the individual student objectives and the overall program
objectives are being attained, as well as how that evaluative information will be incorporated into
an ongoing quality assurance process for program improvement.
13.1 & 13.2. Assessment plans and measures
Assessment of Student Outcomes
Assessment of student learning will be built in to every course in the Learning Sciences graduate
program as described earlier in section 12. In addition to the individual course-based
assessments of student learning outcomes, the program will include the following annual and
benchmark assessment mechanisms of attainment of the various competencies outlined above.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
34
Annual Student Review. Students will be required to submit an Annual Review, following
a template provided by the Learning Sciences program, to show evidence of academic and
professional progress. The annual review will cover topics such as courses taken, research
activities and progress, research presentations on campus and at national or international
meetings, research reports published or under review, special accomplishments in instructional
design, and future program and career plans. The review will provide an opportunity for
students to offer feedback to faculty about the quality and coherence of their learning
experiences in the program and suggestions for improvement.
Comprehensive Qualifying Examination. This is a required portfolio examination. In each
core course, students will generate at least one written product, document, or technology artifact
that contributes to a portfolio of student progress. Upon completion of the Core courses and the
required portfolio items the student will orally defend the contents of the portfolio before a
committee of LS faculty who will determine passing or failing performance on the
comprehensive exam.
Preliminary Examination. The preliminary exam is an oral defense of the completed
dissertation proposal and is taken after successful completion of the comprehensive qualifying
exam. The central purpose of the preliminary examination is review and approval of the thesis
research proposal and admission of the student to the dissertation research stage of degree
candidacy.
Thesis Research. The completed thesis research project must be defended orally and
publicly before a thesis committee.
Additional proposed assessments of students include:

Depth in one or more specific disciplinary areas beyond learning sciences is a program
expectation and requirement. This will be demonstrated through a combination of
coursework, in-depth literature reviews, and work on a project that contributes to a grant
proposal, an article, or a presentation. Faculty from disciplinary departments will serve as
consultants to the Learning Sciences program for the purpose of assessing disciplinary
depth.

In addition to formal coursework, Learning Sciences students will be required to
participate in Learning Sciences community activities, including the seminar series,
interdisciplinary project-based work circles, etc., which afford assessment opportunities
distinct from normal coursework assessment. This information will be shared by program
faculty as part of the annual review process and used as part of the decision-making
process for the comprehensive examination.

Formal "milestones" indicating progress through the program will include portfolio
demonstrations of the ability to digest and summarize contemporary research surrounding
learning sciences issues, evidence of ability to work in multidisciplinary teams,
effectiveness of speaking and writing, etc. Second and third year expectations would
include a brown bag presentation, a proposal to a conference as an individual, and a yearly
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
35
reflective evaluation of progress in the program including evidence of progress reported in
this assessment. Here too, evidence of progress and achievement will be monitored by
program faculty as part of the annual review and the comprehensive examination.
Assessment of Program Quality and Outcomes
As in the case of assessment of student outcomes, assessment of program quality
and outcomes will be drawn from multiple sources of evidence.
While the evaluation of teaching was mentioned in Section 12, it is worth
reiterating that all faculty in the Learning Sciences Ph.D. Program will be required to
provide evidence of their teaching effectiveness through student course evaluations of
each of their courses at least once each year. In addition, faculty are expected to invite
peers to observe their teaching on a regular basis and to teach in co-teaching
arrangements in courses that require multiple modules from different areas of faculty
expertise from different specialty areas across the campus. All faculty standing for
promotion and tenure, for example, must show evidence that they have engaged in such
peer observation and consultation. In addition, the campus annual review process
requires that faculty provide evidence of teaching quality as part of the dossier upon
which salary increases are based. Our Annual Program Review process will assess
course evaluation data on all courses taught in the program to monitor and improve
course quality and overall coherence.
At a level beyond the quality of individual courses, there are a number of indicators
of program health and success for which data will be routinely collected and monitored:







Size, diversity, and quality of the graduate program applicant pool;
Acceptance rates: Percent of students offered admission who enter the program;
Numbers of students who receive university and federal fellowships;
Candidate retention and graduation rates and time-to-degree completion;
Percent of graduates employed in the field as post docs, in faculty positions,
and/or in positions in nonprofits dedicated to program development and
evaluation;
Graduate and employer satisfaction with the program.
Participation rates of faculty and students in professional activities, including
publication and sponsored research.
The data collected about students and from students as part of the Annual Program
Review, together with the indicators mentioned above, will be assembled and reviewed
by all program faculty at a meeting held following the spring semester of each year.
Based on the data and faculty discussion, the Program Director will then compile an
annual report on sources of evidence of student and program success with suggestions for
any program changes and improvement. This report will be shared with all program
faculty and with an External Advisory Board consisting of experts in the learning
sciences drawn from the national community. The Advisory Board will be convened
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
annually for the purpose of reviewing the annual report, and the Board will provide
advice, guidance and evaluative feedback on the program.
36
37
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
Appendix A: Course Program and Brief Descriptions of Proposed Learning Sciences
Courses
Course Program for Four Cohorts of Learning Sciences Ph.D. Program
LS Core Courses F1
All cohorts
Cohort 1
S1
500
F2
540 (2)
501
503
Cohort 2
S2
540 (2)
502
511
500
F3
540 (2)
590 (2)
512
501
503
Cohort 3
S3
540 (2)
590 (2)
513
502
511
500
F4
540 (2)
LS 599 (4)
590 (2)
512
501
503
590 (2)
513
502
511
500
Cohort 4
Non LS Courses
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Cohort 3
spec
spec
spec
elect
elect
spec
spec
S4
540 (2)
590 (2)
spec
elect
elect
elect
elect
spec
spec
Cohort 4
F5
S5
540 (2)
540 (2)
540 (2)
LS 599 (8) LS 599 (12) LS 599 (12)
590 (2)
LS 599 (4)
LS 599 (8)
590 (2)
512
501
503
590 (2)
513
502
511
590 (2)
spec
elect
elect
elect
elect
spec
spec
spec
590 (2)
512
elect
elect
elect
elect
Brief Descriptions of Learning Sciences Core Courses
LRSC 500: Introduction to the Learning Sciences
This is the gateway course into the Learning Sciences program. Required of all first-year students,
this course introduces the key principles of learning, development, and language. Learning is
introduced through multiple lenses—cognitive, affective, and social—and among diverse groups of
learners. The course traces the concepts of expertise, transfer, distributed learning, representation,
and assessment, among others, beginning with their historical roots.
LRSC 501: Research Methods in the Learning Sciences I
This course is focused on understanding the components of scientific arguments as they apply to the
diverse research problems that characterize the Learning Sciences. It includes analysis of the
components of a scientific argument, development of a research question, and the appropriateness
of different research designs for approaching varying questions about learning and learners. Special
consideration is given to: (a) understanding the interplay between the design process and the
research process in the emergent field of “design experiments” and (b) the influence of micro and
macro policy contexts on the framing and execution of research agendas on learning.
LRSC 502: Research Methods in the Learning Sciences II
This course is focused on deepening students understanding of the components of scientific
arguments and execution of the research design and analysis process as they apply to the diverse
research problems that characterize the Learning Sciences. It builds upon the content covered in LS
501 through the in-depth study of specific case study examples of research programs that exemplify
many of the general principles covered in LS 501.
LRSC 503: Foundations of Scientific Inquiry
This course will explore the different meanings attached to the idea of inquiry teaching and
learning, including how this varies by the age of the student. Since one of the reasons for inquiry is
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
38
its possible relationship to authentic science, a consideration of how inquiry functions in the
conduct of science and mathematical research will be included.
LRSC 511: Analysis of Teaching and Learning Interactions
The focus in this course is on tools and techniques for the capture and analysis of multi-modal
interaction—discourse, gesture, and interaction with technologies—among learners, teachers, and
environments. The course is grounded in the identification of problems of practice, and requires
students to use new tools to analyze these problems, including tools for data capture (audio, video,
instrumented software, tracking, etc.) and data analysis (streaming media annotation tools, coding
tools, statistical tools). Techniques discussed include designs for audio and video capture in
classrooms (e.g. instrumentation, layouts) and the impact of tools on the choice of research designs.
LRSC 512: Design of Learning Environments
The design and evaluation of formal and informal learning environments from the perspectives of
four lenses onto those environments: learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered,
and community-centered. Environments range from formal schooling to after-school, home, and
museum learning. Special emphasis on the role of technology within learning environments.
LRSC 513: Change in Individuals and Organizations: Implementing and Institutionalizing Change
for Learning
This course examines the relationships between processes of individual learning and change and
processes of organizational learning and change. The course focuses on theoretical and empirical
work on core principles of change, including forms of leadership (e.g., centralized as compared to
distributed), individuals as agents of change within organizations, organizational properties that
foster or impede change (e.g., tolerance for risk-taking), and implications for innovation and
sustainability of innovation. Of particular interest are organizational mechanisms that support
individual change, and how these are sustained over time and changes in upper-levels of
organizational management.
LRSC 540: Journal Reading Seminar.
This course brings the faculty and students associated with the Learning Sciences program together
as a community to read, discuss, and critique the literature. The course serves as a context for
building a learning community across the vertical cohorts of Learning Sciences students.
Established members of the community model and scaffold the discursive practices of the
community for those who are newer to it. It provides a context for cross-disciplinary discussion and
exchange about theory, methodology, and core issues.
LRSC 590: Research Apprenticeship.
Designed as a supervised research course. Students enroll in this course between 2 and 8 hours per
semester as time they are spending on research projects, supervised by the faculty member with
whom they enroll.
LRSC 599: Thesis Research.
Designed for students who are engaged in research that constitutes the dissertation. Students enroll
in this course for between 0 and 16 hours per semester depending on the stage in their dissertation
research.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
Appendix B. Letters of Commitment to Faculty Positions in the Learning Sciences
39
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
40
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
41
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
42
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
UNIVERSITY
OF
43
ILLINOIS
AT CHICAGO
Office of the Dean (MC 159)
College of Engineering
851 South Morgan Street
Chicago, Illinois 60607-7043
Prith Banerjee
Dean
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Dr. Susan Goldman and
Dr. James Pellegrino
Prith Banerjee
Dean, Engineering
September 27, 2005
Support for LSRI
The College of Engineering supports the idea of establishing the Learning Sciences Research
Institute at UIC to further research, academic programming and training in the Learning Sciences.
We will work with you, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and the College of Education as
you develop a plan for a Research Institute and a PhD. program in the area of Learning Sciences.
As part of this, the College will provide the support of a 50% junior faculty line (Assistant
Professor) in the area of Learning Sciences in the College of Engineering starting Fall 2007. We
will also support an interdisciplinary PhD. program in Learning Sciences in collaboration with
some of the faculty in the College of Engineering.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17,
2006
Appendix C. Faculty Support Letters
Support Letters to Date
Kim Lawless (Ed: Curriculum, Instruction, and Evaluation)
Eric Gutstein (Ed: Mathematics Education)
Kath Glaswell (Ed: Language, Literacy, and Culture)
Maria Varelas (Ed: Science Education)
Mark Smiley (Ed: Organization and Leadership)
Taffy Raphael (Ed: Language, Literacy, and Culture)
Keith Thiede (Ed: Educational Psychology)
Danny Martin (Ed: Mathematics Education; LAS: Mathematics)
Yolanda Majors (Ed: Curriculum and Instruction)
Richard Cameron (LAS: English and Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese)
Jessica Williams (LAS: English)
Ann Feldman (LAS: English)
Susanne Rott (LAS: Germanic Studies)
John Baldwin (LAS: Mathematics)
Jerry Bona (LAS: Mathematics)
Bill VanPatten (LAS: Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese)
Roger Weisberg (LAS: Psychology)
Andy Johnson (Eng: CS)
Barbara DiEugenio (Eng: CS)
Jason Leigh (Eng: Computer Science)
Tom DeFanti (Eng: Computer Science)
Bob Sloan (Eng: Computer Science)
Pete Nelson (Eng: Computer Science)
Andreas Leininger (Eng: Chemical Eng.)
Michael Scott (Eng: Mechanical Eng.)
44
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
Appendix D. Abbreviated Curriculum Vitae of Learning Sciences’ Executive
Committee
45
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
46
SUSAN R. GOLDMAN
Distinguished Professor of Psychology & Education
Department of Psychology (MC 285)
University of Illinois at Chicago
1007 W. Harrison St.
Chicago, IL 60607
Phone: 312-996-4462 FAX: 312-355-3930
sgoldman@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~sgoldman/
Education:
Barnard College of Columbia University, 1970 Bachelor of Arts: Psychology
University of Pittsburgh, 1978 Doctor of Philosophy:
Psychology, “Children's Semantic Knowledge Systems for Realistic Goals.”
Professional Experience
September 2001Distinguished Professor of Psychology and Education, University of Illinois
at Chicago
September 1999Professor of Psychology, Vanderbilt University
August 2001
Senior Scientist, Learning Technology Center
January 1992-1998
Director of Graduate Program in Cognitive Studies, Vanderbilt University
September 1989-1999 Professor of Psychology, Vanderbilt University
Co-Director, Learning Technology Center
July 1984-1989
Associate Professor of Education and Psychology, University of California,
Santa Barbara
July 1979-1984
Assistant Professor of Education and Psychology
University of California, Santa Barbara
September 1978-1979 Assistant Professor, Psychology Department, Emory University
September 1974-1977 National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow
Selected Publications
Goldman, S. R. (2005). Designing for scalable educational improvement. In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, &
L. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational
improvement (pp. 67-96). San Francisco, CA: Josey Bass.
Wolfe, M. B. & Goldman, S. R. (2005). Relationships between Adolescents’ Text Processing and
Reasoning. Cognition & Instruction, 23(4), 467-502.
Goldman, S. R. (2004). Cognitive aspects of constructing meaning through and across
multiple texts. In N. Shuart-Ferris & D.M. Bloome (Eds.), Uses of intertextuality in classroom
and educational research. (pp. 313-347).Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
47
Goldman, S. R. and Bloome, D. M. (2004). Learning to Construct and Integrate. In A. F.
Healy (Ed.), Experimental Cognitive Psychology and its Applications: Festshrift in Honor of
Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer (169-182). Washington, D.C.: American
Psychological Association.
Goldman, S. R., & Wiley, J. (2004). Discourse analysis: Written text. In N. K. Duke & M.
Mallette (Eds.), Literacy research methods (pp. 62-91). NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.
Goldman, S. R., Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., Williams, S., & Tzou, C. T. (2003). Science inquiry
in a digital age: Possibilities for making thinking visible. In H. van Oostendorp (Ed.), Cognition in a
Digital World. (pp. 253-284) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graesser, A. C., Gernsbacher, M., & Goldman, S. R. (2003). (Eds.), Handbook of Discourse
Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wolfe, M.B.W., & Goldman, S.R., (2003). Use of Latent semantic Analysis for Predicting
Psychological Phenomena: Two Issues and Proposed Solutions. Behavior Research
Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1) 22-32.
Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications
for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The
psychology of science text comprehension. (pp. 19-50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, Jr., J. A. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text.
In M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3,
pp. 311-335). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coté, N., & Goldman, S. R. (1999). Building representations of informational text: Evidence from
children’s think-aloud protocols. In H. Van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of
mental representations during reading (pp. 169-193). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Goldman, S. R., Petrosino, A. J., & the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1999).
Design principles for instruction in content domains: Lessons from research on expertise and
learning. In F. T. Durso, (Ed.), Handbook of applied cognition (pp. 595-627). Chichester, England:
Wiley.
Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text:
Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1-53.
Goldman, S. R. (1997). Learning from text: Reflections on the past and suggestions for the future.
Discourse Process, 23, 357-398.
Professional Activities
President, Society for Text & Discourse, 1999 - 2006
Vice-President of Division C, Learning and Instruction, of the American Educational Research
Association, 2000-2002.
Advisory Board Member for the James S. McDonnell Program Bridging Brain, Mind, and Behavior.
Developmental Learning Sciences Program, of the National Science Foundation, Review Panel
member, 1999 -2002
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
48
KIMBERLEY GOMEZ
Assistant Professor
University of Illinois at Chicago,
1040 W. Harrison Street
Chicago, IL 60607
312-413-7953
EDUCATION
1994
Ph.D. – University of Chicago
Educational Psychology
1991
M.A. – University of Chicago
Educational Psychology
1980
M.S. Florida State University
Speech Pathology
1978
B.A. – University of Florida
Speech Pathology
RESEARCH INTERESTS
The role of literacy and language in technology integrated inquiry learning environments, contentarea literacy, especially in math and science; second language learners; multi-literacies in middle and
secondary schooling, local reform strategies for technology and curriculum integration.







FUNDED GRANTS
Identifying and Assessing Digital Literacy Skills of Upper Elementary Students.
Institute for Educational Sciences. March, 2005. Co-PI with Kimberly Lawless, Susan
Goldman, and Jim Pellegrino. $1, 500,000.
Understanding the Connection Between Science Achievement and Reading
Achievement, National Science Foundation, Research on Learning Environments
(ROLE), December, 2004. $1,784,118. Co-PI with Anthony Bryk, Nichole Pinkard,
Louis Gomez, Phillip Herman. January, 2005 December, 2007.
The Instructional Affordances of Curriculum Embedded Assessment, Spencer Foundation
with Susan Goldman and Jim Pellegrino (under review)
Developing a Technology Plan to Support Teaching and Learning for the Renaissance
2010 Mid-South Initiative, MacArthur Foundation, August, 2004-August, 2005.
$120,000
On the Role of Literacy in the Use and Usability of Progressive Science Curricula for
Children in Urban Schools. Joyce Foundation. April, 2000 – August, 2003. $227, 814.
The CILT “Equity Lens” Project. Computer Interactive Learning Technologies. Stanford Research
Institute. December, 2000-June, 2001. $15,000. With J. David Ramirez, Ph.D., Center for Language
Minority Education and Research (CLMER), California State University (CSU), Long Beach
Supporting Teacher Collaboration. Spencer Foundation School Reform Planning Grants.
April, 1999. With Carol D. Lee, Ph.D. and Louis Gomez, Ph.D. $50,000.
PUBLICATIONS
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006

















8
49
Gomez, K.8.(October, 2005).Teachers of literacy, love of reading, and the literate self. The
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy.
Gomez, K. and Madda, C. (September, 2005). From winging it to designing it:
Understanding vocabulary instruction for ELL Latino students in the middle school science
classroom. Voices in the Middle.
Gomez, K. (under review). Negotiating discourses: Urban students’ use of multiple science
discourses during science fair presentations.
Shrader, G., Gomez, K., & Gomez, L. (under review). Participatory design of science
curricula: The case for research for practice.
Bruna, K. & Gomez, K. (Eds.) (in preparation). Talking science, writing science: The work
of language in multicultural classrooms.
Gomez, K., Gomez, L., Kwon, S., Sherrer, J. (Invited Chapter, in preparation). Supporting
reading-to-learn in science: The application of summarization technology in multicultural
urban high School classrooms. To appear in R, Bloymeyer, T. Ganesh, & H. Waxman (Eds.)
Research in Technology Use in Multicultural Settings.
Gomez, K., Sherrer, J., Borg, T., Dowling, J., & Evans, D. (under review) Literacy infusion
in a high school environmental science curriculum. Illinois Science Teachers Association
Journal.
Gomez, L. & Gomez, K. (in preparation). Preparing young learners for the 21st century:
Reading and writing to learn in science. To appear in the Invitational Paper Series of the
Minority Student Achievement Network.
Diamond, J. and Gomez, K. (2004). African American Parents’ Orientation Toward Schools:
The Implications of social class and school characteristics. Education and Urban Society V.
36, (4).
Diamond, J., Wang, L., & Gomez, K. (May, 2004) African-American and Chinese-American
parent involvement: The importance of race, class, and culture. Research Digest. FINE
Network: Harvard Family Research Project.
Williams, K. (2003) But are they learning anything?: African-American mothers, their
children, and play. In Brown, C. R. & Marchant, C. (eds). Playing for Keeps . Redleaf Press:
St. Paul, Minnesota.
Williams, K. and Gomez, L. (2002) Presumptive literacies in technology-integrated science
curriculum. Published in the Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning
Conference. Boulder, Colorado.
Williams, K. (2000). It's a wired world after all. Chicago Parent Magazine.August.p.43-52.
Ryan, S., Bryk, A. Lopez, G. & Williams, K. (1997) Charting Reform: LSC’s-local
leadership at work. (Public Report) The Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Haight, W., Wang, X., Fung, H., Williams, K. & Mintz, J. (1998) Universal, Developmental,
and Variable Aspects of Young Children’s Play: A cross-cultural comparison of pretending
at Home. Child Development. V.70, (6).
Miller, P., Fung, H., Hoogstra, L. Mintz, J. & Williams, K. (1994). Troubles in the garden
and how they get resolved: The history of a story in one child’s life. In C.A. Nelson (Ed.)
Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, (26). Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.
Williams, K. (1991). Storytelling as a bridge to literacy: An examination of personal
storytelling in the black middle-class. The Journal of Negro Education, 60 (3).
Gomez’ former surname was Williams.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
50
Tom Moher
Dept. of Computer Science (CS)
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC)
851 S. Morgan St., Room 1120
Chicago, IL 60607-7053
Professional Preparation
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota
+1 312 996 3002
+1 312 413 7585 fax
moher@uic.edu
www.evl.uic.edu/moher
Computer, Information, and Control Sciences
Computer Science
SB, 1972
PhD, 1983
Academic/Professional Appointments
1999-present Adjunct Associate Professor, Curriculum & Instruction, College of Education, UIC
1988-present Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science (CS) (formerly Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) Dept. until 2001) and EVL, UIC
1983-1988
Assistant Professor, EECS, UIC
1980-1983
Visiting Assistant Professor, EECS, UIC
Selected Publications
Moher, T., Hussain, S., Halter, T., and Kilb, D. (2005). Embedding Dynamic Phenomena within the
Physical Space of an Elementary School Classroom. ACM CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human
Factors in Computing Systems, 1665-1668.
Moher, T., Hussain, S., Halter, T., and Poliakon, E. (2004). Practicing Seismology in the Fifth-grade
Clasroom: Technology in the Service of Developing a Community of Learners. ISTA Spectrum, Vol.
40 (Fall 2004), No. 2, 32-38.
Johnson, A., Moher, T., Cho, Y., Edelson, R., Russell, E. (2004). Learning Science Inquiry Skills in a
Virtual Field. Computers and Graphics, Vol. 28, No. 3, June 2004, 409-416
Moher, T., Kim, J., and Haas, D. (2002). A Two-tiered Collaborative Design for Observational
Science Activities in Simulated Environments. Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (Computer Support for
Collaborative Learning), G. Stahl, Ed., Jan. 7-11, 2002, Boulder, CO, USA, 361-370.
Moher, T., Johnson, A., Cho, Y., Lin, Y. (2000). Observation-based Inquiry in a Virtual Ambient
Environment. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS
2000), June 14-17, 2000, Ann Arbor, MI, 238-245.
Wiley, J., Sanchez, C. & Moher, T. (2005). Research in Educational Technology. In J. M. Royer (Ed).
The Cognitive Revolution and its effects on Educational Psychology. Information Age Publishing,
231-248.
Moher, T., Gomez, L., Kim, J., Hindo, C., Franssen, S., and Watson, B. (2005). StoryGrid: A
Tangible Interface for Student Expression. ACM CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, 1669-1772.
Cho, Y., Park, K., Moher, T., and Johnson, A. (2004). Mediating Collaborative Design for
Constructing Educational Virtual Reality Environments: A Case Study. Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, Vol. 3190, Oct 2004, 30-37.
T. Moher, X. Ding, J. Wiley, D. Conmy, S. Hussain, P, Singh, and V. Srinivasan. (2003). Combining
Handhelds with a Whole-Class Display to Support the Learning of Scientific Control. ACM
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2003) Extended Abstracts, Ft.
Lauderdale, FL, April 2003, 882-883.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
51
S. Ohlsson, T. Moher, A. Johnson. (2000). Deep Learning in Virtual Reality: How to Teach Children
that the Earth is Round. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science
Society, Philadelphia, PA, Aug. 13-15, 2000, 364-368.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
52
Synergistic Activities
9 Classroom-based research program directly impacting teachers and students in public K-12 schools
ranging from 34%-98% minority enrollment (1997-present).
10 Founding Advisory Board member, UIC Center for Learning, Instruction, and Teacher Development
(with S. Goldman, J. Pellegrino, J. Wiley).
11 Planning committee, UIC Learning Sciences Graduate program and Learning Sciences Research
Institute.
12 Member, Board of Education, District 97, Oak Park, Illinois Public Schools (K-6) (elected, 19931997; appointed 1999).
13 Member, Oak Park (Illinois) Task Force on Commitment to Diversity (2000-2001).
14 Board member, Oak Park Education Foundation, and co-designer of program which used a traveling
bus to bring digital video technologies to Oak Park public school students (1993-2001).
15 College of Engineering Research Award, 2005
16 Member, MacArthur Foundation Teaching and Learning Network, Information Infrastructure
Systems Group
Collaborators
Faculty, staff and students at UIC; Tony Bryk (U Chicago), Robert Chang (Northestern U), Diane
Conmy (Lincoln Elementary School), Elizabeth Davis (U Michigan), Daniel Edelson (Northwestern
U), Martin Gartzman (Chicago Public Schools); Louis Gomez (Northwestern U), Mark Guzdial
(Georgia Tech), T. Halter (Lincoln Elementary School), Deborah Kilb (Scripps Institution of
Oceanography), Joe Krajcik (U Michigan), Nichole Pinkard (U Chicago), Chris Quintana (U
Michigan), Brian Reiser (Northwestern U), Yvonne Rogers (Indiana U), Larry Smarr (UCSD), Elliot
Soloway (U Michigan), Ben Watson (Northwestern U).
Graduate and Post Doctoral Advisors
William B. Thompson (U Utah).
Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate-Scholar Sponsor (33 MS and 7 PhD Students)
PhD students: Karl Steiner (University of North Texas); Paul Wilson (formerly U Texas at Austin;
present position unknown), Yong-Joo Cho (Sangmyung University, Seoul, Korea), Victor Dirda
(Cook County, IL Courts); Joseph Dvorak (Motorola Corp.); Michael Lam (Sun Microsystems);
Thomas Muscarello (DePaul U).
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
53
JAMES WILLIAM PELLEGRINO
pellegjw@uic.edu
312-355-2493
Present Position
Distinguished Professor of Cognitive
Psychology and Education
University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago , IL 60607
Office Address
Department of Psychology (M/C 285)
1007 W. Harrison Street
University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago, IL 60601
(312) 355-2493 (phone)
(312) 355-3930 (fax)
Education
Colgate University: Bachelor of Arts; Major: Psychology; 1965-1969
Univ of Colorado: Master of Arts; Experimental & Quantitative Psychology; 1969-1970
Univ of Colorado: Doctor of Philosophy; Experimental & Quantitative Psych; 1971-1973
Professional Experience
2001Distinguished Professor of Cognitive Psychology & Distinguished
Professor of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago; Co-director of
the Center for the Study of Learning, Instruction, and Teacher
Development
1992-1998
Dean, Peabody College of Education and Human Development, Vanderbilt
University
1989-2001
Frank W. Mayborn Professor of Cognitive Studies, Peabody College,
Vanderbilt University
1987-1989
Chairman, Department of Education, University of California at
Santa Barbara
1979-1989
Associate Professor and Professor of Education and
Psychology, University of California at Santa Barbara
1973-1979
Assistant and Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology and
Research Associate in the Learning Research and Development Center,
University of Pittsburgh
Selected Publications:
Theory, level, and function: Three dimensions for understanding transfer and student
assessment (with D. T. Hickey). In J. P. Mestre (Ed.). Transfer of learning from a modern
multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 251-293). Greenwich, CO: Information Age Publishing, 2005.
Learning and Instruction: A SERP Research Agenda (with S. Donovan). Washington, DC:
National Academy Press, 2004.
The foundations of assessment (with N. Chudowsky). Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research
and Perspectives, 2003, Vol 1, No. 2, 103-148.
Connecting learning theory and instructional practice: Leveraging some powerful affordances of
technology (with the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt). In H. O'Neill & R. Perez
(Eds.), Technology applications in education: A learning view (pp. 173-209). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, 2002.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
54
Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment (with N.
Chudowsky & R. Glaser). Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
Addressing the two disciplines problem: Linking theories of cognition and learning with
assessment and instructional practice (with G. Baxter & R. Glaser). In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D.
Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 309-355). Washington, DC: AERA,
1999.
Grading The Nation’s Report Card: Evaluating NAEP and Transforming the Assessment of
Educational Progress (with L. Jones & K. Mitchell). Washington, DC: National Academy
Press, 1999.
How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice (with S. Donovan & J. Bransford). Washington,
DC: National Academy Press, 1999.
The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment and professional development
(with the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1997.
Looking at technology in context: A framework for understanding technology and education
(with the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt). In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.)
The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 807-840). New York: Simon and Schuster
Macmillan Publishing, 1996.
Synergistic Activities:
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on the Evaluation of
the National and State Assessments of Educational Progress (Committee Chair);
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on Cognitive
Science Foundations of Assessment (Committee Co-chair);
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on Learning
Research and Educational Practice (Committee Co-chair);
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on Strategic
Education Research Partnerships: Panel on Learning and Instruction (Committee Chair);
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Board on Testing and
Assessment (Board Member)
• Co-developer with other members of the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt of
“The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury” a multimedia mathematical problem solving series
(educational product for K-12).
Collaborators (last 48 mo.): John Bransford (U. Washington), David Cordray (Vanderbilt),
Robert Glaser (Pittsburgh), Susan Goldman (UIC), Edward Haertel (Stanford), Ted
Hasselbring (Kentucky), Dan Hickey (Georgia), Earl Hunt (Washington), Anthony Petrosino
(UT Austin).
Graduate and Postgraduate Advisees: Brigid Barron (Stanford), Matthew Brown
(Northwestern), Dan Hickey (Georgia), David Law (Tennessee), Kevin Morrin (Lock Haven),
Mitchell Nathan (Colorado), Anthony Petrosino (UT Austin). Graduate students advised –
25+; Post-doctoral Scholars - 10
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
55
STEVEN E. TOZER
University of Illinois College of Education
1040 W. Harrison Street, M/C147
Chicago, Illinois 60607
(312) 413-7782
EDUCATION
1982
1978
1972
Ph.D. Philosophy of Education, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
M.Ed. Elementary and Early Childhood Education/Curriculum, Loyola
University of Chicago and Erikson Institute for Early Childhood Education
A.B. German, Dartmouth College
PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS HELD
1995-2005
University of Illinois at Chicago.
 Professor, College of Education
 Coordinator, Ed.D. Program in Urban Education Leadership, 2003present
 Chair of Policy Studies Area, 1996- 2002.
1978-95
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
 Head, Department of Curriculum and Instruction
 Department of Educational Policy Studies
Associate Professor, 1989-1994
Assistant Professor, 1984-89
Visiting Assistant Professor, 1982-84
Graduate Teaching Assistant, 1978-82
1976-77
Head Teacher/Director, Alternative School, Unified Delinquency
Intervention Services, Cook County Juvenile Corrections.
1975-76
Director, Christopher House/Eastwood Child Care Center, Chicago.
1972-75
Head teacher and site director, Hull House Uptown Center full day
kindergarten, Chicago.
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS
Tozer, S.E., B. Gallegos, and A. Henry, eds. (2006, forthcoming) Handbook of Research in
Social Foundations of Education, Erlbaum, Inc.
Tozer, S.E., P.C. Violas and G. Senese (2005). School and Society: Historical and
Contemporary Perspectives 5th Edition. New York: McGraw Hill. First Edition
published as Tozer, S.E., P.C. Violas and G. Senese (1993). School and Society:
Educational Thought as Social Expression. (New York: Random House).
Tozer, S.E., ed. (1999). Philosophy of Education 1998. Urbana, IL: Philosophy of
Education Society.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
56
Tozer, and Debbie Miretzky (2005): Social Foundations, Teaching Standards, and the Future
of Teacher Preparation, in Butin, Dan,Teaching the Foundations, Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc
pp.___ Revised version of article of similar title published in Educational Studies, 2000.
Tozer, (2003) Making the philosophical practical, in George Noblit, et al (ed.) The Future of
Educational Studies. 9-22.
Tozer, with Ilhan Avcioglu (2001) the Social Foundations of Education: School and Society
in a Century of NSSE, in National Society for the Study of Education Centennial
Yearbook, Lyn Corno (ed). Chicago: NSSE
Tozer and Debbie Miretzky (2000): Professional teaching standards and social foundations of
education, in Educational Studies 31:2 (Summer) pp. 106-118.
Tozer, S.E. and V. Chou (1999). Review of Gerald Grant and Christine E. Murray, Teaching
in America: The Slow Revolution. Social Service Review, 6 ms. pp.
Tozer, Steven (1998). Two Texts in Philosophy of Education. Philosophy of Education 1997.
Urbana, Illinois: Philosophy of Education Society, 433-38.
Tozer ( 1993). Kenneth D. Benne: An Authorship on Authority, Educational Theory, 43:2
(Spring), 229-233.
Tozer (1993). Toward a New Consensus among Social Foundations Educators, Educational
Foundations, 7:4 (Fall), 5-22.
EDITORIAL ACTIVITY
Editorial Board Member, Teachers College Record, 2002-2004; Educational Studies 2001-2004;
Educational Theory, 1996-97, 1999-2003; Educational Foundations, 1990-1993 and 1999-2002;
Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 1993-95;
Guest Editor, with Thomas Anderson and Bonnie Armbruster, of Teachers College Record, Vol.
91, No. 3, Spring 1990, Special edition on Foundations of Education in Teacher Education.
SERVICE TO PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

American Educational Studies Association
Vice-President and President Elect, 2004-2005; President 2005-06
Philosophy of Education Society
 Program Committee, Annual Meeting, 1987, 1997; Program Chair, March 1998, Boston
 Representative to Council of Learned Societies in Education, 1988-95.
 Committee on Professional Affairs, 1993-96; Chairperson, 1995-97
Council of Learned Societies in Education
 President for term 2000-2003
 Vice President 1997-2000
 Contributing editor, revised CLSE Standards of Academic Accreditation for Social
Foundations of Education and Educational Policy Studies, 1997.
Chair, Governor’s Task Force on Teacher Quality in Illinois, 1999-2001.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
57
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
CURRICULUM VITAE
Philip D. Wagreich
Director, Institute for Mathematics and Science Education (m/c 250) , University of
Illinois at Chicago, Chicago IL 60680-4348
Professor, Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science
Telephone: (312)996-2448 FAX: (312)413-7411
Birthdate:
Birthplace:
Education:
Thesis advisor:
Personal:
Positions Held:
July 25, 1941
New York, New York
B.S. Mathematics, 1962, Brandeis University
Ph.D. Mathematics, 1967, Columbia University
Prof. Heisuke Hironaka
Married, four children
1966-68 Lecturer, Brandeis University
1968-73 Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania
1968-70 Member, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton
University of Illinois at Chicago
1973-79
Associate Professor
1979-present Professor
Areas of research: mathematics and science education, algebraic geometry,
discrete groups.
Major Administrative Duties and Professional Activities:
Director, UIC Institute for Mathematics and “Science Education, 1990-present
Director, TIMS (Teaching Integrated Mathematics and Science) Project
Co-director (with Naomi Fisher, Harvey Keynes, and Jerry Bona), Mathematicians
Education Reform Network, 1988-present
Member, Mathematics Association of America Committee on the Mathematics
Education of Teachers (COMET), 1990-1996
Member, NCTM Principles and Standards for School Mathematics writing team.
1997-2000.
Member, AMS Task Force on Meetings and Conferences, 1994.
Organizer, U.S. France Joint Seminar on Singularities, Paris, 1983.
58
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
59
Awards & Public Recognition
School Science and Mathematics Association; In recognition of the promotion
of mathematics and science integration, the 1992 Excellence in Integrated
Mathematics & Science Award (with Howard Goldberg).
Illinois Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1996 Max Beberman Award for
contributions to mathematics education in Illinois and the U.S.
Representative Publications
Isolated singularities of algebraic surfaces with C*-action, (with Peter Orlik), Ann. of
Math. 93 (1971), 205-228.
Seifert n-manifolds, (with Peter Orlik), Invent. Math. 28 (1975), 137-159.
Integrating math and science in the elementary school (with Howard Goldberg),
Science and Children, 26(5), 22-24, 1989.
A model integrated mathematics science program for the elementary school (with
Howard Goldberg), Perspectives on Research in Mathematics Education,
International Journal of Educational Research, 14 (2), pp. 193-214, 1990.
Growth functions of surface groups (w/ J.W. Cannon), Math. Ann. 293 (1992), 239257 .
Growth rates, Zp-homology, and volumes of hyperbolic 3-manifolds (with Peter
Shalen), Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 331 (1992), 895-917.
Making connections by teaching integrated mathematics and science, Proceedings
of the International Commission for the Study and Improvement of Mathematics
Teaching 44, (1993)
The Quest for Integration: School Mathematics and Science, American Journal of
Education, 106(1), pp. 179-206 (1997)
Student Learning and Achievement with Math Trailblazers (with M. A. Carter, J.
Beissinger, A. Cirulis, M. Gartzman, C.R. Kelso) in S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson
(Eds.), Standards Oriented School Mathematics Curricula: What Does the Research
Say About Student Outcomes? Hilldale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
(2003), 45-78.
Math Trailblazers: A Mathematical Journey Using Science and Language Arts (with
Howard Goldberg, et. al.), Grades K-5, Kendall-Hunt Publishing Company,
Dubuque, IA, 11,000pp, First edition 1997, second edition 2004.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
60
Donald J. Wink
Department of Chemistry (m/c 111)
University of Illinois at Chicago
845 West Taylor Street
Chicago, IL 60607
312-413-7383
dwink@uic.edu
Education
University of Chicago, S.B.
1980 Chemistry
Harvard University, Ph.D.
1985 Inorganic Chemistry
Professional
University of Illinois at Chicago
Experience
2001-2005
Head
2000-2001
Acting Head
2000-present
Professor
1992-2000
Associate Professor
1992-2000
Coordinator of General Chemistry
New York University
1985-1992
Assistant Professor
Honors University of Illinois at Chicago
1994, 1996, 2005
Nominated for Silver Circle Award
1996-1997
Excellence in Teaching Award
1997
Silver Circle Award
Selected Publications
“Reconstructing Student Knowledge: The Challenge of Transformative Perspectives," Donald
J. Wink. J. Chem. Educ., 2001, 78, 1107.
“Radical Contraction of 1,3,2-Dioxaphosphepanes to 1,3,2-Dioxaphosphorinanes: A Kinetic and 17O NMR
Spectroscopic Study,” David Crich,* Fernando Sartillo-Piscil, Leticia Quintero-Cortes, and Donald J. Wink, J.
Org. Chem.; 2002; 67, 3360.
"Stereoselective Formation of Glycosyl Sulfoxides and Their Subsequent Equilibration. Ring
Inversion of an a-Xylopyranosyl Sulfoxide Dependent on the Configuration at Sulfur," David
Crich,* Jan Mataka, and Donald J. Wink, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 6028.
“Template-directed C-H activation: development and application to the total synthesis of 7episordidin,” Duncan J. Wardrop, Raymond E. Forslund, Chad L. Landrie, Adriana I. Velter,
Donald Wink and Bhushan Surve, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry, 2003, 14, 929 - 940.
“Highly Regiocontrolled Pd-Catalyzed Cross-Coupling Reaction of Terminal Alkynes and Allenylphosphine
Oxides,” by Mikhail Rubin, Jelena Markov, Stepan Chuprakov, Donald J. Wink, and Vladimir Gevorgyan, J. Org.
Chem.
“Approximate OH5 Ring Conformation of 2,3-O-carbonate Protected - and -L-Rhamnopyranosides as
Confirmed by X-ray Crystallography,” by David Crich, A. U. Vinod, John Picione, and Donald J. Wink, ARKIVOC
Volume 2005, Part(vi) (online journal, at www.arkat-usa.org).
"Design and Synthesis of Highly Constrained Factor Xa Inhibitors: Amidine-Substituted
Bis(benzoyl)-[1,3]-dizepan-2-ones and Bis(benzylidine)-bis(gem-dimethyl)cycloketones," Jian
Cui, David Crich, Donald Wink, Matthew Lam, Arnold L. Rheingold, David A.. Case, WenTao
Fu, Yasheen Zhou, Hohan Rao, Arthur J. Olson, and Michael E. Johnson, Biorg and Med.
Chem., 2003, 11, 3379-3392..
“Relevance and Learning Theory” by Donald J. Wink, in Chemists’ Guide to Effective
Teaching, N. J. Pienta, T. Greenbowe, and M. M. Cooper, Eds., Prentice-Hall, 2005.
"TiCl4 Promoted Multicomponent Reaction: a New Entry to the Functionalized a--Amino Acids” Arun. K. Ghosh,
Chun-Xiao, Xu, and Donald Wink Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 7-10.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on September 8, 2006; August 17, 2006
61
“Connections between Pedagogical and Epistemological Constructivism: Questions for
Teaching and Research in Chemistry,” by Donald J. Wink, Foundations of Chemistry, in press.
"Working with Chemistry: A Laboratory Inquiry Program," 2nd. Ed. Donald J. Wink, Julie
Ellefson Kuehn, Sharon Fetzer Gislason, W. H. Freeman, 2005.
"The Practice of Chemistry: A Preparatory Chemistry Text," Donald J. Wink, Sharon Fetzer Gislason, and Sheila
D. McNicholas, W. H. Freeman, 2004.
Conference Activity Organized
August, 2001
July, 2003
July, 2004
July, 2005
Science
UIC.
Cooperative Workshops in the Chemical Sciences
Implemented a one-week chemical education workshop on a subcontract
from Georgia State University. The theme was "Supporting Student
Laboratory Learning" The four workshops have included more than 70
participants from across the country. With Julie Ellefson Kuehn and Sharon
Fetzer Gislason.
February, 2005 University of West Georgia Generating Enthusiasm in Math and
Designed and implemented a two-day workshop on “Inquiry and Science
Education.”
June, 2005 NSF-Chautauqua Program.
Implemented a two-day workshop on “Peer Led Team Learning,” held at
Collaborators outside of UIC (last 48 months)
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee Thomas Holme
Miami University of Ohio Stacey Lowery Bretz
University of Iowa Norb Pienta
William Rainey Harper College Julie Ellefson Kuehn
Harold Washington College Dennis Lehmann, Dana Perry, Mike Davis
College of DuPage Susan Shih, Mary Newberg, Carolyn Dockus
Moraine Valled Community College Ewa Fredette
Northeastern Illinois University Pratibha Varma-Nelson, Tom Weaver, Veronica Curtis-Palmer
Purdue University Gabriela Weaver, Fred Lytle
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on April 6, 2006
p. 62
Appendix E. PhD Proposal Approval Letters/Emails from Supporting Colleges
College of Education:
February 27, 2006
To:
Dr. Susan Goldman
Dr. James Pellegrino
From: Celina M. Sima
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Terri Thorkildsen
Chair, Educational Policy and Programs Committee
Re:
Approval of Ph.D. in Learning Sciences Program
Members of the College of Education’s Educational Policy and Programs Committee
voted unanimously to approve the Ph.D. in Learning Sciences Program proposal at their
February 23, 2006 meeting.
After careful deliberations about all facets of the proposal, the committee would like to
highlight their appreciation of the thoughtful plans for program administration and
operations. In particular, they noted the importance of the staff support and the director
for graduate studies positions outlined on page 25 of the proposal. We see these positions
as crucial for ensuring program coherence and facilitating communication among
students working in a structure that encompasses four distinct colleges.
We appreciate the thoughtful work involved in bringing forth this proposal and are
pleased to be a part of this exciting interdisciplinary effort.
All our best wishes for an expeditious approval process!
c. V. Chou
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on April 6, 2006
p. 63
College of Engineering:
From: "John R. Hetling" <jhetli1@uic.edu>
Date: February 23, 2006 12:54:59 PM CST
To: "'Tom Moher'" <moher@uic.edu>
Cc: "'Robert Sloan'" <sloan@uic.edu>
Subject: RE: Learning Science PhD Program proposal for EPC approval
Tom,
It was held on Monday of this week; the proposal was endorsed by the COE
EPC.
John
John R. Hetling
Associate Professor, Director of Undergraduate Studies
Department of Bioengineering
Adjunct, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
Neural Engineering Research Group - Neurotronic Communication
Mail to:
University of Illinois at Chicago
SEO 232, MC 063
851 South Morgan Street
Chicago, IL 60607-7052
(312) 413 - 8721 phone
(312) 996 - 5921 FAX
Educational Policy Committee
College of Engineering
Minutes of the meeting
February 20th, 2006 Meeting
1. PhD program in Learning Sciences-EPC endorses this program.
Proposal for PH.D. Program in Learning Sciences December, 2005 – Updated on April 6, 2006
p. 64
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences:
Delivered-To: khubalik@tigger.cc.uic.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.3.4
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 13:14:24 -0600
To: Kim Hubalik Neumann <khubalik@uic.edu>
From: Ginny Tunnicliff <vtunnicl@uic.edu>
Subject: Re: Learning Sciences PhD proposal
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.24 required=5 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,
MR_NOT_ATTRIBUTED_IP,UIC_FROM_UIC,UIC_MENTIONED
autolearn=disabled
version=3.1.0
X-UIC-Note: Already SA Checked.
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 128.248.155.23
The PhD proposal was passed by EPC on Jan. 9. The PhD proposal was voted on and
approved by the faculty on Feb. 28th. -Ginny
Ginny Tunnicliff
Assistant to the Dean
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
University of Illinois at Chicago
601 S. Morgan Street (M/C 228)
Chicago, IL 60607-7104
312-413-2506
Fax: 312-413-2511