There is great interest in interdisciplinary curriculum materials that span different grade levels, courses, and disciplines. The DIMACS Center at Rutgers University has been developing materials in the form of one-week modules for high school students at the interface of mathematics and biology for over five years now and is continuing to do so. The reception to these materials has been enormously positive by both mathematics teachers and biology teachers across the country from small rural schools to large urban schools and everything in between. These materials have been particularly effective at broadening participation of diverse audiences. A second interdisciplinary materials development project for high school students is finishing its second year. This project, The Value of Computational Thinking Across Grade Levels, focuses on computational thinking in a number of different disciplines, such as social studies, mathematics, environmental science, and computer science, among many others. These one-week materials are being field tested nationwide in diverse high schools. Challenges abound when it comes to development of interdisciplinary materials, not the least of which is getting authors with background in each of the disciplines, and authors who understand the pedagogy needed to teach these materials, who can write teachable materials. The difficult development of high school interdisciplinary curriculum materials is compounded by the need to indicate grade level, possible courses­—for example AP or other various levels, as well as various disciplines, and usability by teachers not trained in all of the disciplines that make up the content of the materials.

Participants in the session are provided with modules and pieces of modules from both the BioMath project and the Computational Thinking project, as well as snippets from the evaluations of usage in schools. Questions surrounding the instructional materials are provided to help evoke discussion and provide feedback to the developers and other developers who might be participants to help understand possible solutions to the issues named above as well as others.

Work is progressing to develop the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). With private funding from the Carnegie Corporation and support from National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the National Research Council (NRC) and Achieve, Inc., have embarked on a two-step cooperative process to develop the NGSS. The first step was to develop a conceptual framework that is grounded in current research on science and science learning and identifies the science all K–12 students should know. The NRC released the Framework for K–12 Science Education in July of 2011. The next step is the development of the actual standards, a process led by Achieve involving science experts, science teachers, states, and other science education partners. This two-step process takes a broader and more cooperative approach to the development of science standards. The NGSS are due for completion in early 2013.

This session begins with a dilemma—the realization that professional development often falls short of expectations for improving teacher practice and classroom learning. We realize that teaching is a culturally-bounded endeavor, and changing classroom culture is extremely complex. Our projects are founded on theories of action grounded in research, that is, theories of what is required for professional development programs to change teacher awareness, motivation, understanding, and actual classroom action in STEM. Historically, those theories of action have often fallen short of our ambitions.

Now, advances in technology may provide new potential for meeting our professional development challenge. Do these affordances when blended with established research-based models create novel opportunities for increasing the effectiveness of professional development?

Participants planning to attend the session are encouraged to think in advance about the following questions:

1.                   What works?

2.                   How can technology help?

3.                   What new questions are raised?

4.                   What next steps can we take for increasing professional development effectiveness?

The presenters each have projects informing the issue and will share experiences so that discussion is facilitated by explicit examples. The session will result in a DR K-12 Professional Development Working Group that continues to share ideas, challenges, and strategies.