Resize Text: 
T he call for a more scientifically literate society is a constant drumbeat coming from the mainstream media and from reports of concerned organizations like the National Academy of Sciences. And they see improved education and outreach from institutions of higher learning as key to any proposed solution to this major national challenge. In higher education, the need to integrate research, teaching, and learning has been a theme woven through decades of calls for improvement. In reality, the weight of external research funding has tipped the scales at universities —and increasingly more often at colleges —toward research activities. Any associated gains in the teaching and learning of undergraduates are seen as collateral, albeit very real, benefits.
In an attempt to move, if not balance, the scales of activity toward increasing scientific capability across a diverse national population, U.S. federal funding agencies are purposefully linking research funding to broad national impact. Some U.S. federal funding agencies, such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) are now insisting that scientists describe how their proposed research will have “broader impacts.” Activities of researchers must contribute not only to the growing fund of knowledge but to the more immediate national good.
This appeal for broader impact is an opportunity to truly integrate research, teaching, and learning in the culture of universities and their faculty. Indeed, through the training of graduate students and post-docs, programs that are working to improve STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) teaching and learning—such as the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison—are poised to shape a future faculty whose members are both excellent researchers and superb teachers. Such programs are positioned to enhance both the research and teaching missions of U.S. research universities by providing principle investigators (PIs) applying for grants with the capacity to effectively address the broader-impacts funding criterion, which then becomes a leverage point for institutional change. A decade from now we envision that present graduate students will be leaders of a national faculty for whom the broader impact of their research programs is taken as a given, and that they will have the skills and abilities to make it happen.
Robert D. Mathieu, Christine Pfund, and Don Gillian-Daniel are all at the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Bob Mathieu is a professor and chair of the Department of Astronomy and co-faculty director of the Delta Program in Research, Teaching and Learning. Mathieu also leads the CIRTL Network. Chris Pfund and Don Gillian-Daniel are associate directors of Delta. Dr. Pfund also co-directs the Wisconsin Program for Scientific Teaching, while Dr. Gillian-Daniel leads the Delta Internship and Certificate Programs. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Jane Harris Cramer and Joel Pedersen to this work and the support of National Science Foundation Grant No. 0227592. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Become a Subscriber