EDUCATOR AMBASSADOR WEEK AT SSU:
JULY 15-19, 2002

The Educator Ambassador program at Sonoma State University consists of ten top-notch educators who assist in the development, testing, assessment and dissemination of NASA space-based educational materials. The Educator Ambassadors (EAs) represent the Swift and Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST) satellites and NASA’s Structure and Evolution of the Universe (SEU) theme area which itself consists of 16 astronomy satellite missions. These EAs were chosen through a nation-wide application process. From this large pool of applicants, the few who were selected are at the top of their field; most have won national recognition for their abilities and efforts to teach science. Many reach out to underserved communities, and have special abilities to disseminate the NASA materials.
The Educator Ambassador Summer Institute was a one-week training seminar for the EAs held in the summer of 2002. During their week-long stay with the Education and Public Outreach group at Sonoma State University (SSU) the EAs were submersed in a content-rich experience in SEU science, instrumentation, and mission operations. The EAs used and reviewed the current educational materials associated with each SEU mission. Special emphasis was placed on Swift and GLAST activities for their respective EAs.
Throughout the week the EAs were visited by scientists and educators affiliated GLAST and SEU missions. The guests included Nahide Craig with the Cosmic Hot Interstellar Plasma Spectrometer (CHIPS), Shannon Range and Jennifer Mullins with Gravity Probe B, Tory Brady with the San Francisco Exploratorium Teacher Institute, Ron Marson with TOPS! Learning Systems, and guest lecturer Gerson Goldhaber with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The group took a tour of SLAC, including a personal tour of the GLAST Large Area Telescope (with lecture by Gary Godfrey) and Gravity Probe B facilities.
Assessment of the week’s events was done by Ted Britton from WestEd for GLAST and Sarah Connolly from the Lesley University Program Evaluation Research Group (PERG) for SEU.
What follows below is a detailed itinerary of the summer institute including summaries of the activities, reports from the EAs, and images from the various workshops and talks.

SEU Activities in small groups rotating between:

a) Swift- Spin a Spectrum
b) GLAST- Build your own Active Galactic Nuclei
c) Chandra- Spectrum Scaling
d) CHIPS- local bubble activity
e) XMM-Newton- Seeing the Universe Through X-Ray Eyes

Lynn, Phil, Sarah and Lynda Williams

Nahide Craig with CHIPS

AGN Activity Review:

This evaluation was the first of many to come for this activity. For a previously untested product it received excellent reviews. The EAs agreed that it was a good activity and with a little more work it has the potential to be an excellent classroom activity. From the pictures, it can be seen that the EAs had fun completing this activity, which implies that the students will too.

Chandra:

Spectrum Scaling

Spectrum Scaling Activity Review:

See the Activity (word doc)

Since there were only three evaluations submitted, the overall rating of this activity is not quite as accurate or thorough as the others. The largest concern for the activity was that it is very time consuming, which is a concern given classroom constraints.

Figure 7: Connecting the Bubble dots

See the Activity

The CHIPS activity still needs work. The background info is not included and some of the EAs claimed that they didn’t need the activity information to answer its questions. Only one of the teachers felt they would use this activity in their classroom.

X-ray Eyes Activity Review:

See the Activity

This activity had been used previously by one EA in his classroom, and he gave it an overall good rating. The EAs pointed out that one strength of this activity is that it teaches useful information about image processing. Rewording of the first and second questions was suggested in order to make it more inquiry-driven. Attached is a more in-depth evaluation by Ted Britton.

Tory Brady, from the San Francisco Exploratorium Teacher Institute, specializes in training teachers. She gave the EAs an excellent presentation on how humans define objects as simple as a pear, and how it actually appears to us. She also made a device out of simple household materials to measure the angular diameter of the Sun. Tory also informed the EAs of the many opportunities available to educators at the Exploratorium Teacher Institute.

Invisible Light Sources and Detectors Activity Review:

The GEMS activity received an overall good rating. It is obvious that this activity has been thoroughly tested. Many of the EAs felt that this activity was appropriate for their classrooms. The main suggestion was to better relate how Swift applies to this activity. Attached is a more in-depth evaluation by Ted Britton.

Examining Space-time with Gyroscopes Activity Review:

Many of the EAs felt that this activity would not necessarily apply for their level of students, but instead could be used for Honors high school students and college entry-level students. The space-time topic is a daunting one, which is why many of the EAs felt it would only be useful for the upper level students. A suggestion from one EA was to add misconceptions of space-time to the activity. Gyroscopes, however, are a relevant topic in the course of physics study and some slight reworking of this activity may make it a bit more comprehensible for the average student.

View the presentation given by GPB

Tops Activity Review:

This activity is math-based and therefore aligned better with math rather than science standards. The reviews reflected this concern, with the highest rating from the one EA who has a math background. The most common suggestion was the need to make it more relevant to the GLAST mission, which is funding the activity. Also brought to the attention of Ron Marson, the activity’s creator, was the need for an explanation as to why the students should use slide rules or even learn to use them. The SSU E/PO group has already revised the GLAST mission sections of this activity, and these changes have been submitted to Mr. Marson.

Activity Review:

The EAs were very happy with this activity and booklet. They made the general comment that an activity needs to list specifically data such as how long the work takes, what standards are met, and for what grade level it is designed. The Black Hole activity had all that information. In addition the EAs suggested a page with equations on it to help the students, and to arrange the activity in the booklet so that the directions are listed before the data table. The EAs had fun doing this exercise and felt that the students would learn from it as well.

The EAs were asked to give a thirty-minute presentation of classroom activities they have used in the past. The purpose of this exercise was to see what the EAs themselves have used to teach students, and to see if we can use these methods and topics in future Swift, GLAST and SEU materials. GLAST EA Teena Della gave one such presentation on using “magic” as a method for teaching physics. In the itinerary are titles of the other presentations that were given throughout the week by the EAs.

The week’s conclusion:

The week with the Educator Ambassadors was educational both for them and for our group here. They learned about space science, NASA and what it takes to create a space-based mission, and in turn we received useful input about our activities and our approach at designing them.
We found that our main problem with our approach was the lack of Instructional Design. All of our activities need a common template that (among other things) clearly states the time required to do them, the standards covered, and the appropriate grade levels. The EAs also expressed the need for activities that used more common (i.e. household) materials, and which took less time to do in the classroom. They did express a lot of support for the activities as well, and an eagerness to try many of them out in their classrooms.
Luckily throughout the week we received many new resources that will help us with our instructional design process. Helpful tools include the Challenger Center’s Instructional Design Guide (courtesy of GLAST EA Jason Smith) and SEU EA Mary Garrett’s web sites. Overall the week went very well, and we consider it a success. When we have the next summer institute in 2004, we’ll make some changes including the length of the training and more extensive evaluations of the materials. The week was certainly an eye-opener for us, and a great experience for the Educator Ambassadors.