Talking about Leaving Revisited discusses findings from a five-year study that explores the extent, nature, and contributory causes of field-switching both from and among "STEM" majors, and what enables persistence to graduation. The book reflects on what has and has not changed since publication of Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences (Elaine Seymour & Nancy M. Hewitt, Westview Press, 1997). With the editors' guidance, the authors of each chapter collaborate to address key questions, drawing on findings from each related study source: national and institutional data, interviews with faculty and students, structured observations and student assessments of teaching methods in STEM gateway courses. Pitched to a wide audience, engaging in style, and richly illustrated in the interviewees' own words, this book affords the most comprehensive explanatory account to date of persistence, relocation and loss in undergraduate sciences. Comprehensively addresses the causes of loss from undergraduate STEM majors-an issue of ongoing national concern. Presents critical research relevant for nationwide STEM education reform efforts. Explores the reasons why talented undergraduates abandon STEM majors. Dispels popular causal myths about why students choose to leave STEM majors. This volume is based upon work supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Award No. 2012-6-05 and the National Science Foundation Award No. DUE 1224637.

Talking about Leaving Revisited discusses findings from a five-year study that explores the extent, nature, and contributory causes of field-switching both from and among "STEM" majors, and what enables persistence to graduation. The book reflects on what has and has not changed since publication of Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences (Elaine Seymour & Nancy M. Hewitt, Westview Press, 1997). With the editors' guidance, the authors of each chapter collaborate to address key questions, drawing on findings from each related study source: national and institutional data, interviews with faculty and students, structured observations and student assessments of teaching methods in STEM gateway courses. Pitched to a wide audience, engaging in style, and richly illustrated in the interviewees' own words, this book affords the most comprehensive explanatory account to date of persistence, relocation and loss in undergraduate sciences. Comprehensively addresses the causes of loss from undergraduate STEM majors-an issue of ongoing national concern. Presents critical research relevant for nationwide STEM education reform efforts. Explores the reasons why talented undergraduates abandon STEM majors. Dispels popular causal myths about why students choose to leave STEM majors. This volume is based upon work supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Award No. 2012-6-05 and the National Science Foundation Award No. DUE 1224637.

Partners combines in-depth interviews with quantitative data to show how innovations in the roles of graduate teaching assistants at universities are improving both their own experiences and the overall educational environment. This book addresses a topic of growing interest in higher education, namely the professional development of the future professorate. It explores the contribution that both undergraduate and graduate teaching assistants can play in undergraduate education, particularly in the sciences where considerable rethinking of both content and pedagogy is underway. Drawing on three studies of undergraduate reform initiatives-two in chemistry and one in astronomy-the author illustrates the under-used potential of teaching assistants as collaborators in implementing active and interactive models of teaching and learning. She points to unmet needs in the educational preparation and support of TAs in more traditionally-taught science courses, and the additional preparation that TAs require to be effective enablers of learning in support of new pedagogies. The TAs emerge from her studies as trouble-shooters, consultants, and collaborators in support of the innovations for which they work, with a potential for active collegial engagement that may be underestimated. They also provide insights into the causes of problems that undergraduates often experience in shifting to active learning modes, and of resistance to these changes among students, faculty, and TAs themselves.