1. We listened to other inputs during 2007-2009: 2006 2007 • AIBS Biology Education Summit (May 2008) • HHMI Invitational Summit on Undergraduate Biology: • The Role of Disciplinary Societies (Nov 2008) • NSF Advisory Committee meetings • Biological Sciences • Education & Human Resources • Environmental Research & Education • NRC reports • National Science Board reports • NSF merit review panel meetings • Professional society meetings 2009

2. Mini-conversations during 2009 with undergraduate majors and non-majors to gauge importance of issues to students, discuss potential approaches: 2006 2007 231 student participants from 13 institutions. Convened by participants from the regional conversations. Some students are HERE! MAJOR Biology – 43% Other STEM – 31% Humanities – 15% Arts – 3% Undecided – 9% 2008 2009 Image created with Google Maps

3. Acknowledgments • NSF, HHMI, NIH • Conference Advisory Board • More than 500 faculty and administrators • Scores of students • AAAS staff, especially Yolanda George Vision &Change Conference Advisory Board Chairs Carol A. Brewer – University of Montana Alan I. Leshner – AAAS MembersPeter J. Bruns - HHMI Ingrid C. Burke - University of Wyoming Alan P. Covich – University of Georgia Lynn W. Enquist – Princeton Neuroscience Inst Louis J. Gross - University of Tennessee, Knoxville Felicia Keesing - Bard College Jay B. Labov – NAS/National Research Council Thomas Pollard –Yale University Cliff Poodry - NIH Mary Poss – Pennsylvania State University Muriel E. Poston – Skidmore College Robert S. Seville – University of Wyoming Daniel Udovic - University of Oregon Thomas A. Woolsey – Washington University St. Louis Maria Elena Zavala - Cal State University Northridge C. Brewer, U MT, 2/2010

4. Focal Areas for Working Groups Overarching and unifying key concepts and competencies Student-centered learning to engage students in discourse Assessing student learning Innovations in integrating scientific research experiences across the curriculum Toolkits to support change Preparing current and future faculty to bring innovation to instruction Implementing innovations and assessing their impact Changing institutional approaches C. Brewer, U MT, 2/2010

5. The Charge to Working Groups • Synthesize what has been done, what we have learned & tools/strategies that work • Identify actions and tools that are still needed • Define the changes needed to achieve the vision