The National Research Council (2000) has recommended that science departments at higher education institutions offer "college-level courses that provide teachers with strong exposure to appropriate content and that model the kinds of pedagogical approaches appropriate for teaching that content" (p. 118). In this vein I developed and evaluated a general chemistry course which involved problem-solving, use of technology, and collaborative group work.

Dr. James Gallagher (Michigan St. U.), our external evaluator of the Florida Collaborative for Excellence in Teacher Preparation (FCETP), developed two evaluation instruments with me for the entire FCETP to utilize. The quantitative part of the instruments utilized a Likert scale format. One instrument examined students' perceived understanding of chemistry content knowledge, and the other surveyed students' perceptions about science, mathematics, and technology education (Florida Higher Education Environment Survey, FHEES).

We sorted the student responses on the FHEES into five categories:

• As information transfer
• As encouraging active learning
• As using assessment to foster understanding
• As supporting students' learning needs
• As using technology to aid learning

The FHEES instrument also involved three open-ended questions. We sorted the data using Q.S.R. NUD*IST, a software program that allows one to organize qualitative data into categories of ideas called data trees. The data can be independently sorted using different parameters, allowing one to focus on different aspects of the students' responses.

As part of the evaluation, a graduate assistant interviewed me, the faculty member, and utilized the course syllabus to learn the stated goals of the course. Evaluation of both quantitative and the qualitative data allows me to learn what worked well to promote student learning. It also guides me as to how to improve other aspects of the learning in future offerings of the course.