Abstracts

1

1

Abstracts Beyond Critical Thinking: Teaching Consciousness and Commitment Jane Aiken (Washington University)

William Perry identified Commitment as the highest stage of thinking. It is beyond critical thinking, however, it may be his least developed analysis within his stages of learning. This presentation will discuss Perry's commitment stage and identify ways in which it can be tied to transformative and action learning theory, particularly the theories of Jack Mezirow.

We Know It When We See It: Issues of Quality in SoTL Cheryl Albers (Buffalo State College)

Join a dialogue regarding the setting of standards for assessing SoTL. Some of us argue that credibility can only result by adhering to the criteria used to judge more positivistic forms of scholarship. Others believe the myriad purposes, epistemologies, and products associated with SoTL warrant different indicators of quality. What do you think?

Metaphors in Teaching and Learning Viv Anderson (Leeds Metropolitan University Headingley Campus)

Metaphors have intellectual, emotional, creative and illustrative functions (Bessant, 2002, p.92) The context for this dip into the rock pool of the world of metaphors in teaching and learning is my work with mature students who are in employment and are studying part time. Most of them are women and are in first line managerial positions. This rock pool is fed by the tide which brings with it well known metaphors which have a long history in the world of employment the glass ceiling being a case in point. Davidson (1997) refers to the concrete ceiling for black and ethnic minority women managers and Still (1995), who discusses the history of the glass ceiling metaphor, also refers to glass walls, sticky floors, perspex ceilings and greasy poles (p.107) in relation to the position of women in the work force. Other waves bring in the metaphors that have been used to help understand the culture of organisations ( for example, Alvesson, 2002). Morgan points out how significant metaphors are in implying a way of thinking and a way of seeing that pervade how we see our world generally (1997, p. 12 original emphasis). He continues: we frequently talk about organizations as if they were machines (ibid. p. 13). Mature students in general engage very well with the process of higher education. They bring a wide range of experience, but often struggle with much of the literature and theory, that, anecdotally, they find remote, removed from reality and jargonistic. In addition, as academics we write our learning outcomes in academic jargon for example: By the end of this programme students will be able to synthesise theory and practice. In order to try to demystify this jargon, as part of this study, students were asked to present their organisation as a metaphor, in this case as a drawing, and then apply Morgan's framework. This framework enables us to classify organisational cultures as metaphors. This not only promotes the understanding of organisational culture, but also helps in the process of learning about organisational culture. There is much to be gained from inviting the metaphor first from students, particularly in an action learning context. Perceptions and opinions, degrees of engagement and alienation emerged strongly through the personal metaphors of the students involved in the study. The paper explores examples of personal metaphor from a group of mature students and indicates the benefit of starting from where the student is at. References Alvesson, M. (2002) Understanding Organizational Culture. London: SAGE. Bessant, J. (2002) Dawkins Higher Education Reforms and How Metaphors Work in Policy Making.

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. Vol. 24 No. 1. Pages 87-99. Davidson, M.J. ( 1997) The Black and Ethnic Minority Woman Manager. London: Paul Chapman

Publishing. Morgan, G. (1997) Images of Organization. London: SAGE. Still, L. (1995) Glass ceilings or slippery poles? in Limerick, B & Lingard, B. (eds) Gender and changing

educational management Hodder Education.

Developing Teaching Scholars: Comparing Goals, Theories, and Approaches of SoTL Programs in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States Thomas A. Angelo (Victoria University of Wellington) and Christine M. Asmar (University of Sydney)

What are the distinguishing characteristics of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) programs in different universities and different national contexts? How do espoused theories of teaching, learning

Abstracts

2

2

and change play influence the structures and practices of such programs? Based on data from a selective scan of SoTL programs in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States, this interactive session offers a scheme for categorizing and analyzing the goals/purposes, theoretical bases, and academic/faculty development approaches of such programs. Examples from these three countries will be used to illustrate the scheme and to prompt discussion.

Researching College Student Social Life Elizabeth Armstrong (Indiana University Bloomington)

Colleges and universities provide academic and social opportunities for undergraduates. They also provide a context for students to explore romantic and sexual relationships, and to learn about sexuality. The menu of sexual learning opportunities provided by a college might be referred to as its erotic curricula. To understand if institutional cultures matter for the sexual development of young people, I ask: Do colleges and universities have distinct erotic curricula? And, if so, are these differences consequential for individuals? Does the school attended affect an individuals sexual attitudes, practices, or identity? Does it shape how much they know about sex and the emotions they associate with sexuality? Does it shape how they present themselves as sexual, in terms of how they dress and look? If so, through what processes does institutional environment exert its influence? If the college environment is not consequential, why is it not? These questions will be addressed with a longitudinal study of the college experiences of students attending three colleges a large secular university, a small secular liberal arts college, and a small religious school. This mixed-method project will involve the collection of interview, ethnographic, documentary, and survey data and use both qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques. Data collection for this project is on-going. I have conducted 16 group interviews at a large research university, and will have completed 6 weeks of ethnography of two dormitories at a large research university by October 2004. I will be able to present on observations about student culture from this data, and will invite reactions to my findings from conference attendees. The group interviews suggest that I will discuss how students balance socializing and academics. The students interviewed so far place a high value on social skills. All have talked positively about becoming more outgoing as a result of college. In their view, the consequences of over-studying are more negative than the consequences of partying too much. They are skeptical about the value of grades and credentials in the worlds of work and life they assume that an employer will always choose the more socially skilled and presentable potential employee over the one with better grades. They see going out and meeting people as key to acquiring better social skills. Recent research by economists on the importance of emotional intelligence in today's economy suggests that their assessment of the economic value of social skills may be on target.

The Mack Center at Indiana University for Inquiry on Teaching and Learning Patrick Ashton and other Mack Center Fellows (Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne)

In 2002, the Mack Center at Indiana University for Inquiry on Teaching and Learning was created to promote the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) across the eight-campus Indiana University system, in the state of Indiana, across the country, and internationally. Currently the Mack Center has two primary activities: it sponsors an on-line journal, Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL), to disseminate research on SoTL, and it funds Mack Fellows, who make an 18-month commitment to work on a SoTL project while meeting together to advance and enhance each others research. This poster presentation will describe and summarize the activities of the Mack Center to date.

Transforming the Introductory Sociology Course for Diversity Patrick Ashton (Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne)

In the past ten years we have come to recognize that diversity on campus is more than just food, fun, fashion, and folklore. The challenge of diversity in college education today is twofold: to increase access and to transform curriculum and classrooms. Access is not just recruitment; it is building the support structure for success i.e., retention. Included in this is a diversity-friendly classroom. A growing body of research demonstrates, however, that creating a classroom where diversity is respected and multiple voices are heard is not just good for retention it is better for all students. This paper describes and assesses an effort to create access to higher education for students largely minority who have traditionally been excluded. A significant part of that effort has been the transformation of an introductory sociology course, not only to make it more diversity-friendly, but to improve its pedagogy and make it more educationally sound for all students. The paper describes changes made in the structure and climate of the classroom, pedagogical strategies, and assessment techniques. Data is presented that shows a dramatic increase in minority enrollment following transformation. The data also show a significant reduction in D and F grades for minority as well as majority students, thus reinforcing the point that diversity transformation is good for all students.

Abstracts

3

3

Fellowship Programs that Promote Faculty Change and Student Learning Marcia Babb (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching), Cheryl Albers (Buffalo State College), Anita Salem (Rockhurst University)

Understanding student learning is central to the scholarship of teaching and learning, but often hindered by lack of opportunity and support. Fellowship programs can help, providing collaborative opportunities to design, implement, and critically evaluate scholarly study of teaching and learning. Panelists will offer three perspectives (campus, regional, national) on organizing, building, and maintaining support for faculty investigating and documenting connections between teaching and learning. Participants will consider their own institutional environments for fostering this scholarship.

STRT: Creating Familiar Contexts for Unfamiliar Areas of Scholarship Martha Balshem (Portland State University)

Cognitive science tells us that it is difficult to replace old perspectives with new ones. This is certainly true of the perspectives we gain in graduate school regarding the relative worth and importance of various kinds of academic work. The academic self-concept we learn in graduate school rarely values or even makes visible the scholarship of teaching and learning. STRT (Scholarship of Teaching Resource Teams), a Portland State University program designed to encourage the scholarship of teaching and learning, is currently beginning its sixth year of implementation. Faculty apply at the beginning of the academic year, identifying a specific writing project they wish to move forward during that year. Projects must relate to the scholarship of teaching and learning, broadly defined. Participants are then assigned to teams based on common research interests, and provided with a small stipend. Each group is facilitated by an experienced STRT participant. Groups meet once a month throughout the academic year to discuss the progress of their STRT projects. Based on the number of scholarly presentations, publications, and grant proposals that have been moved forward through participation in STRT, the program is a resounding success. It remains to understand which specific elements of the STRT experience are most effective in supporting faculty to enter the domain of teaching and learning scholarship. Recently, a content analysis was conducted of written reflections by program participants. These reflections were collected over a period of three years, and were written by STRT participants directly after their STRT involvement. This content analysis points to the central importance to participants of the social aspects of the STRT experience. Participation in STRT supports learning new perspectives, and feeling competent in new areas of scholarship, by creating a space for the expression of familiar forms of collegiality around unfamiliar areas of scholarship. In this way, the program enables participants to extend their experience of the scholarly life to include scholarship on teaching and learning.

Engaging Students in Active Learning Through Collaboration: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice Elizabeth F. Barkley (Foothill College)

Central to the scholarship of teaching and learning is the desire to create richer educational environments in college classrooms. Teacher/scholars are concerned with how to improve the quality of student learning, how to improve the effectiveness of teaching, and how to do both affordably and efficiently. Collaborative learning continues to attract interest because it addresses several major concerns related to improving student learning. First, the predominant conclusion from a half-century of research is that teachers cannot simply transfer knowledge to students. Students must build their own minds through a process of assimilating information into their own understandings. Meaningful and lasting learning occurs through personal, active engagement. The advantages of collaborative learning for actively engaging students are clear when compared with more traditional methods such as lecture and large group discussions in which only a few students typically can, or do, participate. Second, many employers consider willingness and readiness to engage in productive teamwork a requirement for success. For some companies and professions, it is a prerequisite for employment. Collaborative learning offers students opportunities to learn valuable interpersonal and teamwork skills and dispositions by participating in task-oriented learning groups; thus, even beyond enhancing the learning of content or subject matter, collaborative groups develop important skills that prepare students for careers. Third, our increasingly diverse s ociety requires engaged citizens who can appreciate and benefit from different perspectives. At the same time, most local, national, and global challenges require long-term, collective responses. Learning to listen carefully, think critically, participate constructively, and collaborate productively to solve common problems are vital components of an education for citizenship in the 21st Century. Finally, colleges and universities want to provide greater opportunities for a wider variety of students to develop as lifelong learners. In traditional lectures, students generally are treated as a single, passive, aggregated entity. Collaborative learning engages students of all backgrounds personally and actively,

Abstracts

4

4

calling individuals to contribute knowledge and perspectives to the education of all developed from their unique lives as well as academic and vocational experiences. The scholarship of teaching and learning suggests several questions regarding collaborative learning:

What is the pedagogical rationale for collaborative learning? What is the evidence that collaborative learning promotes and improves learning, and how convincing is that evidence? Which students are most likely to benefit from collaborative learning? How can discipline-oriented college teachers organize effective learning groups in their classrooms that challenge students to become active, engaged learners?

Informed teaching requires making instructional decisions based on the collected wisdom from scholarship and practice. The primary purpose of this presentation, therefore, is to integrate research, theory and practice to offer college and university teachers guidance on how to implement collaborative work successfully.

Students as Architects of Their Own Learning: Seven Stories from Three Countries Elizabeth F. Barkley (Foothill College), Alex Fancy (Mount Allison University), Richard Butler (McMaster University), Heidi Elmendorf (Georgetown University,) Lee Gass (University of British Columbia), Margaret Johnson (Open University), Whitney Schlegel (Indiana University Bloomington)

On April 3, 2004, the American Association of Higher Education (AAHE) invited approximately 30 award-winning teacher/scholars from the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States to meet in San Diego, California, to brainstorm and plan collaborative work that focuses on scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching and learning. At this meeting, a group of seven professors from the three countries decided to write and disseminate seven narratives that focused attention on the roles students can play in shaping the process of teaching and learning. The project is informally coordinated by Alex Fancy, and is shared on the Council of 3M Teaching Fellows website http://www.mta.ca/3m/index.htm. In this presentation, three of the participating professors will share their individual experiences and reflect upon the group experience with this international collaboration. The presentation will include the process involved in writing and editing the narratives, excerpts from the narratives, an analysis of communalities and differences, and commentary on how the participants are experimenting with each other's ideas. Alex Fancy General SoTL Interest: Use of drama to provide a forum for reflection on critical issues and incidents in teaching and learning; analysis of teaching and learning as a performative activity; rhythm in teaching; co-management in education; and strategies for practicing engagement in teaching. Narrative: Explores characters actions and reactions to the silence and rebellion of a particularly mysterious student (Marie Antoinette) in a bilingual stage production set in a classroom. Describes the use of theatre to empower students both in the writing and performance of drama that illuminates issues of teaching and learning. Elizabeth Barkley General SoTL Interest: Transforming content to reflect the multicultural aspects of contemporary society; expanding traditional course delivery to include both online and blended hybrid models; and creating more authentic assessment. Also using electronic portfolios to document SoTL. Narrative: Describes specific strategies that empower students, including changing to multicultural content, personalizing course delivery, offering a flexible menu of activities, and giving students greater control over their grades as well as student reactions and comments on the strategies. Richard Butler General SoTL Interest: Problem-based learning and the differences in implementation required for academic versus professional students, with additional interest in the introduction of inquiry into first year science programmes. Narrative: Focuses on an Inquiry course designed to help students develop academic skills (as distinguished from discipline content), to explain and reflect upon several exercises in which students learn to pose good questions, identify sources of information, evaluate and integrate that information, and present the answer to the question. Heidi Elmendorf General SoTL Interest: How community-based learning experiences affect student learning. Specifically, the impact that students experience developing and teaching microbiology curriculum in a DC public elementary school has on their own learning as non-science majors. Narrative: Working with students who are simultaneously students and teachers of microbiology, this narrative describes efforts to empower students by a) allowing them to develop a class into a forum for science learning that resonates with them, and b) helping them shape their own learning by teaching science to others. Lee Gass General SoTL Interest: Using interactive engagement of students to promote deep conceptual learning.

Abstracts

5

5

Narrative: Shares the stories of three individual students who grapple with research problems in an interdisciplinary science program. This program, taught collaboratively, brought together several ideas about teaching and learning related to integration, interaction, and community Margaret Johnson General SoTL Interest: Development of learning skills and models that support, produce materials, and train staff in many aspects. Most recently, work has concentrated on helping students to acquire the appropriate register of English Language used in academic study. Narrative: Describes an activity (Reflecting on Your Language History) devised to help students achieve several outcomes, including to begin a discourse about language; to engender a supportive group atmosphere; and to help students become independent learners in an Open University undergraduate course titled The English Language: Past, Present, and Future. Whitney Schlegel General SoTL Interest: Instructional methodologies and means of assessing undergraduate student learning that are consistent with what is valued beyond the classroom in social and intellect ual communities. Deciphering and then delineating a structure for what goes on in the peer learning group in order to engage students in a learning process that will facilitate productive collaborations across disciplines and prepare them for the demands of life beyond the classroom.

Peer Observation as an Assessment Tool for Enhancing the Scholarship of Teaching R. Kirby Barrick (University of Illinois)

Typical methods of teaching assessment are often subjective and non-systematic. Many of the individuals involved in the assessment process are not given sufficient, if any, teaching assessment training. This includes many, if not most, university professors who have had no formal training in teaching/learning systems, particularly the evaluation of their own instruction and the instruction of their colleagues. Improvements in teaching and learning are difficult to achieve when the currently employed assessment tools do not effectively measure current teaching/learning practices. Teachers must learn to assess what is happening in their classrooms, and the classrooms of their peers, understand what modifications could be made to improve, and how to successfully make those modifications. The development and implementation of effective teaching assessment tools is needed for purposes of both teaching improvement and assessment. Faculty need to be encouraged to apply the principles of continuous improvement in their teaching activities. A comprehensive peer observation assessment program was developed and has been implemented. More than 300 faculty and graduate students have participated in the program. The peer observation system is based on coaching and mentoring techniques. The five -part process leads the teacher and mentor through planning, teaching and observing, reflecting, and summarizing the teaching act. This presentation will include an overview of the five -part peer observation for teaching assessment program. Feedback from participants will also be shared, showing three major themes: the program is useful to the instructor being observed, the program is time-intensive, and the observer benefits from the process as well as the instructor. The peer observation system has been utilized in Business, Education, Fine and Applied Arts, Library Science, Social Work, and Agriculture. The system works, teaching is improved, learning is enhanced, and the scholarship of teaching is promoted across various disciplines in the university.

A Comprehensive Approach to Enhancing the Scholarship of Teaching R. Kirby Barrick (University of Illinois)

Formed in 1992, the Academy of Teaching Excellence of the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences at the University of Illinois was created to facilitate continued development of the Colleges teaching program. Three objectives were established: to promote excellence in undergraduate and graduate education; to provide leadership and support to foster advances in instruction; and to provide teaching development programs. The programs of the Academy are faculty-driven, planned and implemented by a core group of faculty in the College. Activities are privately funded as a result of the College making the Academy a high priority. The program is comprehensive, designed to include faculty development and creating a positive environment for promoting the scholarship of teaching and learning. Information regarding sources of program support will be shared. The programs of the Academy are varied. This presentation will share examples of 10 activities of the Academy and how they are implemented and conducted. Primary emphasis will be placed on teaching enhancement programs and the peer observation effort that has been initiated. Other programs include enhancement grants, technology utilization, teaching newsletter, resources for better teaching and learning, graduate student development, and a good teaching web site. Program success and impact will also be shared. Follow-up evaluations of selected programs will be reported.

Abstracts

6

6

Documenting, Measuring, Evaluating and Reporting Teaching Performance to Improve the Teaching Environment R. Kirby Barrick, Cleora J. D'Arcy, Timothy A. Garrow (University of Illinois)

Faculty performance assessment is an important part of any college. While there is no one right way or perfect set of variables to consider, the performance assessment process can always be improved. Interviews were conducted with the seven department heads in the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences at the University of Illinois to obtain descriptions of current systems of teaching performance assessment and evaluation. These interviews confirmed that seven distinct systems to collect, evaluate and report information were in use. Collecting the viewpoints of the faculty being assessed could also be valuable. Faculty in the College were surveyed to identify how they believe their performance in teaching should be measured. Faculty indicated that multiple measures in documenting teaching performance provide useful information. Faculty indicated clear preferences for how their performance should be reported and how decisions should be made and results reported. Results included a preference for peer observation of teaching over student evaluations, assessment based on agreed-upon goals, and an annual meeting with the department head to discuss performance and goals. Faculty were somewhat unclear on how the current performance assessment works in their department, and whether the system in use is equitable. The findings from this project should be used to improve the process of identifying factors to be considered in assessing the teaching process and in assisting faculty in improving their teaching performance. When faculty are unsure about expectations and assessment meas ures, or are suspect of the fairness of the system, performance will rarely improve. Creating a climate where teaching performance assessment is highly regarded will elevate the scholarship of teaching.

The Teaching College Course: Institutionalizing the Scholarship of Teaching in a Research Intensive College R. Kirby Barrick, Shelly J. Schmidt, Cleora J. D'Arcy, Philip Buriak, J. Bruce Litchfield (University of Illinois)

Faculty members at research-based universities have been extensively trained in their research discipline and are expected to establish and maintain a successful research program. Most of these same faculty have received no formal preparation in teaching methods, yet are expected to become effective teachers. This is an unrealistic expectation that often leads to use of ineffective teaching practices and frustration for both teacher and students. This does not have to be the case; faculty can learn how to teach. The Teaching College course in the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences at the University of Illinois has been developed and taught by five senior faculty members from four departments in the College to assist faculty, teaching associates and graduate students in obtaining the training needed to become effective teachers. The objectives of this presentation are to describe the contents and mechanics of the course and to discuss feedback and reflections of participants and the instructors since its inception in Fall 1997 (140 participants from all seven academic departments). Methods used to teach the course include lecturing, individual and small group activities, reflective teaching exercises, discussions, and role play. Feedback from participants was obtained using a common course evaluation form over seven years. Ninety-three percent of the participants reported that their teaching and learning processes improved as a result of participating in the course. Fifty-two percent responded that they began using a variety of teaching methods and active learning tools in their classrooms. One of the main reasons this increase occurred was because participants now realized they needed to reach a variety of learners in their classrooms, based on information presented in learning styles and learning theories sessions. Ninety-seven percent of the participants reported being satisfied or very satisfied with the outcomes of the course.

The Teaching College course is making a substantial contribution to improving the scholarship of teaching and to increasing student learning in the College. In addition, a teaching community for dialogue and sharing best practices has been established within the College and within the disciplines and departments, institutionalizing the role of teaching in a major research College and university.

Walking the Talk: Living with the Consequences of Getting What We've Wished For Randall Bass (Georgetown University) and Dan Bernstein (University of Kansas)

In the form of a dialogue, this presentation will explore several questions about the trajectory of the practices represented by the peer review of teaching and the scholarship of teaching and learning. What are the promise and limits of individual work on teaching and learning to generalize beyond one’s practice? How might our attempts to professionalize teaching practice be leading to new and unintended consequences about kinds of scholarly work we are asking faculty to undertake? How might a shift from individual to collaborative work address issues of professionalism and scholarly impact? What structure

Abstracts

7

7

and values would support this shift? What strategies will be necessary to amplify work on teaching and learning beyond the 'power of one'?

Engaging Students in Meaningful Learning for Long-term Retention John Bennett (University of Connecticut)

We've all heard our students say it: Tell me what I need to know or What's going to be on the test? or That question on the test was not like the activities we did in class, the examples in the book, or the homework assignments. Unfortunately, the large majority of students in our classes today expect to be told what they are to learn with any assessment of the progress requiring only that they give back that same information. They see no need to retain that knowledge long term or to develop learning procedures that will enable them to do the lifelong learning that we all know are keys to a successful career and personal life. Unfortunately, this true message of what is important to success reaches very few students in part because all too few educators help them see/hear the message and learn why its important. As John Merrow noted in the June 2004 Carnegie Perspectives commentary, Someone ought to tell students how unimportant good grades are once they leave campus. What is correlated with success is what is called engagement, genuine involvement in courses and campus activities. Engagement leads to what's called deep learning, or learning for understanding. In the presenters facilitation of his classes, it became apparent years back that students engagement in their learning would be, for all too many at least, limited to doing only those things assigned by the instructor. Knowing then what Merrow writes above and what many others have learned from their research into learning, the presenter sought to understand how he and others [including some of his students, fortunately] gained that deep learning with the goal of seeking to help motivate more students to do the same. In this search, he determined that consistently using an e ffective problem solving approach to all situations faced including learning for long term retention yielded better outcomes faster, truly a winning situation. Further study into the meaning of an effective problem solving approach identified two characteristics of that approach not traditionally emphasized in the literature: the need to embrace ambiguity and the need to regularly self-assess progress throughout the process. First in optional sessions outside the regular class meeting times and more recently through an online, self-paced set of guided exercises, the author has begun to refine his approach to engaging more students in efforts to develop or improve their problem solving process at to habitually utilize it to develop deep learning for long term retention. The purpose of this proposed presentation is to outline the approach taken, to discuss the notion of what makes a problem solving procedure effective, to discuss some of the anecdotal evidence of its effectiveness for his students, to seek input from attendees with regard to similar efforts and their successes with those efforts, and to outline a planned research program into the effectiveness of this approach to the improved learning by students and their increased engagement in that learning.

SoTL Collaboration: A Case Study Curtis Bennett, Jacqueline Dewar (Loyola Marymount University)

This presentation addresses how to locate and work with a collaborative partner in the scholarship of teaching and learning. We will use our recent collaborative experience as a case study of how such links can be forged, to suggest strategies for enabling two linked projects to grow apart, and for finding new avenues to bring projects back together. In our case, we engaged over a novel freshman course that was being passed along to Curt, together with a desire to answer a teaching question that had arisen in this class. Jackie was interested in how students come to see a need for proof in mathematics versus simply trusting examples. This question arose in the Mathematics Workshop class for freshman math majors at LMU. As a result of this question together with a piece of student evidence on transfer of mathematics learning (something Curt was interested in), the presenters began a collaborative inquiry around the Mathematics Workshop course that Curt was teaching for the first time (and that Jackie had helped design and had taught for the previous 4 years). Among the advantages of collaboration were different backgrounds and expertise in mathematics teaching and learning, the (constructive) tension created by different interpretations of data, the ability to count on the other when ones time was limited, and the shared commitment to understanding student learning. On the other hand, scheduling times to meet, sharing the common ground of the project, and having different focuses were difficulties we had to overcome. Curiously, our common data and our search to understand it provided the route to turn many of our difficulties into opportunities for exploration. A major advantage of working together is that two researchers often have quite different strengths. In our case, for example, one of us had a stronger background in the methodology of the work and in framing the questions. On the other hand, the other of us had a longer-term connection to students and other faculty at the institution, a greater ability of focusing on work, and was better at conducting

Abstracts

8

8

literature searches. The tension between our interpretations, however, was probably the most unexpected and valuable aspect of our collaboration. In many cases, we would look at common data and find that we were describing it differently. These differing interpretations almost always led us to the most insightful ideas. Moreover, the disagreements forced us to confront what our earlier knowledge was. The difficulties in our work arose mainly from arranging times and focusing on common questions. Our data proved important in resolving them both. At first, we were able to work on the data sets independently. Thus, we did not need to meet as often. Moreover, understanding the data was a great motivating force along with the realization that if we could not write down a convincing interpretation for the other one of us, then we did not truly understand the data. In this talk, we will explore all of this in further detail by using examples from our work.

Integrating Cultural Perspectives into Science and Engineering Courses Spencer Benson (University of Maryland)

Both recent and historical developments underscore the importance of today's students developing better global and cultural perspectives as part of the their university experience. One common way this need is addressed is through study abroad experiences. While study abroad experiences provide students with hands-on exposure to cultures in near or distance lands and are effective educational mechanisms that provide students with learning opportunities for cultural diversity and global perspectives their impact is limited. Many (most) students are unable to avail themselves of study abroad opportunities due to programmatic reasons and/or financial limitations. In highly structure curriculums such as those in sciences and engineering the ability to spend a semester study abroad is often not feasible due to the time that would be lost within the major, thus requiring extra time to degree. The alternative is for students to carry increased course loads within the major to make up for the time spent abroad. Often this is not possible due to required course sequencing. In addition the increase course loads may be unwise and compromise learning for all but the very brightest students. A recent Freeman Foundation grant to the University of Maryland for integration of East Asian cultural perspectives focuses in part on the development of ways to integrate student awareness of East Asia culture into science and engineering (STEM) courses. To address this challenge STEM faculty have formed the East Asian Science and Technology (EAST) faculty learning community. The EAST group is working to develop educational initiatives that will integrate Asian cultural awareness into a variety of STEM curricula through new courses, course modules within existing courses, short study abroad experiences, and the development of trans-national courses that link Maryland students with their counter parts in East Asia. The presentation will highlight some of the recent developments of the EAST learning community and present several models for overcoming the challenges of integrating cultural and global perspective into STEM curricula.

Value-Added Writing in the Foreign Language Classroom: The Implementation Phase. Didier Bertrand (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

Writing in the Foreign Language (FL) classroom has been largely an exercise in grammatical accuracy. At best, students usually do not like this activity that they rightly see as contrived. At the intermediate level of instruction, furthermore, they are often caught in a frustrating pull between what they are trying to say, and the inevitable inadequacy of their FL abilities. More often than not, the FL student at the intermediate level of FL instruction is frustrated with writing. To remedy this situation, I have devised a "Value-Added" writing exercise, based on Hegel's dialectic, a model very used in the French educational system. Students are made to concentrate first on what they want to say, following the fairly strict model, in which a five -part composition is written, where thesis and antithesis are followed by a synthesis and sandwiched between an introduction and a conclusion. My Carnegie project allowed me to assess the quality of this method, from the point of view of my students. The next stage then required that I turn a classroom project into a method that colleagues from across the United States could relate to and use. This presentation will bring up some of the issues with which I had to contend in trying to make my project acceptable by the many, and how some of them were resolved. IT has become clear to me that students are much more amendable to change than their instructors. Can we teach old dogs new tricks?

Differential Validity of Multiple Choice and Short Answer Assessments in Psychology April Bleske-Rechek (University of Wisconsin), Nicole Zeug (University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire)

Cutbacks in resources for post-secondary education in recent years have, for some, led to larger class sizes. In an effort to maintain their productivity and efficiency, some instructors have begun to rely increasingly on closed-ended (e.g., multiple choice) rather than open-ended (e.g., short answer, essay) assessment tools. Such a move raises the question of whether the use of closed-ended items is a fair form of assessment for all students. Closed-ended assessments demonstrate greater reliability than do open-ended assessments (Newstead & Dennis, 1994), and students scores on the two forms of assessment generally correlate highly (i.e., above .5) for college -level tests (Bridgeman & Lewis, 1994; Bridgeman &

Abstracts

9

9

Morgan, 1996; Kniveton, 1996). However, educators have voiced concern that some students might perform poorly on closed-ended assessments but quite well on open-ended assessments. Thus, the exclusive use of closed-ended assessments could place some students at undue disadvantage. Data on the relative validity of multiple choice and short answer assessments should offer guidance on the costs and benefits associated with relying exclusively on closed-ended or open-ended assessments. Limited research has suggested that open-ended assessments do not consistently add incremental validity, beyond that already afforded by closed-ended assessments, to the prediction of important outcomes such as peoples performance on other, related achievement tasks (Miller, 1999). No study to date, however, has investigated the predictive validity of different assessment types across multiple, distinct correlates. The objective of the current investigation is to inform the debate over the relative value of closed-ended and open-ended assessments by providing a comprehensive analysis of the objective validity of multiple choice versus short answer exam questions. In Study 1, approximately 100 students enrolled in an introductory psychology course took two mid-semester exams that consisted of 70% closed-ended and 30% open-ended exam questions. Results showed that students performance on the two assessment types was correlated. However, the multiple choice assessment consistently provided incremental validity beyond the short answer assessment in predicting students standing on achievement measures (ACT score, high school class standing, and end-of-semester GPA), whereas the short answer assessment did not consistently provide incremental validity to the multiple choice assessment. In addition, no single student maintained a large discrepancy in performance on the multiple choice section and the short answer section across the two mid-semester exams. In Study 2, 44 students from an intermediate level course in research methodology and 26 students from an upper level course in evolutionary psychology took course exams that included both multiple choice and short answer question types. The two samples replicated the findings from Study 1, although the pattern of findings was more consistent in the research methods sample: When forced to compete, students performance on the multiple choice assessment (rather than on the short answer assessment) accounted for the bulk of the variation explained in s tudents ACT score, high school class standing, term college GPA, and cumulative college GPA. We discuss the implications of these findings for assessment in psychology.

Campus Support for SoTL: Models, Strategies, and Examples Cheelan Bo-Linn (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Kathleen McKinney (Illinois State University), Gary Poole (University of British Columbia)

Garnering campus or institutional support for the scholarship of teaching and learning is critical for conducting, sharing, and applying quality SoTL work. Approaches to support vary by campus and institutional context. Campuses have accomplished this support on their own and/or via involvement with national initiatives such as the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL) campus program and the more recent Campus Cluster Program (AAHE and Carnegie Foundation). Three campuses will highlight their SoTL programs and begin to answer some of the following questions: “What were some of the first steps?” “How was SoTL framed and presented to faculty and administrators?” “How does the conversation begin?” “How does one extend the collaborative network to other individuals and institutions?” In this interactive panel, representatives of three institutions, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois State University, and the University of British Columbia will discuss with participants general models, specific strategies, and concrete examples of ways to promote and support SoTL at the campus level. These three institutions vary in their length of involvement in formal SoTL support (2 years to 8 years), institutional classification (Doctoral/Research extensive and intensive), national context (U.S. and Canada), size, and model/strategies used to support SoTL. Example models include working through existing teaching centers, using an endowed chair position, and creating an institute. Example strategies include workshops, small grant programs, web sites, information on funding sources, facilitation of pe er assistance and collaboration, and internal presentation and publication outlets. The institutions will share the challenges they have faced and lessons learned, including impact upon individual faculty and institutional culture. In providing these models and strategies, it is hoped that we can provide different ways in which to define and assess progress of SoTL initiatives on one’s campus. Participants will be actively involved in the session to share strategies from their own campuses and to discuss how new strategies might be adapted to their campuses. In addition, our institutions would like suggestions and feedback on how to maintain support and identify next steps. Ideas for funding such efforts will also be generated. Handouts will be provided.

Abstracts

10

10

Weaving the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning into Students’ Academic Lives Cheelan Bo-Linn (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Heidi Elmendorf (Georgetown University), Michael Loui (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

As faculty join together to build SoTL communities on their campuses, there was been a movement to extend this community to their students; that is, to invite students to become partners in the inquiry of student learning. The presenters in this panel will describe three opportunities in which students themselves conducted SoTL projects. There was tremendous value in these experiences as the students moved from teachers to scholarly teachers to those who participate in SoTL. They not only learned more about the relationship and interactions of teaching and learning but became more reflective about their roles as teachers. This panel will describe our efforts to incorporate undergraduate and graduate students into SoTL work and the results of these efforts. At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, teaching assistants in the Advanced Graduate Teacher Certificate Program (AGTC) and graduate students in the course on college teaching (EOL 490TC) formulated research questions, read and interpreted the literature, and developed the methodology for their proposals. The graduate students in the AGTC program had an additional requirement of conducting the research and making their findings public. For these graduate students, they began to see SoTL as an integral part of their responsibility as future professors and to value dialogues with fellow students and faculty that cross disciplinary boundaries. At Georgetown University, undergraduate students in the Biology department participated in a capstone course that created a multi-dimensional collaboration around SoTL. For these students, who taught middle school students, they gained a new perspective by examining a longer trajectory of learning – through the eyes of the middle school students, looking forward, and from their own perspective, looking backward across the discipline. It was particularly interesting to see the types of questions and issues our students wrestled with in conducting their SoTL projects. Participants will be invited to share ways in which to prepare students for SoTL research and the variety of projects that are conducted. We will also have a conversation about the perspectives students gained about their own learning trajectories. Handouts describing the programs will be provided.

Evaluating the Competence of Novice Information System Auditors: Analyzing Performance to Motivate Learning Experiences for Developing Audit Expertise A. Faye Borthick (Georgia State University), Mary B. Curtis (University of North Texas )

This study offers a longitudinal, multi-institution assessment of learning outcomes for a low-enrollment masters level course in accounting. In an audit simulation, students applied their developing skills in using analysis software to audit the results of application processing. We created an audit simulation because of it potential for staging situations that replicate the essential artifacts of audit settings, which can afford the kinds of experience that novices need to develop audit expertise. Audit simulation can serve both as a means of offering learning experiences based on authentic tasks and as a vehicle for revealing audit performance. This work draws on a rich research literature on audit cognition and the structure of audit tasks. For several decades, audit practitioners and researchers have been seeking the determinants of audit expertise, considering aspects such as experience, knowledge, ability, information search/hypothesis manipulation strategies, and combinations of these. We believe it is possible to create learning experiences with the potential to accelerate the development of audit expertise in replicable, time -compressed ways for expertise based on these kinds of aspects. This paper offers results from novice information systems (IS) auditors (students) working an audit simulation and suggests kinds of learning experiences to address performance lapses. In the simulation, novice IS auditors were applying their developing skills in using analysis software to audit the results of application processing. In this instance, auditing an inventory balance required learners to design audit procedures for financial statement assertions, implement audit procedures with analysis software, and communicate the results obtained from the procedures. The audits from learners at two institutions were analyzed to characterize novice IS auditor performance as a guide to generating designs for learning experiences to improve performance of future sets of learners. No student included an audit objective for detecting the most significant condition warranting further investigation. A possibility for addressing this lapse would be learning experiences that afford novice IS auditors opportunities for developing and applying business models as a way of identifying major financial relationships for money/asset flows to serve as self prompts for developing complete sets of audit objectives. Learners performed better when audit objectives were prompted in artifacts of the simulation than when they were not prompted although many learners had difficulty developing complete, well-stated audit objectives and audit procedures, executing the procedures, and interpreting the results from the procedures. This outcome suggests the need for new learning experiences comprising question sets based on application contexts with explanatory feedback to address different lapses. The next step is to prepare the new learning experiences and assess whether they enable better performance for new sets of learners.

Abstracts

11

11

The full version of the study is available at http://www.gsu.edu/~accafb/pubs/BorthickCurtis2004workingpaper.doc

Use of a Course Portfolio as a Tool for Systematic Reflection on Teaching and Learning within an Introductory Science Class for Non-Majors Simon Brassell (Indiana University Bloomington)

Developments in instructional materials and class assignments may be made with the tacit assumption that such modifications provide enhanced learning experiences for students by improving the quality of the course materials and the usefulness or merit of class assignments. Adoption of technological aids in teaching is perhaps most prone to these possibilities. Similarly, justification of the apparent benefits of course components or pedagogy may reside in anecdotal rather than substantive evidence of enhancements to learning, for example in evaluation comments from students. One approach that can help to verify or validate the perceived gains is the preparation of a course portfolio that combines information on learning objectives and progressive changes in class materials and assignments with examples of student learning, and reflects on the linkages between them. Construction of a course portfolio to document teaching activities in a large introductory class for non-science majors entitled “Oceans and our Global Environment” provided an objective and reflective means to examine (i) evidence of student learning or accomplishment coupled to developments in course materials and assignments, and (ii) the impact and potential effectiveness of changes in teaching methods and practices through eighteen course iterations. A critical aim was to explore the implications for student learning associated with the introduction and extensive use of innovative web-based exercises within the course. Preparation of the portfolio required garnering course descriptions, lecture materials, exam scripts, and assignments plus data on student responses and their individual and collective grades. It enabled recognition of representative elements within the assignments that explicitly tested critical course objectives and could therefore serve as measures of learning associated with complex concepts or acquisition of specific skills. Assessment of materials collected and compiled within the course portfolio provided direct evidence for aspects of student performance including (i) a correspondence between attendance and overall grade, (ii) a negative correlation between class size and scores for written exams, and (iii) a positive trend between comparative scores for s hort-answer and multiple-choice questions that increases with increasing course grade. It also enabled recognition that exposing students to numerous diagrams and maps within the web-based exercises, and requiring them to read and digest information contained in these pictures enhanced their ability to answer specific questions involving explanation of spatial data, vectors and cartographic information in written exams. These perspectives regarding student learning certainly could have emerged from assessments wholly independent from the context of a course portfolio. Yet the compilation of a course portfolio provides a practical, objective, and tangible means to undertake the process of systematic reflection that is critical for such evaluation, and generates a product that is accessible to peer review.

EndNote as a Learning Tool for Emerging Student Scholars Sheryl Breen (St. Olaf College)

I will present results from an extended study of the effects of EndNote, a bibliographic software program, on student learning and competence in undergraduate disciplinary-based research. To measure the effectiveness of EndNote as a learning tool for emerging student scholars, I am compiling the results of research supported by St. Olaf Colleges Center for Innovation in the Liberal Arts. These results support the argument that the integration of EndNote into the syllabus of my departments required research-methods course has led to measurable improvements in student learning in three specific areas: 1) students research competence and critical evaluation of sources within their discipline; 2) students understanding of and competence in source documentation by means of citation styles recognized within their discipline; and 3) students self-identification as emerging disciplinary scholars of empirical research. Evidence for my argument has been collected during the past three years, during which I have taught students in my undergraduate political science research-methods course to incorporate bibliographic software into their research process through our campus-wide EndNote site license. Specifically, I have integrated use of EndNote into the students development and evaluation of research portfolios and production of annotated bibliographies and documented research papers. Its use allows each student to create a personal, searchable, student-annotated research library database through manual entry or selected downloads from our library's indexes (JSTOR, LexisNexis, etc.); select evaluated sources from that personal research library and create an annotated bibliography through a drag-and-drop process; and cite selected sources from their EndNote research library in their final research paper. In addition to the immediate effects on their current research projects, EndNote is a tool that enables students to apply their heightened understanding of bibliographic information, research portfolios and citations to other courses and disciplines that require research and/or cited papers. At the same time,

Abstracts

12

12

EndNote motivates undergraduate majors to begin building a cumulative, searchable, annotated, personal disciplinary research library for upper-division research seminars and/or future graduate-level work.

We May Speak the Same Language, but . . .What the Cambridge-MIT Institute (CMI) Has Taught Two Institutions about Transforming Teaching, Learning and Scholarship Lori Breslow (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), David Good (The University of Cambridge), Suzanne Greenwald, Josh Jacobs (The Cambridge-MIT Institute)

For the past four years, the University of Cambridge and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have participated in a strategic alliance called the Cambridge-MIT Institute (CMI). CMI, whose overarching goal is to improve competitiveness, productivity, and entre preneurship in the U.K., supports both cross-institutional research and educational partnerships. Work in the educational arena began with an undergraduate exchange in which students from each university spent a year at the partner institution. (This was particularly opportune for MIT undergraduates because course requirements in most MIT departments had prohibited them from participating in study abroad programs before.) A full-scale assessment of the undergraduate exchange was undertaken, and that research, along with the astute observations of both faculty and students who participated in the exchange, yielded some insights (apart from the obvious ones) about differences in the educational practices and norms in each institution. Some of those diffe rences included: The consequences of methods and frequency of assessment (e.g., weekly problem sets at MIT as opposed to end-of-year exams at CU) for student learning The nature of the research experience Student attitudes about and ability for self-directed learning Student orientation towards entrepreneurship Both research and experience have shown us that those kinds of differences have important consequences for the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that CU and MIT students have attained by the time they graduate. This panel will report on the results of our work over the past four years, and how that scholarship has been used and will continue be used to develop new ways of teaching and learning at each institution. For example, in 2004, CMI launched three large-scale initiatives in education motivated, in part, from the lessons learned from the undergraduate exchange. These initiatives are focusing on transferable skills, pedagogical experimentation, and curriculum development in bioengineering. We have also learned something about working with colleagues who speak the same language, but who have very different beliefs about and experiences with higher education. Beyond changing CU and MIT, we believe this work has implications for how cross-cultural and cross-institutional research can strengthen educational theory and practice.

Designing Rubrics to Facilitate More Powerful Learning and Student Success Wren Bump, Shujen Chang, Lillian McEnery, Sue Neeley, Margaret Snooks (University of Houston-Clear Lake)

One of the goals in higher education is that our students become lifelong learners. We help to facilitate this attitude and climate by nurturing and enhancing the problem solving and critical thinking abilities of our students. The use of authentic assessment measures has been one of the direct responses to this quest to encourage in our students meaningful learning. The literature shows a renewed interest in examining traditional as well as more authentic assessment practices (Beaman, 1998; Riley, 1994). The use of assessment rubrics helps to address the need for specific ways to assess student learning. We facilitate student learning by providing benchmarks for expected performance through varying levels of specific criteria. A rubric is basically a scaled process that is developed to specify proficiency levels and levels of criteria. Rubrics can be utilized in virtually every discipline and with any type of assignment. They can empower both the teaching and learning process in various ways. In addition to making criteria explicit, they help students become more thoughtful about the quality of their own work.

The presenters will provide a brief theoretical base to substantiate the use of rubrics as well as an overview of various models. The presentation will begin with a brief classroom “lesson” that will be evaluated by the audience using little or no criteria. The audience will then evaluate the lesson using more specific criteria set forth in a rubric that will be passed out. Definitions and a discussion about the process involved in writing rubrics (exploring models, listing criteria, articulating gradations of quality, revising, and reflecting) will follow the mock lesson. Several examples from panel members from a variety of disciplines (Instructional Technology, Library Science, Education, Marketing, and Health) will also be discussed. The second half of the presentation will involve participants pinpointing one assignment or task for which they would like to develop a rubric. Participants will be moved into small groups according to discipline where they can discuss ways to improve the individually produced rubrics. Audience members will be asked to share their rubrics and/or understandings. References Beaman, R. (1998). The unquiet….even loud andragogy! Alternative assessments for adult learners.

Innovative Higher Education: 23 (1): 47-59. Riley, K., and B. Stern (1998). Using authentic assessment and qualitative methodology to bridge theory

and practice. Educational Forum 62 (2): 178-85.

Abstracts

13

13

“Piles of Stones”: Culture, Storytelling and Pedagogy Carolyn Calloway-Thomas (Indiana University Bloomington)

In her powerful autobiography, In Search of Fatima: A Palestinian Story, Ghada Karmi (2002) tells an insightful story about her confrontation with difference. In explaining aspects of her culture, Karmi writes that Palestinians “had no tradition of going somewhere in order to see what it was like, or simply to get away from our routine, everyday setting.” She also notes that “Our mother had little interest in places which had no relation to what was familiar to her, like many Arabs, her concept of enjoyment was being with other people, not gazing at historical monuments which she scornfully referred to as ‘piles of stones.’” When Karmi’s mother had a chance to visit Spain her view of the world shifted dramatically, however. Karmi writes, “The only exception to this position she ever encountered in her life was when once, long after we were grown up, our father took her to southern Spain. There, agog at the splendid Islamic buildings of Cordova and Granada, where she could see the grand legacy of Spain’s Arab past, she felt the thrill that piles of stones could impart. “What colour, what lightness!” she enthused. “How marvelous the Arabs were.” Karmi’s mother’s narrative reveals a great deal about culture and why and how stories give humans good reasons for ordering their lives “this way” and not “that way.” In my paper I will discuss the value of cultural storytelling as a pedagogical tool and offer some suggestions about how instructors can use novels and autobiographies to illustrate connections between storytelling and course concepts. By cultural storytelling I mean narratives that tell us something fundamental about how meanings shape people’s lives and provide information about the content of cultural forms, whether household stories, village stories, history, myth, novels, folktales or autobiographies. Most significant, cultural stories can reveal an inexhaustible amount of embedded complexity, providing many angles from which assumptions and values can be questioned and studied. When such complexities are brought to the foreground students can learn that “cultural frontiers” “spring from the interplay of their (humans) inner essence and environment and historical experience.” The two books selected for illustration are My Palestinian Story by Ghada Karmi and Brick Lane by Monica Ali (2003).

A Snapshot of Student Perceptions, Anxieties and Skills in an Introductory Statistics Course Preliminary Results and Implications Mary Elizabeth Camp (Indiana University Bloomington)

E370 Statistical Analysis for Business and Economics is the first course in statistics for Business and Economics majors. In the majority of cases it is the only course in statistics which a student will take. The course is intended to enable the student to develop a set of statistical tools which can be applied to data encountered in future classes or on the job. Currently, E370 uses a unique pedagogy employing the most effective statistical teaching techniques including team work, collaborative learning, homework assignments, lab activities, active learning activities, a term project, WarmUps and CoolDowns. Despite the improvements in the delivery of the course, student success continues to be a struggle. One apparent component of that struggle is the student's perceived relationship with basic mathematics. The poster proposed here will present preliminary results from one of two assessment packages administered to students attending E370 Fall Semester 2004-05. Based on instruments developed in previous semesters, during the first week of class students will be asked to assess their personal ability levels for ten particular mathematical characteristics of the course, using a Likert -type response scale. Students will also be asked to assess how confident they are their abilities will be sufficient for success in E370. Finally they will be administered a math skills assessment. The assessment package will be administered again at the end of the semester, however, the analysis of the first administration will form the basis of the proposed poster. In previous semesters student assessment of mathematical abilities has been quite high, in contradiction to teaching staff perceptions of their abilities drawn from observed performance. The initial administration of the assessment package will provide information which will enable this contradiction to be analyzed. In particular, student ability perceptions will be quantified, as will student math skills. Tests of the hypothesis "Student perception of mathematical ability level is the same as the observed student mathematical skill level" will be performed for all ten mathematical characteristics. Additionally, the initial assessment will provide insight into pre-course student anxieties with respect to the course and their abilities. Aggregate results of this assessment will be presented in the poster.

Policies and Practices that Support a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at Iowa State University Susan Carlson (Iowa State University)

In 1999, Iowa State University implemented a new promotion and tenure document, approved by both faculty and administration, which draws from Boyer's expanded concept of scholarship. Central to the document are a definition of "scholarship" which includes research, teaching, and professional practice/extension and a flexible definition of faculty work codified in individual "position responsibility statements" (PRS). Each statement specifies expectations in areas of faculty responsibility:

Abstracts

14

14

research/creative activity, teaching, professional practice/extension, and institutional service. After a gradual phasing in of the document, every faculty member being reviewed in 2003-04 was evaluated under the 1999 policy for the first time. Associate Provost Susan Carlson will focus her presentation on two broad aspects of 1) policy development and 2) policy implementation. During the several years of policy development, a partnership of administrators and faculty developed a consensus about the shape of the policy; key issues were the creation of four areas of faculty responsibility, the PRS, and a set of criteria which could be applied to a variety of faculty profiles. During implementation, key issues have been a new role for faculty members in preparing faculty portfolios about all areas of faculty responsibility (not just teaching); training faculty and administrators to apply the 1999 criteria; informing external evaluators of the particular ISU criteria; and grandest of all, encouraging discussion of what constitutes valuable faculty work, including the place of SoTL at a research institution. As this process continues to mature, it is clear that the broad definition of "scholarship" is perhaps the most important part of the move into an environment which values and rewards SoTL.

Designing Interactive Structures for Cultural Change in Higher Education: CATLS at UMass Dartmouth Magali Carrera, Jeannette Riley, Maureen Hall (UMass Dartmouth)

The scholarship of teaching and learning cannot flourish in academic isolation; rather, it must be established as part of integrated institutional change. This presentation examines how the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth promotes the scholarship of teaching and learning through the implementation of a change-management model that shifts the university from a static and often imposing structure of the program model. This shift actively promotes the development of a dynamic campus infrastructure that raises the level of reflection and scholarly dialogue for all members of the campus community, faculty, students, and administrators through the comprehensive integration of professional development activities. This infrastructure, known as the Consortium of the Advancement of Teaching, Learning and Scholarship or CATLS [pronounced catalyst], also effectively integrates the university within the larger national and international conversation about the scholarship of teaching and learning. Part I: The CATLS Overview This three-part presentation first outlines how significant institutional change -management was initiated through an administrative paradigm shift from the program-model of change to an infrastructure model of change. CATLS, which functions as an infrastructure that fosters connections between existing campus programs and activities, as well as creating new initiatives, provides faculty with the structure, support, and environment for development, advancement and renewal to generate innovative, critical conversations and activities focusing on teaching, learning, and scholarship. The cumulative purpose of CATLS is to be a catalyst that integrates campus activities in order to create a center for the university's intellectual life. Information will be provided about how CATLS developed, including an overview of the CATLS task force and goals for the early years of this campus initiative. Part II: Creating Cultural Change Focusing on two new activities, a New Faculty Institute and an E-Portfolio Pilot, the second part of the presentation examines how the campus is instituting cultural change based upon the infrastructure model supported by CATLS. The New Faculty Institute is a series of meetings that introduces new faculty to campus programs and services, while also engaging them in conversations and professional development opportunities in the scholarship of teaching and learning. The E-Portfolio pilot is working toward electronic portfolios for all students and for faculty contract renewal and tenure files. These initiatives ground themselves in the scholarship of teaching and learning as they ask faculty to investigate their teaching, research, and learning practices, as well as to share and make public their discoveries. Part III: Assessing Our Progress The third section of the presentation describes the on-going analysis and assessment built into this change-management model. A case study format will be share d to spotlight the way in which cultural transformation has happened and continues to happen at UMass Dartmouth in relation to CATLS. This case study captures the complexity of the interactions between and among stakeholders and administrative entities. In sum, this presentation analyzes how administrative structures must be part of the critical consideration for building and extending the integrative and cumulative effects of the scholarship of teaching and learning initiatives, giving it a voice in larger national and international discourses on SOTL.

Teaching Social Science Reasoning and Research Principles: The Role of Groups and Active Learning Susan L. Caulfield (Western Michigan University), Caroline Hodges Persell (New York University)

A key challenge in teaching social sciences is having students see that these disciplines are sciences and understand how social researchers warrant their knowledge. This challenge includes teaching students to discern the differences between normative and empirical statements, correlation and causation, and statistical significance and importance. These concepts and principles often seem abstract, meaningless, or irrelevant to students in the social sciences.

Abstracts

15

15

We know from studies of learning that people come to understand concepts and principles better when they need them to perform meaningful tasks. With research principles, this often entails students conducting their own research projects. Supervising such projects is labor-intensive, particularly when one has more than 10-15 students, which is often the case for courses early in the curriculum. There are two pedagogical practices that can help us teach the science of the social sciences: group-based learning and active learning. Students working in term-long groups on an empirical research project is one method of getting them involved in the practice of research. For faculty, it is far more feasible to supervise and meet with 8 or 10 groups of 4-6 students than to meet individually with 50 to 65 students. In addition to aiding the faculty, group-based work also helps to reduce apprehension on the part of some students, who come to the topic already dreading it. Besides using groups throughout the term, is it also important to promote an atmosphere of active learning, where students are expected to engage the subject matter. When the responsibility for learning is placed on the students, there is less chance students will be on the fringe of a course; instead, they find it necessary to be present and to conduct all the tasks required of them. While seeming to solve some problems, using groups presents its own constellation of intellectual, design, interpersonal, and logistical challenges. Some of the intellectual and design issues are found regardless of the use of groups, and these include operationalizing the questions, identifying and assessing relevant research conducted by others, and preparing first and final drafts of a research paper. The use of groups raises further interpersonal and logistical issues, including how to assign students to groups, offer needed support, ensure that work is evenly shared among all members, pace work throughout the term, help groups reconcile differences, and find time for groups to work together. Relying on active learning presents new challenges as well. In particular, students are often unaccustomed to being held responsible for their learning. Trained throughout their educational careers to sit back and take notes, many students actively resist having to take an active and engaged role in their education. In this project, we reflect on these and other issues, discuss insights from ongoing research, and raise questions for further research based on our experiences using group research projects and active learning.

Japanese Lesson Study in the American College Classroom Bill Cerbin, Bryan Kopp (University of Wisconsin-La Crosse)

At the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, faculty in Biology, Economics, English, and Psychology are using Japanese Lesson Study to do systematic inquiry of teaching and learning in their classes. Lesson Study is a process in which teachers collectively design, teach, observe, and revise a single Research Lesson. Lesson Study is a powerful means by which Japanese teachers improve their practice and the practice of teaching in their fields. This presentation examines one of the first lesson study projects in higher education. We will describe how the process works with groups of college teachers examine Lesson Study as a form of scholarly inquiry explain how college teachers learn to do classroom inquiry through lesson student present preliminary findings about how Lesson Study affects teaching and learning show examples of Research Lessons created by project participants Our experience indicates that lesson study structures an inquiry process in which college teachers carefully examine important student learning goals, design classroom experiences intended to address those goals, collect systematic evidence of student learning and thinking, and use evidence to redesign and refine instruction. The process culminates in a Research Lesson, a scholarly product, which not only describes how to teach the lesson but explains what, how and why students learned or did not learn from the experience. Our experience suggests that Lesson Study is a way to build a pedagogical knowledge base that focuses on the class lesson as a unit of analysis. Moreover, instructors can participate in Lesson Study with no prior classroom inquiry experience, which indicates that this process could be a way to build capacity doing for the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Long-Term Knowledge Retention of Non-major Undergraduate Students in Atmospheric Sciences Donna Charlevoix (University Of Illinois)

Candid conversations with university faculty regarding students enrolled in required, non-major courses (e.g., general education) often lead to discussions of the lack of motivation students have regarding learning the material. The typical complaint is that material is learned solely for the purpose of receiving credit for the course. A general belief by faculty is that students are often not interested in the topic and do not retain much of the material they learn. There is evidence from numerous studies that this is not the case (Semb & Ellis, 1994). The discipline of atmospheric sciences/meteorology has been essentially unstudied in this regard. This study examines the long-term retention of material by university students enrolled in an introductory meteorology course. It further investigates the depth of understanding by students and their ability to apply knowledge to real-life situations. The objective of the

Abstracts

16

16

study is to determine what information students retain and to determine what role the curriculum plays in this retention. Interviews of students were conducted seven months after the completion of an introductory meteorology course. This presentation will provide a brief overview of the data collection process and the results of data analysis. Students who were unavailable for interviews completed a written survey that included many of the same questions posed in the face -to-face interviews. Preliminary results show that most students interviewed did recall a significant amount of material learned in the class. However, thorough understanding of the material was less evident. The next step of this study will include examining what role the curriculum played in student understanding. The study will be repeated in the coming academic year with slight changes in the curriculum to determine how this affects student learning, understanding and knowledge retention.

Assessment and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: An Integral Relationship Nancy Chism, Trudy Banta (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

The concepts of assessment and the scholarship of teaching and learning have much in common. Ted Marchese has defined assessment as "a rich conversation about student learning informed by data" (personal communication, January 2004). One might argue that this type of reflection on the data derived from student work is at the heart of the scholarship of teaching and learning. Several scholars commenting on the definitions of the scholarship of teaching and learning have depicted a continuum of activities ranging from scholarly teaching to the scholarship of teaching. For example, Hutchings and Shulman distinguish between excellent teaching, which is characterized by engagement of students in learning, and scholarly or reflective teaching, which adds elements of classroom assessment and inquiry, uses current knowledge of the field, and includes peer collaboration and review. The scholarship of teaching, they assert, is associated with four additional characteristics: being public, being open to critique and evaluation, being capable of being built upon by others, and involving question-asking and inquiry about student learning (Hutchings and Shulman, 1999). We draw a related distinction based on the types of assessment strategies used, arguing that scholarly teaching draws upon more informal ways of gathering and analyzing data, while the scholarship of teaching and learning is more systematic and executed with the intent of informing practice beyond the immediate situation in which it was conducted. Most faculty develop rather refined, automatic habits of monitoring learning environments, whether these are face-to-face in classrooms, laboratories, or one -on-one situations, or in virtual settings. They notice participation and engagement through visual inspection, tone and frequency of oral or electronic communications, and energy levels during interactions. They observe patterns of error as they grade stacks of examination responses, see how students approach a simulation, deliver a speech, or write a paper. Without explicitly tying these observations to learning goals, or performing a close analysis of the learning outcomes and their relationship to various factors, such as the teaching strategy used or the student effort involved, faculty draw conclusions about the quality of learning being realized and make adjustments they deem to be appropriate. When faculty become more deliberate about articulating teaching goals, choosing suitable learning activities, gathering data on student performance with respect to the goals, and reflecting on factors related to success or failure, they are using assessment at a higher level, consistent with the demands of the scholarship of teaching and learning. In these situations, they are likely to use more systematic ways of designing an inquiry, gathering and analyzing data, and reflecting on meaning. They are able not only to draw conclusions about their immediate context, but to discuss these fully in ways that can be useful to others in similar situations. Use of more systematic assessment strategies in the scholarship of teaching and learning can range from relatively straightforward methods, such as classroom assessment techniques (Angelo and Cross, 1993) to more complicated experimental or naturalistic designs. This session will focus on examples of these strategies, discussion of their appropriateness for different circumstances, and experiences with their use. References Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey

Bass. Hutchings, P., & Shulman, L. S. (September/October, 1999). The scholarship of teaching: New

elaborations, new developments. Change, 31:5, 10-15. Marchese, T. (January, 2004). Personal communication to Banta.

More Than Coordination: Constructing Performance-based Coalitions to Institutionalize Learning And Teaching Initiatives In Higher Education Susan Clarke, Diane Sieber (University of Colorado at Boulder)

Our proposal addresses the question of institutionalizing the scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education. We draw on our experiences at the University of Colorado at Boulder a research

Abstracts

17

17

university with an array of active and innovative learning and teaching programs to present some of the lessons learned in moving to the next stage of institutional commitment. To do so, we borrow the concept of performance regimes to analyze the challenges in moving beyond coordination of diverse initiatives to systemic change.

Fundamentally, campus-wide performance regimes or coalitions are driven and distinguished by a performance imperative, rather than distributional benefits: they require motivating stakeholders to make the outcomes a campus-wide engagement in learning and teaching goals rather than the processes or the perks, such as individual program budgets, buildings, or staff--the central concern. Constructing a performance coalition, therefore, is more than a matter of coordination: it involves developing a shared understanding of the problem and potential solutions and encouraging the active participation of diverse interests in collaborative activities focused on performance outcomes. There are several challenges in doing so, however: the sheer logistics of mobilizing diverse participants around learning and teaching issues, sustaining their involvement in the face of competing demands, and creating durable coalitions able to institutionalize new priorities and new resource allocations that strengthen learning and teaching values. Using these analytic categories casts institutionalization issues in strategic terms. We anticipate that it also will encourage comparisons with similar initiatives at other campuses. While the institutionalization initiatives at Boulder are still in the early stages, we can identify some of the ways in which the campus has worked to overcome these mobilization, sustainability, and institutionalization challenges. Specifically, at CU the Provost launched a Provosts Seminar to bring together the key stakeholders on campus, to map the existing teaching and learning activities, and to identify unmet needs. In addition to these monthly meetings, several outside speakers introduced models from other similar campuses. Linking initiatives at multiple institutional levels became a special concern. While these efforts prompted some movement toward developing shared understandings and performance orientations, sustaining involvement among already overloaded faculty is more uneven. Clarification of the short and long term incentives for sustained participation now appears to be an essential and critical element in establishing systemic change. Our experiences to date suggest that mobilization for teaching and learning does not present an intractable problem but that sustaining that involvement and institutionalizing these teaching and learning initiatives is more problematic.

To Practice What We Teach: Using Practitioner Research to Evaluate and Enhance an SOTL Program Mark Connolly (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

This proposed session will describe an approach to program evaluation that actually models the kind of "practitioner research" that a federally funded faculty development program is attempting to cultivate among current and future faculty. The session will discuss how using practitioner research to evaluate a faculty-development program not only can generate credible evidence of program impact but also will help program implementers and participants learn to "walk the talk" of SOTL. Background In late 2002, the National Science Foundation awarded $10 million dollars to the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Michigan State University, and Pennsylvania State University to establish the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) www.cirtl.net. Its mission is to develop current and future faculty members in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) who are committed to implementing and advancing effective teaching practices for diverse student audiences. The instantiation of CIRTL on the UW-Madison campus is known as the Delta Program. The CIRTL Professional Development Program is organized into eight teams, seven of which (College Classroom Teaching, Diversity, Informal Education, Instructional Materials, Learning Community, Internship, and Teaching with Technology) provide professional development classes and resources; the eighth team is the project’s Evaluation and Research Team (ERT). Because the Evaluation and Research Team did not have the resources to evaluate the many activities and products deve loped by other teams, CIRTL project leadership asked the ERT to devise a way to build capacity within each team for evaluating its own activities. Evaluation Model The result was the development of CIRTL’s Evaluation Liaisons Group, which is composed of 10-12 CIRTL development team members (from natural sciences and social sciences) who are responsible for coordinating their own team’s evaluation activities. This group meets monthly to (1) share ideas, strategies, and instruments; (2) raise important questions; (3) coordinate evaluation activities across teams; and (4) offer each other support, advice, and feedback. The two ERT researchers who lead the group borrow from various approaches to practical inquiry, including "empowerment evaluation" (Fetterman, 1996, 2001) and "action learning" (Kember, 2000). The EL group itself has become a testbed for two important pillars of CIRTL—namely, practitioner research (what CIRTL calls "teaching-as-research") and communities of practice (CIRTL’s "learning communities"). As with the STEM graduates-through faculty they hope to affect, Evaluation Liaisons have struggled when learning to ask research questions and gather data that are different from those they

Abstracts

18

18

typically encounter in their disciplines. Additionally, the ELs are learning the importance of belonging to a group of fellow practitioners when learning an activity that entails not only technical skill but also making wise and often difficult choices. It is our contention that what the ELs are learning from one another about doing practitioner research better enables them to guide and support STEM graduates-through-faculty who are also learning to do an unfamiliar kind of inquiry. Furthermore, the ELs are gathering credible evidence to support claims about the effects of their activities on participants.

Improving Students' Critical Thinking Skills Through Internet Technology: Just in Time Teaching in a History of Photography Course Claude Cookman (Indiana University Bloomington)

This paper presents research on my effort to help students in my History of Twentieth Century Photography course increase their critical thinking skills through a new Internet method called Just in Time Teaching (JiTT). Taught during Spring 2004, the course enrolled 107 senior- and masters-level students who were predominantly photojournalism and fine arts photography majors. The primary research question was: Would having students use the Internet to answer study questions on assigned readings increase their critical thinking? The syllabus gave critical thinking a twofold definition: identifying an authors thesis and argument to evaluate if her argument was convincing; second, mastering ten operationalized skills essential to the history of photography such as observing, describing, comparing and contrasting, classifying, analyzing, interpreting. Under JiTT, students responded electronically to questions posted on the course Website. After reading their responses before class, I adjusted my lecture and discussion questions based on their understanding or misconception of the readings. I used Blooms taxonomy to write questions intended to promote higher-level thinking. Early in the semester, I started questions at the level of comprehension but soon moved them to application, analysis, s ynthesis and evaluation. The text was an anthology of primary writings on photographic history. A rich set of data resulted from questionnaires, focus groups, student self evaluation essays and a final-exam question. In the first three, students consistently reported that their critical thinking skills increased. On an exit questionnaire in response to the prompt Did the [JiTT] assignments help you increase your critical thinking skills? 81.97% said yes; 18.03%, no. For each operationalized skill, students were asked if it greatly improved, improved, stayed the same or regressed. Combined responses to greatly improved and improved ranged from 57.14% for testing a thesis to 95.39% for observing. Responses for all ten averaged 82.6%. On an open-ended question, numerous students reported the JiTT assignments did help increase their critical thinking. Responses included: I hated them at first, but soon realized that without them, I wouldn't have bothered to think deeply about any of the readings. They forced me to be a more active, critical reader in this class and in others. They made me go beyond just skimming the readings, they made me retain and process the knowledge found in them. To gather data beyond self-reporting, I asked a question on the final exam based on the skill of classifying. Students were shown photographs they had never seen and asked to position the photographer ... within the history of twentieth century photography. A content analysis is still ongoing, but grading the question revealed that a large majority of students successfully identified the genre, time frame and stylistic tradition. This study found the JiTT method did increase critical thinking among a large majority of students. While more research is necessary, the author hypothesizes that JiTT strongly motivated students to engage in the course; its power resulted from their understanding that their responses would be processed during class discussions, in which they might have to explain and defend their ideas.

Teaching Social Concepts by Creating Graphic Novels Laurel Cornell (Indiana University Bloomington)

In sociology classes at the university level it is relatively easy to find sets of quantitative data which students can analyze in order to address various social problems. What is more difficult is to get students engaged in these issues by acknowledging what they already know about them and enabling them to fit that knowledge into larger conceptual frameworks. One technique I have found to be useful in two very different sociology classes --- one on the built environment and the other on families in Japan --- is to ask students to draw graphic novels on specific themes. A graphic novel is a story told principally through pictures rather than through words. It is like a comic book, but typically treats a more serious issue in a longer format. For example, Art Spiegelman’s Maus (1986) portrays his father’s experience of the Holocaust, while Raymond Briggs’ Ethel and Earnest (1998) gives the history of his parents’ lives in twentieth century Great Britain. Students are familiar with the genre and can easily produce a four-panel five to eight page work as a one or two-day homework assignment.

Abstracts

19

19

This paper presents three different graphic novel-making exercises and assesses the learning experience associated with each. One, “My Life at Age 100,” is about old age; one “My Wedding” explores concepts of marriage in a cross-cultural context, and one “Riding My Bike as a Kid,” examines road design and human behavior. This paper argues that this method engages students in a way the usual written work would not. The method serves as a source of data which forms the basis of analytic and cross-cultural exercises. Finally, it enables students to realize a set of visual skills important in a web-based age but not typically acknowledged elsewhere in the undergraduate curriculum. After presenting the pedagogical intention, the content, and the results of each of these assignments, the paper assesses the effects on student learning through student and my own evaluations.

Using the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning to Foster Educational Judgment David Coulter (The University of British Columbia)

A fundamental assumption of the scholarship of teaching is the idea that knowledge and theory are tightly linked to practice, or how people act in the world. Hutchings and Shulman (1999), for example, argue that the scholarship of teaching "is a condition--as yet a mostly absent condition--for excellent teaching. It is the mechanism through which the profession of teaching itself advances." In short form, their argument is familiar: research on teaching will generate knowledge and theory that, in turn, will influence and improve practice. What is missing in the scholarship of teaching literature is consideration of how research impacts practice: does studying one's own teaching actually make one a better teacher? Some impressive scholars --including those studying teaching--can be poor teachers (Bain, 2004). This is, of course, not a new concern. I understand scholarship of teaching as analogous to educational action research, an approach to the improvement of teaching that has a history of more than fifty years in social science research. As long ago as 1926, researchers recommended that teachers study their practices and thereby promote both student learning and the profession of teaching (Buckingham, 1926, p. iv). The link between knowledge and improved practice is central to both educational action research (e.g., Lytle & Cochran-Smith, 1994) and to the scholarship of teaching (e.g., Mettetal, 2001); yet, at best the link is indirect. When efforts to link research directly to the improvement of teaching floundered in the 1960s and 1970s (c.f. Schn, 1987), researchers responded by expanding conceptions of what counts as relevant knowledge for teaching, in the process creating an explosion of teaching "knowledges": e.g., strategic, prepositional, relational, craft, local, case, tacit and personal (Fenstermacher, 1994). Determining just what counts as knowledge and how such claims might be justified has become extremely difficult in education, as in other scholarly areas. I follow a number of contemporary political philosophers (e.g., Beiner & Nedelsky, 2001; Ferrara, 1999) in arguing for judgment as a better lens to understand how scholarship can influence teaching practice (Coulter & Wiens, 2002). Ironically, for a profession concerned with making decisions affecting the lives of others, judgment is an under-theorized topic in educational research. The study of human judgment, however, has a 2400-year history in Western scholarship, beginning with Plato and Aristotle, through Kant, to the relatively recent work of Arendt (1978), Gadamer (1960/1996) and Habermas (1992/1996). This debate began with Aristotle making a distinction that Plato ignored: the separation of practical wisdom (phronesis) from theoretical wisdom (sophia), each of which emphasizes different forms of knowledge and different intellectual and moral virtues. Here I report on my more recent efforts to develop and use an Arendtian framework to show how the scholarship of teaching might be used to promote educational judgment.

Developing SoTL Through Faculty and Professional Learning Communities Milton D. Cox (Miami University), Laurie Richlin (Claremont Graduate University)

Faculty and Professional Learning Communities (FPLCs) provide an effective approach for developing SoTL and for making it public. FLPCs have been in place at Miami University for 25 years where the program has twice won Hesburgh recognition as an outstanding faculty development program. During the 2003-2004 academic year there were 308 FPLCs reported at 132 institutions in the U.S. and Canada. Including scholarly teaching or a SoTL component were reported by 84 institutions; during the 2003-2004 academic year there were FPLCs specifically on SoTL at 24 institutions. In this session we will describe the ongoing cycle of scholarly teaching and SoTL, the 10 developmental steps that foster SoTL in FPLCs, various ways that community members make their work public, the stages of growth in SoTL development, and evidence that the FPLC approach works to produce SoTL. Participants in this session will have the opportunity to consult about FPLCs to address classroom and institutional concerns and opportunities for their campuses. Additional information (if needed): We define an FPLC to be a cross-disciplinary group of 6-15 (8-12 recommended) consisting of one or a mix of the following: Faculty members, professional support colleagues, and administrators engaging in an active, collaborative, yearlong program with a curriculum about enhancing teaching and learning. Participants engage in activities that enable learning, development, community building, and SoTL.

Abstracts

20

20

A participant in an FPLC may select a focus course or project in which to try out innovations, assess project results and student learning, and prepare a course or project mini-portfolio; engage in biweekly seminars and some retreats; work with student associates; and present project results to the campus and at national conferences. Faculty and professional learning communities create connections for isolated teachers, establish networks for those pursuing innovations and pedagogical issues, meet early-career and senior faculty expectations for community, and foster multidisciplinary curricula. We will provide an overview of faculty and professional learning communities and assessment results of their impact on faculty development, SoTL, and student learning. This workshop will include recommendations and results from the book we co-edited, Building Faculty Learning Communities, volume 97 (summer 2004) in the series New Directions For Teaching and Learning.

Creating a New Curriculum from Scratch: Introduction to Informatics I101 Mehmet Dalkilic (Indiana University Bloomington)

Informatics is the study, practice, and impact of new technologies. One of its chief aims is to teach people how to effectively use information technology (IT) in areas that traditionally have been outside of IT. Indiana University created its own School of Informatics four years ago and began offering introduction to Informatics I101 at that time. Being the first and usually only exposure to Informatics that students have, its success is critical to the success of Informatics as a whole. In this talk we will examine how the content of I101 was created, its intent, examples of lessons, and challenges. The vast majority of people who use and work in IT actually do not work in an IT business—they work where IT is used to solve problems in business, health, entertainment, sports, and so on. In fact, a significant proportion, if not most, do not even have an IT degree. What they do have in common is people solving problems with technology. This observation is the cornerstone of Introduction to Informatics, and contains several important substatements: people solving problems, technology, problem solving with technology. These form the themes of I101: to teach the students to be good, analytical problem solvers, to teach the students about and the use of technology, and to teach the students how to successfully employ technology in areas they are interested and eventually work in, called the cognate area. The lecture and computer laboratory work in concert to provide material for these themes.

Policies and Practices that support SoTL at Georgia State University Harry Dangel (Georgia State University)

The work of faculty members in research universities has traditionally been distributed across the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. While the need to improve the quality of teaching and learning within the research university is self-evident (e.g., promoting scholarly teaching and making teaching community property), this paper focuses on the scholarship component of the faculty work. The very nature of a research university places a special emphasis on scholarship. It is through generating and disseminating new knowledge that research universities define their unique qualities (Bass, 1999). "For an activity to be designated as scholarship," argues Lee Shulman, the President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, "it should manifest at least three key characteristics: It should be public, susceptible to critical review and evaluation, and accessible for exchange and use by other members of ones scholarly community." The traditional framework that has defined scholarship contains elements that depend upon a disciplinary foundation. Professional journals, funding for research, a shared language and epistemology, and professional mobility across institutions provided biologists and early childhood educators more common ground with disciplinary colleagues at other institutions than with each other on the same campus. The concept of a scholarship of teaching and learning represents a further departure from the security of ones disciplinary world. At the least, the social science research models often used to investigate student learning (i.e., research basis used for investigating learning, type of questions asked, data collected and instruments used to do so, analyses conducted, and formats for reporting) are foreign to many faculty in disciplines such as literature, accounting, music, mathematics, etc. At the same time the very definition of a scholarship of teaching and learning has varied widely. For example, are peer feedback and vetting the same as peer review? Is posting a syllabus on a web site and inviting comments an act of teaching or scholarship? There are no formal university policies for recognizing faculty work in the scholarship of teaching and learning at Georgia State University. The primary arbiters for determining scholarship remain the various disciplinary-based review committees of peer-reviewed journals. Faculty members and departmental-level administrators who evaluate scholarship appear to cling to familiar, traditional standards. Yet, there is clear evidence of an informal practice of recognizing and validating research on student learning as scholarship. I ndividual faculty members are receiving promotion and tenure recommendations from the Provost based on research on student learning.

Abstracts

21

21

The Undergraduate Medical Academy: A Strategy for Preparing Students for Medical Study and Service in the State of Texas Dennis Daniels, Willie Wyatt (The Texas A&M University System)

During the past 50 years, an increase in life expectancy for both males and females has occurred. Across racial groups, women live longer than men. Further, in 2002 a study conducted by the National Institute of Medicine demonstrated that clear and serious ethnic health disparities persist, even when looking at persons of comparable educational and economic backgrounds. Therefore, it is increasingly incumbent that the methodologies and the curriculum used to prepare students for medical education must be examined again along with appropriate strategies. The difficult realities as discussed are compounded by a decline in applicants to medical school and the need for physicians in rural communities and urban centers. The State of Texas in response to the need for healthcare providers to address access and quality of care passed House Bill #85. The provisions of H.B. #85 established the Undergraduate Medical Academy at Prairie View A&M University, a member of the Texas A&M University System. The Undergraduate Medical Academy will feature new courses (e.g. advanced cell biology, Research and Evaluation), reserved faculty (6 new faculty members for students of the Academy), faculty mentorship, academic and career counseling, medical research opportunities, standardized testing preparation, medical school faculty enrichment opportunities, medical science library and the development of a new medical science curriculum strategy (e.g. a requirement to demonstrate fluency in a foreign language).

Relationships Between Students Preferred Learning Styles and Instructional Formats and Media Cleora J. D'Arcy, Darin Eastburn, Bertram Bruce, Muzhgan Nazarova (University of Illinois)

Plants, Pathogens, and People is a general education course for UIUC undergraduates, typically from seven or eight different colleges each semester. Over the past 10 years, the instructors have developed a variety of instructional formats and media to try to ensure that each student has the opportunity to succeed in the course. These include: lecture, handouts, visual aids (chalkboard notes, PowerPoint notes, overheads, 2x2 slides, videotapes), discussions (small group, whole class), writing assignments (in class, out of class), a textbook, a web site (text, images, interactive exercises), and on-line quizzes and lecture notes. The goal of this study is to determine if there are relationships between students' preferred learning styles and the instructional formats and media they find most effective. Are all the formats and media useful? Are we are achieving our goal of "reaching" all students in the class? Near the beginning of the semester students complete the Gregorc Style Delineator. To ensure student anonymity, results are encoded before the information is made available to the course instructors. Each student also is provided information about learning styles and the Gregorc inventory before it is administered, and about his/her own preferences afterwards. Near the end of the semester students complete a survey on the instructional formats and media used in the course. They evaluate how useful each type of instruction was in their own mastery of the material on a scale from 1=totally ineffective to 5=highly effective. The data from the Gregorc inventory and the format/media survey are analyzed to determine the distribution of the students' learning styles, the relative effectiveness of different instructional formats/media, and relationships between these two. During Fall 2003 52 students participated in the study. Preferred learning styles (>26) were: 14 abstract-random (AR), 16 abstract-sequential (AS), 18 concrete-random (CR), and 29 concrete-sequential (CS). The formats/media rated effective by more than 2/3 of the students were AR: PowerPoint slides and PowerPoint notes; AS: lectures, PowerPoint slides, and on-line quizzes; CR: lectures, PowerPoint slides, videotapes, on-line quizzes, and PowerPoint notes; CS: PowerPoint slides and PowerPoint notes. The textbook was rated ineffective by more than 2/3 of CR students. During Spring 2004 46 students participated in the study. Preferred learning styles were: 16 AR, 13 AS, 20 CR, and 27 CS. The formats/media rated effective by more than 2/3 of the students were AR: lectures, PowerPoint slides, out-of-class writing, and on-line quizzes; AS: web site images, on-line quizzes, and PowerPoint notes; CR: lectures, PowerPoint slides, web site images, on-line quizzes, and PowerPoint notes; CS: lectures, chalkboard notes, website images, on-line quizzes, and PowerPoint notes. The textbook was rated ineffective by more than 2/3 of AS students. This study will continue in 2004-2005, and will be enriched by qualitative information collected through student focus groups.

Rich Representations of Student Learning Jacqueline Dewar , Curtis Bennett (Loyola Marymount University)

What is acceptable evidence for a claim? How do you present your arguments to others? These two questions lie at the heart of any discipline. For science, the answer to the first question is the scientific method, for history, it's the historical method, for math, proof. A primary concern of college faculty is helping students reach a level of competence relative to these questions by graduation. This presentation describes how two mathematics faculty arrived at a rich representation of student progression toward

Abstracts

22

22

proficiency in their discipline that takes into account both affective and cognitive components and includes a typology of eight types of mathematical knowledge. The result provides many lessons and implications for practice. Similar representations could be constructed in other disciplines. In 2003-4, two Carnegie scholars joined forces in their investigations of the trajectory of math majors' understanding proof as they moved through the major, the role of a novel freshman course for math majors in developing their ability to communicate mathematical reasoning, and how learning mathematics contributes to liberal education. The study began with a survey surrounding attitudes and beliefs about mathematics, problem solving, and proof. It then broadened to include a "think-aloud" investigation on proof with 12 students spanning the major, a focus group with 5 of those 12 students, and interviews with freshmen and senior majors. Generating a mathematical proof is a complex task that requires knowledge of facts and procedures and the ability to make logical connections. It often involves a strategic choice of method and typically presents the opportunity to practice persistence in the face of uncertainty. Writing a proof that meets standards for rigor and exposition requires additional knowledge and sufficient motivation to produce a polished result. In examining student work on the "think-aloud" tasks and information gleaned from the interviews and focus group, the investigators observed the influence of cognitive factors (such as knowledge and strategic processing skills) and affective factors (such as interest and motivation) on performance. A simple numeric rubric proved inadequate for analyzing such multifaceted work. To describe students' performance and the trajectory of their learning across the major, the investigators brought two theories to bear: expertise theory (a model of domain learning) and a typology of knowledge adapted from science education to mathematics. Patricia Alexander's classroom-based model of domain learning concerns itself with the journey from novice to expert, and examines the influence of learner interest on the development of expertise. Richard Shavelson's typology of scientific knowledge includes six types of knowledge that encompass the knowledge and strategic processing portions of Alexander's model. The researchers identified confidence as an additional affective component of performance. The resulting 8-dimensional knowledge-expertise rubric provides a rich representation of student learning and motivation on the journey toward expertise, implications for teaching and learning, and potential for adaptation to other domains.

Why Use a Pen When We Have a Memory? Teaching Creativity in China Ruth Dineen (University of Wales Institute, Cardiff)

The Creativity Workshop was undertaken as part of an ongoing research project into the promotion of creativity in post-compulsory art & design education. This comparative study offers a unique synthesis of theoretical and experiential understandings of creativity and the creative process across three diverse cultures. The first phase drew on the UK's radical pedagogic traditions in art & design. The research outcomes will be contextualised, initially within the social and cultural parameters of the UK, and, in Phase 2 of the project, within China and USA. Pedagogically, the development of creativity in learners is inflected by differing concepts of creativity. In the USA, consumerism's constant demand for novelty, and the associated privileging of the individual, tend to result in an emphasis on creativity as innovation and/or personal development. Historically, the Chinese have viewed creativity in terms of value and cultural appropriateness, a view which has parallels in medieval Europe. There is a tendency to retain honourable craft traditions, re-making a social past rather than reflecting an individual future. Attitudes to creativity in the UK continue to draw on the European tradition of cultural appropriateness, whilst also responding to the imperatives of the market-place, although the balance is not stable. The first phase of the research resulted in a clear understanding of best-practice in the promotion of creativity within post-compulsory art & design education in the UK. This information was then applied to a 6-day Creativity Workshop for undergraduates and post-graduate students in Sichuan Institute of Fine Art, China. The experience has helped the author to begin to modify (and in some cases re-affirm) the initial culturally-specific hypotheses.

Competing Perspectives in the Classroom: The Effect of Sociology Students Perceptions of Balance on Evaluations Jeffrey C. Dixon, Janice McCabe (Indiana University Bloomington)

Balance in the classroom has been the subject of recent debate in both academic and public spheres, with some calling for legislation to preclude instructors from indoctrinating students. The debate over balance is particularly important to sociology because the discipline is sometimes characterized as overtly liberal and activist. Still, the implications of balance for teaching and learning remain unclear. We operationalize balance as students perceptions of whether instructors discuss points of view other than their own and invite criticism of their ideas. Using OLS regression on undergraduate classes quantitative evaluations of sociology instructors at Indiana University during the 2002-2003 academic year (N=99 classes), we ask whether classes that perceive their sociology instructors to be balanced tend to rate their

Abstracts

23

23

instructors and courses higher, ceteris paribus. We find that instructors who are perceived as balanced receive better evaluations, but balance is not as important as the other factors known to influence evaluations. Theoretical, practical, and policy implications are discussed.

Learning Styles: The Benefits of Awareness Rae Anne Dodds (Texas Tech University)

Through my encounters with economic students, I realized that very few are aware of their learning style causing inefficient study methods to be employed. To solve this problem of learning style and study ignorance, I prepared and presented an eighty-minute lecture. Within this lecture, students first learned their preferred learning style(s) followed by multiple study techniques appropriate for their learning style(s) that were then illustrated. Both qualitative and quantitative results revealed that economics students becoming aware of their learning styles, along with learning representative study techniques, was beneficial in increasing economic exam scores and providing the students with the belief that being aware prepares them better for learning/retaining. This paper provides a brief outline and examples of the tools utilized within the learning styles lecture.

Student Perceptions of Work and Pleasure Patricia Donahue (Lafayette College)

In this presentation, I discuss my current research on student perceptions of work and pleasure, undertaken as a CASTL scholar in the 2003 cohort. In an effort to understand how college students in a first year seminar understood the relationship of the work of reading to the work of writing (in composition studies it is commonplace to s peak of reading and writing as interrelated processes of interpretation, selection, and judgment), I used questionnaires to query five sections of students who had recently completed their seminars (I am currently conducting further conversations with a selected group of these students by e-mail and also plan to continue those discussions for the next three academic years). While I learned a great deal about how students describe the processes of writing and reading-in general, that writing requires thoughtful consideration of a process that is learned while reading is something natural-what I learned as a secondary result was actually more interesting: for students the use of the word work in the academic context was both surprising and confusing. For them work signified activity that was time -consuming, other-directed, and controlled by external norms. The opposite of work, however, they identified as pleasure, which they described as self-satisfying and self-determined (time seem irrelevant). In short, work signaled restraint; pleasure signaled autonomy. In my presentation, I will present these findings and discuss their implications. Since work is a term that teachers tend to use without much self-reflection (We have work to do today, This is the work I want you to do), it seems important to understand the preunderstandings students carry with them into our classes. It also seems important, however, to understand how to transform students perceptions of both work and pleasure so that they will perceive the work they do in college as a source of self-satisfaction, self-determination, and autonomy. For such a transformation to occur, what needs to be done, especially in courses like first year seminars and freshman composition, courses that are writing-intensive and assign a considerable amount of difficult reading? I have additional results to share about the possibilities of such transformation, gathered from my freshman writing students. My submission is connected to that of other 2003 CASTL scholars interested in intellectual play. If it is possible to link my presentation to theirs (and to that of Jose Feito), I would be most appreciative.

The Role of SoTL in the Promotion and Tenure Process? What are the Discipline-Specific Recommendations? Faye M. Dong, Robert Hughes, Jr., R. Kirby Barrick (University of Illinois)

Evidence of the importance of teaching and learning activities in the promotion and tenure process, particularly at research universities where discovery activities traditionally have been emphasized, is apparent when one reviews the sections on a promotion dossier. In contrast to a decade ago when evidence of teaching effectiveness was satisfied simply by reporting student evaluation scores, today it is becoming more common to find other assessment results required in the documentation, such as peer evaluations and self-reflective statements. Certainly by using Lee Schulman's criteria for scholarship (activities and products that are made public, scrutinized by review and evaluation by peers , and accessible for exchange and use by others in the discipline), the activities in the area of teaching appear to be approaching those in the area of research when documented for the promotion and tenure process. We are learning more about what faculty members value as assessment tools over and beyond student evaluations of teaching. Through a Faculty Performance Survey conducted in the University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) in 2000 by the ACES Academy of Teaching Excellence, faculty members identified highly valued criteria to measure performance in teaching, research, outreach/extension and service. Highly valued indicators of excellence in teaching included several SoTL activities, such as peer observation and assessment, and publications related to teaching and learning.

Abstracts

24

24

Therefore, given that SoTL activities are highly valued as assessment of teaching effectiveness, the question then arises as to the appropriate balance of SoTL accomplishments within each unique discipline. For example, for a faculty member who has an appointment of 45% teaching, 45% research, and 10% service, what should be the expectation of teaching and learning activities, and how should this be reflected in the promotion document? Subsequently, how should junior faculty members be advised when the opportunity arises to apply for grants to enhance teaching effectiveness, or to publishing results of education-related projects? Should this be encouraged? If not, why not, and if so, to what extent? This presentation will give viewpoints from a department with a laboratory biological- science based discipline (Food Science and Human Nutrition) and a department with a primary emphasis in the behavioral and social sciences (Human and Community Development). Each presenter will describe the opportunities and challenges of conducting high-quality scholarly work related to teaching and learning in their discipline (i.e., funding, publication outlets, views by senior colleagues, and s o forth), how this work complements or detracts from other research activities, and how this work can be incorporated into promotion and tenure documents.

An Assessment of Group Exercise Effectiveness Joseph Donnermeyer (The Ohio State University)

Assigning students to group exercises is quite popular among professors at universities, both large and small. They believe it aids student learning based on the assumption that assignments requiring cooperative, group work creates active learning environments via-vis the exchange of information and ideas. This somewhat pollyanish assumption about group exercises is often made through less than flattering comparisons with the lecture format, which has become the favorite "strawman" amongst those who advocate alternative teaching methodologies. However, feedback on group exercises appears to be a mix of positive and negative experiences, based on personal conversations by the author with both graduate and undergraduate students, and with other professors who have had similar exchanges with students. Although students generally like group exercises, their assessments are far from uniformly positive. Most of their negative comments center on two dimensions of group dynamics. The first drawback to group exercises from the student point of view is that sometimes the mix of personalities is not conducive to cooperative work and learning. Complaints about groups in which one or two students attempt to dominate is a frequently heard criticism. Or, dissatisfied students describe group members who cannot accept criticisms from others and refuse to compromise on issues related to completion of the group exercise (i.e., a "my way or the highway" mentality). A second shortcoming is the "free-rider" issue, that is, the situation in which everyone in the group is assigned the same grade by the professor, but the contributions of group members to the final product is unequal. It is especially galling to students who feel that they did most of the work, while at least one group member barely participated, yet everyone received the same mark. Further, they are critical of professors who are not willing or failed to develop a way to account for unequal contributions. Hence, this criticism is leveled at both the free-loading student(s) and the course instructor. There are other criticisms made by students as well, such as lack of specific instructions for completion of a group assignment, unclear expectations about how the final group product will be graded and insufficient time allowed by the instructor to complete group assignments. However, it is mostly issues related to interpersonal dynamics that cause students to complain about group exercises, or, conversely, to believe that their experiences were positive. There is little research on students' perceptions of the effectiveness of group exercises. This paper reports on one such evaluation, based on data collected in 2 large enrollment sections (about 150 students in each) of an introductory sociology course at The Ohio State University. Each group included 5 students. Data was collected from a survey of students on the day the group assignment was due. The dependent variable was a 10-point scale of group effectiveness. Independent variables included: X1 time at which the section was taught (early morning versus late morning); X2 sex of the student; X3 final grade assigned to the student; X4 attendance of the student in group exercise sessions (ranging from 0 attendance to attendance at all 5 sessions); X5 a 10-point scale measuring how other students in the group rated the respondents' contribution to completion of the group exercise; and X6 the average score given by the respondent to other students in the group. Both bivariate correlations and regression analysis (least squares) were used to examine the relationship of variables. The independent variables explain about 40 percent of the variance in students' rating of their group's effectiveness. Both student's average rating from other group members and the student's average rating of other group members (X5 and X6) were the strongest predictors of over-all group effectiveness. X5 and X6 were only moderately correlated, indicating that their effect on the dependent variable was additive. In addition, attendance (X4) was related to the student's average rating from group members (X5) but was not correlated with the average rating that student gave to other group members(X6).

Abstracts

25

25

Implications for practice are discussed in terms of how to reduce the issue of free-loading through methods that encourage attendance at all group sessions, as well as other recommendations for improvement of group exercises. Suggestions for future research are also described.

Decoding Astronomical Concepts Richard Durisen (Indiana University Bloomington)

This session will describe my efforts to overcome two related bottlenecks to learning: a narrower but essential one concerning how the light spectra of distant objects can be used to deduce important information (such as the presence of planets around stars), and a broader, more fundamental bottleneck about understanding how astronomers create knowledge. Beneath both of these lies a deeper problem: the difficulty most students have in grasping abstract models used to explain complex physical phenomena, and in understanding how such theoretical models are extracted from empirical data. It is no surprise that young non-science majors have difficulty with abstract theoretical models. Perhaps, at this level of instruction, what is more important is their evident and to me surprising ability to use practical, empirical rules of behavior in a creative way when asked to do so. This reflects a path of success in conveying useful information and reinforcing desirable patterns of thinking. Ins ights into student disciplinary thinking were the result of numerous classroom assessments, the results of which will be discussed here. I used them to evaluate strategies, gauge student progress, uncover new dimensions of the problem, and identify areas for future development of students’ abstract theoretical reasoning. Reference Durisen, R., & Pilachowski. C. (2004.) Decoding Astronomical Concepts. In D. Pace and J. Middendorf

(eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98. Blended Learning in Bioscience Lesley-Jane Eales-Reynolds (University of Portsmouth)

In recent years, the move to modular degree programmes in the UK has led to ever increasing class sizes. Numbers trebled over night but module content and learning outcomes did not, despite the fact that the method of delivery changed radically. As a result, the majority of modules in Biomedical Sciences were delivered by chalk and talk and students began to adopt a very dependent approach in their learning tell me what I need to know. This was particularly problematic for me teaching an introductory module in Immunology to students for whom it was compulsory, but not the core subject of their degree. In 2001, I was awarded a UK National Teaching Fellowship which enabled me to develop a Blended Learning approach to teaching Immunology in an attempt to improve the student experience and deepen their learning. This involved the revision of the supporting text, the development of a multimedia CD-ROM, and a student guide. The large group was divided into smaller groups of about 20-25 students. Instead of 30 hours of lectures over 10 weeks, the students received a series of tutorials delivered by two academics and a demonstrator. The tutorials were structured to allow time for themed activities, discussions and individual feedback. Students were assessed by a number of written exercises and a final, computer-based, summative examination. Detailed student feedback was obtained and comparisons were made both within the cohort and between this cohort and the previous one. The results clearly demonstrated that the students started developing as independent learners and were highly motivated. Their performance was much improved over their performance in other comparable modules and over the results of the previous cohort, which had learnt immunology in the large group lecturing format. The final student feedback indicated general satisfaction with the course although in the early stages there was considerable rebellion and upset (as might be predicted). Some students expressed very adamant views such as: "I did not pay my fees to teach myself and "this self-directed learning is a bad idea, it doesn't work". Interestingly the feedback from the students clearly demonstrated a cynicism towards the concept of student feedback and a belief that learning is all about passing exams. I would suggest that this ethos has developed partly as a result of the current approach to higher education, which, whilst it may be cost effective, fails to encourage the development of the enquiring mind, so vital to a scientist. Taking this approach to learning in isolation lead to passionate outcries from the students, the immediate results suggest that the students seemed to learn despite themselves. Further studies on this co-hort will help us to establish if the learning achieved persists.

Promoting Educational Scholarship at the University of Kentucky College of Medicine: A Case Study Carol Elam, Terry Stratton, Marlene Sauer (University of Kentucky College of Medicine)

The University of Kentucky College of Medicine (UKCOM) was recently recognized by the Association of American Medical Colleges professional journal, Academic Medicine, as one of 8 institutions to have a history of scholarly productivity in medical education research. As such, we identified a number of factors that have contributed to our success, including: (1) a history of medical education innovation; (2) curricular reform that led to opportunities for educational research and program evaluation; (3) merging

Abstracts

26

26

the offices of admissions, academic affairs, student affairs, curriculum, and evaluation into a single administrative entity; (4) establishing the Center of Excellence in Medical Education (CEME) to provide faculty development in medical education re search; (5) assigning trained educators to work with course and clerkship directors on medical education projects; and (6) developing and sustaining an institutional culture that supports and rewards the medical education research enterprise. An established CEME offering is the Medical Education Research Fellowship. This six-week program is designed to teach faculty the requisite skills for conducting medical education research, and to promote such activity as an accepted scholarly endeavor. The fellowship consists of two-hour weekly presentations/discussions on: 1) initiating a medical education research program; 2) accessing and using the medical education literature; 3) research design and statistics; 4) a medical education research case study; 5) writing for publication and using reviewers comments; and 6) ensuring success, which emphasizes the use of medical education research in promotion and tenure decisions, human subjects review considerations, and funding opportunities. The Medical Education Research Fellowship has been offered annually for the past five years, and to-date, over 70 medical center faculty members have participated.in the series. When mentoring colleagues interested in undertaking education research projects, UKCOM faculty and professional staff espouse the following Lessons Learned: 1. Study your work. 2. Maintain an applied focus. 3. Get to know your librarians. 4. Review the literature and consider what has been written.

5. Work collaboratively. 6. Seek out research/statistical expertise. 7. Schedule time to write and write with an audience or particular publication in mind. 8. Work to establish a program of research.

This basic roadmap has successfully created and nurtured medical education research productivity at our medical school, and is applicable to others seeking to elevate the status of educational research within their institutions

Building Intellectual Playgrounds through Conversation and Reflection Heidi Elmendorf (Georgetown University), Michael Marx, Catherine Berheide (Skidmore College), Wendy Ostroff (Sonoma State University)

Play is a powerful tool for learning. Children learn through play, and expert learners are adept at playing with ideas. Unfortunately, students are often discouraged from playing in educational environments by traditional pedagogies. In this presentation we discuss how conversations with texts and others, coupled with self-reflection, provide opportunities for intellectual and affective engagement. Each of our three classrooms used informal writing activities to engage the students in conversations with course materials and other students. As the semester progressed, we became increasingly aware of the importance of play in the students work. Marx and Berheide introduced a metacognitive journal into their required, interdisciplinary first-year course to increase student awareness of their thought processes as students developed critical thinking skills. Ostroff's course fostered students responsibility for their own learning process within a first-year seminar. First, students generated the criteria for their own seminar through discussions and public reflections on early seminar meetings. Next, students anonymously evaluated each peers contribution to the seminar and then assessed their own contribution to the seminar in light of the feedback they received. Elmendorf brought conversation and reflection into a general education biology course through the use of an on-line discussion forum and a student-teaching partnership with an elementary school. We independently coded and analyzed written and oral student conversations and their reflections on these conversations for evidence of student learning and self-awareness of their learning processes. Coming together as a working group within the 2003 Carnegie Scholar cohort provided us with the opportunity to note the convergence of our separate investigations around intellectual play. We were struck by the evidence that our students were able to reach our shared goals for learning by playing within a rich diversity of conversational forums. Specifically we noted the progression through a hierarchy of four behaviors: readiness of students to seize opportunity for conversation, emergence of increasingly sophisticated conversations that include increased comfort with uncertainty, ability to reflect critically on their own learning processes, and emergence of self-awareness of importance of play in learning. The results of our separate studies, involving different types of classes at different types of institutions, lead us to conclude that opening up space for more intellectual play would foster greater success in achieving both content and skill goals in college classrooms. As our studies demonstrate, there are multiple ways of doing so, but our data lead us to believe that both conversation and self-reflection are factors in that success. Therefore, we encourage faculty to build intellectual playgrounds in at least a corner of their courses and invite students to join us as we play with ideas. Metacognitive journals, peer- and self-critiques, and on-line discussions are only three of many possible ways of doing so.

Abstracts

27

27

Teaching and Learning Economics through Student-Centered Scholarship in the Undergraduate Business Curricula

Kenneth Fah (Ohio Dominican University) As part of the curriculum, undergraduate business students are required to take economics courses which include introduction to economics, or microeconomics and macroeconomics split and a combination of other courses. Many consider these courses rich in theory which they find intractable and lacking in applications that are of immediate relevance to them. Economics provides the foundation for the study of domestic and global business models. Thus, working knowledge of economic theory and applications is fundamental to the education of the undergraduate business student. This paper and presentation add to the scholarship in economic education by presenting an approach that develops student interest in economic scholarship from the introduction to economics through other economics courses, and culminates in a demonstration of working economic knowledge in the business capstone course. In a liberal college setting, this approach allows students to begin to connect the development of economic theory and its applications to developments in related disciplines to enable them to cultivate an integrated approach to learning economics and presenting its applications. It presents preliminary evidence from application to support the discussion on the reasons for its potential success and challenges facing this student-centered scholarship approach.

Student Attitudes Toward Higher Education Emily Fairchild, Suzanna Crage, Bernice Pescosolido (Indiana University Bloomington)

There have been many articles and opinion pieces published in academic journals, newsletters, and magazines about the presumably rising consumerist attitude toward higher education among college students. Instructors complain that students are not academically engaged and that they are instead concerned with getting their moneys worth, at times making demands that instructors believe interfere with learning. Although these discussions are common, research that defines the attitudes that compose consumerist perspectives is nonexistent. Furthermore, the frequency of such attitudes among students is also unknown; existing sources rely on anecdotal evidence or assumption. This discussion has ranged from the more extreme demand for complete student control of course material to the less controversial demand for honesty in university recruitment materials. Our project addresses both the content of the consumerist perspective and the prevalence of it through an online survey of randomly selected Indiana University-Bloomington undergraduates. Our instrument measures a variety of attitudes that taps into these various components of consumerist perspectives. The poster presents preliminary results of the survey, which answers the following three questions:

1. What do students think are the rights and responsibilities of students, instructors, and the university? 2. What defines consumerism in higher education? 3. How can consumerism be measured?

To answer these questions we analyze responses to the eighty-two survey items. This includes examining observed relationships between responses and sociodemographic characteristics of survey participants (such as GPA and sources of tuition funds), between responses to consumerism items and a scale measuring critical thinking, and between responses to various items that measure aspects of consumerism. We find that there is evidence of consumerist attitudes toward higher education among our sample of 540 undergraduate students. We also find that agreement with our examples of consumerist attitudes varies with different sociodemographic characteristics. These findings are the first step in the process toward developing a rigorous definition of consumerism that identifies variations in types of consumerist attitudes, and that will allow us to develop a scale to measure such attitudes among students and other populations. Our research will allow for rigorous description of this aspect of student attitudes, which will give valuable information to instructors who wish to most effectively motivate and involve their students in the material they are teaching. Funding for this study is provided by Indiana University Bloomington Instructional Support Services and Indiana University Bloomington Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Program.

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Community Colleges

Dianne Fallon (York County Community College), Jim Harnish (North Seattle Community College), Cindy J. Lahar (York County Community College), Mark H. Maier (Glendale Community College), Jeffrey Sommers (Miami University-Middletown) This presentation is an invitation for discussion about individual scholarly projects and about how community colleges have launched and supported Scholarship of Teaching and Learning initiatives. Possible directions for the future collaboration among faculty from 2-year colleges will be discussed.

Abstracts

28

28

Pensive Lingering in the Transforming Moments of Teaching & Learning Sayyedmohsen Fatemi (The University of British Columbia)

Teaching and learning transpire in moments where the knower and learner go through special development both in terms of their being and becoming: How can educators create these promising moments? The presentation seeks to answer this question while focusing on the values of transforming moments. In line with the analysis of moments as the commencement of all the happenings, the presentation explores the quiddity of teaching and learning moments and looks into their manifestations. The presentation will discuss how teachers can create these moments and help learners experience a novel transformation through mindfulness, creativity and expressiveness.

Teaching the Principles of Behavior Modification Using Problem-Based Learning Diane Feibel (University of Cincinnati)

Problem-based learning (PBL) is having students learn by using real-life problems serving as the motivation and framework. (Harper-Marinick, 2001). In wanting to know or being able to solve the problems, students learn the required basic knowledge as the first stepping stone toward the solution (Bloom, 1956). As the solution process continues, students learn vital critical-thinking skills along with the necessity for adaptable, flexible, and creative thinking in the face of barriers. With the endpoint of a solution being part of the motivating force, students must realize that divergent thinking, a generation of new hypotheses/alternative pathways, will help them get there. Based upon the original work on PBL done at McMaster University (1969) on medical school education at the Family of Health Sciences, learning has been described as having four separate aspects. These are that (a) learning is student-centered, rather than teacher-propelled; (b) learning is a collaborative effort occurring in small groups and gene rating a combined solution; (c) learning is facilitated by teachers serving as tutors or coaches who facilitate discovery, inquiry, analysis, and reporting (Harper-Marinick, p. 1); and (d) learners are stimulated by the problem they are presented with and the need to work with their group members leading to effective solutions. The PBL process involves hypothetico-deductive reasoning (Barrows & Tamblyn, cited by Wilkerson & Gijselaers, 1996). This type of reasoning involves the formation of hypotheses and top-down processing from a total concept into specific examples. In order to prepare students for successful PBL, the teacher (coach) must first make sure that a minimal amount of basic information/knowledge has been mastered. This can occur via teache r-centered didactic teaching/instruction or via student-centered archival research/readings. Students can then use that knowledge to generate and synthesize hypotheses for the solution of the problem, recognizing what additional information may need to be acquired. This sets up a feedback loop to motivate additional research. Students use the newly acquired information that is shared with other group members, leading to the generation of newly-revised hypotheses. When the problem becomes solved, feedback occurs, again leading to self- and group-assessment of the accuracy and effectiveness of the solution. The role of the teacher in all of this is that of a coach who asks directed questions, monitors the problem-solving process, and suggests appropriate resources for further research. According to Fink (2001), there are several specific criteria that determine a well-designed course. They include active learning and educative assessment, which lead to teaching/learning activities, coupled with feedback/assessment, which leads to the learning of goals and objectives, which leads to higher level learning. Setting up a course in Behavior Modification using PBL required me to have an educational structure in addition to the content structure of the knowledge of the course. First, I determined my objectives for the students in the course. In other words, what were my learning goals for my students by the end of the course. There were short-term goals (within the context of the specific course) and long-term goals (achievements that will transcend the specifics of this course). References Wilkerson, L., & Gijselaers, W. (Eds.). (1996). Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory

and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bloom, B. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York:

David McKay. Fink, L. D. (2001). Higher level learning: The first step toward more significant learning. To Improve the

Academy, 19, 113-130. Harper-Marinick, M. (2001). Engaging students in problem-based learning [On-line]. Available:

www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/forum/spr01/tl1.html McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York: Guilford Press.

Abstracts

29

29

Dissemination of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning W ithin the Sciences Andrew Feig (Indiana University Bloomington)

Most faculty in the natural sciences read neither the SOTL literature nor even the high profile reports on teaching like BIO2010 by the National Research Council. These same people teach a lot of students and if one is to have a significant impact on teaching efficacy, this is a primary constituency with whom we must communicate. Furthermore, to effectively reform science education, one must get them to buy into a model of improved engagement in their own classroom work. Several years ago we developed a series of exercises to allow the incorporation of bioinformatics into the undergraduate biochemistry curriculum. While the exercises were developed for internal use, we converted them with the help of the IU Teaching and Learning Technology Laboratory to a web-based format. These exercises have now been instituted at a wide range of colleges and universities. The classes using them have spanned from advanced high school students to graduate students in biochemistry. Simply posting the exercises on the web made them accessible to others, but that was not really the key to their efficacy. Since the initial report of this work, we have been looking at how we disseminated the exercises and why they were so widely adopted. Through discussions with faculty members who have co-opted the exercises and surveys of their students after completing the units, we have learned what made the exercises useful and adaptable to course environments beyond our own. These findings lead to a model for effective dissemination that may facilitate adoption of teaching practices beyond the immediate classroom environment for which they were developed. The average faculty member at a research-intensive university with an active research group will not adopt teaching modalities that require extensive preparation. Nor in the current environment will they develop novel interactive modes of teaching for fear that they will be considered less focused on their research activities. In that way, if we wish to break out of the lecuture/recitation/cookbook laboratory format of our curriculum, it is imperative to make the case that implementing SOTL advances will be no more labor-intensive than traditional lecture preparation.

Studying the Effect of Interactive Examples on Introductory Physics Courses Adam Feil (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

Interactive Examples (IE's), developed at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, are on-line homework problems that guide students through the solution by providing help in the form of questions rather than simple hints. Dynamic feedback is given based on a student's correct or incorrect answers to the help questions. Students are taught expert-like problem solving as they are guided through a conceptual analysis of the problem. Because IE's act as a scaffold, students are able to successfully work through physics problems that would otherwise be beyond their ability. Exam and Quiz scores from five years of an introductory mechanics course and an introductory E&M course have been analyzed to measure student performance gains.

Allowing Not-Knowing in Student-led Seminar Discussions Jose Alfonso Feito (Saint Mary's College of California)

This research project analyzed classroom discussions within the context of the Saint Mary's Collegiate Seminar Program; a four-semester undergraduate general education requirement based loosely upon the Great Books tradition of St Johns College. The seminars are relatively unstructured discussions where participants explore the ideas and values evoked by a carefully selected primary text. The pedagogical intent of the approach is to foster productive habits of intellectual inquiry and exchange that will serve students in diverse future learning environments. In an earlier investigation of student reflections on their seminar classes (Feito, 2002), the theme of not-knowing emerged as a key factor in the maintenance of a truly collaborative intellectual community within the classroom. Not-knowing was characterized by a groups ability to defer meaning, tolerate ambiguity, hold divergent perspectives, and postpone closure. The current project investigates how allowing not-knowing is enacted within actual classroom discourse. Detailed digital audio recordings and transcriptions of selected seminar discussions were collected and studied using the method of discourse analysis (Wood & Kroger, 2000). The objective was to characterize the functional specificity of student language rather than to uncover universal laws or manufacture broad generalizations. One hour-long seminar discussion on Garcia-Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude was transcribed and analyzed using this method. At the most explicit level, the students used discourse markers to communicate the provisional and open-ended nature of their contributions. These markers commonly included tag questions (e.g. y'know? isn't it? does that make any sense?), qualifiers (e.g. maybe, almost like, kinda like) and prefaces (e.g. I just thought, I was wondering if). They were used to communicate that utterances were open to modification, transformation and qualification by the group. On a more subtle level, not-knowing was embedded within the classroom discourse structure itself. Through a surprising variety of linguistic forms, students communicated that they do not expect definitive answers to their questions or immediate evaluations to their contributions. Their speech regularly

Abstracts

30

30

indicated that they were seeking other ideas to lie on the table beside their own in an open-ended field of inquiry. These discourse dynamics revealed an underlying epistemology of knowledge as co-constructed and negotiable rather than discrete and given. The discussion segments most strongly characterized by not-knowing had non-linear topic patterns and complex exchange structures; the group frequently veered off topic and then returned in a cyclic pattern. These learning environments required participants to negotiate multiple threads simultaneously and make connections across wide spans of interaction. The associated cognitive demands encouraged more elaborate processing of information as students held, reviewed and reconstituted ideas for lengthy periods of time. This may be one explanation for the traditional (but inconsistently validated) claim that discussion leads to better retention and understanding of course material. Discussions devoid of not-knowing may not foster the same educational benefits. This research represents one step towards building a more articulated model of seminar processes. It describes a emergent dimension of classroom discussions that may be pivotal in facilitating student learning.

Predictors of Introductory Psychology Grades in Students at a Nonresidential Campus Gary Felsten (Indiana University Purdue University Columbus)

In the Indiana University (IU) system, students at nonresidential campuses differ from students at residential campuses in several ways that may influence academic success. Students at commuter campuses are more likely to be non-traditional (25 years of age or older) and to attend part-time. Borden (2000) reported that students at the nonresidential campuses were more likely to be first- generation college students, and to spend less time doing academic work and more time working for pay, commuting, and managing family responsibilities. They were less likely to graduate. The present study investigated academic, demographic, and behavioral predictors of exam grades in an introductory psychology course at a small, nonresidential campus in the IU system. Across three semesters, 311 students (254 traditional, 57 nontraditional; 191 female, 120 male) provided sufficiently complete data for analyses. Students completed a demographic survey and provided weekly reports of class attendance and time spent in academic, work, and family activities. The Registrars Office provided high school GPAs and SAT scores. Nearly all traditional students were single and had no children. Most of the nontraditional students were married, divorced, or separated, and 75% had one or more children living with them. About half of each group were first-generation college students. Nontraditional students had higher college GPAs, had completed more credit hours, but were registered for fewer credit hours than traditional students. During the semester, traditional and nontraditional students did not differ in class attendance (nearly 80%) or hours of commuting or working for pay, but nontraditional students reported more hours of family responsibilities and study and fewer hours of relaxation; they also scored higher on exams. In nontraditional students, high school percentile and college GPA correlated most strongly with exam scores, but fewer than half of the students had scores for these measures. Very few had taken the SAT. Class attendance and time spent in academic, work, and family activities did not predict grades. Number of children correlated positively with grades. In traditional students, college GPA, SAT scores, and high school percentile co rrelated most strongly with exam grades. Stepwise regression for students with composite SAT scores (n = 163) found that SAT scores, gender, and age accounted for 27.8% of the variance in exam grades, whereas academic, work, and family activities added 9.3% to the variance, but only greater attendance and fewer hours of paid work were significant predictors of higher grades. In traditional and nontraditional students, exam scores did not differ between full-time and part-time students, or between first-generation students and students whose parents had attended or completed college. In summary, past and current measures of academic performance were the strongest predictors of grades on introductory psychology exams, but for traditional students, class attendance and hours spent working for pay also predicted grades. Nontraditional students managed college, family, and work responsibilities to outperform traditional students. Part-time and first-generation students were not at a disadvantage. Implications will be discussed. Infusing SOTL into Physics: Completing the Preparation of Future Faculty Noah Finkelstein (University of Colorado, Boulder) While our academic programs appear to do a remarkable job at producing the next generation of research faculty (CSEPP 2000), we are not widely preparing our future faculty to develop or implement productive practices in education. This paper presents a survey of three programs designed to address this gap: a postdoctoral program in science education research, a graduate program for preparing future physics faculty, and an advanced level undergraduate / graduate course in physics education and physics education research. Data on successes and failures of these programs at the level of individual development and the level of departmental change will be presented and analyzed from a perspective of cultural change (Sarason 1989) and developing professionals (Shulman 1997).

Abstracts

31

31

In 1997 the National Science Foundation offered a novel postdoctoral training program in education research -- The Postdoctoral Fellowships in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education (PFSMETE). In 1999, after funding three cohorts of postdoctoral Fellows, the program was cancelled. Surveys of PFSMETE participants and their mentors suggest that the program was valuable for introducing SMET researchers to education research. Meanwhile, the quickly growing field of physics education research has been significantly affected by the PFSMETE program; approximately 20%-25% of junior faculty in PER were PFSEMETE postdocs. Analysis of program structure suggests three particular themes, autonomy, boundary crossing, and cultural change, that shaped the success of this program. Another program, a graduate student program in physics, was explicitly designed to augment the traditional curriculum in order to more fully inform and prepare students for their future roles: Preparing Future Physics Faculty(PFPF). Through detailed case studies of a local implementation of the PFPF program, we identify a framework and general heuristics for successful implementation and retention of this augmented preparation of graduate students. Our key findings include a model that is adaptable, self-supporting, and integrative. We highlight the positive effects of this program on students, faculty, department, community partners, and home institution more broadly. The third model of infusing SOTL in the sciences is the development of a new course on teaching and learning physics that is designed to bridge the physics department and education program. The course promotes the enrollment of physics majors and graduate students in the teacher education preparation program while simultaneously preparing these students to teach. Earlier work (Finkelstein 2003) demonstrates that the course improves student mastery of physics. The present work discusses how this course improves students' mastery of education, and the institutional response to this course. References Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy. (2000). Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for

Scientists and Engineers. Washington DC: NAP. Finkelstein, N. (2003). Coordinating Instruction in Physics and Education, Journal of College Science

Teaching, 33(1). Sarason, S.B. (1989). The Creation of Settings and the Future Societies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shulman. L.S., (1997). Professing the Liberal Arts, In Education and Democracy: Re-imagining Liberal

Learning in America, edited by Robert Orrill. New York: College Board Publications What Happens Next? A Follow-Up Study of PLTL Workshop Leaders Leo Gafney (National PLTL Project), Pratibha Varma-Nelson (Northeastern Illinois University)

The Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) model preserves the lecture and introduces a new structure, a weekly two-hour workshop, where six to eight students work as a team to solve carefully structured problems under the guidance of a peer leader. The peer leader is a student who has done well in the course previously and is trained to facilitate the workshop. The peer leader clarifies goals, ensures that team members engage with the materials and with each other, builds commitment and confidence, and encourages debate and discussion. A good leader liberates students to take responsibility for their own learning and focuses their efforts on negotiating meaning and constructing individual understanding. The results of the PLTL Workshop are quite clear: students achieve better grades; retention improves; students like the PLTL Workshop. The uniqueness of PLTL lies in the fact that it links the use of a trained peer-leader with small group work and integrates these into the structure of a science course. This paper will present the results of a pilot study that was conducted to study whether former leaders at Saint Xavier University, now in business, industry, teaching and in graduate school believed that acting as a peer leader was significant in their education and was a factor in their work. A survey was devised including graduate study and career information. Likert-scaled items about impact on learning, and open-ended items asking about the effect of the PLTL program on career decisions and activities and on retrospective views of PLTL in their education were created. Selected phone interviews were also conducted to add detail and pursue interesting areas such as the connection between PLTL and an interest in teaching.

Fanning the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Effective and Innovative Faculty Development Barbara Mae Gayle (St Martin's College), Nancy Randall (Malaspina University-College), Robert Wolffe (Bradley University), Larry Kiser (Eastern Washington University)

Plutarch noted that "the mind is a fire to be kindled, not a vessel to be filled." How do we 'fan the fire' and encourage disciplinary scholars to engage with the often alien world of the scholarship of teaching and learning? Our CASTL cluster focus is 'Supporting Scholarly Work in Learning-Centered Universities'. In our cluster institutions, we have been investigating the impact of scholarly work on faculty members and on the larger educational community. Join our international group as we explore these questions. Presenters will share innovative and feasible practices and will present the preliminary outcomes of our cluster investigation. Participants will identify issues of supporting SoTL and receive handouts with detailed explanations of strategies shared.

Abstracts

32

32

Physics 100: An Introductory Course for Under-Prepared Students at the University of Illinois Gary Gladding (University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign)

The introductory physics sequence is seen to be a major point of attrition for engineering students, especially those from under-represented groups. For example, at the University of Illinois, about 20% of the students in the first physics course receive course grades of D or lower, with this fraction increasing to 35% for Latino/as and 60% for African-Americans. Indeed, 70% of the Latino/as and 80% of the African-Americans that leave the College of Engineering without a degree receive a grade of D or lower in at least two introductory physics courses. To address this problem we have developed Physics 100, an initial short course for under-prepared students (http://online.physics.uiuc.edu/courses/phys100/fall03/). This nine -week course makes extensive use of novel web-based exercises, followed by a weekly two-hour meeting that features cooperative group work. In this talk, I will describe the design of the course and the challenges of making a meaningful assessment of its effectiveness.

Preliminary Findings on the Significance of Learning Styles over Time Mary Goodwin, Mary Elaine Califf (Illinois State University)

Does a students learning style change over time? Do only those students who enter a major with a learning style compatible with that major succeed? If learning style can change, can we educators facilitate that change? Nulty and Barrett (1996) examined learning styles of students in four academic disciplines, one of which was computer science. Students just beginning their programs of study did not have significantly different learning style scores when the means for each discipline were compared. However, computer science students in their third year of study had learning styles that strongly preferred active experience and abstract conceptualization, which differed significantly from the other three disciplines. This study was not longitudinal, so two logical explanations exist. Either students who start with this learning style are much more likely to succeed in computer science, or students learning styles actually shift. We are following up on this work by conducting a longitudinal study of learning styles of students in computing disciplines. We are using Ridings Cognitive Styles Assessment, a fairly reliable instrument that measures learning styles on two dimensions: visual-verbal and holistic-analytical (Riding, 1998). An analytical preference is similar to abstract conceptualization in Kolb's scale used by Nulty and Barrett. We are conducting the s tudy in a School of Information Technology with three computing-oriented majors. All students in the school take three beginning courses: an introduction to the discipline, and a two semester sequence in computer programming. We administered the assessme nt to students in the introductory course in fall of 2003. We are then following up on students and administering the assessment a second time as they complete the second programming course. In order to determine whether we had a population that had already self-selected toward a particular learning style, we also administered the assessment to students in one of our relatively non-technical service courses. We found no significant differences between these students and the students in our introductory course, confirming Nulty and Barrett's findings. Data collection is not complete. However, a small percentage of students took the introductory course and the first programming course simultaneously, so we have gathered the second set of data from a very small number of students. This data shows a major shift in learning style toward the Analytic end of the scale although the N is too small for statistical significance. Our hope is that this study will show that at least some students do adjust or expand their learning styles to enable them to better cope with the subject matter. Then we can follow up by exploring ways to support and encourage students to make this adjustment, allowing a higher percentage of students to succeed. References Nulty, D., & Barrett, M. (1996). Transitions in Students Learning Styles. Studies in Higher Education.

21(3), 333-345. Riding, R.(1998). Cognitive Styles Analysis-Research Administration. Learning & Training Technology,

Birmingham, UK. 2-7.

Pre-service Teachers and Diverse Student Populations: Attitudes in Action Nelson Graff (San Francisco State University)

Although student populations in U.S. secondary schools are becoming increasingly diverse in terms of ethnicity, class, and linguistic heritage, the teaching population remains predominantly white, middle-class, and female. These elements of learners' backgrounds, according to much current educational research, can affect the meanings of literacy, the social practices of knowledge construction and display, and the nature of interactions around learning and teaching. Because these differences in background may therefore lead to miscommunications in classrooms, the ability of teachers to reach their students and educate effectively comes increasingly into question under current conditions.

Abstracts

33

33

As a teacher-educator preparing students to teach secondary English, I have tried to help them develop sensitivity to diverse students through research and reading, writing, discussion, and analysis of secondary student writing. In the fall of 2004, I will be working with pre-service teachers in the second semester of a two-semester curriculum and instruction class. This second semester includes their student-teaching experience and directs student attention to researching their own teaching, assessing their effectiveness as teachers and their students' learning. Because the first semester course focused attention on ethnic, class, and linguistic diversity and strategies for educating diverse students, I will investigate students' implementation of these strategies during their student teaching. I will collect students' written products including profiles of exceptional learners, culture and climate reports of their schools, reflections on their teaching and students' learning, and comments on their students' writing as well videotapes of their teaching. Analyzing these data sources will give me insight into students' development as teacher researchers and their processes of transforming their own learning about diverse students into effective classroom practice. Because this will be work in progress, I will focus my preliminary analysis on one or two students. By October, they should have produced one or two pieces of formal analysis of their teaching and several informal reflections. Even these early reflections should give me insight into their practices of educating diverse students and their initial ability to self assess and adjust their teaching. Because so much research on this issue has focused on teachers' attitudes, the examination of their actions as beginning teachers and development as teacher-researchers has great potential implications for teachers concerned both about social justice in education and the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Teachers as Learners in the Global Race Conscious Classroom Otis Grant (Indiana University South Bend)

This presentation will focus on reflective analyses. The presentation is meant to be thought provoking and encourage discussion of identity, power, and diversity in the college classroom. In the college classroom, teaching effectively across race and culture requires both commitment to diversity and cultural perceptiveness (Bowers & Flinders, 1990; McDermott, 1977). At its core, diversity reflects the social cons truction of difference. By cognitively embracing the diversity aspect of learning, teachers will come to realize that individual and cultural experiences are tied closely to external, structural processes. As such, in order to teach effectively, teachers must be willing to learn from their students, and also be cognizant about how their own racial self consciousness affects their teaching. Hraba (1979) describes race consciousness as the self consciousness of group members, [and] their realization that they belong to the same group and have a degree of loyalty to each other, [thereby] drawing a distinction between themselves and others (p.348). It often takes time and energy to become self conscious about race (Delgado & Stefancic, 1997; Katz & Ivey, 1977). However, when these teachers become racially self aware, the benefits will outweigh the costs. For example, when teachers are racially conscious, they are more able to comprehend and apply knowledge gained from their students, thereby increasing the positiveness of the learning environment. Too often, teachers have an unconstructive perception about minorities and are often unfamiliar with the particular quandaries that minorities encounter. In order to gain the benefits of diversity, teachers must listen to their students, especially minority students, in an effort to learn about the pitfalls of being a minority and to comprehend themselves and the role they fulfill as teachers (Mura, 1988). Because students cannot be told about their own lives, teachers will lack a fundamental aspect of diversity. As such, minority perspectives are essential in helping teachers shape the learning environment. Good teachers are not only concerned with achievement scores; they are also concerned with the moral, social and ethical development of their students. When students respect a teacher, they will seek that teachers approval. Within this positive relationship teachers should not only reciprocate, but also eagerly engage and search for underlying issues. These underlying issues often reflect the interest and perspective of the student. Accordingly, teachers need to be able to connect the relevance of race to the subject being taught. The true pedagogical task is to teach students to operate and perhaps be leaders in a global multicultural world.

Decoding the Identification of Evidence in the Study of History Valerie Grim (Indiana University Bloomington)

One aspect of the successful study of history is the ability of students to situate a personal viewpoint within a critical framework. This session will show how I explored strategies for encouraging this kind of thinking, and the result of a systematic assessment of student effort. For a large, introductory class, I designed a series of role-playing assignments which involved historical imagination. These exercises pushed students to think as passionate advocates to uncover human motivation that connect historical struggle to agency. By the final assignment, more students understood how to use specific details and how to relate them to broader analytical contexts. The regular opportunities for practice and frequent feedback, parts of the Decoding and Disciplines model, provided a framework for considering how to teach students skills important to the study of history.

Abstracts

34

34

Reference Grim, V., Pace, D., & Shopkow, L. (2004.) Learning to use evidence in the study of history. In D. Pace and

J. Middendorf (eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.

CHEMX: Assessing Cognitive Expectations for Learning Chemistry Nathaniel Grove, Stacey Lowery Bretz (Youngstown State University)

The heart of teaching and learning chemistry is the ability of the teacher to provide experiences that share a conceptually abstract, mathematically-rich subject with novice learners. This includes not only chemistry concepts, but also knowledge about how to learn chemistry. Students' expectations for learning chemistry in the university classroom impact their success in doing so. Physics education research has explored the idea of student expectations with regard to learning physics, resulting in the development of MPEX (the Maryland Physics Expectation survey). We are adapting MPEX to develop a chemistry survey regarding student expectations for learning chemistry: CHEMX. In particular, CHEMX explores the role of laboratory in learning chemistry as shaped by Johnstone's work with the macroscopic, particulate, and symbolic representations of matter. Data collection from university chemistry faculty, undergraduates and graduate students in chemistry programs approved by the ACS Committee on Professional Training allows examination of differences in expectations across the disciplines of chemistry. Data will also be collected regarding changes in expectations among chemistry undergraduates as they progress from general chemistry through ACS approved programs. Data collection from high school chemistry teachers examines the environment in which entering undergraduates develop their expectations. Collaborations with the POGIL Project (Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, NSF-DUE-CCLI-ND-0231120) and the MORE Project (Model-Observe -Reflect -Explain, NSF_REC-ROLE-0208029) focus upon explicit efforts to shift student expectations and explore correlations with student achievement. This work is funded through the National Science Foundation, CCLI Award 0404975, July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2006, $113,012.

The Socratic Method Re-Examined Richard Gunderman (Indiana University Bloomington)

Socrates famously declared that "the un-examined life is not worth living." As in life, so in the classroom, it is vital that we create opportunities to re -examine what we are attempting to achieve. This paper provides a theoretical framework for embodying the Socratic Method in the contemporary classroom. In its fullest flourishing, the Socratic Method invites students and educators to learn through inquiry, and to inquire into that which is most worth knowing. The Socratic Method springs from opposition to the teachings of Sophists such as Gorgias, who held that "nothing exists, and even if it did, it would be unknowable, and even if it could be known, knowledge of it would be incommunicable. Socratic inquiry is grounded in the conviction that knowledge is both possible and sharable, and most likely to be attained and enriched through sharing. Socrates saw doubt not as the destination of education, but as an essential route to truth. He sought to lead his interlocutors into a state of aporia, in which old convictions can be examined for what they really are, and new insights emerge for the first time. Socrates held that the greatest human misfortune is not death, or even unjust execution, but rather what he called "misology," the hatred of discourse. The only way human beings can lead full lives is to think through what we are living for. The Socratic Method is not about indoctrination, but engaging learners as inquirers in the own right. The learner is not an empty vessel to be filled with facts, but a co-investigator, in whose company even the wisest person can learn much. Above all, the Socratic Method represents an invitation to ethical inquiry. It is vital that we examine our own assumptions, including what we understand education to be and why we believe it to be important. It is through examining various claimants to our ethical allegiance, our vision of the good life and the role of education in it, that we become more fully human. In the course of considering different visions of the good life, we gain deeper insight into what we are, and what we are capable of. The paper concludes by highlighting the basic tenets of the Socratic Method. First, it is vital that we resist the temptation to answer student questions immediately. The primary goal of education is not to transmit knowledge, but to prepare co-investigators. Second, we should focus less on giving the right answers, and more on asking the right questions. We define ourselves as human beings not by what we know but by what intrigues us. Third, our guiding vision of learners should be who they are outside the classroom. We are preparing people not merely to pass exams, but to lead fruitful lives. Finally, we need to rethink our attitude toward error. Rightly understood, errors are not failures, but vital steps along the path to deeper understanding.

Abstracts

35

35

Decoding Literary Text Paul Gutjahr (Indiana University Bloomington)

Students report obstacles from two directions in analyzing text. Unlike science and mathematics, there are no “right” answers and this bothers them. It seems to outrage their sense of justice and fair play. Second, they have become convinced somewhere along the line that the study of literature is much like the process of solving an incredibly obscure code or puzzle whose answer is known only to the teacher, who frequently takes pleasure in making them guess what an author’s intent or a text’s true meaning is. In freshmen literature classes, I attempt to address both these complaints by leading students through an exercise which shows them that neither of these complaints is entirely true. Literary analysis actually demands that the student take a kind of middle road between these two positions: there may not be a “right” answer, but there are certainly better and worse positions to argue when it comes to what a given text might mean. This failure to understand the basic project of literary analysis is a major bottleneck to student success. To strike at the root of these complaints in a 280-person lecture based course I model how to uncover double and even triple meanings. This session will show the application of the decoding the disciplines model to the study of literature: defining the bottleneck to learning, ascertaining the mental operations that an expert in the field uses to overcome such a bottleneck, modeling the analysis of a text, giving students practice on their own as well as feedback, and finally, the systematic assessment of the extent to which the students mastered this mental process. Reference Ardizzone, T., Gutjahr, P., & Breithhaupt, F. (2004.) Decoding the Humanities. In D. Pace and J.

Middendorf (eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98. SoTL as a Tree of Teaching and Learning John Habel (Western Carolina University)

Western Carolina University (WCU), one of 16 ins titutions in the University of North Carolina system, is a regional, comprehensive university with an enrollment of approximately 8,500. In the fall of 2002 WCU launched a multifaceted campus-wide program to foster the scholarship of teaching and learning. The banyan tree with its ever-spreading canopy and its ever-expanding system of aerial roots is the symbol of SoTL at Western. At the center of our poster is a graphic configuration of our banyan tree symbol with some of our main SoTL initiatives radiating from it. SoTL is that canopy and from it grow the roots of teaching and learning experiences with students, experimentations, innovations, research, collaboration, publication or dissemination. As a banyan tree grows, it sends down from its branches thin fibers that eventually reach the ground and root. The process of faculty development in teaching and learning about learning is like the growth of the banyan tree. First it has a single trunk or focus, but as time passes and experiences of teaching take deeper root, the branches of wisdom about teaching and student learning reach out by sending down new roots.

Our SoTL initiatives include: • Annual SoTL Faire: a one -day conference in which WCU faculty inform each other about their

methods, research, reflection, and results in creating, guiding, and assessing learning opportunities for students.

• Annual Summer Institute on Teaching and Learning: WCU's three-day Summer Institute on Teaching and Learning is faculty led and open to all members of the faculty. Last June nearly 50 faculty participated. Each participant chooses a topic from the list provided and becomes a member of a focus group led by a faculty facilitator. Topics addressed at recent summer institutes include: assessing student learning, developing a teaching portfolio, teaching first-year students, and developing a SoTL project.

• Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs): WCU has established a number of topic-based FLCs, each composed of 6 - 12 faculty. Faculty participants make a commitment to meet, work, collaborate with colleagues on the FLC and disseminate the outcomes of the FLC's work.

• The Open Classroom Project: Each semester dozens of faculty at WCU volunteer to open their classrooms to visits by other faculty, and those who volunteer are themselves encouraged to visit the classes of other volunteering faculty. The purpose is for the observer to gain insight into different approaches to teaching, not to evaluate the instructor or the class,

• Certificate for Professional Development in Teaching and Learning (CPDTL): The CPDTL is voluntary and open to all members of the WCU faculty. It allows faculty a structured, concentrated way to expand the scope of their own teaching within one calendar year from the time of registration. Participants are asked to: attend workshops or seminars about teaching and learning and write, observe the classes of at least two other faculty, have a class session videotaped and assess the quality of student learning occurring, and compile a Learning Portfolio that includes both a teaching autobiography and a collection of journal entries about teaching and learning.

Abstracts

36

36

• Mountain Rise: a peer-reviewed, electronic journal published twice a year as a vehicle for disseminating scholarly work about college teaching and learning. Our goal for Mountain Rise is to establish a significant national and international voice for the scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education.

The poster presents brief descriptions of these and other SoTL activities at WCU. In addition, handouts describing these activities will be available.

Classroom Tension and College Transition: Managing the Space between Adolescence and Adulthood in a Pre-College Summer Program Kathryn Gold Hadley (California State University, Sacramento), Laura Fingerson (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

Students entering college for the first time face an important life course transition. When moving out of adolescence and into adulthood, the college classroom is one place where students learn how to negotiate the tension between competing sets of behavioral expectations. While college instructors and administrators expect new college students to adopt adult behaviors and responsibilities, they simultaneously implement policies and practices that treat students like inexperienced adolescents. Students new to college must manage these competing role expectations. In Summer 2000, we and other members of a larger research team conducted a study of a pilot summer program at Indiana University. The program, called the Summer Freshman Institute (SFI), was designed to help recent high school graduates make the transition to college. The program targeted a group of sixty recent high school graduates who narrowly failed to achieve admission to the university. Successful completion of the six-week SFI afforded these students the opportunity to earn regular admission to the university in Fall 2000. The goal of the program was to provide an intellectually stimulating freshmen experience that would turn the light bulb on and produce interested, engaged college students. In our efforts to evaluate this program, we conducted a multi-layered data collection including pre- and post-program student surveys, ethnographic observation of classroom interactions and administrative meetings, and in-depth interviews with classroom instructors. Inductive, grounded analysis of the ethnographic and interview data showed that the students faced competing expectations throughout their participation in the program. Some administrators and instructors treated the students like inexperienced adolescents who needed explicit instructions about how to behave properly in the college classroom. In contrast, other administrators and instructors trusted these new students to manage the growing responsibilities of an adult college student. The tensions between treating the students like adolescents and expecting students to behave like adults manifested at all levels of the summer program; from the administrative meetings to the instructors attitudes to the students interactions in the classrooms. Students experienced this tension most acutely, and they responded to their treatment in many ways. Most frequently, students acquiesced to the instructors training and follow the instructors directions. Other times, such as when students were talking during lecture, they would simply continue talking even if the instructor admonished them to be quiet. Some students preferred to be treated more like children than adults, such as demanding the type of individual-level considerations they were used to receiving in high school classrooms. However, most students expressed frustration that the instructors and administrators were treating them like children, even as they were teaching them how to be an adult. In sum, students both accepted and resisted their teachers efforts to treat them like adolescents and adults during the transition to college. We couch these research findings in the social psychological concepts of role expectations, life course transitions, interactional power, resistance, and agency.

Focus, Locus, and Hocus Pocus: SoTL as an Intellectual Journey Sharon Hamilton (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

This session situates the intellectual journey of the scholarship of teaching and learning within a research framework, while also highlighting the human and social aspects of SoTL. It uses as a case study the intellectual journey of one Carnegie Scholar as she starts out with a plan ambitious enough to transform liberal learning in higher education (were it possible to achieve this plan) and, after preliminary research and scholarship, and after conferring with several colleagues on campus and through the Carnegie cohort, ends up with a project elegantly simple in design, eminently achievable within a reasonable time frame, and with the potential to benefit her students and her campus first, before moving on to other institutions across the country. The process of the intellectual journey is staged in six steps: inquiry the guiding question; research and exploration the initial exploratory activities and readings; discovery and insight discovering the flaws and the potential and seeing how to move forward; application the beneficial uses of these discoveries both intellectual (to move the inquiry forward) and practical (to improve teaching and learning); dissemination and publication; and how it all leads to new questions and inquiry.

Abstracts

37

37

This intellectual journey will frame the research project itself, which looks at how we can document growth and achievement in the goals of liberal learning. Initially, the project focused on the goals of liberal learning outlined in the AAC&U Statement of Liberal Learning, and situated the study in the Senior Seminar or Capstone, gathering information in the form of a survey. After six months of redesigning the survey, several flaws in the original design became apparent, particularly with the insights of my colleagues on campus and my Carnegie research group. The need to establish baseline information earlier in our students academic careers forced me to change the focus of the inquiry from the capstone to both the first year and final year of the undergraduate learning experience. Furthermore, the AAC&U Statement on Liberal Learning proved to be problematic in the Midwest because of the connotations of the word Liberal and because the wording seemed out of context for most of my students. The advice from my Carnegie group was to look closer to home for the intellectual values that would map onto more generalized goals for liberal learning, and I found those in the Principles of Undergraduate Learning. This has led to exciting and meaningful campus-level applications, as well as to the development of a potentially more fruitful and ongoing inquiry that may yet achieve the initial broader goals.

Discipline-based Pedagogic Research: A Survey Nick Hammond (The Higher Education Academy)

Discipline -focused research into teaching and learning within Higher Education is largely conducted by practitioners motivated by potential enhancements to practice within their disciplines rather than by development to underlying educational or psychological theory. A number of researchers have stressed the value of adopting a discipline -base approach to pedagogic research (e.g., Jenkins, 1996), and published case studies and analyses of effective discipline -based pedagogic research (e.g., Cousin et al., 2003) support the notion that research conducted within specific discipline contexts can be effectively shared. However there have been few specific studies exploring discipline differences systematically. In what ways does pedagogic research differ across disciplines? To what extent, and how, can findings from discipline -specific studies be shared and built upon? Can discipline differences be usefully conceptualised so as to understand the potential for cross-disciplinary transfer? The current study represents an initial attempt to address these questions. The subject centre network of the UK Higher Education Academy (until recently the Learning and Teaching Support Network, LTSN) provides an opportunity to collect comparative evidence on small discipline -specific pedagogic research projects. The network consists of 24 Subject Centres (plus a Generic Centre), each of which supports HE practice in a single or related group of subject disciplines. Nearly all centres provide funding for teaching staff to conduct small research or development projects (miniprojects) and have been doing so for a number of years. On the basis of workshops on pedagogic research conducted with subject centres, we have developed a classification scheme for discipline-based pedagogic research. The classification scheme takes as its starting point Glassicks six criteria for evaluating scholarship (Glassick, Huber and Maeroff, 2000). The classification includes goals (purposes, questions addressed, phenomenon under investigation), preparation (context and background), methods (method of investigation, measures used, analysis required), content (nature and interpretation of findings), presentation (reporting, sharing and application) and reflection (resultant action, subsequent research). This classification formed the basis for a survey in which the 24 Academy Subject Centres were asked to provide information on a range of pedagogic research and development projects within their specific discipline areas. Data collection is still under way, but a preliminary analysis of responses shows systematic differences between broad categories of discipline (science, social science, humanities). Discipline differences are particularly apparent in terms of the goals of research projects, the methods employed (to some degree reflecting those familiar to researchers within their disciplines) and nature of reporting of the outcomes of projects. The presentation will explore the implications of the findings for promoting discipline -based pedagogic research and for enabling the cross-disciplinary sharing of outcomes. References Cousin, G., Healey, M., Jenkins, A. and Bradbeer, J. (2003). Raising educational research capacity: A

discipline -based approach. In G. Gibbs and C. Rust (eds), Improving Student Learning in the Disciplines. Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford.

Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T. and Maeroff, G. I. (2000). Scholarship assessed: An evaluation of the professoriate. Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Jenkins, A. (1996) 'Discipline-Based Educational Development', International Journal for Academic Development 1(1): 50-62.

Assessing Virtual Field Experience Mary Hancock, Suzanne Sanborn, Donald Cunningham (Indiana University Bloomington)

One of the requirements of a vast majority of current teacher preparation programs is field experiences in K-12 classrooms. Teacher candidates need to observe, interact with, and receive targeted feedback on their initial attempts at teaching and teaching related activities from experienced and

Abstracts

38

38

competent teachers who are skilled at mentoring. However, some mentor-teachers providing field experiences for pre-service teachers lack the experience and expertise to effectively model and coach various teaching strategies (e.g., effectively integrating technology, working with students with special needs, implementing inquiry activities) in their classrooms. Moreover, even if mentor-teachers do have expertise in one or more of these areas, they may not have the opportunity to model diverse teaching strategies in the limited amount of time a pre-service teacher is present in the classroom. Likewise, teacher education faculty are unable to directly share or assess the quality of the experiences that their students are having. These issues have led many researchers to suggest that the development of rich, case-based video databases of teaching practices may serve to supplement actual classroom experiences. The Inquiry Learning Forum (ILF), developed at Indiana University is a web-based professional development tool that provides video-based examples of inquiry learning practices in mathematics and. The ILF provides a database of video lessons, teacher and student materials, teacher reflections, and discussion/reflection tools in order to allow participants to virtually visit actual classrooms and observe inquiry teaching practices. The ILF is currently being used as a virtual field experience in all sections of EDUC P312 Learning: Theory into Practice in t the IUB Teacher Education Program. Students have been assigned three projects in which they analyze a video case from the perspective of the learning science concepts that are being presented in the course (e.g., scaffolding, multiple intelligence, authentic assessment, learning transfer, etc.). We have analyzed the changes in the students analyses across the three assignments as well as on a video we showed to students during the first week of the class and again during the last week of the semester. Ratings of student analyses have shown steady growth over the semester in pre-service teachers ability to use learning science concepts to describe the teaching they analyze in the video cases. We observed substantial growth in the students sophistication of recognizing, labeling and appropriately using learning sciences concepts. In our presentation we will present both full protocols documenting pre-service teacher growth as well as quantitative results based upon a rubric we have developed to assess these protocols. Intellectual Camaraderie: Building Knowledge and Community Maria Harper-Marinick, Maureen Zimmerman, Dean Stover, Diane Clark (Maricopa Community Colleges) The Maricopa Institute for Learning (MIL) provides an opportunity for faculty at the Maricopa Community Colleges to become part of a Fellowship of peers dedicated to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). In this program, participating faculty are able to devote their time and resources to conducting applied research in their classrooms and building knowledge through community. MIL Fellows are also expected to share their insights with their peers across the Maricopa district via articles, dialogue, and reflection, and to make their work public. As MIL continues to evolve, the participants in the program have identified elements that support the program’s continuing success:

• Merit-Based Nomination And “Blind” Selection Process • Release From Teaching Duties To Engage In Research • Reflective Practice • Opportunities For Community Building • Faculty Voices • Administrative Support • Institutionalized Program • Continuous Evaluation • A Program Advocate

There is no one key to the success of the MIL. Rather, it depends upon the rich interaction of diverse elements. Faculty can only succeed when their goals are supported with the necessary resources. It is administrative support that makes these resources available. The MIL has been a strong source of the continued growth of SoTL across the Maricopa district, and is an excellent model of how faculty and administrators can work together to encourage life-long learning, not just in our students, but in our faculty as well. Since its inception in 1998, 28 faculty Fellows have participated in the program, representing diverse disciplines and different colleges within the Maricopa system. Fellows have made their work public via the MIL web site, have presented at national and international conferences, and have published in professional journals. With a stable model for the fellowship, our focus has shifted to explore new ways to connect work in SoTL to other initiatives at the district and college levels, and to engage more faculty in reflective practice, classroom-based research, and meaningful dialogue about deep and long-lasting student learning. (http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/mil/)

Abstracts

39

39

Course Enhancement: A Road Map for Devising Active-Learning and Inquiry-Based Learning Science Courses William Harwood (Indiana University Bloomington)

Over the past decade there have been increasing numbers of calls for reform in science education that focus on college level science education for both science majors and non-science majors. Science faculty members have become deeply concerned with both the quality of students understanding of the basic principles of various science disciplines and with the recent diminution in the number of students interested in pursuing science majors in colleges and universities. Often the focus of criticism is the quality of teaching at the undergraduate level. A biology professor reported in a journal article that typical undergraduate science teaching does not have a beneficial or even a neutral benefit for students. Rather, it is harmful! The president of the National Academy of Science (and textbook author) Bruce Albert asked, "Why do the same scientists who remember with distaste their own college laboratory experiences continue to run their own college students through the same type of completely predictable, recipe-driven laboratory exercises that once bored them?" (Alberts, 2000) Generating reform in the undergraduate learning experience (i.e., classroom teaching activities) is intrinsically labor intensive. Because research-oriented universities share a common culture that emphasizes research publications a conflict exists between devoting time and effort to the undergraduate classroom experience and the professor's research enterprises. A Road Map for Change The dominant metaphor for this presentation is the road map. The process of reforming ones course can be viewed as a journey with many opportunities for wonderful experiences as well as the risk of an accident. The use of a road map for reform enhances the probably of a successful experience. Keeping with this metaphor, I will address issues and question to consider regarding the following stages in course reform: Preparing for departure, Selecting a route, Eliminating excess baggage, Our first destination: Lecture, The next stop: Laboratory, Navigating challenges and special issues, Learning style vs. Teaching style, Reaching our final destination: A new class. Each of these stages will be introduced with a specific example from one of the science disciplines. Key questions for course reformers to consider at each stage will be presented. It is hoped that audience members will share their experiences (good and bad) and concerns. Desired outcomes are that participants realize the process of course reform follows a general pattern that has been articulated in the research literature. Like a scientific research study, there are ups and downs, but effective means to gather evidence are available to help the reformer find and stay on the desired path. Reference Alberts, B. (2000). Some Thoughts of a Scientist on Inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. H. v. Zee (Eds.), Inquiring

into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science (pp. 3-13). Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Reforming a Science Course for Pre-service Elementary Teachers: Scientific Inquiry and Inquiry Teaching William Harwood (Indiana University Bloomington)

It is well documented that teachers tend to teach the way they were taught. Thus, if we are to improve the quality of pre-college education, it is imperative that we reform the college science instruction that pre-service teachers receive. For this group of students, it is not only important that we consider carefully what we teach, but we must also consider “how” we teach. In fall 2003, I became coordinator for a large multi-section science course required for elementary education majors. The course serves between 240 and 280 students per semester. The title of the course is Introduction to Scientific Inquiry and its stated purposes are to provide students with an understanding of the process of scientific inquiry, an increased understanding of key concepts in chemistry, and sufficient additional science content and skills so students are prepared for the other three science courses in the curriculum. Traditionally, however, the course has focused on developing basic skills through highly structured laboratory experiences. A pilot study regarding student understanding of the process was conducting in fall 2003. For students in this course, the most common response can be summed up as scientific inquiry is whatever we do in science class. This perspective on the part of the students underscores the need to provide strong inquiry experiences and to provide explicit models for scientific inquiry and for inquiry teaching. Recently, I have developed a model for the process of scientific inquiry as it is practiced by research scientists (The Activity Model). In this presentation I will describe my use of the Activity Model as a guiding framework for reforming the course. The Activity Model describes the process used in authentic scientific research and helps me guide students toward approaching investigations in a way that is more like authentic scientific inquiry. The use of a lightly guided semester long inquiry and its outcome will be discussed. In addition to a semester long inquiry project, it is also necessary to do smaller inquiry projects throughout the semester. I will describe one lab unit that was changed in spring 2004. The change

Abstracts

40

40

revealed a fundamental misconception in chemistry held by the students. Additional outcomes from the reform of this unit will be discussed and their impact on the next iteration of reform occurring during the fall 2004 semester

Beyond Instructor Beliefs: Additional Barriers to the Adoption of Student-Centered Instruction in Physics Charles Henderson (Western Michigan University), Melissa Dancy (University of North Carolina at Charlotte)

The findings of educational research and resulting curricula are only marginally incorporated into physics courses. Based on semi-structured interviews with four thoughtful and respected physics faculty, not involved in educational research, we have developed hypotheses to explain why a transition from traditional instruction to research-informed instruction is uncommon. The analysis included identifying (1) beliefs about teaching and learning, instructional goals, self-described instructional activities, and inconsistencies between these three aspects; (2) current and past efforts to change instruction and factors that facilitated or hindered such changes; and (3) knowledge about and attitudes towards research-based instructional strategies. We found that these instructors have instructional goals that are consistent with student-centered instruction. These instructors want students to improve their understanding of physics concepts as well as physics -specific and general problem solving skills. Also consistent with educational research is their belief that they are not meeting these goals. These instructors exhibited a mixture of student-centered and teacher-centered beliefs about teaching and learning. For example, many stated that a teacher should organize and deliver content (teacher-centered belief) as well as arrange situations where students can develop their own understanding (student-centered belief). Self-described instructional practices, however, were predominantly consistent with teacher-centered instruction (e.g., lecturing, teacher control of content and structure of course, assessment focusing on quick and accurate performance in solving a set of familiar problems) even though the instructors were often aware of research-based, student-centered alternatives. Although these instructors should be ideal consumers of education research (compatible goals, many compatible beliefs, dissatisfaction with outcomes, and familiarity with alternatives) they indicated only modest influence of this research on their teaching. Often it is hypothesized that instructors ? strong teacher-centered beliefs are the dominant factor in their resistance to student-centered instruction. These instructors, however, described practices that were significantly more teacher-centered than their beliefs. We hypothesize that, while teacher-centered beliefs do appear to play a role, complete incorporation is hindered by at least two additional factors: (1) instructors? either misinterpreting or having a low opinion of the trustworthiness of educational research results, and (2) institutional constraints that support teacher-centered instruction. Although the first factor suggests that educational researchers should reexamine how they interact with instructors it also suggests a larger, structural problem ? that the division between producers and consumers of educational research inhibits movement towards student-centered instruction. We expect that these barriers would not exist if the instructors had been involved in the scholarship of teaching and learning. This, of course, is related to the second factor since the scholarship of teaching and learning is not widely supported or practiced in many colleges and universities. These results suggest that we should carefully examine and consider the institutional factors that resist research-informed teaching. If, as is commonly stated, the goal of the education reform movement is to create a critical mass of instructors using reformed pedagogical approaches, the type of thoughtful instructor that we have studied can be expected to form the core of that critical mass. However, having compatible goals and beliefs will likely not be sufficient.

Tri-modal Teaching - the Art of Using the Same Thinking Format as Your Students Derek Hill (University of Salford, UK)

In 1966 Eysenck proposed there were three thinking styles verbal, numerical and visuo-spatial. He argued that individuals had a preferred thinking style, (though they were capable of utilising all modes), further postulating that there would be a difference in intelligence in the three modes for any individual. This work has been built upon by many authors and summarised by Bogood (2003). Whilst other dimensions have been added, e.g. spatial thinkers, the paper will explain why it is practical to utilise the three modes of thinking proposed by Eysenck. Whilst it is therefore possible to categorise students into one of the three modes of preferred thinking, it is harder perhaps for tutors to realise that they also have a preferred thinking mode and that there is a tendency to try and communicate their topics in their preferred mode. This may not be a problem for a physics professor teaching quantum mathematics to say baccalaureate physics students, there is a high probability that everyone in the classroom is predominately number thinkers. What happens though when the same professor attempts to teach basic maths or statistics to say nursing students or postgraduate classes of say Human Resource Managers? The author's experience and that of colleagues

Abstracts

41

41

world-wide is that often you are speaking in an alien tongue to a majority of the students with the learning experience being incomplete. Based upon the work undertaken by the author and other colleagues, this paper will explore how you can enhance the teaching experience by delivering the topic in all three modes, so students who are predominately word or number or picture thinkers all have an enhanced learning experience. This has been designated as tri-modal thinking by the author. (Hill 2004)

A Little Bit of What You Fancy? Anne Hill, Nick Morton (University of Central England))

An inquiry based approach to management skills development incorporating patchwork texts, action learning sets, peer mentoring and reflection, all in one module taught to four full and part-time cohorts of undergraduate students in a School of Planning and Housing. Managing a broad set of learning outcomes can be quite challenging. How should these be taught and assessed in a 14 week semester with students across a wide range of programmes and experiences? How might students support each other through their learning and how can staff design out opportunities for plagiarism at the same time? As part of a three year project examining the value of Inquiry Based Learning to full and part-time vocationally focused students, a variety of teaching and learning approaches were amalgamated to encourage students to develop their inquiry skills, reflection and learning, as well as to integrate students who were studying one module but were taking four distinct programmes of study. Each of the learning, teaching and assessment approaches has been developed and evaluated separately in a variety of ways over a number of years and through much learning and teaching expertise. The question might be is it too much to throw four distinctive pedagogies into one pot or could it be argued that together they blend into a seamless and rational whole? The pedagogies used included patchwork texts; action learning sets; peer student mentoring and reflective diaries. Each of the processes engaged students in the process of inquiry, co-operation and reflection. Student reaction at the start of the module was uncooperative as they felt they weren't being challenged by the approach to the module, which despite the variety of ways they would be asked to work in the module, students didn't see as sufficiently challenging! Results and feedback at the end of the module suggested that there had been much more gained from the range of processes experienced than they imagined. Students began to recognise that they were developing their skills towards more focused inquiry and that reflection can come from the learning from shared experiences.

Connecting Cultures: Promoting Diversity across Campus through Outreach Programs Deloice Holliday (Indiana University Bloomington)

This is an informative presentation on useful diversity initiatives and practices that can enable diversity coordinators and program directors in designing effective programs. Much of the information presented will highlight activities and programs that have worked for me in my capacity as multicultural outreach librarian for Indiana University Bloomington (IUB) Libraries.

Of particular importance are the cultural recognition months that are celebrated at Indiana University. Programs that have been initiated are the annual Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday Celebration as well as Asian and Latino cultures. These are celebrated by sponsoring the annual international film festival, a speaker series featuring faculty, students, and local community leaders. Also included are online and paper bibliographies celebrating cultures of the many people who teach, learn and work at Indiana University.

Because Indiana University is a global community serving more than 4,400 international students throughout the state, Indiana University Libraries have initiated programs designed to attract students, faculty and staff, as well as members of the local community to visit the libraries and learn more about the many international collections that are housed here.

There are 19 libraries throughout the Bloomington campus which houses our great collections with more than 20 subject and area collections specialists covering collections on Central Eurasian studies, Chicano-Riqueno studies, East Asian studies, Germanic studies, Global studies, India studies, Latin America and Caribbean studies, Middle Eastern studies, Tibetan, Uralic and Altaic and many more areas of global and language specific interests.

Diversity and multicultural initiatives have sprung up all over campus and at Indiana University Libraries matters regarding diversity programs are as commonplace and as important as research and teaching initiates on campus. I believe libraries are essential in promoting and sustaining the higher education students of today.

Morning Becomes Electra: Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in a New School Sara Anne Hook (Indiana University Bloomington)

The Indiana University School of Informatics was founded in 1999. Since that time, it has continued to add undergraduate and graduate programs and is now in the process of designing a doctoral degree

Abstracts

42

42

and offering courses on the regional campuses of Indiana University. Not only is the school in its infancy, but the field of informatics is nebulous and undefined. Even the definition of informatics remains elusive. The combination of a new school and an emerging discipline combine to provide a unique opportunity to implement the scholarship of teaching and learning at the earliest stages of the development of faculty policies and the schools culture. Around campus and beyond, many faculty members, administrators and dossier reviewers continue to be confused about SOTL, particularly how it impacts promotion and tenure decisions and what kinds of faculty products can be considered as scholarship. The dawning of a new academic discipline, particularly in a field based on new technologies and fresh perspectives, brings a rare opportunity to shape notions about what it means to be excellent in teaching, including the importance of documenting impact and innovation in teaching, distribution of findings and methods to the larger academic audience, peer review and self reflection. The IUPUI campus has made significant efforts to support the s cholarship of teaching and learning and the principles and practices used at the campus level were blended into even the earliest drafts of the School of Informatics academic policies and procedures. Efforts to support faculty efforts in SOTL can be found in the schools promotion and tenure guidelines, offer letters, letters to external reviewers and the faculty annual review process. Faculty publications and presentations and candidate statements in dossiers reflect the precepts of SOTL and faculty activities in SOTL are considered in promotion and tenure deliberations, third-year reviews, annual reviews, faculty mentoring and in assisting candidates with dossier preparation. This poster will cover the multi-faceted approach and methods used to infuse SOTL into a new school. Faculty annual reports will be studied to see if faculty scholarship in teaching and learning has increased and how thoroughly SOTL has become accepted as part of faculty work. The poster will also compare the schools efforts in implementing SOTL with other schools and departments on the IUPUI campus to determine if SOTL has been more readily embraced in a new academic entity than in more established schools and disciplines and what kinds of evidence faculty have used to highlight their activities in the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Creating Social Presence: The Challenge of Online Education Carol Hostetter, Monique Busch (Indiana University Bloomington)

The purpose of the presentation is to share findings about a s tudy which compared two entirely online courses with one face -to-face course, in order to understand students perceptions of social presence in online courses. Social presence is selected as a means to investigate online course delivery because, as Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, and Archer wrote, social presence supports cognitive objectives through its ability to instigate, sustain, and support critical thinking in a community of learners (1999, p. 52). Online education presents faculty with the challenge of facilitating a sense of community without the accustomed face -to-face classroom culture. The need for effective distance education is crucial. While the increase of computer-mediated education has been rapid, enthusiasm among educators has been mixed. Questions have arisen about the soundness of the pedagogy of online education. Social presence theory holds promise as a means of infusing online courses with some of the principles of educational excellence, such as contact between students and faculty, cooperation among students, active learning, and prompt feedback (Chickering and Gamson, 1987, p.3). Research is needed to add to our understanding of how to construct an excellent, engaging online teaching/learning environment. Jaffee states that an important question in studying web-based learning is how a shift from a physical classroom to a virtual learning environment shapes and reconfigures the social roles and relations among faculty and students (2003, p. 227). This is a fertile, and important, area for the scholarship of teaching and learning. The objectives for this exploratory, qualitative research were 1) to examine students perceptions of social presence through surveys and interviews for both online and face -to-face classes, particularly comparing classes in which students are familiar with the faculty and those where they are not; 2) to examine social presence, as expressed through content analysis of discussion groups and chat rooms in online classes, and 3) to explore the relationship between students learning outcomes and their perceptions of social presence. An interesting range of perceptions of social presence, or online community, was found in the study. Surprisingly, the online delivery was pronounced more personal by several students. The data was nuanced in terms of the reactions of students to various aspects of the online class. The presentation will discuss what aspects of social presence contributed to the online classes, and at what points the sense of community emerged. The effects of students relationships with each other and with the professor will also be discussed, along with connections to learning outcomes. References Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.

AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7. Jaffee, D. (2003). Virtual Transformation: Web-based technology and pedagogical change. Teaching

Sociology, 31, April, 227-236.

Abstracts

43

43

Rourke, L, Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 50-71.

The Principles of Undergraduate Learning in Introduction to Sociology Courses Jay Howard, Aimee Zoeller (Indiana University Purdue University Columbus)

This study examines the achievement of the IUPUI Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PULs), six general education goals for all undergraduate students, in Introduction to Sociology courses. The PULs include: (1) core communication & quantitative skills; (2) critical thinking; (3) integration & application of knowledge; (4) intellectual depth, breadth, & adaptiveness; (5) understanding society & culture; and, (6) values & ethics. We sought to determine the degree to which the PULs are addressed in introduction to sociology courses and the degree to which students make progress on the PULs as a result of participating in the course. We observed four class meetings of nine sections of Introduction to Sociology taught by nine different instructors in order to obtain a measure of the types of instructional methods used in the course and degree to which classroom discussions occurred. Students in 15 sections of Introduction to Sociology taught by these same nine instructors were surveyed at the end of the semester to measure students perceptions of gains on the PULs and their perceptions of the frequency with which various pedagogical strategies were utilized in the course. Each of the nine instructors and ten students were interviewed with regard to the PULs addressed in the course. We use observational and interview evidence to link pedagogical strategies with students perceptions of gains on the PULs. At this point in time data has been collected and analysis is underway. No preliminary results are yet available. Results will be available in October.

Fighting the Failure Effect in Introductory Psychology Classes Mark Sudlow Hoyert, Cynthia O'Dell (Indiana University Northwest)

Many students struggle in introductory level courses. Failure on examinations and courses occur too frequently. While there are many potential reasons for the lack of success and many potential avenues to approach it, we will explore the relevance of one motivational variable: goal orientation. Goal orientation research suggests that students pursue two educational objectives: learning and performance goals. Students who pursue learning goals tend to attempt to master the course material. Students who pursue performance goals tend to search for evidence of their competence. We have previously found that the endorsement of one of these over the other can dramatically affect course performance in Introductory Psychology courses. The biggest difference is observed after students had failed an examination. The average examination grade of learning oriented students increased by about 15 percentage points while the average examination grade of performance oriented students decreased by about 10 percentage points. Goal Orientation theory suggests that these differences accrue from the students' goal orientation. Learning oriented students view the failure as a lack of effort while performance oriented students view it as a lack of ability. We attempted to alter goal orientation in struggling Introductory Psychology students (espe cially in performance dominant students) in order to alter the reaction to failure. We arranged a system of peer mentors. After each examination, we called all of the students who had scored less than 60 (out of 100) and invited them to attend one of several tutorial sessions. The mentors employed multiple techniques designed to increase the endorsement of learning goal orientation and to encourage the use of effective studying techniques. The techniques included the orientation modeling from several different perspectives. 1) Students who received the intervention had a 8 point increase between the examination before they received the intervention (before) and the examination after the intervention (after). 2) Students in the control group (matched for goal orientation and initial examination grade) had a 7 point decrease (on a 100 point scale) between the two examinations. 3) Many students who participated in the intervention were able to continue to improve their grades and achieve passing grades in the class. 4) Most students in the control group failed the course. 5) Many (but not all) students who participated in the intervention began to endorse learning goals to a greater extent. 6) Goal orientation did not change for the students in the control group. Goal Orientation theory predicts that the adoption of mastery goals is accompanied by a host of adaptive academic behaviors and attitudes such as the use of effective learning strategies. The goal orientation intervention produced clear benefits: students in the intervention began to endorse mastery goals to a greater extent and earned higher examination and course grades. Many were able to avoid the devastating effects of failure seen in performance oriented students.

A Faculty Development Program in SOTL Ella Ingram (Rose Hulman Institute of Technology), Craig Nelson (Indiana University Bloomington)

Many faculty are interested and engaged in research in SOTL. However, most faculty have not received training in SOTL, unlike in their specialty disciplines. Although very capable and motivated,

Abstracts

44

44

faculty may not have the tools necessary for successful and meaningful SOTL research. We implemented a week-long program in which SOTL researchers developed and revised projects, and learned major themes of SOTL, research strategies, and venues for further development in SOTL. In addition, the faculty created a small community to rely on for further feedback. Each day the group of seven faculty and three facilitators met for about five hours. During this daily session, one or two faculty participants presented proposed projects and received detailed feedback from the group. Presentations by the facilitators, a research librarian, and a consultant for human subjects studies provided additional support for the developing projects. Participants read and discussed papers on liberal learning, cognitive development, assessment, and examples of SOTL research. The culmination of the week was presentations by the participants to members of an unrelated summer teaching institute. Based on the progress made by participants on developing their projects from ideas to workable SOTL research, the program was highly successful. The participants felt that the most beneficial aspect of the program was receiving multiple perspectives on their individual projects. Additionally, participating in the program forced participants to spend time thinking about their projects; SOTL research came first during the week. The half-day model was deemed suitable to the program goals and the needs of the participants, since faculty devoted a block of time to their SOTL projects but still accomplished other tasks (i.e., two faculty taught full credit courses during the program). Our most significant problem was that group discussions often diverged into an analysis of good teaching or teaching problems, rather than our intended focus on researching teaching and research problems. The facilitators remedied this difficulty by inserting comments or questions with a particular focus on SOTL research. Faculty were provided summer salary to carry out their projects and received travel money for presenting either a research proposal or research findings at a national meeting; several faculty have presented their SOTL work so far. We suggest two improvements on our basic model. First, since every scheduled session ran long due to the high level of engagement in discussion, we suggest scheduling more time for discussion, either by lengthening the daily session or by reducing the time devoted to pre-determined sessions. Second, participants found the back-to-back daily schedule was very intense; scheduling the program to span a weekend might allow ideas to develop more fully and provide a needed break from the intensity of the program. We note that faculty development professionals could readily assess the success and impact of a program like ours as a demonstration of SOTL research. The overall success of the program is reflected in the SOTL research of the participants.

Affirming Evidence-Based Practice through Classroom-Based Research Michael Jabot, Larry Maheady, Kathleen Gradel, Kathleen Magiera (State University of New York at Fredonia)

Research suggests that students with and without special needs perform much better when they are actively involved during teacher-led instruction. The daunting question confronting teachers in inclusive settings, however, is how to actively engage everyone in relevant instructional activities and meet the increasingly wide range of academic needs present within the classroom. Over the past 15 years teacher educators at SUNY Fredonia have worked collaboratively with classroom teachers in inclusive elementary and secondary settings to develop, implement, and evaluate a variety of "low tech" academic interventions. This session will: (a) introduce participants to four, "low tech" academic strategies, (b) provide empirical data regarding their effects upon culturally and linguistically diverse learners, students with special learning needs, as well as normally achieving peers, and (c) discuss how such interventions and research designs might be used to address significant questions being posed in this era of evidence-based education. The first investigation examined the effects of Numbered Heads Together, an alternative questioning strategy, on 3rd grade pupils' social studies test performance and in class engagement. A second study used an Alternating Treatments Design to compare the effects of Numbered Heads Together, Response Cards, and Whole Group Question and Answer strategies on 6th graders' understanding of important chemistry content. In both investigations, all pupils performed noticeably better academically when the low-tech strategies were in effect. Moreover, direct observations revealed that the classroom teachers used the strategies with a high degree of accuracy and that both pupils and teachers preferred the interventions over conventional practice. Our third study involved the use of a Computer Performance System, a technology-assisted instructional package that consists of a group of wireless individual response pads, a centralized receiver, and classroom assessment software as an alternating responding format. Each pupil received his/her own numbered responding pad and pushed appropriate buttons to transmit their response to teacher questions. Using a multiple baseline design across classrooms, we examined pupils' performance across three inclusive 6th grade science classes. In a recent investigation, we also prepared 10 preservice general educators to implement the Juniper Gardens Class Wide Peer Tutoring (CWPT) program during their student teaching placements. We determined how much time was required to bring all 10 teachers to a preestablished training criterion, monitored how accurately they implemented CWPT over the course of the study, examined what impact the intervention had on pupils' weekly spelling test performance, and assessed teacher and pupil satisfaction with the intervention.

Abstracts

45

45

Memories of Teaching, Good and Bad Michael Jackson (University of Sydney, Australia)

Do bad and good teaching overlap? Common sense suggests they do. Moreover, the advice routinely offered to new teachers in higher education emphasizes organization, punctuality, preparation, and the like. These behaviors, however, fall short of good teaching because they are teacher-centered, concerned almost exclusively with what the teacher does and not what the students do. This distinction between teacher-centered and student-centered teaching allows us to see that good-teaching goes far beyond bad teaching. In an empirical study of the memories of graduates of both bad and good teaching, there was little overlap between the two. (I mailed a simple questionnaire to all economics graduates prior to 1974, about a thousand, netting 165 replies, some running to several pages.) Those describing good teaching emphasized the zest for teaching, pleasure in the association with students and the like, and only occasionally referred to preparation and content mastery. The evidence is clear that respondents describe good teaching in a largely different vocabulary than that with which they describe bad teaching. They describe good teaching as student-centered, focused on the learner. Eradicating the features of bad teaching will only leave the sterility of well organized presentations and disciplined classrooms with passive students waiting to be told, but it will not make good teaching. Thanks to such well-organized lectures many students have made great success at university by giving other peoples answers to other peoples questions, only to discover that this ability is not a transferable, life skill. Eliminating the negative does not accentuate the positive. Nor does the reverse follow: a student-centered teacher may not be particularly well organized. Three other conclusions also emerge. The first is that graduates have things to tell us about teaching that only they can say with authority. They are ready to advise us if asked. Second, good teaching is simple, not mysterious. It marks the memory, which is a higher test of quality than anything applied by university managers. It takes visible pleasure in working with students in the classroom. It encourages success rather than threatens failure. It speaks to students in a way they can understand. It is student-centered, not teacher-centered. Finally, a third conclusion swims to the surface. Good teaching is done by good teachers. That conclusion will surprise those quality managers who think good teaching stands apart from good teachers, as when they insist that the evaluation of teaching is not the evaluation of teachers. Despite the good done through quality assurance, on this occasion it seems more master than servant of teaching. Moreover, good teaching is not done by quality managers. It is done by good teachers with students, and it can be done in tiered lecture rooms. Just as good teaching is student-centered so the management of teaching has to be teacher-centered.

Epistemological Development in College Students: A Longitudinal Investigation Patricia Jarvis, Gary Creasey, Leatrice Brooks (Illinois State University)

A primary objective of many freshmen experience courses is that college learners develop critical thinking skills. The theoretical foundation for such courses across the country is consistent with a model of adolescent analytical reasoning that assumes development of critical thinking is spurred by cognitive dissonance (Klaczynski, 2000). However, this framework also posits that not all adolescents engage in analytical thinking when challenged. We investigated students epistemic beliefs longitudinally to better understand why such courses only work for some students and how the courses might be restructured to meet goals more effectively. Unfortunately, many adolescents (especially first generation college students) possess an educational background that has encouraged silence and lack of debate (Torff & Sternberg, 2001). These learners may be disadvantaged in two ways (Belenky et al., 1997). First, they may feel threatened by participating in a group setting; much less a group setting where older, educated adults attempt to encourage debate! Second, such learners often hold low-level epistemological beliefs possessing a high need for closure, a low tolerance for uncertainty, and strong desires for personal theory preservation (Klaczynski, 2000). Although cognitive dissonance and debate are claimed to shake up low-level belief systems in young learners, the theoretical framework above, and other conceptual frameworks explaining the development of adolescent analytical reasoning (Kuhn et al.,1995) suggest this is a very untenable assumption that is not supported by contemporary theory or research. Research suggests that adolescents who hold low-level epistemological beliefs, when challenged, often engage in simple heuristic processing relying on impressionism, intuitions, and gut reactions. They may dismiss/ignore contradictory viewpoints that conflict with their personal theories (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995). We assessed students at the first and last two weeks of a semester. In the fall of 2003, 215 students completed the Need for Closure Scale (Kruglanski et al., 1993) assessing individual differences in the need for cognitive closure. Individuals with high scores are extremely resistant to changing beliefs based on well-reasoned arguments by others. Students also completed the Belief Defensiveness Scale (Klaczynksi et al., 1998) assessing ones openness to belief revision. Individuals with higher scores demonstrate stronger critical thinking skills than their lower scoring counterparts. Finally, they completed the Need for Cognition Scale (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982) that assesses the tendency to seek and enjoy challenging experiences. Low need for cognition is related to

Abstracts

46

46

the use of heuristic reasoning during periods of cognitive dissonance (Klaczynski, 2000). A 2(time) by 2(gender) MANOVA revealed that critical thinking improved over time but need for closure and cognitive challenge did not change indicating that combating defensive beliefs must be achieved before higher order thinking is possible. There were no significant gender effects. It is recommended that educators loosen rigid epistemological belief systems, and help adolescents feel comfortable working in open group settings, before moving into tasks/assignments that encourage major cognitive dissonance and argumentation.

A Design and Build Strategy: Using Simulation to Redesign Experiential Nursing Education Pamela Jeffries (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

A partnership was created between the National League of Nursing and the Laerdal Corporation to sponsor 8 Project Coordinators from diverse schools of nursing across the nation to conduct a national, multi-site study to explore various parameters related to the use of simulation in basic nursing and selected student outcomes. Specifically the study was designed to: 1) explore the relationships between the use of simulations and student learning; 2) identify a simulation framework to design, implement, and evaluate simulations as a teaching learning strategy; 3) begin to assess for best practices related to the design and the use of simulations and 4) contribute to the refinement of the body of knowledge related to the use of simulation in nursing education. During this session, the work of the national project that includes eight selected nursing sites across the nation will be discussed. Objectives: The participants will be able to: 1)Describe a simulation framework to create a well-designed, student-centered simulation for nursing. 2)Discuss the gaps of designing and using simulations in healthcare education. 3)Identify important data-based findings to use when designing and implementing simulations in your classroom and learning resource center.

Teaching Time in Undergraduate Geology: Innovations and Assessments Claudia Johnson (Indiana University Bloomington)

In the undergraduate classroom, a professor engaged in student learning is vital to students who wish to learn both the components of an assigned task and the concepts underlying the assignment. A preliminary example of the proactive role a professor can take is developed for the sciences, specifically for a geology class populated by students who do not major in the sciences The geologic time scale is a classic figure in geology textbooks. The time scale is composed of terms specific to the field of geology and numbers expressed in units of millions and billions of years. A professional geologist views the geologic time scale as a calendar of major events in Earth’s history recorded in both relative and absolute terms. Students are required to memorize and understand the geologic time scale in order to follow the sequence of events and causal mechanisms presented through the semester. Traditional techniques for teaching about geologic time include redrawing the figure on the board or distributing a Xeroxed version of a detailed geologic time scale. From this chart with unfamiliar terms and numbers, it is expected that students grasp the key concepts that time is continuous, and significant events punctuated Earth’s history. Nevertheless, students in undergraduate geology classes find it difficult to understand the concept of geologic time because it runs counter to human experience. Geologic time spans many billions of years and continues to accumulate. Students, on the other hand, view their lives as a series of events and have a relatively static view of time. Innovative small group activities that draw on students’ own experience of time increase their understanding of geologic concepts of time. A categorizing grid serves as a tool both to give students practice with and assess their understanding of the geologic time scale. Major categories of time, such as “duration of geologic time” and “a single point in geologic time” are presented with a list of terms and phrases to be evaluated and placed in the correct category. A trial group of respondents categorized the terms and phrases easily. A further classroom assessment technique is to reassign the list and request placement of geologic events in each category from oldest to youngest. This helps assess the learning of specific events in relative geologic time. The offshoot of this exercise is to illustrate to students that they constructed an abbreviated geologic time scale. A summary of the lesson is then presented to reinforce the important concepts of geologic time. In summary, the classroom lesson and student activities will introduce students to new terminology through small group activities, and the classroom assessment techniques will serve to quantify the group learning skills for comparative evaluation of the techniques through the semesters. Student activities and assessment techniques will be presented for the first time in the classroom during the Spring, 2005 semester. The goal of utilizing these techniques is to develop discipline -specific knowledge as well as higher order thinking skills that can be transferred to the job market upon graduation.

Abstracts

47

47

Active Learning within the Anthropology Curriculum Frederika Kaestle, April Sievert (Indiana University Bloomington)

We present preliminary results of a study designed to research active learning, and hands-on instruction techniques within Anthropology curricula. Our overall project comprises three components: 1) directed interviews with anthropology faculty at a single university concerning the use of hands -on activities in the classroom, 2) surveys of students in courses that carry a component of hands-on instruction at that university, and 3) a national survey of the attitudes of anthropology faculty who work in various kinds of postsecondary educational contexts. We find that defining hands -on instruction is not necessarily clear cut, and that members of anthropology's diverse subfields (archaeology, biological anthropology, linguistics anthropology, and social/cultural anthropology) have multiple ways of both conceptualizing the meaning of hands-on instruction or active learning, and incorporating these methods into classroom situations. We focus here on the assessment of hands -on instruction for four courses, one in each subfield of anthropology. Differences in subdisciplinary cultures are considered as a factor in defining active learning and creating hands-on instruction within the range of approaches used by anthropologists in different subfields.

Habits of Mind, Symbolic Patterns, and Critical Thinking Jerry Kapus (University of Wisconsin-Stout)

As a philosopher, I teach courses in critical thinking and elementary logic. On the first day of classes I typically tell students that our main goal is to develop our critical thinking skills and that the application of the concepts and techniques studied will enhance these skills. However as I speak, I am aware of my own skepticism. Scenes from the well-known video A Private Universe (Schneps and Sadler, 1987) intrude on my mind, and I privately acknowledge that once my students step outside of the classroom they will most likely revert to their usual habits of thinking. I consider that in Critical Thinking: Some Lessons Learned, Timothy Van Gelder (2001) states that empirical research shows that critical thinking and introductory logic courses as traditionally taught have limited impact on improving critical thinking skills. That sense of being a fraud accuses me on the first day of class. In response to this problem, I have undertaken research into the question of whether and how students critical thinking skills can be enhanced through instruction in informal and formal logic. My proposed presentation involves a discussion of preliminary results of research that is currently underway. In undertaking the research, I am conducting a literature review of work in psychology and cognitive science related to learning theory, reasoning, and the use of informal and formal logic to improve reasoning skills. In light on this review, I am redesigning my critical thinking and elementary logic courses. The course redesigns will be implemented in the fall 2004 semester. The effectiveness of the course redesigns will be evaluated through the use of a pre and post-test using the California Critical Thinking Skills Test administered to sections using the old and new course designs. In the proposed presentation, I will discuss both the preliminary results as these relate specifically to critical thinking and elementary logic courses, and I will also draw out general implications relevant to any instructor seeking to enhance their students critical thinking skills. The results of the literature review and the course redesign process and the content of the redesigns will be discussed. I will also discuss preliminary appraisals of the effectiveness of the course redesigns. Some of the general implications of my research that will be discussed are that:

1. skills acquisition and mastery involves extensive and deliberate practice 2. promoting the transfer of skills to novel situations involves exposure to multiple contexts and situations, 3. skills are enhanced by an understanding of theory 4. critical thinking must confront the problems of belief preservation and belief perseverance 5. argument mapping enhances critical thinking 6. intrinsic motivation matters more than extrinsic motivation.

Learning About Race: What Does Learning Look Like When It's Not Going Well? Terri Karis (University of Wisconsin-Stout)

Drawing on preliminary findings from an on-going SOTL project, this presentation will explore malfunctions of understanding in white students constructions of new racial knowledge within a General Psychology course. Investigating students racial constructions helps illuminate prior knowledge, and provides a foundation for creating more effective learning methods. My SOTL project is an exploration of how white students learn about race within the context of a General Psychology course. This presentation will focus on what I have learned about students prior knowledge regarding race, and some of the unexpected ways that this prior knowledge shaped the construction of new racial knowledge. Students came to my class with prior knowledge about race, often based on imprecise thinking and unexamined assumptions. Examples include the ideas that simply talking about race might be offensive

Abstracts

48

48

or racist, that it would be racist, offensive or uncomfortable to even notice or name what is widely known to be true (for example, that non-whites face discrimination and prejudice), and that it would be prejudiced to say you don't want to be discriminated against. It was particularly interesting to see how prior knowledge influenced constructions of new racial knowledge. Shulman (1999) writes that learning is an interplay of moving prior knowledge out while getting new knowledge in, and that this process s ometimes malfunctions. Although I had ideas about what I hoped students would learn, prior knowledge shaped their understandings, sometimes leading to misconceptions far different than what Id hoped to convey. I found it instructive to look at these malfunctions of understanding Shulman calls them fantasias because they helped me see more about students prior knowledge and how I hadn't sufficiently taken it into account when presenting new information. Investigating students racial constructions has provided the foundation for new thinking about how to deepen white students racial understanding. Reference Shulman, L. S. (1999). Taking Learning Seriously. Retrieved June 29, 2004, from

http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/eLibrary/docs/taking.htm Inquiry Course Portfolios as Tools for Individuals and Institutions Doug Karpa-Wilson, Deanna Reising, Catherine Sherwood-Puzzello, Valerie O'Laughlin (Indiana University Bloomington)

Course portfolios are a powerful and highly versatile format for documenting the intellectual work of teaching and the scholarship of teaching. We have developed this workshop to give participants who are new to course portfolios a taste of what portfolios are, how they may be used, and how one prepares their own course portfolio. We hope to inspire participants to bring the course portfolio concept back to their own institutions. In the first part of the workshop, we will introduce the genre of the course portfolio. We will show a variety of different portfolios and explain their five main components: a description of the course and students, course goals, course methods and assignments, evidence of student learning, and reflection. Through this overview, participants should get a strong sense of the commonalities and variety among portfolios. Following a question and answer session, we will launch into the second part of the workshop in which participants will develop their own portfolios and discuss ideas they might have for using the genre in their own communities. Participants will engage directly in the work of developing a portfolio in a small-group format. We will direct participants through a step by step framework for developing a course portfolio. Bringing a syllabus to the workshop is recommended to aid in designing your own portfolio, but is not required. Through this process, participants will begin the outlines of their own portfolios and gain insights into the benefits and work involved. Finally, we will briefly outline some of the successful approaches we have taken at Indiana University to promoting course portfolios. Based on this discussion, we will conclude with a discussion of ways to use portfolios in the participants’ contexts.

Translating Research Results Into Practical Tools for Teaching Mills Kelly (George Mason University)

Now that the scholarship of teaching and learning has moved beyond its start-up phase, scholars are beginning to produce new tools that educators can use for teaching drawn from SoTL research. This paper discusses two different online projects as models for how practitioners can translate the results of SoTL research into tools that other teachers can use. World History Matters (http://chnm.gmu.edu/worldhistorymatters/), addresses the problem of our students need to develop a more sophisticated approach to the analysis of primary source evidence. Various modules in the two websites that are part of this project present novice learners (or teachers) with the tools they need to develop such an approach. Drawing heavily on the work of Samuel Wineburg, this project makes visible the intermediate processes of cognition of expert learners through essays by scholars and teachers, interviews with scholars in which they discuss their process of analysis, and scholarly reviews of hundreds of websites. The Western Civilization Webography Project [http://chnm.gmu.edu/history/faculty/kelly/wciv/webography/webography.htm], addresses a constant complaint by historians that their students are ill-equipped to find quality websites. Students who use the Project learn how to select and review websites containing historical sources. Already, the Project database contains more than 500 student reviews of websites and later this summer the Project will be made available to teachers at other institutions. In subsequent semesters, a World History and a U.S. History version of the project will come online and will be made available for wider use as well. The database offers teachers one tool to address a pressing classroom challenge, but also offers researchers a valuable resource for the SoTL. As the number of entries in the database grows, researchers will be able to examine how different students reviewed the same websites in different (or similar ways), revealing potentially very interesting patterns in student thinking about online resources. World History Matters is a complex undertaking supported by large grants and has a multi-year timeline for completion. The Webography Project was the result of two small grants funding the efforts of

Abstracts

49

49

one graduate student during the summer. As such, these two projects offer practitioners instructive examples of what is possible across a range of funding situations.

Learning Introductory Physics Is Adult Second-Language Acquisition Patrick Kenealy (Cal State University, Long Beach)

Investigating the language and articulation of a discipline touches scholars deeply held beliefs and assumptions about their discipline. This paper looks at research in learning and teaching introductory physics and at research in second-language acquisition (SLA). Are students of introductory physics literally learning a new language in order to understand physics? The answer here is Yes. Pinker (1994) cites Weinreich in defining a language as a dialect with an army and navy, which, in this case, is the physics community. As reviews of any introductory physics text will show, this language is a fiercely guarded terrain. The second language, an L2 in SLA, will be called Physics Language (PL) in this work. Physics Language has been crafted to be in accord with verifiable experiments, definitions, and descriptions acceptable to the physics community. This formulation constitutes a grammar of the physical world, establishing the syntax of the language to be learned by an introductory physics student (See Touger 1991). The major assumption is that the necessary syntactical relationships in PL expressions are formed by, and governed by, outcomes of physical events as described by the physics community, and is a language built onto and sharing a native language (L1) as a kind of natural-language, symbiotic parasite, using the mechanisms of the native language to construct its own viable syntax and lexicon. Does the scholarship of teaching and learning in adult second-language acquisition (SLA) explain aspects of successful teaching practices of introductory physics? Does this approach provide a useful model that explains and connects outcomes of research on physics education? Again, my answer is Yes. If one adopts a functional and psychological analysis of grammar, the similarities in approaches to learning in physics and SLA are numerous. The basic events that occur in a physics classroom are communication events, not in themselves in the discipline of physics. Communication breakdowns can occur when an unacknowledged linguistic context and skill is expected to be quickly acquired by a student. Many of the changes implemented in physics education have been successful in establishing interactive -student-centered activities that result in relatively larger gains on pre- and post-test instruments like the Force Concept Inventory. These successes can be analyzed as a result of providing realistic opportunities for students to learn Physics Language. diSessas (1993) genetic epistemology as a basis for physics learning is suggestive of experiences described in learning the lexicon of ones native language. An SLA model can also be connected to epistemological studies of student and teacher beliefs about learning physics. If introductory physics learning is SLA, the expected rate at which students might learn introductory physics, and the ways available to learn, might be reconsidered. References Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct. NY, William Morris & Co. Touger, Jerold (1991) "When Words Fail Us," Phys. Teach. 29, 9095. diSessa, A. (1993). "Toward an Epistemology of Physics." Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225

The Conundrum of the Large Lecture Course – High Enrollment vs. Educational Goals: a Case Study Dorothy Keyser (University of North Dakota Music Department)

There is no question that, given sufficient resources in information technology and support staff, large lecture classes of 200 and more can be pedagogically effective. Unfortunately, in today’s climate of budget cuts and pragmatic education, few instructors have access to such resources. This is especially true of general education humanities courses such as Music or Art Appreciation at mid-size to large research (or aspiring research) universities, where money and other resources tend to be funneled into the grant-producing hard sciences. Indeed, in many such cases the large lecture course is seen as a cash cow needed to support a financially strapped department. Instructors are caught between the desire to do their job – i.e. educate their students – and the necessity of filling seats. The best students will of course rise to the challenge of a demanding course, but a high percentage of college students choose gen ed courses based on word of mouth regarding minimum demands and an opportunity to improve their grade point average more than on interest in the subject or desire to learn. In essence, the instructor (often in consultation with the department) must find an acceptable compromise between an entertaining, undemanding course that attracts the maximum number of students, and a course that challenges and informs but may scare many away. This paper describes an ongoing effort to chart a course between these two extremes. It documents four years of experimentation and refinement in a large lecture Music Appreciation course at a mid-size Midwestern aspiring research university that presently attracts 400 students per semester – the maximum that can fit in the room. IT support, which centers on the Blackboard Course Management System, is good, but support staff is limited to one quarter-time GTA and a half-time workstudy student who assists with computer input. The instructor also teaches a music history course for majors each

Abstracts

50

50

semester, and operates under the expectations of committee work, departmental service and research normal for a faculty member in her situation. The instructor’s goal for the students is not merely acquisition of information, but refinement of skills in listening to and understanding music. Therefore, exercises in active listening and creative application of musical terminology have as much weight in grading as tests over facts. Students are offered a smorgasbord of options for acquiring points toward their final total, including reports on concerts attended, online essays, and exams. They also write in-class essays over material covered in lectures. Documentation includes pre-course surveys to determine students’ level of musical competence, examples of student progress through the course, post-course student assessment, and documentation of how the course has changed over four years in response to that information.

Investigation of Critical Thinking among College Students: Definition, Investigation, Results, and How being part of a SOTL community greatly assisted this effort Greg Kitzmiller (Indiana University Bloomington)

Faculty members often say they wish to generate critical thinking in their students. However, this researcher found dozens of different definitions of critical thinking. By crafting his own concept of critical thinking in a class he was able to measure a change in critical thinking skills from the start to the end of a course. He also found it relatively easy to conduct the research using his own students. This presentation will review both methodology and results of this study on the change in critical thinking skills of students as defined for this study. It will demonstrate a measurement that could be used in any classroom where papers are written. It will also demonstrate in-class and out-of-class activities that may stimulate critical thinking skills in students. This presentation will address the following: What is critical thinking? How is it defined in this course? Why critical thinking is important in this course? Why critical thinking is important in a college education? During six years of thought and preparation regarding critical thinking these questions loomed large and answers were sought both in the literature and in the classroom. In addition, the presentation will relate how being a member of a faculty community interested in the scholarship of teaching and learning greatly assisted both the thought process and the methodological investigation. Finally, a comment on how this investigation has led to further research on students and their critical thinking skills.

Increasing Validity of a Needs Assessment for Faculty Development Neil A. Knobloch, Anna Ball (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)

The measurement of faculty members’ professional development goals and perceptions about what works best for them is critical for effective faculty development (Baldwin, 1984; Evans & Chauvin, 1993; Hodgkinson, 1974). Because of validity limitations of closed-ended questionnaires, this study used ope n-ended questions to triangulate data for greater understanding of assessing professional development needs of college teachers. This scholarship of teaching and learning project engaged 242 teaching faculty and professional staff in a college of college of applied life, consumer and environmental sciences in a research-based university to reflect on solving problems of teaching practice using closed-ended and open-ended questions to identify their problems of practice and faculty development needs. The needs assessment instrument, “Reflecting on Your Teaching,” was developed based on the results of a collective case study of exemplary teachers in the college and a review of literature. Face and content validity of the reflective questionnaire was established through a field test and expert reviews. One hundred nine participants (45% response rate) completed the online reflective questionnaire (or paper version for those who preferred this format). Closed-ended questions were compiled into a database and analyzed using a computerized spreadsheet. Frequencies, population means, and standard deviations were calculated. The open-ended questions were entered into a word processing program. Open-coding was used to identify themes from a post-positivist stance. Faculty and professional staff taught an average of eight contact hours (s = 7.39) with 36 students (s = 59.44) during fall and spring semesters. The participants taught an average of 10 years (s = 8.79) in the college and 14 years (s = 9.74) in higher education. For the closed-ended items, a majority of teaching faculty and academic professionals rated teaching for thinking, motivating students, using a variety of teaching strategies and approaches, and utilizing instructional technology as their greatest needs for professional development. Fourteen participants suggested other professional development needs such as a university emphasis on teaching, peer-based evaluation systems, recognition for outreach and adult education, and strategies for active learning. For the open-ended questions, the themes ranked by frequency of responses were: motivating students; not enough time to prepare and difficulty balancing with research and outreach/service; accommodating diverse learning styles and educational preparation or background of students; remaining current with the course content; communicating content; extending the students’ thinking; lack of university support; reaching and inspiring students for life-long learning; self improvement, and teaching concepts for student understanding. Although the open-ended questions validated the results of the

Abstracts

51

51

closed-ended items, the participants identified some major problems and needs that were not reflected in the closed-ended items. Faculty and professional staff described their problems of practice from their perspectives, which provided greater understanding of the challenges they faced. The open-ended questions took longer to analyze, but provided greater validity in assessing the needs of teaching faculty and professional staff.

Developing the scholarship of teaching through transformative learning Carolin Kreber (University of Alberta)

Following a cognitive-developmental perspective, the model assumes that academics can learn and grow as scholars of teaching and learning. Hence, developing the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning is understood as a process of knowledge construction whereby knowledge claims need to be verified through reflection on teaching experience and educational theory. In as far as the knowledge claims academics construct about what makes effective teaching are validated through processes of instrumental, communicative and emancipatory learning, student learning can be assumed to be positively affected. These reflective learning processes can be documented and peer reviewed. Teaching portfolios are particularly suitable for this purpose as they allow for the documentation of indicators of reflection. This can be done for each of the three domains ofteaching knowledge: what we consider to be meaningful goals and purposes of higher education; what we know about student learning and development in relation to these goals; and what we know about the instructional processes and design processes needed to bring about such learning and development. Specifically, the model is deduced from Mezirow's transformative learning theory, which postulates that there are three different levels of reflection: on content, process and premises. According to Mezirow, content reflection, is a thinking process in which we "are not attending to the grounds or justification for our beliefs but are simply using our beliefs to make an interpretation" (Mezirow, 1991, p.107). Through content reflection we make explicit what we presently know or believe. Process reflection, on the other hand, is focused on the process of problem-solving. In process reflection we find out whether what we do works by seeking some form of evidence for its effectiveness or appropriateness. Finally, in premise reflection, we call into question the presuppositions on which our present knowledge is based and ask "why is it important that I attend to this problem- is there an alternative?". Validity claims are questioned in both process and premise reflection but only in premise reflection does our reflection become critical or emancipatory. Validity claims can be questioned and verified in three ways (through instrumental learning, i.e.. hypothesis testing; through communicative learning; i.e., reaching consensus within a community of peers; and through emancipatory learning; i.e., questioning and liberation from constraints). Both the educational literature and our individual and collective experience are important sources of knowledge that facilitate these reflective processes. An important assumption underlying the model is that it stresses the careful consideration of goals and purposes of higher education as an integral part of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. At a time when not only the intellectual but also moral and personal education of our students has been recognized as an important prerequisite of lifelong learning (e.g., Baxter-Magolda, 1999; Colby et al, 2003; Eyler et al. 2001; UNESCO World Conference of Higher Education, 1998), it seems rather strange perhaps that the goals and purposes of higher education remain a less frequently discussed aspect of the scholarship of teaching initiative.

Teaching Diversity As If It Were Easy Paul Kriese (Indiana University East)

This workshop will illustrate how diversity issues abound. Courses inall disciplines have issues that are diversity laden even those 'hard' sciences where people claim there is no ability to use such materials. This workshop will illustrate simple tips and examples that with little or no disruption to curricular issues can expand student knowledge of diversity issues in that content area. Websites and other useful databases will be shared to help all participants access diversity rich materials when they leave the workshop.

Decoding the Assessment o f Student Learning Lisa Kurz, Joan Middendorf (Indiana University Bloomington)

In this session we present an overview of the assessment strategies used by faculty participants in Indiana University’s Faculty Learning Community (IUFLC), from the development of assessment plans to the analysis of the resulting data. We assisted faculty as they have experimented with innovations in teaching and learning in their courses, and as they selected or designed appropriate assessment techniques. We have also worked with these faculty members to refine and improve their assessment approaches throughout the project. We discuss here the unsuccessful as well as the successful techniques -- what didn’t work as well as what

Abstracts

52

52

did -- and provide some take -home messages on assessment for others who may seek to apply the Decoding the Disciplines model to their own courses. The assessments not only provide evidence of improvements in students’ learning, but provided valuable feedback to students. They also enabled faculty to de vise more effective ways of conveying disciplinary thinking processes to students in. In addition, the analysis of the assessment data was for many faculty an unexpectedly positive experience. Once a faculty member had obtained positive results using one of Angelo and Cross’s Classroom Assessment Techniques, for example, this experience seemed to provide motivation for the faculty member to continue investigating new ways to teach course content and incorporate active learning strategies. References Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K. P. (1993) Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers

(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kurz, L., & Banta, T. (2004.). Decoding the assessment of student learning. In D. Pace and J. Middendorf

(eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98. The Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning Joan Kwako, Margaret Chmiel, Jennifer Schoepke, Ronald Yaors, Christine Pfund, Aaron Brower (University of Wisconsin, Madison

Numerous studies and surveys of graduate students and faculty have repeatedly documented inadequate preparation of graduate students for their future faculty responsibilities. This inadequacy is leading researchers and programmers in higher education to design projects that address this deficit. The Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning seeks to build the capacity in our present and future faculty to integrate research and teaching in order to improve student learning. The Delta Program is built on three pillars: teaching as research (TAR), learning community (LC), and learning through diversity. TAR encourages faculty and students to approach their teaching with the same analytical rigor as they use in their research; principles of LC emphasize that learning takes place interactively and through shared discovery; learning through diversity recognizes the diversity of students and learning styles in the classroom and that the classroom environment itself must be built to encourage all students. Many activities are offered through Delta, including for-credit courses, intensive workshops, internships, and reflective-practice portfolios and all of these activities incorporate all three of Deltas pillars. In our presentation, we will provide examples of how our activities reflect these pillars as well as how we have dealt with the challenges that we have faced as these activities have evolved. On a broader scale, Delta strives to develop a program that is sustainable, leads to self-sustained improvement of education, and provides opportunities for its participants to apply what they have learned as participants in the Delta community. At the same time, Delta is designed to accommodate its participants availability, needs, commitment, and motivation. Finally, Delta is committed to developing and engaging in a conversation within the institution that will lead to growing acknowledgment and support for those engaged in the integration of research, teaching, and learning. While there are many excellent teaching and learning efforts which are working towards some of these same goals, the Delta program is unique in many ways. First, the Delta Program was developed and is supported by a network of inter-disciplinary and inter-generational teams. These teams include subsets of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics faculty and staff, as well as Communication and Educational Researchers. We will discuss the successes and challenges of this team structure from the perspectives of program development to implementation in the classroom. Secondly, the Delta program strives to train every participant to engage in the practice of TAR. We will describe several efforts now in place that are aimed at training current and future faculty in how to implement TAR. We will illustrate examples of how the Delta program is promoting practice of this approach. Lastly, the Delta Program is promoting a new generation of STEM faculty who are (1) successful and tenurable at a range of institutions; (2) excellent teachers to all students and peers; (3) able to set goals and evaluate their teaching; (4) more efficient and effective researchers, communicators, and teachers; and (5) engaged with a larger community of like-minded peers. We will present evidence from some of our efforts which indicate that we may be advancing this goal.

It’s all about integration Developing multicultural and global competence Cindy J. Lahar , Dianne Fallon (York County Community College)

How do students develop a sense of global awareness? How can instructors cultivate cultural sensitivity in a way that helps students make judgments, evaluate situations and solve problems in multicultural America and the global village? In the first presentation, Developing paths towards global awareness and intercultural competence, Cindy J. Lahar will describe some classroom activities aimed at helping students develop intercultural competence at a two-year college in Maine. Examining the students impressions of and reactions to these activities clearly suggests that contact and exposure to multicultural and global issues have increased these students awareness of other cultures. This awareness is an important first step in the developmental process toward becoming an effective global

Abstracts

53

53

citizen. Some developmental models of global education and intercultural sensitivity will be described in order to view where students are in their development, both before and after engaging in varied learning experiences. In the second presentation, Learning about Diversity: Results from emerging work in SoTL, Dianne Fallon will review and synthesize recent scholarship about diversity learning in the classroom across a variety of disciplines. What have we learned about how students engage with and learn about diversity issues such as race, class, and gender? More importantly, what does our scholarship suggest for teaching practice and curriculum design? The presenter also will briefly review results from her own research in this area, including the metaphor of the meta-stable state, and will outline an ongoing project this semester in which she is attempting to identify which activities, readings and class discussions work towards connecting and developing both cognitive and affective student outcomes in diversity learning.

How Can Learner Reflection Be Supported in Online Collaborative Learning: From Perspectives of Environmental Design Principles Seung-hee Lee (Indiana University Bloomington), Jin G. Shon (Korea National Open University)

The purpose of this study is to suggest how reflective support could be incorporated in the online collaborative learning environments and to identify its effects on the online activity process and performance in the collaborative learning. The studies on online collaborative learning environments say meaningful group learning depends on how to facilitate thinking and idea sharing by peers’ discourse. Throughout reflection within group, learners are situated in social contexts. Reflection by nature has a social aspect and has strong impact on collaborative activity. To support learners’ reflection in group activities, this study suggests four principles how to design cognitive tools for reflection support. Also, it examines how the tools could be integrated in the online learning environments; • Facilitating social awareness: Having a sense of community among learners is important in the initial

stage of learning. It makes them open-mined and ready to listen and work together. • Thinking visualization: Visualizing thinking is an upcoming hot issue in online environments.

Learners’ reflective inquiries increase when they can check how their own thinking in group is flowing.

• Group discourse: Reflective practices come out of when learners freely expose and share their feelings, emotions and ideas that they have had during learning

• Group meta-cognition: To reflect requires cognitive assistance how to and what to think back. Meta-cognitive activities scaffolding stimulate and lead to the effective solving problems.

For this study, refection-supporting online environments are developed and 60 adult learners were asked to participate in the experiment for collaborative learning activities. For data collection the triangulation was applied and difference sources of data were analyzed from performance measurement, one to one interviews, survey and tool feasibility test were conducted. As a result of the study, the design of reflection support turned out to be required for enhancing collaborative activities and those cognitive tools. Especially thinking visualization and group discourse were considered as key elements to support group learning activity online. Also, learners react to the cognitive tools of reflection were positive, and we will discuss these research findings and implications in detail in the full paper. Reflection is the in-depth practice in which learners participate in social behaviors such as communication or decision-making. With reflection learners can look back at their thinking process or actions, and listen to peer learners in group throughout collaborative reflection. The social contextual environments with peer learners can be very useful to develop high-level cognitive structures. Based on what is found in the study, further studies are expected to go on in the area of how learners’ thinking and behaviors change in the flow of online collaborative learning. This work was supported by Korea Research Foundation Grant (KRF-2003-037-B00071).

A Learning Environment for the Freshman Year: Integration of Classroom Instruction, Field-Based Research and Service Learning in a Freshman Academic Residence Fritz Lieber, Jeremy Karnowski (Indiana University Bloomington)

The poster will describe an experimental living-learning program for freshmen at Indiana University that integrates a year-long topical seminar, field-based research, service learning, and a freshman academic dormitory. The poster will present the set-up, rationale, and preliminary findings of an analysis of this program; provide a formative assessment of it; and offer a model for the enhancement of intellectual, social, and civic experience in the freshman year. Intensive Freshman Seminars (IFS) is a 14-year old academic community that prepares incoming freshman for living and learning at Indiana University. The summer program consists of small, 3 credit-hour seminars taught by faculty. The core of each summer seminar is grounded in discipline content, discussion, and thoughtful pedagogy supported by extra-curricular programming. To capitalize on the success of the summer program, administrators created an academic residence for freshmen, the IFS

Abstracts

54

54

Extended-Year Program. Students in this program participate in the three-week summer seminars, continue living together as an academic learning community throughout the year, study with faculty in credit generating inquiry projects, engage in meaningful community service, and enjoy academic, social, and cultural extra-curricular programming. Initial enrollment in the yearlong project is 80 students. The theme of the 2004-2005 extended year is Individual and Community. Faculty will conduct seminars in four disciplines: political science, English, criminal justice, and counseling and educational psychology. Seminar students engage in discovery projects that investigate the theme. Discovery projects provide students an entrance into basic inquiry methodology, and develop connections between themselves and their learning. Professors help students develop focused questions and design an investigative plan, select appropriate resources, and assess the final product. Seminars meet once weekly in the residence center with the aid of teaching interns. During the spring semester, students connect with the broader community through semester-long community service projects; and local and regional cultural events and excursions. Student leadership in residence hall programming and governance is encouraged to advance the academic and social experience. Data for analysis are drawn from interviews with participating faculty, students, civic community members, program administrators, students parents and peers, and course evaluations. A Teaching-Living-Learning Model for the Freshman Year The poster will present conceptual building blocks, supported by analytic data, for an integrative model that enhances academic, residential, social, cultural, and civic experience of freshmen at a large state university. A brief review of literature and similar projects at other universities will place the model in historical and practical context. Likewise, the model will present an array of possible relationships to scholarship of teaching and learning initiatives in small and large university settings. Questions for future research are included.

The Teacher-Scholar-SERVICE Model: Development and Debate Paul Lloyd (Southeast Missouri State University)

In 1993, Southeast Missouri State University developed a definition of the teacher-scholar model. The campus has continued to embrace the model by including reference to it in the faculty handbook, faculty contracts, and promotion & tenure guidelines. In 2002, the model was revisited and redefined, with an increased emphasis on service being placed in the model. In this session, we will present the model and describe the development process. This includes the process as well as buy-in required. Also part of the process is the debate about the addition of service, or the degree to which service was addressed directly in the model. Secondly, the implementation of this new model will be discussed, particularly in the face of continued budget cuts and the impending program cuts currently being implemented on our campus. Finally, the session will include the development of teaching effectiveness indicators that derived from the development of the T-S model and the new involvement our campus has initiated in the CASTL program on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, including inclusion in one of the newly developed cores. Participants will learn about the conditions which prompted the University to redefine the teacher-scholar model a decade after its original definition was developed. Reference will be made to the new definition. Of particular interest will be the debate that has arisen over the greater emphasis placed on service in the new definition. The definition was developed through campus conversations and included input from deans and the Provost. The inclusion of service was debated and a compromise settled on. Participants will hear about this process. Participants will leave with ideas on how service has now become a more essential component of the teacher-scholar model and whether this applies to their campuses. Participants will learn about the implementation of the new model including issues of quality teaching, effective teaching, and more that need to be ensured while at the same time the University faces continued budget cuts which include probable program cuts. Participants will leave with ideas on how the teacher-scholar model can effectively be implemented, even in the face of budget cuts. Participants will learn about the relationship of the teacher-scholar model to the SoTL initiative on campus that has put our campus into the CASTL program and as a new core CASTL member. Participants will leave with ideas on how SoTL and the teacher-scholar model may possibly become high-profile on and off their campus.

Voicing Intersections: An Ethnography of Teachers’ and Students’ Intercultural Experiences in Russia Krista Longtin, Kate Thedwall (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

As American higher education institutions continue to build partnerships with universities abroad, more students and faculty will experience a variety of international pedagogical methods. While considerable attention has been paid to the experiences of students in the international classroom, little research explores the value and challenges of the intersection between American and international teaching methods. This paper seeks to explore how cultural differences in teaching and learning styles can be used to create innovative and more effective classroom practices.

Abstracts

55

55

Using ethnographic research methods, the authors collected narratives from students, faculty, and staff who participated in an international program in which American communication professors visited Russia to teach classes and discuss curriculum. Since “speech communication” or “communication studies” is rarely considered an academic discipline in Russia (Beebe, Kharcheva, & Kharcheva, 1998), all participants come from a variety of disciplines and experience levels. By addressing participants of varying ages and educational backgrounds, the authors were able to identify themes such as power, wealth, necessity, and passion in the classroom. In deconstructing the origins of these themes, the faculty and students involved in the study were encouraged to attempt new teaching and learning methods, re-examine their personas as instructors and students, and appreciate diverse views in the classroom. Reference Beebe, S. A., Kharcheva, M. & Kharcheva, V. (1998). Speech communication in Russia. Communication

Education, 47, 261-273.

University of New South Wales Network in Learning and Teaching: a new model for sustainable academic development Peter Looker (University of New South Wales)

As the University of New South Wales (with 40,000 students) faces a number of difficulties, especially with regard to sustainability, and the wide engagement of both academic and non-academic staff. UNSW has developed a two-stage model which places responsibility for academic development in the hands of staff themselves, supported by, rather than preached to, by professional academic developers. In stage one academic development programs (which address different areas of need, and target different cohorts according to experience), staff do not only encounter pedagogical theory and explore practical issues, they also develop workshop skills in learning and teaching issues to enable them to be the planners and facilitators of stage two academic development. The UNSW Network in Learning and Teaching (UNILT) is a new concept in academic development and consists of an ongoing program of workshops open to all staff and facilitated by cross-disciplinary teams of academic and non-academic staff who have participated in first-stage programs. The topics of the workshops are decided from concerns expressed in student surveys, concerns of Heads of School and Deans, and others, including Equity and Diversity and Student Counseling, and by the facilitators themselves. The facilitators participate in preparatory workshops to develop their facilitation skills and are supported in the design and presentation of the workshops by the Learning and Teaching Unit. Two series of workshops have been successfully run to the middle of 2004, and the feedback suggests that participants appreciate the fact that the workshops are run by colleagues, rather than by professional academic developers. This paper briefly describes the first-stage programs on which UNILT draws, and outlines some of the theoretical principles underlying the UNILT program. These include modeling good practice in learning and teaching in the design of the workshops, using staff-centered learning as an analogue of student-centered learning, and supporting a communities of practice approach to academic development. The paper also looks at feedback from staff to ask what kinds of needs should be met in engaging staff in ongoing learning and teaching development. The aim of UNILT is to assist in deeper cultural change with regard to learning and teaching practices by engaging staff who teach in effecting changes, rather than having change imposed from above. Our belief is that a sense of ownership over learning and teaching development will lead to more extensive and more accepted changes. Significantly, this form of staff development is leading to a greater interest across the University in SOTL.

Ethics and the Development of Professional Identities of Engineering Students Michael Loui (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

What educational outcomes can we reasonably expect from instruction in engineering ethics? Students are definitely capable of reaching cognitive goals in knowledge and reasoning. Self and Ellison (1998) demonstrated that in a full three-credit course on engineering ethics, the moral reasoning skills of students improve significantly. While we may expect instruction in ethics to improve students cognitive skills, do ethics courses strengthen the students commitment to act morally? An individual can know what is right, but might not act accordingly, for lack of courage Should courses promote moral courage? In their study of moral exemplars, Colby and Damon (1993) concluded that when self identity and moral goals are aligned, people act on their moral judgments with certainty. It is logical, therefore, to pursue an investigation of moral courage through a study of identity development. In this project, I studied the effect of instruction in engineering ethics on the development of an engineering students professional identity. I administered the following questionnaire to nine volunteers who had not taken a course on ethics, and to a total of 77 students in ECE 216, Engineering Ethics, an elective course for juniors and seniors,

Abstracts

56

56

at the beginning of the Fall 2003 and Spring 2004 semesters. At the end of each semester, I asked the students how their answers had changed as a result of the taking the course. Questionnaire (Final Version) What are the characteristics of the ideal professional engineer? What are the engineers most important professional responsibilities? Give specific examples. Explain your reasoning. What people and experiences have shaped your understanding of these characteristics and responsibilities? How have they done so? Describe specific incidents or actions you have taken. Possible sources could include relatives, friends, employment, courses, student organizations, etc. To what extent do you feel that you have these characteristics and are prepared for these responsibilities? Why or why not? How would you know that you are a professional engineer? Give specific criteria. I found that students learn about the characteristics and responsibilities of professional engineers primarily from observing relatives and co-workers who are engineers, generally not from engineering courses and professors. According to students, the ideal engineer is honest, conscientious, and confident, as well as technically competent. Although Downey and Lucena (2003) asserted that engineering students are taught to make the self invisible in problem solving, students understand that engineers are personally responsible for the social consequences of technical decisions. In ECE 216, students became more confident about their moral reasoning skills. Their thinking was significantly influenced by classroom discussions with multiple perspectives and by stories of major cases such as the Challenger disaster. At the end of the course, listing characteristics of professional engineers, students included internal personal qualities such as moral reasoning skills and awareness of social consequences. References Colby, A., and Damon, W. The Uniting of Self and Morality in the Development of Extraordinary Moral

Commitment, in The Moral Self, ed. G. G. Noam and T. E. Wren, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1993, pp. 149-174.

Downey, G., and Lucena, J. When Students Resist: Ethnography of a Senior Design Experience in Engineering Education, Intl. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 19, no. 1, 2003, pp. 168-176.

Self, D. J., and Ellison, E. M. Teaching Engineering Ethics: Assessment of Its Influence on Moral Reasoning Skills, J. Eng. Educ., vol. 87, no. 1, Jan. 1998, pp. 29-34.

Past, Present and Future in Online MBA Learning : Instructor perspectives Richard Magjuka, Seung-hee Le, Xiaojing Liu, Curtis Bonk (Indiana University Bloomington)

Business education, as much or more than any other academic discipline, requires students to engage in complex and complicated learning tasks that emphasize real world application. Previous studies have emphasized a variety of benefits realized by business students through online learning. The results reported in this study represent initial findings obtained from a long term research project to document effective online strategies and approaches as well as revitalize and upgrade the quality of instruction in an online MBA program. As the initial project in this research effort, this study examines the perspectives of MBA instructors related to online instruction, online technology, and the relationship between their online teaching and their more traditional, face -to-face teaching efforts. The MBA program studied here was a top ranked business school in a large Midwestern university. Given the sudden emergence of online MBA programs across the United States and the world, it is vital to understand the difficulties instructors currently face as well as the successes they might encounter online. Online MBAs, in fact, are highly popular degrees and are far more likely to be offered online than any other business degree. Twenty-eight faculty members from the program were strategically selected for interviews and sixty faculty members were solicited for surveys. To understand their perspectives, the study introduced the model of community of inquiry concept (Archer, Garrison, Anderson, & Rourke, 2001) to provide a framework of analysis. The model of community of inquiry postulated that three elements are essential to an educational experience: (1) cognitive presence, (2) social presence and (3) teaching presence. In the present study, the original model was modified with the additional element of (4) technology presence. Based on interview and survey analyses, the most shared concerns and issues from online MBA instructors were categorized into these four dimensions of the model of community of inquiry: 1) Cognitive Presence Student engagement in learning; Instructional strategies fostering reflective inquiry and self directed learning; Balance of content expertise (business) vs. process skill; How to develop MBA core competencies (critical thinking and application skill) 2) Social Presence Lack of immediacy and intimacy in personal touch; Sense of community, class identity, and the way to enhance students belonging; Lack of sense of belonging in business community; Virtual teaming in business field (team norm development, teamwork process, balancing individual learning and collaborative learning, equal participation- free rider issues)

Abstracts

57

57

3) Teaching Presence Customization of course structure and design fit into online setting; The efficiency of synchronous learning in business contents; Management skills for asynchronous business activities; Case teaching vs. case teaching online ; Moderating guidelines; Assessment on learning process vs. product and sense of fairness 4) Technological Presence The effective use of cognitive tools; Integration of tools into pedagogical approach; Tool development for administrative efficiency In reviewing the data, several themes emerged, such as the formation and effective administration of virtual student teams in online courses and the development of cognitive tools to support case-based learning. In addition, several socio-cultural factors were identified that influenced the effectiveness of online case learning. As demand for online learning in business disciplines continues to grow, and, more specifically, the popularity of online MBA programs explodes, it becomes increasingly important to assess the instructional strategies and technologies employed. In effect, this study is intended to provide some guidance for those in the online learning trenches of business education.

Does the Debate on Open Source vs. Proprietary Software Really Matter? : Examining the Open Source Concept for Distance Education Richard Magjuka, Seung-hee Lee, Xiaojing Liu (Indiana University Bloomington)

In last two years, many large, influential universities have announced their support of the Open Source concept. Sakai, Fedora, VUE, LionShare represent only a few of the most visible and highly publicized projects. Even a cursory review of a listing of universities who have agreed to participation to some degree in these initiatives underscores the fact that Open Source initiatives are quickly gaining momentum in higher education. These trends place academe squarely in the middle of an ongoing debate concerning the merits of Open Source versus proprietary software. The Open Source concept has been developed to refer to non-proprietary software in which the software source code is available and can be adapted by users to suit their needs. The Open Source Model provided users with access to low cost software that will evolve to meet the needs of users. In general, Open Source software is purported to be more secure, more reliable, and less expensive than their proprietary counterparts and it is asserted that the Open Source model spurs innovation. In distance higher education, the outcome of this debate will affect how universities provide course management systems for their online courses, how online courses are developed and also the online portions of their traditional courses. However, what is really important in distance education is how a school or college allows faculty to use information technology to effectively teach and manage instruction in a distance higher education environment. This does mean that hardware and especially software is critical in distance education. On the surface, this would suggest that a debate concerning the merits of Open Source and proprietary model would appear to be critical when examining how instruction is offered online. However, in practice, the criteria on which the different models are assessed (e.g., reliability, security and expense) yield precious little added value for learners. Learners need an online course management system to be relatively secure and reliable but once this threshold is met, a student would not be induced to enroll in a program that offered a higher rate of security or reliability than another program as long as both surpassed an acceptable standard. Similarly, the economics of higher education suggest that the expense of licensing a course management system, amortized over the total number of courses and learners enrolled, does not add significantly to the per credit tuition rate charged by a distance learning program. The debate over the merits of Open Source only really matters if one could argue that one model or the other will significantly affect the pace of innovation in online learning. The quality of online learning does represent an area of significant value added for learners enrolled in distance education programs. Pedagogical innovation will influence the online learning experience and we believe that this experience affects student satisfaction and ultimately the growth of an online degree program. Research on Innovation in organizational settings indicates that innovations are developed primarily when the innovation process is aligned with critical success factors, that is, the strategy, vision and ethos of an organization. These success factors represent the design of an organization. Research and theory on innovation indicates that organizational design is the most significant factor influencing the pace of innovation. Universities operate along classic organizational lines and their design will exert a similar influence on instructional innovation. In the full paper later on, we outline in detail the primary organizational issues in a university that could affect the pace of instructional innovation in distance higher education. We then assess the degree to which the type of model employed for software development, open or proprietary, should affect the degree to which each organizational factor (e.g., degree to which distance learning programs operate as profit centers, market competitiveness, faculty staffing and compensation policies, and degree of decentralization in decision making) affects instructional innovation in distance education Finally, we discuss how the debate should be re -cast in order to provide college administrators and faculty with a

Abstracts

58

58

clearer picture of what is at stake when the merits of adopting an Open Source model are discussed in a university setting.

Video for the Novice: Increasing Classroom Presence with Video Lectures for Distance Education Jerome Mahaffey (Indiana University East)

Recent advances in video and computer technology have created a situation where amateurs are now able to produce quality video products on their desk or laptop PC. With the effort of learning the basics of video photography and non-linear editing, teachers in any discipline can efficiently and economically produce a high quality video product that will greatly increase the personal connection that students feel with the instructor. Video files can then be streamed over the internet or burned on a CD for students in Distance Education courses. The present article will discuss the pros and cons of adding video to distance education and set forth a general approach to creating computer playable video files. This study describes how to use PowerPoint slides with text and images as a background for ones talking head to create a multimedia classroom lecture experience.

SOTL at Two-Year Institutions: An Open Breakfast Discussion Mark Maier (Glendale Community College)

A group of community college instructors would like to meet with others interested in SOTL at two-year institutions. We believe that the prospects for SOTL are heightened in this environment for many reasons, including a traditional emphasis on effective teaching, a diverse student body, and large introductory courses taught to many sections. Please join us.

Advancing the Scholarship of Teaching in a Research University: Forming a Cross-Disciplinary, Instructor Driven Research-Based Teaching Group Pia Marks, Vivian Schoner, Liwana Bringelson, Tom Carey (University of Waterloo)

The challenge to make the scholarship of teaching and learning a bona fide research mission of the research university necessitates the transformation of the university culture to embrace as scholarship the systematic inquiry into teaching practices and student learning outcomes. To ensure that educational change is neither piecemeal nor superficial but rather truly transformative, we sought to establish a formal community of researchers committed to fostering systematic study of classroom practices and their impacts on student learning outcomes. Top-down, we received support from University administrators who created the Associate Vice-President position for Learning Resources and Innovation. This office undertakes initiatives to target funding sources for classroom-based studies, promotes teaching as a scholarly activity to Faculty Deans, and provides consultation on design and process features needed to create a research culture from the ‘bottom-up’ level. Bottom-up, the utilization of in-place resources were ‘brokered’ through the university’s R&D unit for learning and teaching through technology (LT3), including consultation and support for research on teaching and learning, pedagogy-based faculty training workshops, learning objects repositories, and the use of a new course management system that showcases pedagogical features for learning activities. The role of six LT3 Faculty outreach liaisons was expanded to promote the scholarship of teaching as part of their working relationships with faculty members, and to provide follow-up ‘hands-on’ consultation and support for those conducting studies. Under development is a networked collaborative research repository containing information on campus and off-campus studies, learning designs and activities, and links to theory and research on teaching. Initially, 40 faculty members and continuing lecturers expressed interest in this initiative and/or attended a series of invitational lunches convened to promote the formation of a ‘Teaching-Based Research Group’ (T-BRG) in the university community. Their commitment exceeded our expectations. The shared objectives of the group are four-fold: to broaden the definition of what counts as ‘scholarly’ to better undertake classroom studies according to interest, ability and experience (‘scholarly’ includes, for example, reviewing papers for conferences and journals, book reviews, reviewing learning objects, conducting classroom-focused systematic action research studies and formal research studies, administering questionnaire assessments of students’ experiences of learning, and participating in survey research on courses and programs); to assess the impacts of strategic teaching practices on learning outcomes; to make information on scholarly activities publicly available through seminars, symposia, workshops, presentations and publications; to promote research on teaching and learning to colleagues in their disciplines and more generally, to the campus community and beyond. From its inception in Fall 2003, the T-BRG has undertaken 20 classroom-based studies, 27 course-based learner perception assessments of students’ experiences in learning with technology, designing a large-scale evaluation process for a new program, and developing co-op student work experiences into field-based case studies for use in teaching on-campus courses.

Abstracts

59

59

The working assumption for the T-BR Group is circular, that is, results from studies on teaching should inform good practice and implementing good practice should have a positive impact on student learning outcomes. Cases where this doesn’t occur present new research challenges.

Just-in-Time Teaching: Using the Web as a Tool To Transform Teaching and Learning, and Advance The Scholarship Of Teaching And Learning Kathleen Marrs (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) is a teaching and learning approach that combines the best features of traditional instruction with the communication and resource potential available via the Web. JiTT brings bring pedagogically successful methods for teaching and learning into the classroom: interactive engagement (active learning), constructivism, the learning cycle, and prompt feedback (formative assessment). This talk will discuss how JiTT can be used as a tool to investigate two major theories of learning, namely constructivism and the learning cycle. JiTT is based on constructivism, which states that new learning happens best when students confront scenarios and problems that first require them to reveal and address their prior beliefs or prior knowledge. A key feature built into JiTT, use of the internet, allows faculty to pose scenarios and questions to students prior to class on the web. These open-ended questions, called Warm Up assignments, require students to reveal their prior knowledge as they submit their answers to faculty via the web prior to class time. By examining student responses to Warm Ups before class, faculty can determine the level of understanding, prior knowledge, and misconceptions that students bring to class. Selected student Warm Up responses are shown and discussed in class, allowing classroom time to be spent addressing misconceptions and prior knowledge, solving problems using in class cooperative learning exercises, and generating alternative knowledge, while discussing that day’s course content. Other features of JiTT, such as “What is Biology Good For?” assignments done after class make clear the relevance of specific concepts in biology in society and increase student motivation (for more information, see Marrs et. al 2003, Marrs and Novak 2004). The ultimate impact of this research is on both the students, who become better learners through JiTT, and on the professors using JiTT, who come to rely less on traditional lecture and more on the use of interactive techniques to teach science or other disciplines. JiTT is an ideal method to promote scholarly teaching in classrooms, allowing faculty to gather evidence of student success and assess student learning. JiTT has also allowed faculty in many disciplines the opportunity to contribute to the scholarship of teaching and learning, through the publication of their results in peer-reviewed journals and development of new ways to facilitate the use of JiTT in the larger community. I will present results of Just-in-Time Teaching on student retention, student confidence and motivation, student study skills, and content knowledge, as well as provide information for faculty interested in learning to implement JiTT in their own courses.

Initiating and Encouraging Teaching Reform from Individuals, to Department, to Discipline: A Case Study from Geology at the University of Akron David McConnell (Institute for Teaching and Learning), David Steer, Katharine Owens (The University of Akron)

As instructors of an introductory science course for non-majors, our teaching methods were a reflection of how we had learned when we were students. However, we found that our own learning experiences provided ine ffective models with which to shape the learning of our students. We harbored misconceptions about how we should teach and on how students learned based on our personal experiences. We anticipated that all students should be equally prepared to learn and that differences in student performance could be primarily explained by intrinsic factors such as motivation. We were only able to change our teaching practices when we had access to effective teaching models and opportunities to observe, discuss, participate in, and experiment with teaching and learning through workshops or interaction with peers. Using a logical thinking instrument, we discovered that the majority of our students entered class unprepared to understand many of the abstract concepts critical to success in the course. Changing our classes to promote diverse student learning styles and encourage social interaction through collaborative exercises provided greater benefits (e.g., improved attendance, greater student participation, reduced attrition, increased student scores on logical thinking instrument) than changes in presentation style (e.g., overheads to PowerPoint slides) or course organization. Departmental conversations led by appropriately trained instructors helped other faculty identify teaching and learning goals and to match these goals to effective assessment methods. Instruments such as the Teaching Goals Inventory (Angelo and Cross, 1993) were valuable in finding common ground on which to build an assessment program. Sustainable change requires a cultural change in higher education institutions. It is not sufficient to simply present evidence to trigger instructors to change their teaching methods. Faculty will have little personal ownership in the process of long-term systemic change unless they have some incentive to change and see University investment in teaching/learning reform. Changes in University of Akron

Abstracts

60

60

promotion guidelines favored the scholarship of teaching and learning. UA Geology faculty responded by getting state and federal grants for content-specific educational research, and disseminated the results of this research as presentations and articles in professional journals. One product of this research program is the development of a collection of seve ral hundred on-line geoscience concept test questions developed by a team of instructors from across the nation. Several of these instructors have begun reform of their own courses through the integration of the concept test questions. Ongoing research is exploring the impact of these questions in courses of different sizes at a range of institutions.

Students Tell Us About Learning Sociology Kathleen McKinney (Illinois State University)

The goal of my 2003-2004 Carnegie Scholar project was to further our understanding of how sociology majors believe they learn the content and skills of their discipline. In addition, I hoped to gather some data on what learning strategies, behaviors or attitudes correlate with success in the major. Ultimately, my long-term goal is to apply the findings to improve student learning in Sociology. In contrast to most prior work on learning in my field which looks at Introduction to Sociology students using quantitative methods or assesses the impact on one particular assignment or teaching strategy, my focus was on sociology senior majors, using primarily qualitative methods, to give the students a voice in telling us how they learn. I wanted to hear what students have to say about their strategies for learning, to find out whether more and less successful learners differed in their learning behaviors, to see whether their reflections mirrored the theories and research on learning in higher education, and to develop practical interventions based on the findings to enhance learning. My project was a multi-method adventure involving four studies with two populations: a focus group or group interview with nine Sociology senior honors students from around the nation, learning log analysis using logs from eight Illinois State University (ISU) Sociology seniors, face -to-face, semi-structured interviews with 21 ISU Sociology seniors, and self-administered questionnaires with 54 ISU Sociology seniors. The work is in the tradition of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), and classroom or program action research. As I reflect on the results of this work, six key ideas about learning from the view of my students emerged: making connections, collaboration, preparation for class, engagement, relevance, and reflection. In addition, there is some evidence that more and less successful students in Sociology differ in the quality of their ability to reflect on their learning, on age and race, on the attributions they make for success in Sociology, and on the frequency with which the come to class well prepared and complete all homework on time. We must focus, now, on designing studies to assess whether these strategies, perceived by students as effective for learning our discipline, actually are effective, when, for whom, and what processes underlay that effectiveness. In addition, we need to extend this work to at least two other populations: 1.majors who are struggling to learn and succeed in the discipline and 2.Sociology students on other campuses. Should these themes be confirmed and elaborated, they will provide ideas for practical interventions to improve the learning of Sociology by our majors.

Organizing to Foster the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: A Cluster Kathleen McKinney, Patricia Jarvis (Illinois State University)

Illinois State University (ISU) has been involved in CASTL (Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning) since the early stages in 1998. In 2002, ISU was selected as one of 12 Campus Cluster Leader schools. This poster presentation will highlight the work of this AAHE-Carnegie SoTL Campus Clusters --Organizing to Foster the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. This Cluster contains ten institutions from around the nation working on campus support for SoTL. These institutions are Buffalo State College, Dominican University, Purdue University-Calumet, Richard Stockton College of NJ, South Dakota State University, Southeast Missouri State University, Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville, St. Olaf College, and Western Carolina University. The original cluster goal is to enhance the support for, value and recognition of, and practical application of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) on core member campuses. The poster and handouts (a cluster web snapshot) summarize some of the activities of our cluster. Those viewing the poster can discuss the value of the cluster activities with the poster presenters, and share other ideas for supporting SoTL at the campus or cluster level.

Student Evaluation Data Linking Social and Cognitive Presence and Teaching Presence in the Community of Inquiry Model Henry Merrill ((Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

The recently developed Community of Inquiry model uses a Venn diagram to describe three elements of an educational experience: 1) cognitive presence; 2) social presence and 3) teaching presence. This model was conceived and is being developed by D. R. Garrison, T. Anderson, L. Rourke, and W. Archer at the University of Alberta (see http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/cmc/)

Abstracts

61

61

The Social Presence Indicators developed by Garrison, Anderson, et al, (2000) and Swan (2002), the set of Cognitive Presence Indicators and Teaching Presence Indicators provide what appear to be very useful sets of descriptors for analysis of behavior in online learning. The Social Presence element includes the broad categories of affective, cohesive, and interactive behaviors with a set of indicators for each category. The Teaching Presence element also includes three broad categories described as design and organization, facilitating discourse and direct instruction, with a set of indicators for each of these categories. The Cognitive Presence element describes a process that may be idealized as these four phases of critical inquiry: triggering event, exploration, integration and resolution. Its important to note that they state this is not necessarily a sequential and immutable sequence of the process of an online discussion (2003). I have used the Community of Inquiry model to guide my research on online graduate course and found the three elements and the indicators very useful. In one course we looked closely at the concept of cognitive presence and the coding indicators identified in the original research, but found those were not as useful in describing the written student work we were seeing in adult education graduate courses. We have developed and are testing a set of cognitive indicators using descriptors based on the revised Blooms Taxonomy of Educational Objectives for the concept of cognitive presence. (Pohl, 1995). We incorporated a set of questions in the student evaluation of teaching survey in order to gather data on the Social and Cognitive Presence dimensions of the course. This session describes the analysis of three semesters of student evaluation data and preliminary results of how this perspective contributes to our understanding of the Community of Inquiry model, especially the Teaching Presence component. References Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003). A theory of Critical Inquiry in Online Distance

Education. In Moore, M. G, and Anderson, W. G. (Eds). Handbook of Distance Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical thinking in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 1-14.

Pohl, M. (1995). Blooms (1956) Revised Taxonomy. Retrieved July 31, 2003, from rite.ed.qut.edu.au/oz-teachernet/training/bloom.html

Swan, K. (2002) Immediacy, social presence and asynchronous discussion. In Bourne., J. and Moore, J. C. (Eds) Elements of Quality Online Education, Vol. 3 (pp. 157-172). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Learning.

Lessons Learned: Designing and Implementing Reusable Learning Objects (RLOs) in Online Learning Henry Merrill, Jeani Young (Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)

All areas of the economy are looking to distance education to support their education and training needs, however there are few opportunities for program planners, administrators, teachers, and designers to learn the basics of good distance education program design. IU has offered an introductory distance education course for the past four years to more than 500 participants and has received numerous requests from the community to offer advanced modules. Participants come from a variety of backgrounds including corporate training and human resource development, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit organizations, and governmental agencies. They also come from a wide variety of levels within these organizations from high-level administration to trainers and technical support personnel. We expanded the existing Distance Education program to better meet the needs of learners by developing three advanced modules: Instructional Design for Online Learning, Strategies for Facilitating Online Learning, and Evaluating Online Programs. This session describes the original concept of this initiative, the organizational context, the funding from an Indiana grant competition, the process of working with a design team, and the implementation in the summer of 2004. The timeline for the initial process was February 2003 through August 2004. During the fall of 2004 we are developing an Impact Assessment instrument to ask participants if they are applying the knowledge and skills developed in the Modules back in their organizations. We also have some enhancements planned based on the pilot offering. These advanced modules will be offered again during the winter of 2005. The overall structure of the advanced modules (and graduate courses in which these RLOs will be incorporated) is an Oncourse-based, discussion-driven one. Participants interact with course instructors and facilitators through threaded bulletin boards, synchronous chat, and e -mail within the Oncourse course management system. Two of the advanced modules include specially developed RLOs that add visual components to the modules. All modules include an organized set of resources accessible from within the course that cover the knowledge and skills related to the module focus. Advanced Module One (AM1) focuses on instructional design for on-line learning and incorporates an interactive RLO allowing for a visual exploration of a systems model of instructional design. AM1 includes learner development of an ID plan for a Learning Event of their choice that is beta tested and student learning assessed, as a demonstration of authentic learning. Advanced Module Two (AM2) covers facilitation strategies for on-line learning. AM2 includes learner development of a plan for facilitating an on-line learning event, facilitation of that event, and assessment of student learning as a demonstration of

Abstracts

62

62

authentic learning. Advanced Module Three (AM3) focuses on the evaluation of on-line programs and incorporates an interactive RLO allowing for a visual exploration of a utilization-focused evaluation model. AM3 includes learner development of an evaluation plan (in the form of a detailed outline) for a specific utilization-focus for a dimension of a program (or program component) as a demonstration of authentic learning.

Quantifying Students Intellectual Growth and Writing Skills Progress: Unexpected Lessons and Transformative Findings Eric Metzler (Indiana University Bloomington)

This paper will discuss and explore the rich findings both expected and unexpected that resulted from a formal classroom research project conducted by the author. The project sought to answer two main questions: 1) were students growing intellectually vis-à-vis the course content goal and 2) were students making progress on the key writing skills of articulating a clear thesis and using evidence effectively. The project proved successful in answering these questions, but in the e nd, it also raised and answered other questions that resulted in a transformation to both the authors teaching and how he thought about teaching. Ironically, these unexpected answers and transformations turned out to be the most valuable aspect of the classroom research project. The paper will begin with an explanation of the motivation for conducting the research project and then turn to describe the research design. It will then present the quantitative data gathered on objects of study that are qualitatively oriented (i.e. student papers). After interpreting the expected data and discussing how it affected the authors praxis, the paper will turn to discuss the unexpected findings of the research. These findings surfaced when the grades were correlated with the data that had been gathered for the research project. The patterns that emerged from the correlations were quite surprising and have led to a radical re-envisioning of how expectations about assignments should be communicated to students. The unexpected findings also effectively solved some mysteries about student evaluations that were previously opaque to the author. The paper will conclude that the substantial time and effort invested in this Scholarship of Teaching and Learning project yielded a profit of rich and useful results that far exceeded the authors expectations.

A Multi-Layered Campus Approach to SoTL Renee Meyers, Tony Ciccone (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee), Katina Lazarides (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

We propose a presentation that describes the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's multi-layered approach to SoTL that allows faculty and students to discover, and enter into, SoTL work via multiple doorways. The philosophy behind these efforts is that SoTL programs (especially at research-centric universities) must be flexible enough to meet faculty and students on their own terms. Hence, the UWM program offers multiple points of entry for students and faculty to discover, or delve into, SoTL work. Some of the programs/activities we would like to highlight in this presentation include: • Reading/Discussion Groups. These groups meet either in the summer, or over the course of a

semester. Some of the topics that have been addressed included Classroom Assessment, Teaching and Learning in Large Lecture Classrooms, Becoming a More Reflective Teacher, among other topics. Group members who are especially intrigued by ideas learned in these groups are encouraged to participate in other SoTL activities offered at UWM.

• SoTL for Teaching Assistants. A one -credit class on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning for interested teaching assistants is offered each year. In this class, TAs discuss teaching and learning issues and relevant readings, and produce a teaching-learning portfolio. This class is designed to entice novice teachers to think more critically about teaching and learning issues in their own classrooms.

• SoTL Conference. Each Spring a conference highlighting SoTL activities and work is offered. In three half-day sessions, faculty are introduced to SoTL, are provided models of past SoTL research, and then are asked to form their own SoTL questions. At the end of each conference, there is time for participants to talk to conference organizers about how they can become more involved in other SoTL programs at UWM.

• Student-Faculty Partnerships. This program is focused on having faculty and students work together to conduct a SoTL research project. It is a year-long commitment, and each student-faculty partnership team writes a proposal, and if selected, receives a small grant for conference travel or supplies. At the end of the year, each team provides both an oral and written report of their research findings.

• Center Scholars. This program is aimed at faculty members who are in more advanced stages of SoTL inquiry. Interested faculty members produce a proposal for a SoTL research project, and if selected, are given a substantial grant to work on the project. At the end of the year, each scholar is required to

Abstracts

63

63

write up their findings, and these are published in a journal produced by the Center for Professional and Instructional Development.

• Leadership Site. The Leadership Site is a UW-System initiative, but is housed at UW-Milwaukee. It interacts with SoTL activities at UWM through work on the student-faculty partnership projects, takes a active role in the annual conference, and offers connections to other faculty in the UW-System who might be collaborative partners to those at UWM working on SoTL projects.

Building a Multi-Institutional Collaborative Structure and Process for Advancing the Practice of Teaching Through Scholarly Inquiry into Student Learning Renee Meyers, Katina Lazarides (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

Created in 2003, the UW System SoTL Leadership Site was designed to increase knowledge about, and supplement work on, the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning on all UW System campuses. The Leadership Site is housed at UW Milwaukee, but its mission is to support work on all campuses in the UW System. The Leadership Site’s goals include: • Assisting individual UW campuses in understanding the nature and value of SoTL work; • Helping individuals integrate their existing exploration of teaching and learning into the scholarship

of teaching and learning; • Bringing groups and individuals together across traditional barriers of departments, disciplines, roles

(faculty/student, faculty/staff) and institutional type, to work collaboratively on developing new knowledge in the practice of teaching;

• Working directly with those units on campus that are responsible for faculty development and teaching improvement to connect their work to SoTL principles and practices;

• Encouraging individuals and groups to broaden their perspective of SoTL in order to address campus and system initiatives and priorities more effectively.

Over the past year, the UW System Leadership Site for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning housed at UW Milwaukee has been focused on developing structures and processes to support scholarly inquiry into teaching and learning on all UW campuses. To that end, it has developed an organizational structure for the Leadership Site that consists of an Executive Committee and an Advisory Council. It has helped to build an extensive communication system that brings faculty together from across the campuses via email reflectors and a Leadership Site website. In addition, the UW System SoTL Leadership Site has been engaged in working with each of 15 campuses across the state to support their SoTL work. Some of the projects that are currently being accomplished include: • UW-La Crosse: Creating a SoTL Colloquium: Lesson Study Project • UW-Milwaukee: Creating Teams of Faculty, Staff and Students to Investigate the Nature of Learning • UW-Parkside: Making Critical Thinking an Object of Inquiry • UW-Platteville: Promoting SoTL Principles and Practices in Faculty Work on the Scholarship of

Engagement • UW-Stout: Using the Scholarship of Teaching to Investigate Effective Learning Situations • UW-Extension: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning with Technology These projects, as well as the other UW System SoTL projects will be highlighted on the poster.

The Physiology Educational Research Consortium: One Model for Advancing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in a Discipline Joel Michael (Rush Medical College)

The scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) encompasses many activities: research on teaching and learning, dissemination of research finding about teaching and learning, and assisting teachers in applying these findings in their classrooms. We will describe a model for advancing an SoTL agenda in a specific scientific discipline. The Physiology Educational Research Consortium (PERC) is a collaborative effort by 16 physiologists and physiology educators representing 15 post-secondary institutions (community colleges to medical schools). It is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. PERC's mission is to improve life science education in general and physiology education in particular. This is done by engaging in research, materials development, and faculty education. The focus of our research is improving classroom practice. Our efforts range from studying difficulties students have in learning physiology to exploring techniques to help students achieve learning with understanding. Our recent research projects have focused on misconceptions about physiology held by undergraduate students and their implications for helping the learner to learn, design of student laboratories to enhance conceptual learning, and applying general models when learning about physiological systems. Research results are disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presentations at national and international meetings.

Abstracts

64

64

Our materials development efforts translate our research findings into resources for use in the classroom. These resources often become the object for further research to determine their effectiveness. Those with proven effectiveness are disseminated and added to the agenda of our faculty education sessions. Finally, we conduct workshops to help faculty address issues related to techniques for helping the learner to learn. These workshops are conducted at national and international meetings, single or multi-day workshops on college campuses, and short courses offered through the NSF Chautauqua Short Course Program. Topics of recent workshops have included active learning, meaningful learning, physiology for biology and physiology teachers, misconceptions in science, and the teacher as educational researcher. PERC members fall into two categories. An investigator group consists of individuals who devote a substantial fraction of their time conducting research on teaching and learning; they are generally the instigators of new research projects. The participant group contributes to the design of experiments, provide sites at which the research is conducted, are involved in writing papers, and help conduct the faculty development workshops. PERC provides a network for collegial collaborative work and discussion. Whether members participate as investigators or participants, each provides a valuable contribution to the progress of achieving the organization's overall goals of enriching classroom teaching and learning. What PERC does and how it does it are a product of its own unique history. It is, however, one model for achieving progress in SoTL, and several similar programs are active in other science disciplines.

Exploring Our Expertise as Scholars of Teaching and Learning Joan Middendorf, David Pace (Indiana University Bloomington)

What if we were to cease reinventing the “wheels” of research on teaching, so that the achievements of one insightful researcher became the property of all the scholars engaged in this study? And what if the distance between being a teacher and being a scholar of teaching and learning began to disappear, so that the intellectual powers of the professoriate were brought to bear fully on the challenges of helping students learn?

This open-ended session will provide s pace for a discussion of the insights SOTL researchers have gained about building on a base of previous research, about identifying appropriate questions, about research methods, and about connecting with supportive collaborators. All are welcome to attend.

Institutional Outcomes Assessment as SoTL: A 30-year Journey Judith Miller, Richard Vaz (Worcester Polytechnic Institute)

In 1970, Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) replaced its traditional undergraduate curriculum with an outcomes-oriented curriculum. the WPI Plan. The degree requirements of the Plan are explicitly project-based. All faculty members advise projects, and all undergraduates complete a nine credit-hour project in their major, a nine credit-hour project relating technology to society, and a three credit-hour project in the humanities or arts. These projects, many of which are completed off-campus for external agencies and organizations, provide considerable evidence of student achievement, but also pose challenges for the appropriate design of general education. In this presentation, we describe how WPI has used projects as a foundation for program and institutional assessment, and is now engaging in institutional SoTL as it rethinks general education in the context of a project -based curriculum. The original Plan was so outcomes-based as to make both accreditors and some faculty nervous. There were no course requirements whatsoever; students graduated when they completed three projects and a comprehensive exam. Under pressure from accreditors, the university replaced the comprehensive exam with major-specific distribution requirements in the late 1980s. However, project activity was still the primary means by which WPI students demonstrated their skills and abilities, and by which their candidacy for graduation was determined. In the late 1990s, what had once been an accreditation liability became an asset, as reform in regional, ABET, and AACSB accreditation processes aligned them with WPIs outcomes-based education. Data from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) has indicated, as expected, that seniors are highly engaged, working closely with faculty and each other on substantive academic work that includes significant research, writing, teamwork, and presentation. However, first year students are not so highly engaged. This is no surprise, since the first year is largely course-based. NSSE and other internal data have created a conversation about how the first year might be aligned with the upper level projects, and how best to prepare students for the inquiry-based learning that project work features. Since many of its programs are accredited individually, many faculty are familiar and involved with outcomes assessment. Recently, however, the university took two major steps toward campus-wide outcomes assessment. In 2003, the faculty voted to create a standing Undergraduate Outcomes Assessment Committee, and in 2004, the faculty approved a set of Undergraduate Learning Outcomes. The university is now developing means for assessing the outcomes of components of the program, including the first year, as they relate to the campus-wide Undergraduate Learning Outcomes.

Abstracts

65

65

The initial development of WPIs revolutionary Plan was based on educational scholarship. However, the enormous demands on faculty of early implementation of the Plan meant that its effectiveness was never formally assessed. Subsequent curricular evolution took place in reaction to external pressures. Now, thanks to the emergence of data-driven outcomes assessment, the curriculum development process has become scholarly once more. Although it has taken thirty years, WPI is approaching completion of its first cycle of institutional SoTL.

An Examination of Instructors Metaphors for College-Level Teaching Diane Monahan (Keene State College)

Metaphors are commonly used as a teaching tool. Instructors integrate appropriate metaphors into the lecture in order to better ensure student understanding. Examining metaphors that instructors use to describe their approach to teaching provides useful insight. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how instructors at the college level describe their approach to learning in terms of a singular metaphor. Metaphors are analyzed for several elements. First, the relationship between to the instructor and the students as characterized in the metaphor produces several categories. Second, the metaphor is examined for the pattern of interaction present. Third, the overall theme of the metaphor produces many categories, such as work, fragile, and uniqueness. Lastly, it is important to examine how learning is characterized, active or passive. This research demonstrates the useful of examining instructors metaphors for teaching. Furthermore, it relieves how different instructors approach learning in their classroom. This study offers many implications for improving our overall effectiveness in the classroom. This research is currently in progress and final results will be included in the completed paper.

Gauging Success and Guiding Improvement Through Faculty-Student Dialogue Rae-Anne Montague (University of Ilinois at Urbana-Champaign)

This presentation discusses the rationale, methodology and results of series of activities designed to promote dialogue among faculty, staff and students during the 2002 LEEP Retreat. LEEP is a scheduling option for students seeking an accredited masters degree in library and information science (LIS) offered online through the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In the nine years since its inception, LEEP has evolved into a dynamic community of learners with 296 students currently enrolled, and a total of 376 graduates. LEEP represents a hybrid model. Classes include synchronous, asynchronous and independent components as well as brief periods of face-to-face contact. Synchronous sessions with chat, audio, and graphics are typically scheduled once per week, and activities include discussions, group tasks, lecture and oral presentations. Asynchronous activities involve electronic bulletin board discussion, small group work, and e-mail. Independent learning activities provide opportunities for expanding on concepts outside class and include independent study, practical, community-based tasks and theses. During the past decade, online education has evolved immensely. In addition, several formal models of online program evaluation emphasizing objectives and strategies to promote a quality educational experience have emerged. An alternative approach to understanding quality, used during the LEEP Retreat, focuses on what the participants themselves consider best practices. This research was designed to understand and describe the overall success of the LEEP model by promoting self-directed dialogue across groups. As Freire (1993) observed, Only dialogue, which requires critical thinking, is also capable of generating critical thinking. Without dialogue there is no communication, and without communication there can be no true education. The aim of the LEEP Retreat was to provide an opportunity for faculty, staff and students to identify teaching strategies, methods and supporting technologies that have been the most advantageous to teaching and learning. In short, to identify and describe a model of best practices" by considering the experiences of all those involved in LEEP since its inception. Reference Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, pp. 73-4.

Documenting Culture, Communication, and Engaging the Community Through Teaching and Performance Lori Montalbano-Phelps, James Tolhuizen, Dorothy Ige, Earl Jones (Indiana University, Northwest)

Lori Montalbano-Phelps, "Performance as an epistemological tool: Engaging the community through personal narration." Dr. Montalbano-Phelps examines Walters Fishers assertion that we are all storytellers and that telling stories is an important way in which we come to understand our world. A significant body of research indicates that personal narration gives voice to marginalized groups in society and allows us to understand ourselves and others through re-performance (Conquergood, 1983; 1981; 1991; Goffman, 1959; Langellier 1983; 1986; 1989; Polkinghorne 1988; Robinson, 1981; Turner, 1981). In her paper she describes the ways in which we can engage our community through gathering and transcribing narratives of members of the community, and gain experiential knowledge in the classroom through re-performance. Specifically, she will address two studies she has conducted on personal

Abstracts

66

66

narratives of abuse survivors as well as World War II home -front narratives gathered for the above purposes.

Dr. James Tolhuizen, "The development of classical music performance in Northwest Indiana." Dr. Tolhuizen's paper examines the intersections between the history of the Northwest Indiana Symphony Orchestra, cultural discovery, and their implications for the local community's sense of self worth and development.

Dr. Dorothy Ige, Mr. Mark Spencer, and Dr. Taylor Lake, "Mass communication in the classroom and its extension into the community." This paper represents a dialogue between university administration (Dr. Ige), university classroom pedagogy (Dr. Lake) and high school pedagogy (Mr. Mark Spencer) about media literacy, theater and video production, and community activism. Specifically they discuss Mark Spencer's locally produced film Posin as a case study of how theater and video production can spur high school students from a disadvantaged community like Gary Indiana to learn vocational skills applicable to the real world job market and academic skills that prepare them for higher education at a four year university or college. They examine possible pedagogical strategies for: building bridges between the college and high school classroom and extending the college mass communication classroom into the community through the study and documentation of local culture and illuminating the intersections between mass communication and political praxis.

Dr. Earl Jones, "Participatory outreach in the classroom." Dr. Jones discusses participatory outreach research to explore music and the sense of community in local African American culture.

Student Evaluation and the Scholarships of Teaching and Learning Theories Mathew Mutaba (Freight & Travel Institute)

The role of university and college lecturers is changing. Traditionally, their main role was to teach, i.e., to impart knowledge to their students via lectures and similar face -to-face activities. Now, it is becoming increasingly widely recognised that their main role is to help their students to learn, something that requires a fairly radical change in how they work. They are also having to cope with all the various technological developments that are currently having such an impact on tertiary education, and may eventually change it beyond recognition. This covers all the main aspects of tertiary-level teaching in some detail, but the essence of the course can be encapsulated in a comparatively few basic scholarship theories. This article highlights the changing role of university and college lecturers from teachers to facilitators of Scholarship learning, together with the requirement that they work to increasingly high standards. It offers detailed practical guidance on how to put these into practice. In recent decades new styles and methods of both teaching and learning have emerged. Some of the freshest initiatives have emerged from the experience of scholarship educators. These new styles often challenge the presuppositions of “classical” methods. What are these changes? What values undergrid such developments? How can these inform our common interest in scholarship learning? What resources and tools can come out of these experiences? The exploration of new styles of knowing, thinking, and doing, an example of this was given by our research fellow, Robert Mwaniki when he gave the following demonstration of given pieces to form the letter “T” CAN YOU?

The Medical Science of Psychoactive Drugs: Teaching Complex Scientific Concepts to Non-Science Undergraduate Students Joseph A. Near, Bruce J. Martin (Indiana University School of Medicine)

The Medical Science of Psychoactive Drugs is an examination of the biological mechanisms underlying all major pharmacological effects of psychoactive drugs, including effects on the brain and other organs and tissues. Molecular mechanisms and genetic factors involved in drug-induced therapeutic and adverse effects are emphasized. The course is open to undergraduate students at all levels, carries no prerequisites, and enrollment is limited to approximately 50 students. Our experience over a period of four semesters is that enrolled students exhibit a very wide range of backgrounds, from fourth year chemistry, biology and biochemistry majors to first semester students intending to major in the humanities. Both instructors attend and participate in all class meetings. Major teaching modes include lecture, short homework papers (class tickets) on general topics related to the previous class meeting, small group discussions at several points during lectures, and whole class discussions. Our goals are to foster the development of an organized knowledge base about the principles of pharmacology that will have practical applicability in the daily lives of the students, to promote the rational application of this knowledge in thinking about current medical, social, legal and ethical issues involving psychoactive drugs, and to cultivate critical thinking and communication skills among the students. Because of the diversity of students knowledge of basic science necessary to understand pharmacology, we employ a variety of methods designed to help students grasp the necessary scientific concepts. For example, molecular models are passed around the class and used to illustrate the concept of chemical optical isomers, how this affects the drug-receptor interaction at the molecular level, and why this is important in receptor specificity and drug design. Another example is the use of a multi-station

Abstracts

67

67

manufacturing operation to illustrate the nature of drug metabolism and disposition, the induction of metabolic enzymes, and resulting metabolic tolerance. We have found that the very advanced students in the class are a considerable resource to less advanced students in small group discussion because they often clarify and emphasize a basic concept presented only moments before by the instructor in lecture. By reading class tickets the instructors are able to monitor the progress of each student as well as of the class as a whole. Individual students who are having problems are assisted by pairing them with more knowledgeable students or the instructor not lecturing during that section of the course, and encouraging individual discussion with the instructor during office hours. By the end of the course the majority of students have mastered many important concepts in pharmacology, and have developed some appreciation for such complex and rapidly evolving areas as the cellular and molecular mechanisms of drug addiction. Our experience demonstrates that, with the appropriate ins tructional methods, it is quite possible to impart complex scientific concepts to a very naive student audience.

A Web-Based Medical Course in Biostatistics and Epidemiology Joseph A. Near (Indiana University School of Medicine)

Indiana University School of Medicine requires that all medical students take and pass a one credit course in basic biostatistics and epidemiology. Because students prior knowledge of the subject matter varies so widely, a self-study Web-based course was developed. The course materials consist of a study guide of learning objectives, a textbook on the subject, an online self-testing application with immediate feedback keyed to the objectives and relevant pages in the text, and a secure on-line final exam. There are no scheduled lectures or discussions, and no written assignments to be turned in. Students can complete the course at any time during the semester and work at their own pace. Students are encouraged to seek help from fellow students, and from the instructor on an individual basis as needed. The course material is broken up into a number of units, with self-test questions available for each unit. Students are expected to review learning objectives in the study guide, read the assigned pages in the text, and then work with the self-test questions on the Web. When the student feels he/she has mastered all the objectives and practice questions, the student takes the final exam. The final examination may be taken at any time and a human proctor is not required. The exam is administered from a Web server residing within the department, and access is limited by IP address to workstations located in a specific room within the department. The room is monitored continuously by a video camera with images archived to a server every fe w seconds and accessible by the instructor at any time, including real time. The exam itself consists of a pseudorandom sample of a relatively large bank of multiple choice questions. Results of the exam and final grade for the course are available immediately to the student and are stored in a grade database on the server along with date and time. The format of the timed exam has been designed to duplicate, as much as possible, the on-line testing environment students will experience while taking the USMLE Step 1, which is required to proceed to the third year of medical school and eventually to the MD degree and licensure. This course design provides a number of advantages as applied in this particular situation. Students may allocate their time on the course in a way that best accommodates their many other very demanding responsibilities. The asynchronous self-directed course format allows the student to proceed at his/her own pace and accommodates students with a wide range of previous coursework in the subject. The design of the course not only allows each student to focus selectively on specific topics appropriate to his/her prior knowledge, it also provides students a preview of one kind of learning experience that will encounter throughout their careers as they fulfill requirements for continuing medical education.

Frameworks for SOTL Craig Nelson (Indiana University Bloomington)

Each of the three presentations in this session has important implications for both SOTL and teaching generally. Specifically, they introduce several frameworks that we can use to better frame our SOTL questions and to better understand why many of our teaching interventions work for some students and fail for others. Physics provides an especially well-developed model of disciplinary-based empirical and theoretical research on student learning. Pollock will outline some of this discipline's research-based assessment and curricular tools and the developing roles of discipline based research in classroom practice and departmental cultures. Bain will use key case studies to illustrate the interplay of SOTL with disciplinary and general learning frameworks (e.g. historiography and cognitives and historical psychology). Aiken will explore the connections (generally and in teaching law) between two of the most influential frameworks for understanding the goal and challenges of higher education: Perry's theories of intellectual and ethical development and Mezirow's frameworks for transformative and action learning.

Skill Development in the Science Classroom: A Website to Promote Student Skills Stephen C. Nold, Michele D. Zwolinski, Scott D. Zimmerman (University of Wisconsin-Stout)

Science education is content rich, requiring students to demonstrate knowledge of their field. But before students can enjoy academic success, they must learn the skills of information acquisition.

Abstracts

68

68

Scientific knowledge is constantly expanding, and acquisition skills are at least as important after students leave college; when entering the workforce or participating as informed citizens. However, skills are learned. Like using a microscope or a pipette, students need to understand, practice, and assess their skills. To directly address student skill deficits, we developed a series of short exercises. These skill stations are flexible, instructor-tailored modules that can be used during lecture or laboratory sessions. We tested a series of skill stations focused on social interactions. Social skills, such as communication and trust, promote positive small-group interactions in the college science classroom. Twelve small group skills stations were assessed in an Introductory Biology laboratory course. Two treated and two control laboratory sections, taught by the same instructor, were used to test the effect of skill stations on student performance. Student grades based on quiz, lab, and exam scores were not affected by using stations. However, subtle differences were seen in a pre/post survey of students attitudes toward learning biology. Sections using the group skills demonstrated a greater positive shift on survey items related to group work than the control sections. Classroom observations, instructor comments, and student course evaluations indicate that the stations benefited group interactions, created an interactive classroom environment, and decreased student reliance on the instructor. However, instructors do need practice in administering the skill stations and in creating interdependence within groups. Our observations helped to identify areas for improvement and the skill stations were modified for future semesters. Skill stations can be used in any course. We share an example semester, including core small-group social skills and selected critical thinking, study, time management, and information management skills students need for scientific knowledge acquisition. We also present our on-line skill station resource, an interactive, curated collection that will grow as users submit their own contributions. This approach supports the growing trend in science education toward skill development and knowledge acquisition. Further information about this innovative approach is available via the following web site: www.uwstout.edu/skills.

Can Course Management Systems Embrace Discipline-Specific Media and Learning Tools? A Case Study of Music Mark Notess (Indiana University Bloomington)

Computer technology, the internet, and the world-wide web offer promise of improving teaching and learning in post-secondary education, and indeed educational institutions are making large investments in information and communications technology (ICT) to support academic activity. Such investments currently include computer labs, printers, software, file and compute servers, wireless and wired networking, technical support, etc. Course management systems (CMSs, also called learning management systems or virtual learning environments) have become standard equipment. Usage of commercial products such as WebCT and Blackboard is widespread. Blackboard recently had a high-profile initial public offering of their stock. Other universities have developed their own CMS or are participating in open source efforts such as Sakai. Yet most CMSs are little more than generic communication tools. While it is true that CMSs typically provide some functionality specific to teaching and learning, such as quiz/test tools and grade books, they are necessarily general purpose, leaving the more transformative opportunities of ICT largely unexploited. Variations2, the Indiana University (IU) Digital Music Library project, is a discipline -specific effort to transform teaching and learning in music by providing digital media (streaming audio; scanned and encoded scores) as well as pedagogical tools to support media use in the classroom and in personal study. Variation2 goes beyond being just a search-and-retrieve digital library by providing tools for audio and score analysis and annotation. For example, users can diagram the formal structure of a piece of music, annotate the diagram, and then save it as a web page or a data file. Such analyses can be used in the classroom or can be given as assignments. Indiana University uses a "homegrown" CMS, Oncourse, and is a core institution in the Sakai open source CMS project. Oncourse is used both to support face-to-face classes and to deliver online classes. One objective of Variations2 is to integrate with Oncourse. Students in an online music appreciation class (M174) offered by Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) use Oncourse and have begun using Variations2, which has required installation of Variations2 on students home computers. This presentation briefly demonstrates the Variations2 pedagogical tools, summarizes survey results and issues encountered from multiple semesters of IUPUI M174 usage, and assesses prospects for integrating discipline -specific learning tools with course management systems.

Holding Up a Mirror to our Teaching ? Patterns in Instruction: One Generalized Model Based on Structured Observations in Graduate Courses Sean O Connor (Washington College)

This paper presents i) a summary of instructor and student behaviors observed in a series of graduate school classes in several countries, and ii) a description of instructor perception of own behavior as contrasted with her or his observed behavior. The paper concludes with recommendations for self

Abstracts

69

69

monitoring of instruction. This latter activity is significant because the observations revealed an amount of self deception in what instructors said they did and what they did. The principal behaviors studied were interaction patterns, questioning routines and participation rates, and questioning and interaction related to degree of difficulty of material in classes. All behaviors were identified in time sequences. Observed classes were followed by debriefing feedback interviews which saw the instructor describe his or her own perception of student participation, and perceived use and length of time. Instructor self report was then contrasted with the data gathered through observations. Interviews were concluded by discussing potential instructional revisions and methods for tracking exact teaching behavior. A generalized model with an instructional time sequence is presented as a method of summarizing findings, illustrating patterns, and suggesting alternative teaching organization. The observation process and data gathering methodology are described.

Finally, simple self review strategies for monitoring ones own teaching behaviors are presented.

The Problem Set Process: Knowledge transformation, Collaborative Meaning Making, Change and Leadership - A Workshop on Teaching Sean O Connor, Michael Harvey (Washngton College)

In the workshop the presenters describe and model a ten step collaborative teaching-learning design [Generalized Instructional Pattern, The Problem Set Process ] in which students from undergraduates to business executives learn at three levels when investigating a given problem set. The model re -presents a learning organization in which personal knowledge is transformed into common knowledge through persistent meaning making interactions, and language exploration. The process is made up of a developmental weave of pedagogical [learning construction] possibilities from the gently simple and subtle to complex cooperative designs, encouraging varied learning pathways, and illustrating the use of contemporary practices influenced by learning styles design for diverse learners. Those who attend this session will be involved in a collaborative learning design used by the presenters in social science and humanities university courses. The design is a process first used in a teacher education program and then followed by applications in other disciplinary fields. Learning participants in this developmental structure judge that the design i) produces substantial unconscious learning using discovery and constructivist approaches, ii) introduces new material [content] and models meaning making strategies in a manner which enhance integration, iii) produces learning at three levels which have a high degree of persistence, iv) develops a community of learning and responsible interdependence, v) allows the instructor to effect a number of learning economies of scale , and vi) places the individual and group in continuously self assessing mode. The presenters and participants will discuss the valuable blurring of boundaries between informal learning, experiential interactions, training processes, and formal education structures. The model process is further analyzed in the context of leadership theories, the place of democratic meaning making, decision processes, the estimated change consequences in the culture(s) of learning organizations/communities, and the potential for developing interpretative, normative, and critical perspectives on the content and setting under study. In developing the workshop two faculty in two different departments, mutually informed each other of the crossover value of concepts, research, and learning processes [strategies] which mutually benefit each discipline, and have value in the professional worlds which each department inhabits.

Rethinking Consensus: Group Work and the Dynamics of Decision-Making Theresa A. Ochoa, Jennifer Meta Robinson (Indiana University Bloomington)

Many undergraduate courses use group work as an instructional delivery approach, and many instructors strive to develop the problem-solving skills of their students. Chief among the benefits of group work is that students, not the professor, drive discussion. Furthermore, unlike lecture formats, group work allows more interaction among students and time for students to participate simultaneously within their small groups. Despite its obvious benefits, group work also engenders unequal participation that may result in social loafing for some individuals (Knotek, 2003). One dimension of research suggests that satisfaction with group membership is useful for assessing group work effectiveness (Olaniran, 1996). However, we believe that additional dimensions beyond student satisfaction need in-depth research. In particular, a better understanding of how student thinking develops through group-learning experiences will aid instructors efforts to create efficacious learning environments. How does group work cultivate collaborative skills? How do groups sort through disparate opinions to arrive at consensus? What impact does group work have on the opinions held by individuals? Is that impact constructive? If higher education is to succeed at adequately preparing students for reasoning beyond college, additional dimensions of collaboration and problem-solving skills warrant study. This study examines group dynamics during a college-level, computer-assisted problem based learning module. It finds that students often do not engage in the constructive dissonance assumed to contribute to strong consensus decisions: groups often defer to an individual or minority opinion with little persuasion or critical thinking. The

Abstracts

70

70

presenters recommend teaching subject content together with groups skills such that future professionals can ensure that all voices are heard, quick answers are scrutinized, and alternative solutions are appropriately vetted by teams. In this session, participants will: gain an overview of the relationship among group interaction variables (status consensus, movement towards goal, and participation), hear the results of a study of group work in a problem-based learning module, and engage in a discussion of ways to improve the evaluation of group work through a critique of a satisfaction and participation questionnaire.

Integrating Culture: Multi-media Teaching for African Languages Alwiya Omar (Indiana University Bloomington)

Integration of cultural and social context into language classes enriches the communication experience for students and broadens understanding of the language and the diverse groups of people who speak it. In order to reinforce and extend in-class instruction of language skills and cultural competence, to address multiple learning modalities, to provide learning activities, and to track learning progress, I discuss web-based culturally authentic multimedia resources that can be used in language teaching in multiple modalities and within the context of social/cultural events. Examples will be given from African languages of Bambara, Hausa, Twi, Kiswahili, and Zulu. These materials are accessible for presentation in class and for review and learning activities outside the classroom. Each social event includes culturally authentic multimedia resources and learning activities delivered online through language-specific Web-sites: • Texts in the target language describing how a certain cultural norm is performed • Dialogues presented in text and audio (students can hear, read, or hear and read) • Imagery (either still or video) appropriate to the specific situations and interactions • Reading and/or listening to texts and dialogues • Connecting images with specific language behaviors • Practice skills through exercises for comprehension and mastery, providing immediate automatic

feedback • Online scores so learners can know their progress • Online glossary for reference when meaning can not be inferred in context • Comprehensive test sent directly to instructors I will discuss the success of this multi-media resource based on students performance.

Taking General Education Seriously: Expanding the Boundary of a Principles of Macroeconomics Course Patrick O'Neill (University of North Dakota)

Does teaching a course that counts for general education credit carry with it any responsibilities beyond disciple content? How might you entice students to view a discipline specific course in more general terms? What might be done to link a course in one discipline to courses in related disciplines so that students see connections? These are some of the questions that I have been attempting to answer within the context of a Principles of Macroeconomics course at the University of North Dakota. This paper describes two initiatives undertaken over the past two years. The first initiative occurred during the Spring 2003 semester within two sections of Principles of Macroeconomics. In one section students were given a traditional lecture-based course. In the other section, in addition to lectures, students were asked to read, think about, discuss, and write about how economics relates to other disciplines and how economic thinking might be applied when examining issues beyond economics. The main vehicle used for this latter aspect of the course was to have the students explore the book Dollars and Change: Economics In Context by Louis Putterman. The second initiative took place during the Spring 2004 semester. During this semester, within two sections of Principles of Macroeconomics, all students were asked to read, think about, discuss, and write about general education (liberal learning) and how a course in Macroeconomics might fit into this liberal learning. The main vehicle used for this initiative was to have the students explore the book A Students Guide to Liberal Learning by James V. Schall and the description of general education in the University of North Dakota catalog. A detailed description of each of these two initiatives is provided, including copies of assignment sheets and grading rubrics. A discussion of the outcomes of each of these initiatives is presented, from the perspective of the students as well as of the faculty member. The analysis presented is primarily qualitative. The potential for future quantitative analysis is described at the end of the paper.

Class Participation: A Model to Promote Understanding of a Dynamic Process Carolyn Kelly Ottman (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee (School of Business Administration))

In the classroom, faculty often request student participation as part of the learning process. In some cases, participation is required and a component of the overall course grade. Yet, misunderstandings of participation expectations can occur based on differing perceptions of participation, specifically differing

Abstracts

71

71

perceptions between the learner and the faculty. In this session, we will discuss a study that focused on understanding participation from the learners perspectives. Specifically, questions such as what is participation, how is it valued and how can it be promoted and used to develop a learning community will be addressed through a proposed participation model. Interpretive methods, grounded in ethnography, guided a study to understand adult learner classroom participation, from the learners perspectives. This focus provides the foundation for the presentation. The presentation is based on a dynamic participation model that emerged through triangulation of the study's data (face -to-face and telephone interviews, classroom observations, card sorting, surveys, and document analysis). The participation model, distinct from the adult learner literature, facilitates theoretical discussion linked to practical application. Key attributes of participation, as described by learners in the study, include being prepared, answering and asking questions, having self-confidence, listening and being honest, being open-minded, taking risks, meeting expectations, and teaching others. To promote participation, based on these attributes, the model highlights the interrelationship of the learners, the instructor, the environment, and the techniques. The primary focus of the model is to develop participation through interaction among learners and the instructor. Through the development of participation, learning communities can emerge. It is recognized that the understanding and value of participation by learners is not universal. Thus, the learning environment and the influence that the individuals background has on participation are integrated in the model. Feedback processes in the model aid in recognizing and responding to the uniqueness of the environment and the learners. In the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning session, discussion will focus on the dynamic participation model. The goal is to provide session participants with an understanding of the multiple ways learners view participation and value participation as part of the learning process. Based on the participation model, specific strategies to promote participation and a learning community will be highlighted. To model the concepts, session participants will be encouraged to participate in the learning process. Thus, the session will be interactive.

The Cognitive-Affective Relationship in Teaching and Learning Patricia Owen-Smith (Oxford College of Emory University)

In the spring of 2003 Oxford College was selected to serve as a Carnegie Campus Cluster Leader in the area of Cognitive-Affective Learning. Our initiative focuses on the creation of a “center without walls” that is multipurpose, interdisciplinary, and dedicated to creating campus environments that acknowledge the idea that enduring learning involves the whole person, the affective as well as the cognitive. (Until recently, little attention was given to dimensions of emotionality in higher education). Four other institutions joined Oxford College to become members of the Cognitive -Affective cluster: Agnes Scott College, Kennesaw State University, Wright State School of Medicine, and the Community College of Philadelphia. Through the venue of the 2003 and 2004 Summer Academy representatives from each of our institutions (faculty and students) worked together initially to develop a set of goals for the next three years, a time line for reaching these goals, and ways of communicating with one another. Subsequently, our work continues to move forward as we both expand and meet our goals. The purpose of the proposed poster is to reflect both our development as a cluster and the work we are doing collaboratively and individually on our respective campuses. As such, the poster describes our understanding of the cognitive-affective relationship that is derived from current research and scholarly work in this area. It demonstrates our initial steps in introducing the concept of the cognitive -affective relationship to our colleagues and faculties and the current assessment processes that are beginning. As part of the poster presentation we will disseminate both a bibliography on the cognitive -affective relationship and handouts of our own practices that we consider to be related to cognitive -affective teaching and learning.

Measuring the "Un -Measurable" Patricia Owen-Smith (Oxford College of Emory University), Mary T. White (Wright State University), Isa Williams (Agnes Scott College)

As early as 1917 William James spoke eloquently about the relationship between the cognitive and affective spheres of learning noting that they are never separate from one another, nor distinctive, nor pure. However, higher education has continued to ignore this connection in its practice. Educational policy and administration have increasingly attended to rationalized, cognitively driven and behavioral priorities of knowledge. (Hargreaves, 1997) Consequently, little theoretical attention has been given to emotional understanding, and empirical research on the affective has been virtually absent. The terrain is changing, however, and there is a newly emerging rhetoric about the importance of emotions in intellectual inquiry. Scholars such as Alexander Astin, Daniel Goleman, and Parker Palmer point out that the academic bias against subjectivity in higher education has resulted in an alienation of students and teachers from their own lives. These scholars are addressing the harm we impose on our students and

Abstracts

72

72

teachers when we ignore these emotions. Yet, still there remains a dearth in both qualitative and quantitative research that measures what many refer to as the un-measurable. Three members of a Carnegie/AAHE initiative on Cognitive-Affect ive Learning will review the significance of the assessment process in the study of the cognitive -affective relationship. The presenters will give specific attention to: (1) theoretical models that integrate the cognitive and affective (such as service learning and experiential education programs at the undergraduate level and ethics education in the medical school curriculum) and (2) assessment methods that have been and are currently used to evaluate such models. A medical ethicist at Wright State Unive rsity School of Medicine will describe courses in ethics and professionalism and the methods used to assess their effectiveness. Similarly, the director of an experiential education program at Agnes Scott College will discuss the relationship between classroom/program structure and assessment. Finally, the faculty coordinator of a service learning program at Oxford College of Emory University will describe the initial stage in assessing her institutions faculty members self-report understanding of the affective in teaching and learning. The session will culminate in participants exploration of ways in which classroom structure and pedagogy can support assessment and enhance the learning process and student development.

Decoding the Disciplines: Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking David Pace, Joan Middendorf (Indiana University Bloomington)

Using the Decoding the Disciplines model, faculty who are deeply committed to their disciplinary research answer a series of questions to understand how students think and learn in their field. The cross disciplinary nature of the process clarifies the thinking for each discipline.

This session will describe the Decoding the Disciplines process, including how to get faculty to engage in this activity. Participants will undertake Step 1 of the Decoding the Disciplines process, in order to produce their own examples of student bottlenecks. Once bottlenecks have been identified, specified and modeled for students, they become the basis for teaching tactics and assessment of learning. The results of some the fourteen research projects recently reported in the Winter 2004 volume of New Directions for Teaching and Learning will be summarized. Reference Pace, D., & Middendorf, J. (Eds.) (2004). Decoding the disciplines: Helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.

Notes from a Naïf: The Design Salon and Other ‘Jury’ Innovations Gregory Palermo (Iowa State University)

This presentation describes and analyzes three innovations in teaching and learning strategies for architectural, environmental and physical design disciplines. A principal method for assessment in design curricula is the ‘jury’: a public student presentation of design work to visiting faculty, practicing professionals and peers – often an audience of 20+. The design studio and jury have been much examined (Schön; S. Ahrentzen and L. Groat; and AIAS; the Chronicle; et al). The review process fosters oral and visual communication skills, and enables direct assessment and feedback to students on their design work, but it can also be a setting for abusive attacks on student performance, or the students themselves. A single strong jury member can sway and direct discussion, limiting feedback to the student, often leading to ‘tuning out”. The “jury” can be an intimidating environment, yielding much stress and little learning. Strategies for enriched learning through three innovations in formal design presentations have been developed to ameliorate the negative while retaining positive aspects of the design ‘jury’. Architectural design reviews typically include oral, graphic and physical model representations prepared by each student. The first strategy employed to enrich the ‘jury’ as a learning environment is the addition of a written component: a 250-word abstract for distribution during the review that includes a statement regarding design concepts, a list of precedents and a bibliography. The abstract not only helps improve students’ discipline specific writing skills in a manner that makes their ideas publicly accessible, it provides an outline of the main ideas they wish to convey orally. As a result, oral presentations are delivered with more precision and confidence, and it provides a reference base for the visiting critics. The net impact has been lowered stress, less meandering during the oral presentation, and enhanced critical feedback because the visiting critics are more fully informed of student intent than is typical. After each review, students write a self-critique of the review: what they learned, where they succeeded, what failed, and a plan with outcomes for subsequent design development. These written critiques become the basis for one -on-one follow-up with the professor to jointly assess design progress and determine ‘next steps’. This exercise develops critical reflection and judgment skills. The third new feature is the salon type review. The work of all students is posted exhibition style. There is a collective satisfaction in seeing all of their work at once that changes the mood from trepidation to celebration! The review panel is divided into teams of two people. They circulate to the students for 30-minute reviews in a round-robin fashion. Each student will present two or three times in an afternoon, to different teams of faculty critics. The results have yielded nearly universal positive feedback on the

Abstracts

73

73

process from students and critics. The ability to present more than once enables on the spot corrections by the students. Each review is fresh – demanding rigorous attention by the reviewers, often eliciting quite different responses and new critical perspective and learning. Students tend to watch several reviews, critique each other privately since all of the work is posted, and stay more alert than in the typical review format. Analysis of excerpts from undergraduate and graduate student abstracts, self-critiques, design presentation material, and salon scenes illustrates the cumulative learning benefits.

Effects of Online Pedagogical Interventions on Collaborative Inquiry Amongst Language Teachers Faridah Pawan (Indiana University Bloomington)

Computer-mediated communication (CMC) and its use in teaching and learning is a revolution that mirrors the use of writing in teaching and learning. Writing was a revolutionary technology when it was first introduced. The ability of writing to capture the ephemeral nature of speech and to freeze thoughts, as Ong (1988) and Goody and Watt (1968) put it, increased the opportunities for reflection and led to an intellectual revolution. CMC has brought about similar revolution in teaching. Asynchronous as well as archived synchronous discussion forums make it possible for instructors to document almost every detail of their instruction, to analyze it and to take a reflective look at who they are as instructors in the online classroom. The current research was undertaken in two steps to address the development of an online instructional collaborative pedagogy. The first step consisted of a study involving descriptive statistics and a content analysis of randomly selected archived discussions in three online classrooms over a period of two weeks. The study was undertaken to understand the patterns of collaborative interactions in the classroom and the teaching activities that are aligned with the patterns. This part of the research also included an analysis of the activities aligned with collaborative inquiry as defined by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2001). From this research, we noticed that without specific, consistent and timely instructor guidance on collaboration and participation, students tended to focus instead on brainstorming and exploration over half of the time at 66%. In addition, without the instructors prevalent modeling of critical thinking and questioning, students contributions consisted primarily of a series of declarations (Connolly and Smith, 1998). The second part of the research was undertaken utilizing the aforementioned findings to conduct a semester-long investigation (14 weeks) to answer the following questions:

• What are the instructional factors involved in the implementation of the interventions to promote collaborative inquiry in the classroom?

• How are student collaboration patterns affected by the interventions? • Do the interventions increase students cognitive presence through collaborative inquiry?

A case study approach was selected as the overarching approach for this part of the study involving one instructor and three students over a period of one semester to gain an understanding, within a defined and distinctive context, the individual factors involved in student participation in collaboration and collaborative inquiry as consequenced by the interventions. Our preliminary findings at this point suggest that CMC provides a natural avenue for collaboration and collaborative inquiry. However, the two processes are challenging for the instructor given her struggle with balancing between the instructivist model of instruction which is more time efficient and the constructivist model which is messier and time consuming; and between injecting cognitive dissonance and nurturing invested engagement. The students, on the other hand, struggle with collaboration and collaborative inquiry in terms of the necessary time needed for student reflection, active engagement in challenging inconsistencies, exploration of dissonant and divergent positions; rigorous substantiation of opinions with cohesive and well-researched arguments.

What Do Students Do (Academically Speaking) When They’re Not in Class? David Perry and Lisa Kurz (Indiana University Bloomington)

What students do outside of class to support their learning is largely invisible to faculty and academic support staff. This presentation will address an online survey of 550 undergraduates that sought to answer five questions about students’ academic activities when they are not sitting in a classroom:

• What learning activities do students engage in and how do these contribute to their learning? • How many hours do students spend on coursework in a typical week? • What activities do students engage in to prepare for an examination and how do these contribute

to their learning? • How do students manage the time they spend on academic tasks? • What factors may interfere with academic engagement?

We will present selected findings, but will emphasize those things that have broader applicability beyond IU, such as the methodology, how the findings might be useful to faculty and support staff, and how individual faculty might collect similar information on a smaller scale for their own classes.

Abstracts

74

74

Why Didn't the Light Bulb Turn On? Institutional Barriers to Organizational Innovation in Teaching and Learning Bernice Pescosolido, Stacy Scherr (Indiana University Bloomington), Jeni Loftus (Purdue University), Laura Fingerson (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

One of the most widely reconsidered college experiences in recent years revolves around the freshman year. In accordance with this national discussion in higher education, Indiana University embarked on the development of a test-program, the Summer Freshman Institute (SFI), which was designed to turn the light bulb on intellectually and, if successful, be the basis for a new freshman year approach. After two summer trials, the program was discontinued. In this paper, we shift from our role as the assessment team to explore the dynamics underlying this failure to improve teaching and learning. We examine the influence of institutional opportunities and constraints as well as stakeholder predispositions, on the outcomes of the SFI. Specifically, we have three aims. We first review the program and its outcomes. While SFI students were retained at similar rates as a control group and maintained passing grades, their GPA performance was significantly worse at the end of both fall and spring semesters. Second, using qualitative and quantitative data, we set out and test hypotheses brought to the table by participants. These hypotheses target the role of motivation, SAT scores, family background, and involvement in educational and social activities. They are found to have little explanatory power in SFI performance. Third and finally, we follow the process of program implementation and examine critical turning points in its development. We find that the program, while originally planned to be intellectually innovative, was remedial in its implementation. Constrained by a reliance on existing teaching and learning structures and resources, the initial goals of the program were not translated into innovative approaches. In essence the program functioned to successfully screen marginal students for college expectations, serving as a litmus test but not serving to enhance their academic achievement. We conclude by discussing the implications and critical role of institutional barriers on the development and implementation of teaching and learning innovations in complex higher education structures.

Creating Authentic Opportunities with a Virtual Archive: Technology and Disciplinary Methodology Dolores Peters (St. Olaf College)

For practicing historians, personal encounter with historical evidence and the ensuing creation of meaning is thrilling. The implication for teaching history is to bring what students do into line with what historians do: to teach them how to think like historians and to provide authentic experiences for creating knowledge. The survey course offers a challenging environment for exploring technology's role in supporting a disciplinary context for pedagogy and student learning. As an Associate of St. Olafs Center for Innovation in the Liberal Arts (CILA) in 2001-02, I began using the Web to embed in a survey course aspects of the process of doing history. The project exploits three distinctive characteristics of the Web used in tandem with low-tech email capacities: 1) its scope and efficiency in providing access to resources, 2) its capacity to create virtual learning communities, and 3) its capacity to mimic the recursive nature of historical research and writing. Doing history" means direct involvement in the process of historical inquiry based on students' engagement with the material and their interaction with each other. The projects keystone is a Virtual Archive (VA), a self-contained virtual environment for doing history, complete with intellectual dissonance. Comprised of sections based on categories of primary sources used by historians (e.g., Images, Government Documents, Ephemera), the VA is a series of links to existing Web sites or to material scanned for inclusion. While links and content are determined by me, they represent primary sources of varying quality; and in some cases are misleading or incomplete. Tied to activities both in and outside the classroom, use of the Virtual Archive requires students to locate sources, evaluate evidence, and create an historically authentic life (hi)story of a fictitious individual for whom I've drawn up a sketchy scenario. That scenario includes cues drawn from the history and scholarship of the period under study. Comparative evidence (two semesters with the VA, two semesters without it) documents that students using the VA engaged primary sources with greater frequency on the targeted assignment and in other written work for the course as well. Evidence regarding the relationship between frequency and quality (as measured by grades) of use of primary sources is more difficult to measure and interpret, and does not support a strong correlation. Between 57% and 70% of the students identified a recursive model of research as best describing their process of creating the life (hi)story attached to VA use. Finally, both quantitative and qualitative evidence suggest a higher level of engagement with the targeted assignment and the course as a result of the VA and the mini-learning communities established for the assignment. This project reinforces an emerging consensus regarding the teaching of history:

1) History is a process, a set of discursive practices; that process, and not content, should be the focus of history teaching. 2) Disciplinarity is a powerful basis for active learning. As recent work suggests, while individual learning styles may exist, learners nevertheless adapt to the discursive practices of the subject taught.

Abstracts

75

75

Grappling with Visualization in Astronomy C.A. Pilachowski (Indiana University Bloomington)

Students in introductory astronomy classes confront sizes and distances that are much too large to relate to their everyday lives, and they find difficulty in organizing information about the structures we find in the Universe. Visualization is important to help students learn the relationships between and the evolution of astronomical bodies. Astronomers use several methods to assist with visualization tasks, including diagrams, three-dimensional models, and mathematical models, and astronomy textbooks include many schematic diagrams to illustrate astrophysical concepts. To a scientist, these diagrams contain the kernels of astrophysical concepts, while the text serves primarily to flesh out the idea with further detail. Scientists look first at the diagrams to understand the ideas, and only secondarily read the text to fill in those details. Most non-science students, however, focus first on the text, and lose the central idea in the myriad details they find there. Their experience in other courses often leads them to see illustrations and images as decoration or enrichment, rather than as primary content. Therefore, it is necessary to develop ways to model this process of “thinking visually” to help students identify and master critical astronomy concepts more easily. Students’ first challenge in thinking visually in an astronomy course generally comes with an introduction to the night sky. Visualization of the Earth-Moon system provides students with a comfortable place to begin. Using balls of different sizes and a large ball in the center of the room (simulating the Sun), students, working in small groups, learn to visualize the relationships among the Earth, Moon, and Sun. In addition to explicit three-dimensional models, “kinesthetic” learning activities assisted students to visualize more complex processes and relationships. An exploration of radiation and convection in stars to transport energy from the interior to the surface utilized balloons representing the energy produced by fusion. The evolution of star clusters was simulated using balloons of different colors and sizes. In a third kinesthetic exercise, students modeled the distribution of globular star clusters to locate the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. The modeling exercise was followed with graphical and schematic depictions of the distribution of real globular clusters in the Galaxy. In addition to 3-D models and kinesthetic exercises, students demonstrated concepts in astronomy through drawings and illustrations. For example, students sketched the Milky Way Galaxy to illustrate its structure and contents. In another assignment students produced an original work of art or a children’s book, both illustrating an astronomy concept, and also explained the concept depicted in their artwork in a written paragraph. These paragraphs revealed students’ attempts to organize and structure astronomical knowledge in ways meaningful to them. Throughout the course, students struggled to place unfamiliar concepts into a landscape beyond direct human experience. The use of visualization helped students to structure the concepts of astronomy. Asking students to construct two and three dimensional models of astronomical concepts helps them develop a more complete and more correct understanding of astronomy.

Building on a Base: Applying Physics Education Research to Physics Teaching Steven J. Pollock (University of Colorado)

SOTL in many physics departments today has benefited from support of professional physics organizations and the presence of discipline -based education research situated within physics departments. Over the past 20 years Physics Education Research (PER) has undergone tremendous growth, resulting in a solid base of empirical and theoretical research that we may apply to our educational environments. This talk will outline some of the PER subfield's research-based assessment and curricular tools, and the developing roles of discipline based research in classroom practice and departmental cultures.

Assessing reforms in a large-lecture course: learning gains and student attitudes. Steven J. Pollock (University of Colorado, Boulder)

Large introductory physics lectures are a fact of life at many institutions, but are often demonstrably ineffective in developing conceptual understanding [1,2]. They can also foster less desirable student attitudes and beliefs about science and learning [3]. Much SOTL and Physics Education Research has focused on characterizing and measuring conceptual learning gains and attitudes about the nature of science and learning, with a goal of developing effective classroom interventions. Less is known about the transfer of interventions to new environments. We have implemented several research-based reforms in a large (500+) physics course, and present results here on the coordinated aspects of these reforms, and their resulting impact on learning and student attitudes.

Abstracts

76

76

Our reforms include the following. 1) We use Peer Instruction[4], frequently interrupting lectures with conceptual questions. Students talk with their peers, and then respond via individual infrared "clickers". 2) We implement Tutorials[5], smaller student-centered recitations using conceptually focused group workbook problems developed by the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington. Tutorials are run by graduate and undergraduate learning assistants trained in a Socratic method of guided instruction. Other course reforms include the use of personalized computer graded homework, a multimedia textbook [6], and a staffed help-room for student support. Assessment involves several complementary methods. To measure conceptual learning, we issue pre/post exams (widely used, validated multiple choice instruments [2]). We also use pre/post questions (some free response) for more detailed examination of physics topics. We study attitudes and beliefs about the nature of science and science learning with a pre/post Likert-scale survey[7] developed locally. We also survey students informally roughly every week online to collect further open-ended data on attitudes. Here we present measures of learning gains with an emphasis on correlations to specific course reforms. Our results are high by national norms: the median normalized learning gain on the conceptual surveys was above 66%, yet we cannot associate these gains with individual course components. We see no decline in measured student attitudes, but find that attitudes and attitude shifts both correlate positively with conceptual learning gains. Our ongoing work involves studying the effects of, and interplay among, the various interventions, while making these reforms sustainable and accessible without demanding excessive new institutional resources. References [1] R. Hake, Am.J. Phys. 66, 64-74 (1998), [2] L. McDermott and E. Redish, Am. J. Phys. 67(9) 755-767 (1999) [3] E. F. Redish, Teaching Physics with Physics Suite, Wiley 2003. [4] E. Mazur, Peer Instruction, Prentice Hall 1997 [5] L. McDermott and P. Shaffer, Tutorials in Introductory Physics, Prentice Hall 2002 [6] CAPA (www.lon-capa.org), and Thinkwell Physics I (www.thinkwell.com) [7] Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. Adams, Finkelstein, Perkins, Wieman, in prep. (cosmos.colorado.edu/phet/survey/CLASS/CLASS.html) *This work is supported in part by Pew/Carnegie, NSF, and APS PhysTec.

What Makes the Boy from Oz Excellent? Hugh Jackman and the Pedagogy of Excellence in the Performing Arts. Robyn Quin, Lynne Hunt (Edith Cowan University)

This paper presents the findings of a focus group study comparing staff and student attitudes towards learning in a performing arts setting. The pedagogy for learning in creative arts courses has arisen, in part, from master-apprenticeship relationships between students and expert practitioners. How do these traditional patterns of learning translate to a university environment that requires compliance with quality assurance processes in teaching and learning per se as well as quality in performance outcomes? To what extent do university values, policies and procedures relating to pedagogy, instruction, assessment, and evaluation accord with the values, expectations and processes of actors, singers and dancers? Do students and staff in the performing arts vary in their expectations and experience of the learning process? Finally, do staff and student expectations and experiences vary in terms of one -to-one and cohort learning contexts? The location of this study is the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts at Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia (WAAPA@ECU). It is an elite training school for students wishing to pursue careers on the screen and stage whether as actors, dancers, musicians or producers/directors. The study is informed by an interest in the pedagogy of excellence. It is problem-based research because the study was prompted by a recognition that WAAPA@ECU produces nationally and internationally recognised excellent outcomes yet the faculty are unable to articulate why or how they achieve this. Even curriculum content is problematised in a creative arts setting because there is only limited delineation of what counts as knowledge in the performing arts. There is a clash of cultures between arts and university settings. This is manifest in non-compliance with University policy, failure to achieve comparable rates of promotion and workload issues. In the longer term, therefore, this focus group study will become part of a wider action research project designed to produce material that can inform the teaching of performing arts and articulate the best of what they do whilst maximising opportunities for harmonious working relationships that foster positive outcomes for students.

Abstracts

77

77

Optimizing the Implementation of Technology for Teaching in Higher Education: An International Assessment of Key Factors Gail Rathbun (Indiana University Purdue University, Fort Wayne)

Research on the conditions and factors conducive to the successful implementation of teaching technologies in higher education consistently lists the availability of resources, infrastructure, training and technical support, time to teachers for planning and learning, and incentives and rewards; the participation of users (teachers) in planning and decision-making; and leadership (Carr, 2004; Surry, Ensminger, & Jones, 2003; Surry & Ensminger, 2002; Barajas, 2000; IVETTE, 2000; Ely, 1999). Studies of implementation are important because the teaching and learning outcomes achieved (or not achieved) may be the result of the implementation, not the result of a change in teaching or learning. Using this research and her own studies of implementation (Rathbun, 2003; Goodrum, Robinson, & Rathbun, 1997) the researcher constructed the Technology Implementation Fitness Quiz as an educational tool to help educators and technologists quickly gauge the readiness of their institutions to successfully exploit technology for teaching, and thereby be able to accurately evaluate teaching and learning outcomes (Rathbun, 2004). The researcher asked university educators from around the world to complete an online version of the quiz. Eighty-eight university educators computed an implementation fitness ratio, providing a rough estimation of how well his or her institution implements available educational technology resources. Only 12 of the respondents gave his or her institution an excellent rating. Although the essential hardware infrastructure, human resources, and knowledge support are in place almost everywhere, key factors necessary to the full implementation of the available instructional technologies are still lacking in the majority of the institutions surveyed. Leadership, participation, time, and rewards are either non-existent or uncoordinated with the technology deployment aims of the educational institutions surveyed. Lack of attention to these institutional or organizational factors can inhibit successful implementation in even the best-resourced institution (Carr, 2004; Surry & Ensminger, 2002). The results of quiz indicate that universities should pay closer attention to policies, participation, and advocacy backed by commitment in order to optimize their return on investment in technology.

Using Course Portfolios to Design Hybrid Courses Jude Rathburn (University of Wisconsin - River Falls), Carolyn Kelly Ottman (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee)

This session will begin with a brief overview of the course portfolio as a method of scholarly inquiry into teaching, learning and instructional design. We will also discuss effective ways to review and evaluate course portfolios, regardless of the field of study. Participants will be given an overview of and excerpts from course portfolios that were used to design two different hybrid business courses a senior level capstone course in strategic management and a graduate level course on leadership. We will use these examples to explore the central, guiding question of our course portfolios, namely How can we use an online course management system, as well as other technologies to help our students develop and demonstrate a deeper understanding of course content? As we review the excerpts, participants will gain an appreciation for how the course portfolio method requires critical reflection to uncover course goals, desired learning outcomes, and ways to effectively assess student learning and understanding. Hopefully they will also recognize that this scholarly approach to hybrid or online course development can foster integrative learning, deeper levels of understanding for our students, as well as provide a systematic way to document the impact of technologies, like an online course management system, on learning. The session will conclude with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of using the course portfolio method for course development. Each participant will also identify ways that she/he might be able to use the course portfolio method to design her/his own hybrid or online courses for any course or learning management platform, such as Blackboard, eCollege, WebCT, Desire 2 Learn (D2L), etc. We will provide a number of opportunities for short (3-5 minute) small group discussions about the following topics: (1) using the course portfolio method of instructional design; (2) ways to use an online course management system to facilitate learning and foster deeper understanding of course content (and process); (3) evaluating various features of online course management systems and how well they help us achieve course objectives; (4) other issues or concerns that may arise as a result of participants own experiences. We will also ask participants to take a few minutes to reflect on how they might use the course portfolio method to design their own hybrid or online course using an online course management system.

Framing and Understanding Student Learning in the Seminar David Reichard (CSU Monterey Bay), Jose Feito (St. Mary's College of California), Laura Greene (Augustana College), Michael Axtell (Wabash College), Wendy Ostroff (Sonoma State University)

In this panel, several Carnegie Scholars reflect on approaches used to research student learning in the seminar. Representing a variety of educational contexts, the presenters will reflect on their experience in framing their research questions: How do common seminar courses in undergraduate curricula

Abstracts

78

78

compare across institutions? Why do students ask the questions they do? In what ways do students allow for not knowing in seminar discussion? What is the relationship between electronic and face -to-face discussion for students working in seminar? Roundtable presenters will first provide a brief overview of their research how the group helped each other form research questions, what methods they used to understand student learning, and what the group came to unders tand about the place of the seminar in liberal arts education. Organized in the form of a roundtable, the presentations are designed to prompt questions among the panelists and, in the process, invite those attending the session to participate in an open discussion of those questions and others brought forward in the conversation. Participants in this session should expect to emerge with a deeper understanding of how to approach the scholarship of teaching and learning in the seminar, a greater awareness of what kinds of SOTL research are emerging about the seminar, and a better sense of where this research might be headed.

The Creation of a “Public Homeplace” in Learning Communities: The Role of Emotional and Intellectual Safety in Student Learning Jane Lister Reis, Carol Hamilton (North Seattle Community College)

In 2003-04, Carol Hamilton (English) and Jane Lister-Reis (Communication), two coordinated studies faculty members from North Seattle Community College, became interested in Mary Field Belenky’s work with women, and particularly in her concept of the creation of a “public homeplace.” In her book, The Tradition That Has No Name, 1997, Belenky and her colleagues described and named what they call “public homeplaces” which are “physical and social environments intentionally created as safe or free spaces, in which people can come to a stronger sense of themselves, are supported in finding their own voices, and gain skills in listening to and respecting the voices and identities of others” (Krimerman, What Did Theory Ever Do For Us?). Hamilton and Lister-Reis designed a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning project to explore the impact on student learning when a classroom was intentionally designed as an inclusive and emotionally and intellectually safe space. Along with Belenky’s writing and research, we were interested in and informed by Carnegie Scholar Jose Feito’s work in the development of “intellectual intimacy” (http://kml2.carnegiefoundation.org/html/poster.php?id=47). Making the classroom an emotionally positive place, particularly a place of respect and safety, is not just being nice or ‘touchy-feely.’” It is imperative to do this because emotions powerfully affect how we learn, think, and remember. For example, Mike Rose (1995), after a 4-year journey through American’s public school classrooms, reported that students are more motivated and successful in classrooms in which they feel respected and safe (Smilkstein, We’re Born to Learn, 413-414).” Besides asking students to talk about their experiences, the project also outlined the role of faculty in the creation of a public homeplace: 1. Design activities to construct a nurturing, respectful learning environment by having students:

• practice a variety of small group and interpers onal listening exercises to create a climate of respect and inclusion;

• write and share stories of their own experiences of identity, culture, and personal history; and • create intentional spaces that supported the development of community such as sharing of a

common meal. 2. Encourage students to integrate cognitive and affective experiences.

According to Belenky, “The public homeplace tradition rejects dualistic constructs that presume feelings and thought are separate and opposing processes. Instead, it envisions hearts and minds developing in tandem. It understands that emotions can spur the development of thought and that thought clarifies and nourishes emotional life” (16).

3. See students as competent, evolving learners: “The public homespace tradition rejects the notion of an ‘Other’ – that there are inferior people incapable of becoming full participants in society. We are all members of one family – the human family” (Belenky 16).

For example, Feito’s concept of allowing “Not Knowing” for students: • “the ability to acknowledge their initial lack of understanding • willingness to be wrong and let your opinions evolve • offering genuine questions • space to struggle with a difficult text”

4. Select texts to foster multicultural understanding: Texts were carefully selected to create a cultural framework which supported a rich discussion and learning about: • Identity development by race, gender, class • White privilege and power • Respect and awareness of cultural perspectives and uniqueness

Abstracts

79

79

This research project has raised new questions about the need to explore further a pedagogy that is sensitive to women’s and people's of color ways of learning and being in an intellectual and social community. The next phase of this research project is to integrate our initial findings into the “Student Voices” initiative that our college is part of as a “Carnegie Cluster campus.”

Course Portfolios as Scaffolding for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Jennifer Meta Robinson, Howard Rosenbaum (Indiana University Bloomington)

This presentation will discuss preliminary results of a pilot faculty learning community at Indiana University that is exploring course portfolios as a way to launch scholarship of teaching and learning projects that result in publications. This project represents the generative intersection of two Indiana University initiatives: the Peer Review of Teaching Course Portfolio Initiative and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Program. It addresses this central question: How can we use the strengths of the course portfolio, deep reflection, dialogue with peers, and focus on student learning to help faculty members formulate, write, and publish their scholarship of teaching and learning so that they can advance our knowledge of this domain in the literature and gain the kinds of recognition valued in higher education? Indiana University was one of five institutions that participated in the Pew-sponsored Peer Review of Teaching Course Portfolio Initiative. Through that project, faculty members and graduate students at Indiana have produced 27 course portfolios that document the intellectual work of teaching particular courses. The participants have typically reported both personal satisfaction and teaching benefits from the reflection, articulation, and peer feedback involved in writing course portfolios. Some have found additional audiences for their work in award, promotion, and job applications. However, many have expressed frustration that few if any traditional publication ve nues are willing to publish a course portfolio as such. For although some of the content may be readily recognizable to journal editors, the course portfolio format remains unfamiliar. Almost simultaneously with the course portfolio project, Indiana University launched a major scholarship of teaching and learning initiative that has resulted in numerous presentations, publications, and individual and program grants and awards. The emphasis for this initiative has been to cultivate publications in peer-reviewed venues so that faculty scholarship can receive due recognition. However, the rate of publication remains below program goals. In spring 2004, a small faculty inquiry circle formed to pilot a promising next step: using the strengths of the course portfolio to push beyond the limits of that genre toward the production of more conventionally recognizable documentation of scholarship of teaching and learning. The Pew Inquiry Circle is comprised of one professional staff member and five faculty participants from a variety of disciplines and ranks who were invited to participate based on their demonstrated commitment to scholarship of teaching and learning. Each participant began by writing a course portfolio compatible with those in the Pew project. As is typical in that project, the group met on a regular basis to provide peer feedback. After completing a course portfolio, each circle member then used it as a springboard into the questions, data collection, analysis, and writing of a readily-publishable scholarship of teaching project. In this session, the presenters the director of Indiana University Bloomington's Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Program and the Inquiry Circles faculty leader will discuss the goals, assumptions, group composition, trends, signs of success, and lessons learned. Conference participants will explore the possibilities for such a program on their own campuses.

Advancing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at Research Universities Jennifer Meta Robinson (Indiana University Bloomington) and The Research University Consortium for the Advancement of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Consortium Institutions: Indiana University Bloomington (lead campus) Arizona State University Georgia State University Howard University Graduate School Iowa State University Michigan State University National Communication Association

Northwestern University The Ohio State University University of British Columbia University of Illinois/ Urbana-Champaign University of Maryland, College Park University of New South Wales University of Nevada—Las Vegas University of Wyoming

Consistent with the longstanding mission of research universities, the scholarship of teaching and learning offers far-reaching possibilities for integrating discovery, learning, and public engagement. An international AAHE-Carnegie consortium of major research universities and disciplinary societies has formed to further the emerging recognition of the scholarship of teaching and learning as a powerful and integral component of the research university’s mission and identity. The scholarship of teaching and learning must be held to the same

Abstracts

80

80

standards of rigor, relevance, peer review, and dissemination as other forms of disciplinary research and creative activity. It also must bring the same levels of rewards. In an effort to make a significant contribution toward the transformation of the academy, these collaborative partnership is addressing scholarship of teaching and learning through key components in the mission of research universities:

• Advancing what we know in the disciplines. We are facilitating discussion of scholarship of teaching and learning among disciplinary societies.

• Making work public. We are advancing scholars’ efforts to “go public” with their work by collaborating with the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.

• Securing appropriate rewards. We are developing and disseminating language for promotion and tenure documents appropriate to research institutions and designed to maintain rigor and high standards of achievement.

• Preparing the future professoriate. We are surveying institutions and will make recommendations for using scholarship of teaching and learning to prepare the next generation of college and university faculty.

Transforming Student Learning Experience: Students as Contributors to Learning Anthony Rosie (Sheffield Hallam University)

The award of a national teaching fellowship gave the author an opportunity for re -thinking teaching at the level of both the programme and the individual module. This paper starts from experience of the module and shows how this has been taken further. Within his teaching areas the author runs a single year long module on historical-comparative sociology at a UK university to second year undergraduates. Coming to historical-comparative from a different discipline base meant the author had to 'learn' and learn quickly so the experiences he went through were broadly similar to those of his students but he researched it in personal terms and as a social scientist. Students currently complete a portfolio through a research question, research design, analytical commentary, reflective writing on personal learning. This is substantial but the majority of the students' submissions are via a set of appendices which constitute student analysis of the topics, etc. The appendices are not formally marked and they become a territory students and tutor can share without worrying over formal presentation. The NTF award has meant setting up video interviews with the world's leading sociologists in historical-comparative research. This work informs student experience but what comes across from the research data is that a scholarship of teaching and learning needs to incorporate an adequate analysis of emotional intensity in learning, a set of ways for students to 'think the unthinkable', for learners to be able to talk through and act on 'moving on' from one arena of learning to another. The outcomes of the module in terms of pass rates are strong, student evaluation refers to the module as 'life changing'. This paper takes these dimensions forward and does so in ways that bring out a commitment to change, a way of recording student experience of learning change which tutors can properly use as part of their evidence for learning and teaching development. This recording protocol includes four areas: (i) integration of knowledge and pedagogy, (ii) students' learning in local, national and international contexts, (iii) student transitions through formal stages, (iv) pedagogic innovation. The final part of the paper shows how this has been taken up on a programme basis and provides discussion opportunities for participants to explore take up in their institutions.

Can Those Who are Rewarded for Teaching Form a 'Community of Practice' That is of Value for SOTL? Anthony Rosie (Sheffield Hallam University), Philip Frame (Middlesex University), Johnson Johnson (Open University)

Central to Lave and Wenger's major text (1991) is the idea of learning through and engagement in practice. Wenger (1998) extends this to identify overlapping but discrete communities of practice. If those who are rewarded for their support of learning through national awards such as Carnegie scholarships, 3m awards, Australian and UK national teaching fellowships share and promote excellence, then do they form a community of practice that can support SoTL? This paper starts with some of the contradictions in community of practice theory. While the value of community of practice theory has been noted we point to the following - lack of attention paid to the role of emotion (Walkerdine, 1997); lack of historical and social location of the subject (Lerman, 2000); lack of attention paid to power relations (Walkerdine, 1997); multiple forms of participation that go beyond immediate communities (Hodges, 1998); ways in which members of such communities act in ways that disappoint expectations held by the community. Our contention is that since 2000 the major individual reward for faculty staff in England and Northern Ireland has been the national teaching fellowship. Over the first five years of the scheme a community of award holders has emerged - some 130 strong. To what extent does this grouping form a community of practice? Could such a community form a potent force for the development of a scholarship of teaching and learning?

Abstracts

81

81

Our research into experiences of award holders from the 2000, 2001, 2002 cohorts has found the following: the difficulties that inform community of practice theory also inform the experiences of award holders. However, by understanding how some of the communities within the overall group operate we can make some tentative suggestions as to how the scholarship of teaching and learning can be supported. In particular, we draw attention to power relations and networking. Many national teaching fellows are involved in projects and activities that support radical approaches to pedagogy. We identify how higher education policy and practice can build on this work and we identify some potential barriers to be overcome.

Teaching and Learning with Web-Enhanced Technology Craig Ross (Indiana University Bloomington)

The increasing use of teaching and learning web technologies has raised the importance of evaluating its educational effectiveness. To assess the success and progress of an undergraduate program is the key to learning and growth, and receiving feedback is the primary requisite for making technology planning essential. However, assessing the learning outcomes that result from web-enhanced courses is a difficult challenge. In many instances, learning gains are not due to the technology per se, but the sound pedagogy it promotes. In this session, Dr. Ross will share his study of the use of traditional courses in recreation and leisure studies using web-enhanced technology. In his study, he employed the AAHE Flashlight Program and Tool Series Kit to learn what works well and not so well in teaching and learning with web-enhanced technology. The session should help faculty identify ways of thinking about pedagogical approaches to and uses of web technology that can make significant differences in the way their students learn. Learning Outcomes Participants will:

1. Be able to identify pedagogical approaches to and uses of web technology that can make a difference in the way students learn. 2. Learn about the AAHE Flashlight program for assessing technology. 3. Discuss what works well and not so well in teaching and learning with web technology. 4. Explore a model for gathering feedback about the role of the web enhancements in student learning.

Outline of Session 1. Background and overview of the presentation 2. Study overview 3. Methodology 4. Results/Conclusions 5. Perceived impact on learning students/faculty 6. Most and least useful features of incorporating web technology into teaching 7. Greatest barriers/benefits to faculty 8. Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in web-enhanced courses.

Enhancing Student Learning of Statistics via Digitized Video-Based Case Studies Barry Rubin (Indiana University Bloomington)

This paper addresses the limited degree of the average student's learning and long-term retention of critical concepts in introductory statistics. This outcome arises largely from the unfamiliar nature of statistical concepts and the need to stack multiple levels of abstract thought one upon another to achieve critical insights and understanding. Furthermore, most students labor under a series of preconceived and erroneous ideas as to what statistical analysis involves, the relevancy of applying statistics and finite mathematics concepts to problem-solving outside of the university or college, and even the definition of what a statistic actually is. The levels of abstractions involved, the misconceptions of statistical analysis, the "dryness" of many foundation topics, and the math anxiety and inexperience with mathematical reasoning common to many students all act to create a very difficult environment for learning and teaching. Although some solutions to these problems have been proposed, there is still no systematic evaluation of any of these elements to determine what best addresses the pedagogical dilemma of introductory statistics. In order to address these issues, I experimented with digital video interviews of former students from my statistics classes, who utilized statistical analysis to solve major problems in a professional context. By showcasing statistical analysis conducted by alumni who have sat in the same class as current students, and by providing digitized video interviews of these former students presenting the problem and the results of their analysis, statistics can "come alive." These videos serve as the focus of small group discussions and as active learning exercises for addressing real problems in contextual form, overcoming the motivational bottleneck and linking classroom experience with a students future profession. The video cases and associated active learning exercises were evaluated via a questionnaire and focus group. The questionnaire results were analyzed using single-sample t-tests and multiple regression. These results, which were generally significant at the .001 level, affirm the efficacy of the digitized video-based case study as the center of a group exercise to enhance motivation and improve student learning. Moreover, the regression analysis indicates that the interest level of the exercise and the full class discussion were most

Abstracts

82

82

important with respect to maximizing student learning; and that gender, full class discussion, and math comfort level were most critical with respect to student motivation. The overall implication is that student learning and enthusiasm toward incorporating statistics into their careers will be maximized as the interest level of the video-based case study is increased. Thus, to enhance the efficacy of this learning method, instructors should seek or produce video cases focusing on interesting topics, and make the case study exercise one which tends to be enjoyable for the students to pursue. In addition to the specific results derived from the digital video case studies, there are several additional observations that are made in the paper concerning the utility and production of such case studies.

Decoding the Teaching of Statistics Barry Rubin (Indiana University Bloomington)

There are a number of bottlenecks to the average student's learning or long-term retention of critical concepts in introductory statistics. This is due to the unfamiliar nature of statistical concepts and the need to stack multiple levels of abstract thought one upon another to achieve critical insights and understanding. The sampling distribution is the leading bottleneck in the teaching and learning of statistical analysis, because of its importance and students’ difficulty in understanding. Students have great difficulty in adding the concept of a sampling distribution to the much more tangible and experience -based concept of a frequency distribution of raw data. This development is not a linear learning process. Instead, it is necessary to move back and forth between concepts and applications, such that one continuously reinforces the other. Assessments of student learning over several iterations of the course revealed an enhancement in learning following the exercise, and showed that even students who had a reasonable grasp of the concept prior to the exercise often improved their understanding. Another aspect of my intervention strategy for teaching introductory statistics, Step 5 of the Decoding the Disciplines model, considers the motivational aspects of student learning. By addressing real problems in contextual form, and linking the classroom experience with a student’s future profession, I intended to motivate students to spend the time and energy necessary to learn the critical concepts and analytical techniques necessary to become proficient with statistics. I created video case studies of statistical analyses conducted by alumni who had sat in the same class as current students. By providing digitized video interviews of these former students presenting a problem and the results of their analysis, statistics can thus "come alive." These videos served as the focus of small group discussions and as active learning exercises. My experience supports the Decoding Disciplines Model, starting with the identification of specific bottlenecks, enhancing learning through students practice and feedback, followed by assessment tools tailored to obtain evidence of student mastery. Reference Rubin, B., & Krishnan, S., (2004.) Decoding applied data in professional schools. In D. Pace and J.

Middendorf (eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.

Negotiating Multidisciplinary Collaborations Ginny Saich (University of Stirling)

Experience of mediating complex, university-wide, collaborative innovations has created opportunities for exploring alternative strategies for creating and maintaining effective team working among colleagues with multiple, diverse and possibly conflicting affiliations. Dialogues, across different disciplinary or professional ‘communities of practice’ (Wenger, 1998), are frequently problematic. Communication styles and the imperatives of research, policy and practice may vary. The Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice (PGCert), currently under development, must cater for diverse disciplines and a range of professions supporting student learning. There are two elements to this initiative: the development process and the programme. Examination of case studies will identify relevant strategies and components with potential for repurposing within the PGCert. Establishment of the Coalition for Learning Innovation (CLI) provided a university-wide alliance co-coordinating distributed support for, and development of, the use of learning technologies. The alliance was modeled on the ‘roundtable’ methodology with full representation from students, academic, support and administrative units ), from which a ‘community of practice’ (CoP) emerged (http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/TLTR/home.htm). The CLI brought together disparate individuals, established a shared vision and maintained pursuit of a shared enterprise, developing resources reflecting the accumulated knowledge of the community. It provided a public arena for collective, inclusive decision-making, promoted pedagogic debate and research and supported showcase events for sharing good practice. On achieving its shared vision through the establishment of a single, central support unit for learning technologies, the CoP dispersed. In contrast, collaborative curricular innovations with Careers Advisors, departmentally-based academics, students and local voluntary organisations developed accredited courses providing practical, discipline -related, work experience for students within voluntary and community organisations. Course components include disciplinary-specific content, a common ‘core’, personal development planning (PDP) opportunities and support, employability skills and voluntary work experience. A common pedagogic approach focuses on

Abstracts

83

83

experiential learning, with blended support, providing opportunities for structured reflection, dialogue, reciprocal peer feedback, and workplace mentoring. Students on similar placements form peer support groups, mimicking characteristics of CoPs. Team teaching maintains the development team’s CoP. In both case studies, the development process and its outputs suggest elements and approaches of potential value within the context of a PGCert for academic and support colleagues with differing disciplinary affiliations. Mediation of PGCert developments will support cross-disciplinary and cross-professional working. Course participants will contribute to the development and review process, providing early encouragement for engagement as legitimate participants in academic CoPs. CoPs recognise that ‘”community” plays a crucial symbolic role in generating people’s sense of belonging’ (Crow & Allan, 1994: 6). Systemic perspectives will orient consideration towards long-term developments with emphasis on feedback mechanisms to inform evolution of the course. Mirroring double loop learning systems (Argyris & Schön, 1978) shared goals, values, plans and rules will be both operationalised and evaluated. The PGCert will support participants undertaking scholarship, including publication through peer-reviewed routes and critically supportive CoPs such as the HE Academy. The PGCert will thus complement other activities undertaken in support of the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Mentoring Newer Scholars of Teaching and Learning Anita Salem, Cheryl McConnell (Rockhurst University)

The focus of our Cluster is on mentoring newer scholars of teaching and learning. Rockhurst University serves as the leadership site for this Cluster. Partnering with us in this work are six institutions: Creighton University, Colombia College Chicago, Morehead State University, Truman State University, University of Houston-Clear Lake and University of Texas El Paso. Rockhurst University and its six partner institutions are focusing on nurturing faculty who are interested in producing new knowledge in this field of SOTL and on fostering a community of faculty who will be intelligent consumers of this knowledge. Specific goals for the Cluster include: (1) providing mentoring opportunities for scholars who are at the beginning or middle levels of experience in SOTL. The focus of this goal is to help move scholars toward completion and publication of SOTL projects; and (2) developing a variety of supports for scholars and potential scholars that will make easier their SOTL. These supports will include developing and sharing resources through the use of online tools, assisting in the development of institutional structures such as seminars or research circles, and linking with related national initiatives. The centerpiece of our work is building a nationally recognized annual summer institute that supports an innovative approach to the development of emerging scholars of SOTL and that pays particular attention to the interdisciplinary nature of investigations into student learning. The institute is designed to (1) provide access to issues, examples and practical approaches to scholarly inquiry into teaching and learning for participants who want to learn more about the field; (2) provide emerging scholars who have works-in-progress with the practical tools and insights that will allow them to move their SOTL projects forward. For example, scholars present their projects to cohort groups mentored by nationally recognized SOTL leaders who critique and provide suggestions for advancing the projects to a level suitable for publication as works-in-progress; (3) cultivate mentors by providing opportunities to develop the skills and leadership capacities necessary to make visible the work involved in the scholarship of teaching and learning; and (4) establish a peer-reviewed publication venue, An Online Gallery of Works-in-Progress, that will highlight works-in-progress together with reflective response essays written by the mentors. Publishing works-in-progress provides an innovative supporting framework for advancing the work beyond the initial stage. The dissemination of the works-in-progress as a publication also provides an avenue for potential scholars and others to see how SOTL investigations take shape. This is especially important given the newness of the field and the lack of institutional and professional supports to guide the development of new ideas. Past cluster-sponsored events include: 2002 Conference (Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning), 2003 Summer Institute (Opening Lines) and 2004 Summer Institute (Ethics of Inquiry). Plans for 2004-2005 include a Summer Institute (Creativity in the Classroom) hosted by Columbia College Chicago, one of our core member institutions, and the development of an online gallery of works-in-progress.

Teaching Difficulty Mariolina Rizzi Salvatori (Lafayette College), Patricia Donahue (University of Pittsburgh), Laura Greene (Augustana College)

In the dominant paradigm of higher education, whenever students express difficulty (confusion, bewilderment, obfuscation), teachers assume it is their responsibility to step in and clarify it, even if by doing so they encourage student passivity and preserve the dichotomy of teacher as all knowing and student as not knowing. This urge to clarify prevents students from learning to tackle difficulties on their own. It also prevents them from acquiring the strategies and tools of self-reflection they need to possess their knowledge. Finally, it prevents them from developing the confidence of expert learners (such as teachers) because an essential stage of understanding, whatever the disciplinary field, is an encounter with difficulty, with naming and describing it, mining it for its incipient knowledge.

Abstracts

84

84

In this panel, three English professors and CASTL scholars (the first from the 1999 cohort, the second and third from the 2003 cohort) share their reflective analyses and the results of scholarly projects in which each was engaged in the pedagogical work of Teaching Difficulty: helping students articulate and reflect on difficulties of various kinds (reading, writing, questioning) so they could see difficulty as a gateway rather than impediment to understanding. The first speaker, Mariolina Salvatori (Difficulty As Understanding) will establish the theoretical context of difficulty, and describe the genesis of her work with students' difficulties to suggest/demonstrate what teachers can learn by paying attention to what students say. The second speaker, Patricia Donahue (Student Perceptions of Difficulty), drawing from responses provided by 200 first year students, will examine the preunderstandings of difficulty first year students already possess and their perceptions of the difficulty of academic reading and writing. The third speaker, Laura Greene (Difficult Questions), will share what her work with student-generated questions reveals about student models of inquiry, which in turn reveals the kinds of difficulty students are most likely to acknowledge and address, and the kinds of academic problems that seem not to occur to them. The panelists will invite the audience to reflect on their own conceptual and pedagogical associations with difficulty through a process of guided questioning.

The Learner’s Mind: Cognitive Principles and Constraints Leah Savion (Indiana University Bloomington)

Educational techniques based on viewing the student's brain in analogy to a dry, thirsty sponge, equipped with a well-organized library, prove ineffective. The brain does not merely record information, it does not comprehend it in isolation from prior knowledge, nor does it "read off" the relevant "file" when retrieval is called for. Instead, the brain is engaged in selecting and manipulating information, categorizing and reconstructing it at the acquisition level, maintaining knowledge in appropriate memory compartment, and retrieving some of it in accordance with its encoding, its search strategy, and the relevant cues. These processes are determined mostly by cognitive mechanisms that generally promote rapid and efficient mental models to connect the existing knowledge with the ones presented. Our mental models are limited by general cognitive principles that govern the operations of our minds, and by contextual factors such as mode of delivery of the new information, anchoring, level of abstraction and complexity, that tend to constrain learning outcome. Awareness of these constraints can enable the educator to press some cognitive limitations into service, tailor her teaching strategies to accommodate the involuntary ones, and bypass pedagogical inhibitors. The effectiveness of education depends on understanding the cognitive tools that students bring to bear on their learning. The presentation offered here presents a number of mental procedures that are involved in three stages of learning concepts: acquisition, retention, and retrieval. General mental principles, such as cognitive economy and the search for coherence will be discussed, as well as major cognitive devices for carrying out these principles, and the effect of a deliberate and considerate instruction on learning. The aim of the discussion is to seek specific applications of the findings about the working of the mind to teaching in various disciplines. To this end, the last part of the presentation (that can hopefully be at least 60 minutes long) will include a multi-step discussion outline that includes:

• Brainstorm cognitive constraints specific to the participant instructors areas • Identify confusion and difficulties students encounter as a direct result of these constraints or of the

models they generate • Devise intervention techniques and general assessment strategies for evaluating them • Possible SOTL projects that are likely emerge from these activities.

Using Quality Circles to Enhance Student Involvement and Course Quality in Large Undergraduate Courses Shelly J. Schmidt, Mevanne S. Parmer, Dawn M. Bohn (University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign)

Large undergraduate courses are a challenge to teach; yet such formidable classes can flourish when students' participation is facilitated. One method of generating authentic student involvement is the use of Quality Circles. First introduced by Japanese corporations in the early 1960s to enhance quality and productivity, Quality Circles (referred to here as Student Feedback Committee [SFC]) in an undergraduate classroom can be used as a voluntary problem-solving group that communicates student-generated feedback to the instructional team. Our objective was to implement a SFC in a large introductory Food Science and Human Nutrition (FSHN 101) course to enhance student involvement and course quality. At the beginning of each semester (Spring 2003, 632 students; Fall 2003, 114 students; and Spring 2004, 620 students), students were asked to volunteer for SFC membership by submitting a brief application addressing why they would like to participate on the SFC. In addition to a strong narrative, selection for the SFC was based on obtaining a diverse committee in terms of gender, class rank, and major or option. Each semester either 14 or 15 applicants were selected to participate on the SFC, which met three times during each semester. During all three semesters, SFC members actively shared anonymous feedback from class members, as well as provided their own personal feedback. Numerous ideas for improving instructional practices, including

Abstracts

85

85

course policies, course content, and assessment methods, were obtained and put into practice. In addition, SFC members were asked to provide the instructional team with input regarding penalties associated with student violations of course policies (e.g., late papers and missed exams). In general, for all three semesters, the survey results for the SFC members were statistically significantly higher than the class member results on all rating scale survey items (1 = not effective to 4 = very effective) using a two-sample t-test with alpha = 0.05. The SFC participants rated the overall effectiveness of the SFC as effective to very effective (average rating = 3.33); whereas, the class members rated the overall effectiveness as somewhat effective (average rating = 2.17). In general, survey results from the SFC members indicated that the SFC was rated as effective in improving the instructional and/or content aspects of the course, improving the student-teaching team rapport, and increasing student involvement/participation in the course; whereas, the class members gave a rating of somewhat effective to these same items. Suggestions for improving the effectiveness of the SFC process were discussed each semester and implemented as soon as possible. Overall, the SFC provided a continuous and dynamic feedback mechanism for the instructional team and an opportunity for class members to confidentially share their input to affect change in the course throughout the semester.

SoTL in the Discipline of Food Science Shelly J. Schmidt, Faye M. Dong (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Wayne T. Iwaoka (University of Hawaii), Grady W. Chism (The Ohio State University)

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) in the discipline of Food Science is becoming visible through the combined efforts of the members of the primary scientific food science society, the Institute of Food Technologists, and the faculty and staff members in university departments housing food science programs. The objectives of this presentation are to document the major events in the development of SoTL in Food Science and to discuss current circumstances affecting its advancement and future sustainability. IFT has had a long-standing commitment to education as evidenced by the establishment of standards for undergraduate curricula in food science since 1966 and a national teaching excellence award since 1970. More recently, a number of developments taking place within IFT have encouraged the advancement of SoTL in Food Science. These developments include: 1) approval for the formation of a special interest division specifically designed to support education-related activities; 2) formation of a task force for strategic planning for excellence in food science education; 3) formation of a task force for developing outcome-based learning guidelines for four-year food science education programs; and 4) startup of a separate web-based journal (Journal of Food Science Education, JFSE) specifically intended for food science educators in the food industry, government, and K-12 education. The Education Division was established in March 1995 through the efforts of a group of IFT members interested in advancing the educational aspects of Food Science. In 1998, several Education Division members conceived the idea of publishing an education journal that would serve the interests of IFT members involved in food science education. After much discussion, the Education Division representatives convinced the IFT Executive Committee to approve creation of the journal, with the inaugural issue published in April 2002. SoTL is also becoming visible in the Food Science discipline through the introduction of SoTL to faculty and staff at Institutions of Higher Education. Many campuses with Food Science Departments currently have SoTL initiatives underway. For example, at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), SoTL has become an important focus of the University's Teaching Advancement Board. In 2003, Dr. Lee Shulman delivered the keynote address at the Annual Faculty Retreat on Active Learning specifically devoted to SoTL. Subsequent to the retreat, a campus wide SoTL reading group was formed. In addition, in 2003, UIUC was selected to participate in the AAHEs Carnegie Academy Campus Program Cluster in the area of SoTL in Large Research Universities. Some of the current issues surrounding the advancement and future sustainability of SoTL in Food Science that will be discussed include:

1) awareness, perspective, and acceptance of SoTL in Food Science, 2) quality, value, and impact of SoTL research in Food Science, and 3) practical application and influence of SoTL in Food Science in the food industry, government, and K-12 education settings.

SoTL at the Liberal Arts Colleges David Schodt, Sheri Breen and Dolores Peters (St. Olaf College) This session will provide an opportunity for faculty and staff from the liberal arts colleges to share ideas about the particular challenges and opportunities for doing the scholarship of teaching and learning in this educational context. Correlating Student Use of Follow-up Questions with Class Performance Michael Scott (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) A preparatory course is offered at the University of Illinois to students who are under prepared for the calculus-based introductory physics sequence. The nature of the course consists of five components, four of

Abstracts

86

86

which are online: lectures, preflights, homework, and quizzes. From these four computer-based components, we are able to collect data from the students that consist of all submitted responses along with time stamps. The fifth component of the course is a weekly, two-hour class where students meet together in a discussion-style setting. In the fall semester of 2003, this class time was videotaped giving more than 300 hours of data. Thus, nearly every aspect of the students experience with the course is documented in some form or another. This talk will look at reflective, follow-up questions used in the Interactive Examples homework to see how student use of these meta-cognitive exercises correlate with their class and course performance. Possibilities and Challenges for the Next Generation of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Eden Segal (University of Maryland)

As a graduate student involved in the movement to integrate the scholarship of teaching and learning more firmly into the academy, as well as engaging my classroom, the author has an unusual perspective. Graduate students play a unique role in the scholarship of teaching and learning. As teachers, we may do the scholarship of teaching and learning in our classrooms. As students, we may be engaged with faculty who are focused on studying how to effectively teach us. Like the author, we may study and promote the scholarship of teaching and learning as a movement within a department, discipline, campus, or beyond. There are numerous possibilities and challenges for the next generation of scholars. This roundtable will offer the opportunity to share your thoughts, learn about others’ experiences, and gain support for engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning. It will be of particular interest to graduate students engaged or interested in the scholarship of teaching and learning, those who mentor graduate students, and undergraduates interested in the future of this work.

Developing and Answering Learning-Centered Research Questions about Power and Diversity with Students as Partners Eden Segal , Jo Paoletti (University of Maryland)

The authors began to collaborate through the Carnegie Academy Leadership Cluster on Sustaining the Student Voice in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. The University of Maryland is a core member in this group that works to incorporate student perspectives into SoTL on college and unive rsity campuses across the country. In the course of this work, the authors discovered several points of intersection in our classrooms. We will highlight these results, along with broad implications for SoTL based on a year of campus dialogues about student voices. We will address epistemological issues raised when incorporating students into SoTL, discuss students roles in developing and answering research questions in our disciplines, and share some challenges faced when partnering with students in this work. During the 20032004 academic year the University of Maryland held three dialogues on undergraduate perspectives in teaching and learning. First, a loosely moderated panel of four undergraduates spoke about positive and negative learning experiences on campus and answered questions from teachers faculty, graduate students, and administrators. The following semester, four students and twenty teachers used campus data from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) to launch discussions about specific gaps between students and teachers expectations. At the final workshop, four students and eight teachers related national NSSE data to perspectives on student participation in class discussions. We will discuss themes we saw emerge from the series. Incorporating students in rigorous or good SoTL projects raises crucial epistemological issues. How do we teachers know what students are learning? They are not lab animals on which we conduct pedagogical experiments. We lack, for example, a gauge to measure personal and intellectual transformations that may occur for college students in a service-learning course. Students are agents, in our case adults, who make choices that affect how they learn what we aim to teach. We focus exclusively neither on teachers perspectives, as was the case in the past, nor on emerging learner-centered perspectives that reflect systems that hold students most accountable for failures of the process. Rather, our experiences bridge a gap, highlighting the need to incorporate students as partners in learning-centered research. The authors have begun to rely on students in assessing transformations of knowledge, understanding, attitudes, and/or behavior related to issues of diversity, identity, and power. We will share pivotal educational aha! moments in two very different disciplines. Eden Segal will share experiences from a Higher Education development course, Career Planning and Decision Making, for which the backgrounds and values of a diverse group of students were central to teaching and learning. Jo Paoletti will discuss events in an American Studies service-learning course, Popular Culture, Youth and Literacy, which involves tutoring high school students and contextual reading and communication. Finally, we will address some challenges faced when working with students as co -inquirers; obstacles range from simply achieving student participation to resolving complex power dynamics created by a system in which teachers make the rules and assess the process.

Abstracts

87

87

Connectionism: The transformation of instruction Gipsi Sera (Indiana University Bloomington)

One of the first ideologies to have clear and widely applied implications for teaching came from early behaviorists like Watson (1913) and Skinner (1957). For these behaviorists, teachers maximize student learning and retention by staging highly organized environments where associations between stimulus and response pairs are obvious to students. In turn, students demonstrate learning by making observable responses that can be reinforced by the teacher. However, while the principles of behaviorism are applied in some form in most modern classrooms, it has long been criticized for its inabilities to explain higher order cognitive skills such as language acquisition, problem solving, or strategic behavior. To explain these complex cognitive processes, connectionist network models of information processing have become popular. Connectionism borrows much of its terminology from the field of neurology and proposes that the organization of our knowledge and cognitive processes are similar to a neurological framework. Based on this perspective, then, knowledge is an inter-connected network of processing elements, and learning involves modifying the connections between these elements. Further, in connectionist models, the strengths of associations are not simple relationships among pairs of elements. Instead, through the idea of back propagation, associations are formed in complex, interrelated patterns of network elements that can be strengthened through indirect connections among the processing elements. The idea that associations can be modified indirectly through propagation in a network is the main difference between the simple associations in the behaviorist models and the complex network patterns often addressed in connectionist models. The implications of connectionism for teaching are clear: Teachers should support the development of complex relationships among ideas through contiguous and frequent experiences with basic topics presented in thematic units of interconnected information. The main implication leads to a curriculum that metaphorically represents a course spiral in which topics, once introduced, are repeated in increasingly complex contexts throughout the semester. By following the spiral approach in which the same basic groups of topics are repeated, the relationships among these important course topics and the various complex contexts in which they are experienced will be strengthened, and hence more likely to be remembered. These implications of connectionism were tested in a large enrollment, sophomore level technology course. In total, four sections participated in the present study. Two sections, or approximately 60 students, were treated as the control group and presented with the existing curriculum that largely follows behaviorist principles of reinforced stimulus -response pairings. The other two sections, with approximately 60 students total were the experimental group and presented with the same material re-arranged according to connectionist principles. The study spans for approximately eight weeks until the same standardized exam is administered to all four sections and their results compared. This presentation will discuss the preliminary findings of this ongoing research as well as the nature and development of the spiral curriculum and guidelines for its application in other disciplines.

The Influence of Teaching Approaches in the University Classroom on Student Performance and Motivation Sheila Settle, Neil A. Knobloch (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

Because student motivation and performance are important for academic success, the researchers investigated how particular methods of instruction influence students motivation and performance in a university classroom. The purpose of the study was to explore the effects of teacher-centered and learner-centered teaching approaches in two university classrooms on student performance and motivation. The teacher-centered approach predominantly utilized traditional lecture methods. The learner-centered approach used problem-based learning. This was a collective case study. Grade reports and semi-structured, one-to-one interview sessions were used to collect the data for this study. Because of the limitations of time in conducting qualitative interviews, 60% (N = 12) of the accessible population participated in the study. All of the students (N = 12) were concurrently enrolled in a traditional, lecture-based course and in a problem-based learning course. Both the lecture-based course and the problem-based learning course were upper-level courses in the discipline area of food science and human nutrition. Ten of the students were seniors. One student was a graduate student and one student identified their class level as other. All of the students were female. Nine of the students were majoring in dietetics (75%), while three students (25%) were majoring in food and nutrition sciences. The students expected to receive a higher grade in the traditional, lecture -based course than in the problem-based learning course. However, the students overall mean grade was notably higher in the problem-based learning course than in the lecture-based course. The interview sessions focused on students motivational beliefs pertaining to goal orientation, task value, and self-efficacy in both the lecture-based and the problem-based learning courses. The interview questions were adapted from the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991). Regarding goal orientation, the majority of students expressed a performance goal in both the lecture -based and the problem-based learning courses. Forty-two percent (n = 5) of the students indicated a mastery goal in the problem-based learning course, compared to 25% (n = 3) in the lecture-based course. Fifty percent

Abstracts

88

88

of the students (n = 6) indicated high self-efficacy at the conclusion of the lecture-based course, while the remaining 50% indicated lowered self-efficacy. All of the students reported an increase in self-efficacy at the conclusion of the problem-based learning course. Task value beliefs did not vary between the lecture-based course and the problem-based learning course. Future research is warranted to determine if there is a relationship between self-efficacy, method of instruction or teaching approach, and performance. The relationship between goal orientation and type of instruction received should also be investigated. Problem-based learning courses should be studied in light of the specific motivational and performance outcomes they produce.

Connections: An Interdisciplinary Learning Community Morteza Shafii-Mousavi, Ken Smith (Indiana University South Bend)

Local retention efforts and national research strongly suggest that students who fail to make a vital connection with faculty, other students, and university support services early in their college life are less likely to persist past their first year of college. Leading researchers have found that the failure to make contact with others on campus (i.e., students, student organizations, faculty, and/or advisors) after entry, contributes more to voluntary withdrawal than almost any other factor. As stated by Astin (1993), Learning, academic performance, and retention are positively associated with academic involvement, involvement with faculty, and involvement with student peer groups (p. 394). In fact, many institutions, keenly aware of this fact, have initiated cohort programs, so as to make it easier for students to develop collegial relationships with one another and with faculty members. First-year students, particularly those who place into developmental-level Math and English, are at a particularly critical stage in their university career. Attrition, as related specifically to first-year students, has been documented to be as high as 30% for public, four-year institutions (Tinto, 1993). With all of the aforementioned thoughts and data in mind, Indiana University South Bend (IUSB) has initiated a Connections program, a learning community concept based upon a collaboration of Math and English with student support services and the Academic Resource Center (ARC). These constituents provide services that are identified in the literature as high-need areas for incoming students. The Connections Program, as currently designed, consists of clustering targeted sections of developmental mathematics and composition courses on a morning schedule, with an open session between the connected classes. In order to enroll in one of the targeted sections of a course, the student must enroll in a companion section of the other course. The linked Math and English courses are characterized by intense faculty interaction (with each other and with students), tutoring support, peer mentor involvement, and advising, all at hand during class time and in the shared open session between classes. In addition to the above noted strengths, this learning community design has provided the opportunity for faculty across the disciplines and the administration to discuss the needs of these and other students. Discussions have focused on the appropriate pedagogy for students and the commonalities that exist between their persistence and attrition. We will cover the benefits that have resulted for students and faculty, quantitatively and qualitatively, including the scholarship of teaching and learning. The interdisciplinary faculty continue to consider the institutional, scholarly, and pedagogical implications of the current program, and to plan future extensions of it. We will outline these results and present a brief overview of future plans, including two alternative models for interdisciplinary connections. We will invite audience members to discuss current and planned interdisciplinary learning community models at their institutions and will lead a discussion of the comparative merits of alternative models.

Sources and Severity of Stress Among Baccalaureate Nursing Students Roberta Shea (Indiana University Bloomington)

Purpose: A frequent complaint among nursing students is that they experience significant stress. Uncontrolled stress may interfere with optimum learning ability, may play a role in loss of students from the program, and at the least is an unpleasant experience. However, little is known about the sources or severity of stress among this group. In order to implement and test interventions to treat or prevent stress among nursing students it is first necessary to identify the sources and severity of this stress. Sample: A convenience sample of baccalaureate nursing students (n=200) was used to gather data on stress ratings. Each semester was tested at the same point in the semester. Methodology: Following IRB approval, a pilot study was conducted, and a focus group was utilized to examine and revise the stress tool. Data were then gathered on all represented semesters one week prior to finals, with each participant rating the severity of stress (0-10 scale) caused by various sources for that current semester. Results: Data yielded a total stress score, two subscales and scores for each stress item. Results were analyzed by semester as well as by stress item. Significant differences were obtained for: exam performance, participation in group work, performance of nursing skills and worries about being in the wrong major. Conclusions: Results will be applied in two ways: educators can alter the expectations and educational experiences of nursing students, and students can be supplied with and trained in methods to enhance coping ability. Because some sources of student stress are similar to those experienced by practicing nurses, learned coping mechanisms may enable students to function better as nurses in the future.

Abstracts

89

89

Changing Perceptions: Reflections on the Application of Sociological Knowledge to Pre-registration nursing practice Philip Shelton (University of Central England)

Sociological and policy dimensions of health and health care are important and well established components of the education of healthcare professionals including nurses. Students often have difficulty with the forms of conceptualisation in sociological and policy discourse and often express doubts about the relevance of even highly applied knowledge to their experience (Cooke,1993, and Sharp, 1995 Porter, 1996). Changes to the structure of the curriculum on the pre-registration diploma course at UCE mean that students will have the benefit of initial practice experience before they undertake the Nursing Health and Society module in future. The research aimed to explore how such experience might be effectively utilised in enabling students to apprehend practice through relevant and accessible sociological reasoning. The students comprise BSc and Dip HE in Nursing and were 420 in number. Previously the module has been delivered over a twelve week period. The teaching team comprised eight members of staff each teaching a class of 100 in teams of two. Each lecture has been written by an individual lecturer which is then taught by the team. Central to the students learning is a module guide. The module guide contains an introduction and a week by week overview of topics to be covered, reading, questions and tasks for the learning set workshops, and key terms and concepts. Aims of proposed research To examine ways student nurses make sense of applied sociological knowledge in the context of practice experience. To establish those parts of the curriculum which student nurses find most and least helpful in conceptualisation aspects of practice experience. To establish those aspects of beginning practice experience which students feel could be more usefully addressed in the sociology policy curriculum. Methodology In keeping with the exploratory nature of the study a qualitative methodology is the most appropriate to encompass the multidimensionality of health care work, by revealing the complex relationships and understandings of sociology as applied to health care provision from a variety of standpoints. A qualitative approach also reveals how perception relates to practice, by enabling respondents to map out the territory under discussion in their own terms. Focus groups are the sole method of gathering data. This method enables a group discussion in which to locate shared experiences, where spontaneous ideas and reactions from participants can be generated which can lead to previously unanticipated areas. Initially, the research involved a pilot group of students who had not been on placement prior to the module. This provided an opportunity to ensure the relevance of the questions and their order. The focus groups for the follow up cohort have taken place immediately at the end of the module This was then followed up by another set of focus groups after their place ment. References Cooke, H. (1993) Why teach sociology? Nurse Education Today 13, 210-16. Porter, S. (1996) Why teach sociology? A contribution to the debate, Nurse Education Today 16, 170-4. Sharp, K. (1995) Why indeed should we teach sociology? A response to Hannah Cooke, Nurse Education Today

15, 52-5. Decoding the Identification of Evidence in the Study of History Leah Shopkow (Indiana University Bloomington) Students who do not understand how historians use evidence are almost certain to fail at the core tasks in this discipline. I selected the simple identification of potential evidence in primary sources as the bottleneck I wanted to work on as an application of the decoding the disciplines process. When students are not adequately prepared to succeed within the discipline of history, they can catch up when they are active participants in the process, when tasks are broken down for them in the right way, and when they are given regular opportunities to practice what they have learned. Before students can use evidence from primary sources in support of arguments, they must recognize evidence when they see it. But students are often unsure what they are supposed to get out of primary sources when they read them. I decided to focus students on the collection of evidence, splitting into two the tasks that experts perform simultaneously: gathering evidence and deploying it. Through a series of exercises which built upon one another, students practiced and got feedback on gathering and deploying evidence . The question here was whether simply gathering a lot of potential evidence would lead the students to use more evidence in their papers, and if they did so, whether their papers were better for it. In this session I will report on data which enabled me to evaluate teacher strategies, gauge student progress, and uncover new dimensions of this task. Reference Grim, V., Pace, D., & Shopkow, L. (2004.) Learning to use evidence in the study of history. In D. Pace and J.

Middendorf (eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.

Abstracts

90

90

In Search of Signature Pedagogies: Learning from Lessons of Practice Lee S. Shulman (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching)

During the past several years, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has studied teaching and learning in undergraduate and graduate settings, as well as in a variety of professional preparation programs. Increasingly, we are intrigued by how particular kinds of teaching become identified with particular forms of learning. Why do certain fields develop specialized forms of teaching? What are the virtues and liabilities of signature pedagogies? How does teaching in the professions differ from teaching in the arts and sciences? What can we learn more generally about teaching in higher education from careful consideration of the role of these signature pedagogies?

Technology Fluency in the Disciplines: Weaving Information Technologies into Student Learning in the Humanities and Social Sciences Diane Sieber (University of Colorado at Boulder)

The Technology Arts and Media Program, a campus-wide interdisciplinary minor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, is taking the campus lead in defining Information Technology (IT) Fluency, co-designing new discipline -specific courses with departmental faculty, and assessing teaching and learning outcomes through its Evaluation and Research Group. This paper presents ongoing research on course design and on the efficacy of teaching and learning discipline -specific materials in an IT-rich environment. Driven by increased student use of digital media and by the growing importance of new media in many academic fields, teaching faculty face the challenge of developing new hybrid courses which combine hands-on information technology with discipline -specific critical inquiry. In humanities and social sciences fields which traditionally have not emphasized IT or multimedia production, faculty often strike out on their own with little knowledge of their colleagues activities. Drawing from the CU-Boulder Campus Education Technology Strategic Plan, and from the Planning Across the Curriculum for Technology (PACT) Initiative, the TAM Program is working with faculty to set goals for IT fluency within fields of inquiry, to design courses which balance disciplinary content and hands-on computer-based student work, and to respond effectively to assessment results. Specific examples are drawn from courses in Spanish and Portuguese, English, Architecture, Journalism, French and Italian, History and Linguistics.

Just-in-Time Teaching: Using Web-based Assignments to Inform and Modify Classroom Teaching "Just-in-Time" Scott Simkins (North Carolina A&T State University), Mark Maier (Glendale Community College)

Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) is a widely-used pedagogical teaching/learning strategy in which students respond to strategically constructed web assignments due just hours before class. Students’responses to JiTT questions provide instructors with just-in-time feedback on students’ conceptual understanding and are used to inform and modify classroom activities in the upcoming class. In this presentation we will share examples of how JiTT pedagogy is used to enhance teaching and learning across a wide variety of disciplines. In particular, we will report on a 2003 survey of JiTT users from multiple disciplines that finds: (1) students who participate in JiTT-based courses are better prepared for class, leading to more effective classroom discussions, increased student participation and overall better engagement with course concepts, (2) instructors are better able to understand the thinking processes of students prior to class, allowing faculty to make more effective and efficient use of precious class time, (3) JiTT pedagogy has a transformational effect on classroom teaching and learning, changing both the learning environment and the way that instructors teach, and (4) JiTT promotes intentional learning and teaching, helping both instructors and students to become more reflective about the learning process and developing students’ self-assessment abilities. As part of our presentation we will show workshop participants short examples of student responses to JiTT questions and demonstrate how these responses provide insight into student understanding and form the basis for learning activities in the following class. In addition, we will introduce participants to web-based resources at www.jitt.org and http://www.ncat.edu/~simkinss/jittecon that provide additional examples of how JiTT pedagogy has been used in a variety of disciplines. In the past five years the National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded five grants for development of JiTT pedagogy in six disciplines, including our own NSF project in economics. Overall, more than 300 faculty at over 100 institutions, teaching in 30 disciplines, use JiTT in their courses, and the National Science Foundation is currently funding a JiTT Digital Library project (http://www.usafa.af.mil/dfp/physics/webphysics/JiTTDL/) that will aid implementation of JiTT by bringing together JiTT resources from a variety of disciplines in a central location. As a result of participating in this session, attendees should gain a working knowledge of JiTT pedagogy and understand how it can be used to effectively promote student learning. Participants interested in adopting JiTT pedagogy in their own courses will also benefit from the extensive web resources highlighted in this session.

Abstracts

91

91

Just-in-Time Teaching: Experience Using Web-based Assignments to Inform Scott Simkins (North Carolina A&T State University), Mark Maier (Glendale Community College)

Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) is a widely-used pedagogical teaching/learning strategy in which students respond to strategically constructed web assignments due just hours before class. Students’ responses to JiTT questions provide instructors with just-in-time feedback on students’ conceptual understanding and are used to inform and modify classroom activities in the upcoming class. By exploiting the communication and instructional efficiencies provided by the web and web-based course management tools and directly linking out-of-class student academic work with classroom-based learning, JiTT promotes increased student participation in the learning process, provides students and faculty with prompt feedback on student learning, and encourages better student preparation for class. JiTT pedagogy has been adopted by more than 300 faculty at over 100 institutions, ranging from research universities to small liberal arts colleges to high schools. From an initial core of adopters in the sciences, JiTT adopters now include faculty in 30 disciplines, including economics, history, journalism, philosophy, religion, sociology, and teacher education. This poster provides a description of JiTT pedagogy, its educational grounding, and our experience with the development, implementation, and assessment of JiTT pedagogy. In addition, we will refer participants to web-based resources (www.jitt.org and http://www.ncat.edu/~simkinss/jittecon) that provide additional information on how faculty across a wide variety of disciplines are using JiTT in their courses. While JiTT pedagogy was originally developed for physics education, in recent years the National Science Foundation has supported the expansion of JiTT pedagogy to chemistry, biology, mathematics, and economics. Currently, the National Science Foundation is funding a JiTT Digital Library project (http://www.usafa.af.mil/dfp/physics/webphysics/JiTTDL/) that will aid implementation of JiTT by bringing together JiTT resources from a variety of disciplines in a central location.

Interactions Among Preservice Teachers and International Students which Contribute to Transformations Dorace Smith (Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne)

Students who enter schools of education are most often white, monolingual, and female (Clark& Medina, 2000; Clifford & Guthrie, 1988; Glazier, 2003; National Center for Educational Statistics, 1995). However, the public student population is becoming increasingly diverse (AACTE, 1999; Latham, 1999; Yasin & Albert, 1999). Students who are future teachers must learn to value the multitude of talents originating within various cultures, identities, and backgrounds (Chavez, 2003; Fried, 1995; Thomas, 1992). A lack of multicultural education assumes the non-existence of distinct cultures which dismisses one of the most important features of a child's identity. (Ladson-Billings, 1994). Researchers Varma-Joshi, Baker, and Tanaka (2004) report that an education must begin with training teachers to understand and deal with multiculturalism themselves before trying to share this knowledge with their students (p. 204). The researchers conclude that the only solution is to critically examine culture and race in order to offer every child an equitable opportunity at academic success. In practice, the difficulty of critically examining culture and race in ways other than print and of creating opportunities for students to interact with students of races or ethnicities other than Caucasian is difficult, if not impossible. One reason is that many college classrooms are made up of all or almost all Caucasian students and are taught by Caucasian teachers (Chavez, 2003). One college classroom in a midsize Midwestern university with such a make up attempted to remedy this problem by bringing guest international students into classrooms of preservice teachers. The college classroom was transformed into an international forum on topics that covered a variety of topics from world affairs to comparisons of dating habits. Five to seven international students spent about two hours in each classroom talking with approximately 25 preservice teachers. During these informal conversations, startling transformations took place. Students who were primarily from small towns and had attended white high schools grew to know students from around the world. The resulting rich international environment was evident in the discussions that ensued. The preservice teachers asked questions dealing with a variety of topics such as food, family, comparisons of educational systems, adjustments to American life, differences in cultures, race perspectives and problems, challenges moving to a new country, and perceptions of Americans. Students gained an international perspective from this short discussion. Because of the success of the project, future discussions expanded to three hours and interactions with emails are planned. Assessment was completed in a number of ways. At the conference, participants will be able to see the results of the pre and post attitudinal surveys and any correlations that might occur. They will be also able to hear parts of self reflection papers that were completed following the exercise. Bringing international students into classrooms of preservice teachers has been the practice for four semesters. Each semester, modifications to the project were made based students recommendations and on previous experience. These lessons learned will also be shared with participants.

Abstracts

92

92

What History Is Good For: Teaching and Learning History through Service Learning Michael Smith (Ithaca College)

As a teacher of college history I have encountered a paradox in my students' perception of history. On the one hand many seem to feel obliged to invoke Santayana's nostrum about the past and the need to "know" it. On the other hand, students also either explicitly or implicitly express their sense that history seems abstract and remote, lacking relevance to their own lives and experiences. Moreover, Howard Gardner has shown that pre-existing "theories of mind, of person, or of self play a major role in the ways in which [people] interpret texts about human nature." For all of these reasons, historical thinking, as educational psychologist Sam Wineburg has put it, is an "unnatural act." Of the many pedagogical strategies I have used to help render the study of history relevant and more meaningful to students, to illuminate the bias and pre-conditioning we all bring to a learning experience, and to help make historical thinking more natural, service-learning has been one of the most effective. As a strategy for interaction, service learning has tremendous potential and yet remains underutilized by practitioners and understudied by scholars of teaching and learning. The International Partnership for Service Learning has offered the fundamental raison d'tre for service -learning in any discipline: "Service learning responds to students' desire to be in the world, learning from experience as well as classes, and to put their education to use for the good of others." At some level that desire to be in the world is present in almost every student I have met. Engaging the world through service learning can illuminate historical issues (and issues from almost any discipline) in ways no classroom exercise can, whether it be the changing perception of poverty or the historical roots of political parties. As students work on their service project away from campus and then reflect on this experience (through both journal writing and in-class discussion), most students become much more self-conscious about their own learning, their own role as historical agents, and their potential as change agents. This component of reflection, for which the teacher must offer careful guidance, provides hard data about both student self-consciousness and student learning. As a teacher of a service learning course one can see the students progress up the Perry scale of cognition in ways that are quite remarkable and measurable. A student in my Wealth and Poverty in American History course titled her final paper "My Middle-Class Solipsism," a narrative of her journey from some level of dualistic thinking about poverty and the history of poverty to a commitment to integrating life and her education. In my presentation I will briefly discuss the literature on service learning, focusing on the work Ed Zlotkowski and his "service-learning matrix" that helps identify the range of student learning in such courses. I will describe the ways scholars of teaching and learning (as well as teachers) can evaluate service-learning, not just in history courses but in any discipline. Finally, I will describe my own experiences using and analyzing service learning in four different kinds of history courses and compare my outcomes with others.

The Hegemony of the Final Exam in a PBL Literature Course Jeffrey Sommers (Miami University Middletown)

Problem-based learning (PBL) is an instructional method which presents groups of students with a real-world problem to solve. Kelson and Distlehorst define problem as : any situation that inspires a goal for which there is no clear path to reach it. Within this context, the term problem can refer to creative challenges as well as difficulties to be resolved. (in Evensen and Hmelo, 168). English 124 is entitled Introduction to Fiction. The course description explains that the class will focus on the elements of the fiction writers craft: plot, setting, point of view, etc. I designed the course as an introduction to historical fiction. The central problem I posed for the students was this question:

When reading a book set in the past, how are readers supposed to know what to trust or believe, especially when on some occasions they encounter actual persons, places, events from history and on other occasions are reading about cultures with which they are unfamiliar?

The course problem was an open-ended one, a highly abstract question about reading processes to which there is no one definitive answer. In the final take-home essay exam, the students were asked to apply what they had learned about critical reading to an historical novel they had each selected individually, providing an opportunity to show what they had been doing as critical readers of historical fiction. Mario, the student in my case study, was thoroughly engaged in attempting to solve the problem with his group. I analyzed his final essay exam by tracing the evidence it offered of his thinking as previously recorded in his on-line musings in class discussions, his on-line interactions with his group as they attempted to solve the course problem, and an interview he granted to my research partner. After the course concluded, I interviewed Mario about his final exam. My study concludes that the exam stunted Mario's thought processes to some degree. While he produced a very strong essay, the rich, exploratory quality of his thought throughout the term was absent in the exam, suggesting that the powerful influence of the final exam may have forced the student into premature closure. What does that mean for the policy of administering final exams, even take-home essay exams? I don't have an answer to provide, but I do wish to raise the question. My poster will present my case study, explaining its methodology, results, and implications. Reference Kelson, Ann C. Myers and Linda H. Distlehorst, Groups in Problem-Based Learning (PBL): Essential Elements

in Theory and Practice. in Dorothy H. Evensen and Cindy E. Hmelo, eds. Problem-Based Learning: A

Abstracts

93

93

Research Perspective on Learning Interactions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 2000. Evensen and Hmelo, 167-184.

"Based on a True Story": PBL in a Literature Classroom Jeffrey Sommers (Miami University Middletown)

Problem-based learning (PBL) is an instructional method which presents groups of students with a real-world problem to solve. Kelson and Distlehorst define problem as : any situation that inspires a goal for which there is no clear path to reach it. Within this context, the term problem can refer to creative challenges as well as difficulties to be resolved. (in Evensen and Hmelo, 168). My research question was Do students in a problem-based learning (PBL) literature course read critically? English 124 is entitled Introduction to Fiction. The course description explains that the class will focus on the elements of the fiction writers craft: plot, setting, point of view, etc. I designed the course as an introduction to historical fiction. The central problem I posed for the students was this question:

When reading a book set in the past, how are readers supposed to know what to trust or believe, especially when on some occasions they encounter actual persons, places, events from history and on other occasions are reading about cultures with which they are unfamiliar?

The course was based on a familiar experience for students: the legend Based on a True Story that appears after opening credits in many movies. Clearly, the filmmakers like historical novelists expect that information to affect the audiences viewing experience. The point of the course was to explore possible answers to this very real, but abstract and messy question. In the final take -home essay exam, the students were asked to apply what they had learned about critical reading to an historical novel they had each selected individually, providing an opportunity to show what they had been doing as critical readers of historical fiction. Using a taxonomy I developed, A Map of Literary Reading Responses, I analyzed student final exams to learn to what extent they manifested critical reading responses in six of the behavior domains on the Map, the ones most closely related to the stated course objectives. Two readers read and coded the exams for those behaviors, identifying four levels for each behavior. The results suggest that significant critical reading response behaviors are present in the exams. While these results cannot be attributed to PBL pedagogy, they do demonstrate that in a literature course employing PBL, critical reading response does occur. The results are encouraging enough to justify further experimentation with PBL in future literature courses.

My poster will present my research question, methodology, results, analysis of data, and implications of the study. References Kelson, Ann C. Myers and Linda H. Distlehorst, Groups in Problem-Based Learning (PBL): Essential Elements

in Theory and Practice. in Dorothy H. Evensen and Cindy E. Hmelo, eds. Problem-Based Learning: A Research Perspective on Learning Interactions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 2000. Evenson and Hmelo, 167-184.

Policies and Practices that Support a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University Anna Soter (The Ohio State University)

One of the critical ways in which a university can support teaching in a scholarly way is through its reward and accountability system. In R1 universities, there is no question that research and publications related to research are highly valued, and ranked more highly than teaching. At the same time, of course, teaching must be at least adequate and unsuccessful teachers who are not highly successful in bringing in large funded research projects, are given short shrift. However, highly successful teachers who do not have an impressive funded research and publications record, are not generally as valued in R1 institutions as their research-focused peers. Much of the above can be attributed to prevailing attitudes as to what counts and why it counts. Furthermore, prevailing attitudes find their way into university rules and documented expectations. Attempting to shift focus to valuing teaching in the same we in which we value funded research requires, essentially, a belief and attitude shift. Attempting to institutionalize valuing teaching in an R1 setting, requires a culture shift. In our institution (The Ohio State University, College of Education), we were able to make some fairly significant moves toward such change in ways in which teaching is evaluated in our tenure and promotion document (at College Level). This is not to say that we have transformed our culture; it is, however, fair to say that having a department faculty vote to accept that we can make teaching visible in ways that research and its products (publications) are visible, is a major shift, not only in attitude, but also in how we live out those attitudes. A key working concept that helped make this shift happen was defining visible in terms of products. As with research, teaching has products that can be peer-reviewed (e.g., syllabi, lectures, web-materials, teaching materials, papers related to teaching, papers related to inquiry of ones teaching and student learning, and so on). This focus on products enabled us to claim not only visibility of teaching, but also parity with how research is evaluated by our peers (e.g., peer reviewed journals, peer-reviewed conference

Abstracts

94

94

presentations, outside peer-review of samples of published materials submitted for evaluation by colleagues outside ones institution( for tenure and promotion This paper will describe the nature of these changes to our tenure and promotion and patterns of administration documents over the past year at a major Midwest, R1 institution, as well as the processes by which they were brought about. Challenges obviously remain and test cases have yet to prove that changes that appear in our documents are reflected in the ways we actually count teaching as a form of inquiry and scholarship.

Improving Student Engagement using Electronic Classroom Polling Tim Stelzer (University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign)

Electronic classroom polling systems offer the potential to significantly enhance the effectiveness of Peer Instruction in large lectures. In addition to providing prompt and accurate feedback to the instructor, such systems also increase student participation by allowing students responses to be anonymous to their peers. Data collected by electronic polling systems can be used by the instructor to correlate individual student lecture performance with performance in other aspects of the course. In this talk, I will discuss experiences with Peer Instruction at the University of Illinois over the past several years, both with and without electronic polling systems. I will also discuss what we have found to be key components to the successful implementation of a classroom polling system and data from our current solution.

Crossing the language barrier: stepping-stones to scholarly writing and publication Martyn Stewart, Sue Thompson (Liverpool John Moores University)

From the perspective of an educational development unit with the remit of cultivating scholarship of teaching and learning at campus-level, a recurrent theme is the barrier that faculty teaching staff face with the technical language and research paradigms in education. At the broader level of communicating with the whole teaching community to disseminate news of educational developments, the key issue is usually one of exposure to unfamiliar technical language (jargon). At more advanced levels where staff are engaging in scholarly activity, either accessing the educational literature, participating in research to explore a phenomenon, evaluate the impact of a teaching innovation, or writing research reports for publication, the challenges are more often associated with exposure to epistemologies, research designs and conceptions of validity and reliability that may be unfamiliar or differ from those of their own discipline. This presentation will describe the evolution of a UK campus-wide model to promote scholarship of teaching & learning that is structured in the form of a series of stepping stones designed to ease the transition into the language and culture of the educational research environment. At the heart of this model is the philosophy of encouraging reflection through scholarly writing and publication. An account is presented of these stepping-stones. These include:

1) An in-house educational magazine designed to serve as an informal first platform to write up case-studies, reflective accounts and evaluations of teaching innovations. This magazine, which is distributed to all teaching and learner support staff in the institution, also serves as a vehicle to raise awareness of learning methods and more recently to introduce theoretical concepts and references to the educational research literature. 2) The use of awards to recognise existing developmental and research initiatives, stimulate new projects and encourage dissemination of outcomes. 3) Networking forums. Internal learning and teaching forums and conferences have, through the process of facilitating networking and debate with like-minded colleagues, played an important role in building confidence and serving as a key stimulant for encouraging writing. 4) A database designed to guide budding authors through the great volume of generic- and discipline -based educational journals to appropriate publications. 5) Collaboration with the University's School of Education to create a research centre that will harness and sustain over the long-term the developing culture of scholarship throughout the institution. Through its policy of open-access membership, this research centre will provide opportunities to staff across the university for mentoring and professional guidance on publication from published educational researchers.

Evaluations of the impact of this model have recently been conducted and findings will be presented. The issue of easing the transition into the educational research culture also formed a central focus of a series of pedagogic research workshops, and feedback from these sessions will be described. Interestingly, in all cases, the value of using metaphors and analogies to help explain learning theory concepts appear to have been highly valued in making communication accessible.

Decoding Genetics and Molecular Biology: Sharing the Movies in Our Heads Susan Strome (Indiana University Bloomington)

As professional scientists, we usually develop dynamic "movies" or "cartoons" in our minds that organize the information we currently have and help us make a guess (a hypothesis) about how the process might

Abstracts

95

95

work. We realized that we were not explicitly developing such model-building skills in our students, and that this was an essential skill for making sense of the vast array of information we present to them. To address this problem, two colleagues and I independently developed some hands-on modeling exercises (Step 3 of Decoding the Disciplines) that required students to manipulate objects to illustrate a process. We found that it was not enough for us to demonstrate biological processes; we had to help students develop the dynamic cartoons we use in our minds. Furthermore, to develop skill at this kind of visualization, students needed to use kinesthetic props. Following this modeling step, we gave students ample opportunity to practice these skills and to receive feedback (Step 4), and to use such opportunities as a tool for testing their own understanding of the process. We motivated our students through exercises that were kinesthetically appealing and gave them a sense of self-efficacy. And prior to setting the students loose on these exercises, we explicitly told them what we were trying to accomplish by having them create these models and how we hoped it would facilitate their learning (Step 5). Finally, we assessed the results of these efforts regularly across the semester, often using Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs) borrowed from Angelo and Cross (Angelo and Cross, 1993). In this session I will describe specific modeling exercises, and our assessments of their effectiveness. Reference Zolan, M., Strome, S., & Innes, R. (2004.) Decoding Genetics and Molecular Biology:

Sharing the Movies in Our Heads. In D. Pace and J. Middendorf (eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.

The Collaborative Online Research Community: from Metacognitive to Metavisual Awareness Kathy Takayama (University of New South Wales)

In the current ‘post-genomic’ era, the quantity and complexity of information create a formidable challenge for educators in the life sciences who endeavour to integrate inquiry-based teaching opportunities relevant to current research. ‘Visualising the Science of Genomics ’ (VSG)(1) was a project developed to create a collaborative online research community. VSG was designed on a ‘cognitive apprenticeship’ model, in which emphasis was placed on the process of inquiry rather than on content and outcomes. ‘Research teams’ composed of 5 students, each from a different country, collaborated on an open-ended project to analyse, hypothesise, and formulate models using a multidisciplinary approach. Participants represented a diversity of scientific disciplines and levels of study. The international and multidisciplinary composition of each research team reflected how scientific research is a concerted global effort dependent upon contributions by scientists with specific areas of expertise. The VSG approach situated abstract concepts into authentic contexts through the use of case studies and visualisations. The diversity of situations amongst different teams provided a forum for identification of commonalities and distinctions during the learning experience. Furthermore, students’ metacognitive awareness was scaffolded through careful sequencing of activities, and the very first challenge for the students was ‘what is my question?’ This approach presented a paradigm shift in traditional university laboratory-based teaching, whereby the ‘aim’ and methodology for the lesson is invariably provided to the students. Student engagement and learning outcomes were analysed using modified rubrics to examine in detail transcripts of discussion and chat sessions(2). A true sense of community and ownership developed as the temporal and geographical differences fostered a dependency on online collaboration. The sociology of the learning environment was integral to student engagement with the process and contributed toward synthesis of ideas. The process of negotiation and development of shared understanding was a conduit toward cognitive development, as evidenced by the dialogic progression within a group that resulted in continual reflection and process-oriented critical analysis. The VSG project emphasised the integration of visualisations into contextual learning. The students were able to analyse and apply abstract concepts through visual application of this abstract information. During the analysis of dialogic evidence, it became evident that visual literacy plays a significant role in student learning. Differences in the metavisual cognitive ability of the students would indeed affect their ability to interpret and manipulate visual representations of their data. As I reflected on this new twist, it became apparent that whilst chemistry educators have extensively characterised visuospatial abilities and student learning(3), this is an area seldom considered in teaching the life sciences. Students’ metavisual competence in interpretation and comprehension of visual representations, and their application of visual thinking toward problem-solving may differ significantly within the context of a project like VSG; ideas and reflections on metavisual literacy in the context of scaffolded experiential learning will be discussed.

Learning to Facilitate the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning K. Lynn Taylor (Dalhousie University), David Kirby (University of Manitoba)

Despite the uptake of the term scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) in the academic literature and in university policies describing promotion and tenure criteria, contemporary discourse reflects tensions between understandings of scholarly teaching and SoTL (Kreber & Cranton, 2000; Richlin, 2001; Shulman, 2000). Emerging from these tensions is a characterization of scholarly teaching as the interaction between

Abstracts

96

96

reflection on teaching-learning processes and subsequent action based on knowledge from theory and/or practice with the intent of enhancing the learning experiences of students (Shulman, 2002). Increasingly, SoTL is characterized by additional criteria: that ones scholarly teaching is documented in ways that are open to peer review and is disseminated for the benefit of other scholars (Hutchings & Schulman, 1999; Richlin, 2001; Trigwell, Martin, Benjamin & Prosser, 2000). In part, our intellectual struggles in articulating a working definition of SoTL may reside in the nature of scholarship itself. Beyond the essential general characteristics of scholarship identified by Glassick, Huber & Maerof (1997), the operationalization of the meaning of SoTL, like other forms of scholarship, is influenced by the nature of disciplinary knowledge (Donald, 2002; Hativa & Marincovitch, 1995) and culture (Becher & Trowler, 2001) in each discipline. Consequently, there is an emerging focus on discipline -specific perspectives on teaching as scholarship (Diamond & Adams, 1995; 2000; Huber & Morreale, 2002). These developments are critical to the development of SoTL because they situate this genre of intellectual work as integral to the scholarship in each discipline. In this context, the role of educational/faculty development specialist is changing. Increasingly, we collaborate with colleagues in defining a focus for inquiry, providing links to relevant literature, assisting with procedures for ethical approval, and interpreting data in meaningful ways. Like many aspects of our work, the complex task of facilitating SoTL is not something we were formally prepared to do. As part of a larger Canada-EC Program for Cooperation in Higher Education and Training Mobility Project involving 3 Canadian and 4 European universities, the authors are developing a course on the SoTL. Learners in this course will engage in a critical examination of readings on the nature of scholarship, on how SoTL is characterized as academic work, and how it is assessed and recognized. We are also planning to explore, though published examples, the diversity of SoTL expressed across disciplines. Woven though this conceptual development process is the design of a SoTL project by each learner, working as part of a peer review pair. Each pair will continuously evaluate the conceptual and practical development of projects, in terms of the readings explored. Colleagues participating in this 90-minute session are invited to help us create a more effective learning experience by work-shopping this course: critically reviewing its philosophical and conceptual underpinnings and the planned learning experiences. In turn, this process will challenge us to examine our own beliefs about SoTL and how it can be expressed and assessed across disciplines.

Bootstrapping Research in Computer Science Education Josh Tenenberg (University of Washington, Tacoma), Sally Fincher (University of Kent)

In this paper we present a multi-institution, multi-national model in the conduct of principled, large-scale Teaching and Learning research, building on expertise in research theory, design, and methods and supporting the motivation of practitioners to engage in high quality, collaborative, educational research. The model has been instantiated in the US and Australia. The model comprises a set of integrated activities focused on specific acts of collaborative research called experiment kits. An experiment kit is designed by an experienced investigator and details the design of a piece of disciplinary-specific educational research, from methodology to analysis, and situates it in its theoretical context (readings, case studies and further references). An experiment kit is executed by participants from multiple institutions over several countries within their local contexts. The experiment kit is initially presented at a one -week workshop. Data gathering is carried out collaboratively during the following year in the participants own institutions. During the year, participants maintain contact for problem-solving and support, forming an electronic research network, and meeting for discussion at the national CS Educators technical symposium (SIGCSE). In the following summer, there is a final one-week workshop in which participants share results, analyze data and make plans for reporting and disseminating those results. Additionally, they work to develop their own research studies, with the critique and support of other participants. The Bootstrapping model is distinctive from other similar efforts to build disciplinary-specific educational research communities. Like Bootstrapping, the Carnegie Scholars Program requires a two-year commitment, with matching intensive workshops built around disciplinary groupings, but participants work only on their own studies. The Conducting Rigorous Research in Engineering Education workshops have a single co-located meeting: participants develop individual studies, which they continue working on after the workshop, on a one-to-one basis with a research mentor. The CAEE Institute for Scholarship on Engineering Education has a mix of faculty & graduate students who each undertake individual studies that are set in the context of the investigation of a learning issue derived from their own teaching. All these models recruit participants from a local or, at most, national context. Unlike these other models, Bootstrapping is multi-national, centered on a shared piece of research. By explicitly designing for multi-national participation, we bring to the fore issues of comparability of context that must be addressed in any SoTL endeavor. With a single-institution or single-nation model, shared assumptions of cultural context are never made explicit. The inclusion of the Experiment Kit serves to create mutual dependency among participants; whilst all bring their unique perspectives, all are responsible for the

Abstracts

97

97

success of the research. This shared experience fosters spontaneous collaborations between participants that scaffolds a community of practice that will extend beyond the boundaries of the specific intervention. Acknowledgements: Part of this material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grants numbered DUE-0243242 and DUE-0122560. Any opinions, findings, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. Marian Petre worked with us on this model, and we gratefully acknowledge her significant input.

Strategies for Optimizing Undergraduate Student Success Derived from Human Cognition Research Mark Terrell (Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis)

The most important task entrusted to professors is the transfer of knowledge to promote student learning and intellectual development. College faculty are ubiquitously faced with multifaceted challenges in teaching a rapidly evolving student population. Although preparation of nearly all faculty consisted of an in-depth-study in an academic discipline, very few received formal training in teaching, learning, cognition, and memory development. The proposed reconceptualization is to utilize cognitive science for the basis in reforming contemporary science education to the same extent as biological science provides the basis for modern medicine. The science of learning is an emerging interdisciplinary field that applies cognitive -based learning theories to Strategies for Optimizing Undergraduate Student Success Derived from Human Cognition Research to enhance educational practices and uses empirical methods of science in determining their actual effectiveness on student learning. Evidence -based cognitive learning principles should lead the development of pedagogical innovations in science education to solve many multifaceted instructional challenges and to significantly increase student achievement, motivation, and long-term retention. A cognitive model of human learning is proposed to optimize teaching and learning of science that includes: the role of prior knowledge and experience, practice at retrieval, information processing theory, motivation, variability in learning and classroom contexts, metacognition, and student-centered classrooms.

Initiating and sustaining a campus SoTL program: first attempts, impressions, and results. Michael Theall (Youngstown State University)

One of the consistent findings in research (Braxton et. al., 2001; Franklin & Theall, 2001) on faculty opinions and the implementation of campus efforts in the area of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is that many faculty hesitate to become involved for three reasons: 1) they do not have initial interest in research beyond their own disciplines; 2) they do not have experience skills in educational research; and 3) they do not anticipate that their efforts will be recognized or rewarded, this despite guidelines for the assessment of scholarship (Glassick et. al., 1996; Theall & Centra, 2001). How can campus SoTL programs build a culture of appreciation for SoTL and provide faculty with the kinds of support necessary for successful SoTL work? One way is to create faculty learning communities (Cox & Richlin, 2004) that provide a collegial basis for sustaining SoTL work, and the other is to use campus resources coordinated and delivered via a faculty development office or teaching and learning center. This session will include a teaching center director and four faculty who were among the first participants in a Summer Institute for Teacher Scholars: a four-day retreat designed to provide the information and personal resources that would prompt the initiation of SoTL efforts and help to sustain those efforts throughout the academic year and beyond. The panel will discuss the design and dynamics of the institute, its immediate products, and its extended influence in the form of a faculty learning community supporting continuation of the work begun in the summer. Faculty panelists will also discuss the SoTL work that has been carried out, and how that work has evolved over time from a joint project developed during the Institute and carried out in the subsequent semester, to individual projects that are at various stages of completion. The relationship of a campus teaching and learning support unit to the SoTL projects and the ongoing faculty learning community will be outlined with respect to faculty and organizational development literature. References Braxton, J., Helland, P. A. & Lucky, W. (2001) Faculty engagement in Boyer's four domains of scholarship:

results of a national survey. Paper presented at the Faculty Roles and Rewards Conference of the American Association for Higher Education. Tampa, FL, February 3.

Cox, M. D. & Richlin, L. (2004) Building faculty learning communities. New Directions for teaching and learning # 97. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Franklin, J. & Theall., M. (2001) Faculty opinions about the scholarship of teaching Paper presented at the 81st annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Seattle WA: April 13.

Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Mearoff, G. I. (1997) Scholarship assessed. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Theall, M. & Centra, J. A. (2001) Assessing the scholarship of teaching: valid decisions from valid evidence. In

C. Kreber (Ed.) "Scholarship revisited." New Directions for Teaching and Learning # 86. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Abstracts

98

98

Developing Active Learning Skills by Instructional Design: Problems, Practices and Improvement in Teaching College Mathematics Simei Tong (University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire)

This study addressed existing problems in students' learning style and professors' teaching methods in college mathematics courses. Although it is assumed that students are willing to work hard and wish to perform well academically, and that professors care about college education and are willing to help students to learn well, there are still some fundamental problems in the teaching-learning process. Many students are accustomed to learning mathematics by filling in blanks in a worksheet. Even word problems are often solved by following examples step-by-step without understanding of the underlying reasons for each step. Well-meaning instructors often compound the problem by presenting the material in small, unconnected units that do not require students to read the text. This learning and teaching style may seem to help the student in the short run, but it leaves the student without a big picture of the concepts when he or she needs to create a method to solve a new problem. Furthermore, the students capacity for independent learning is not developed. To avoid the problems indicated above, the author designed a new teaching method in introductory college mathematics. The method helps students build active learning skill so that they are not only able to understand what they are taught but they are also able to explore facts and concepts by themselves. One of the cornerstones of this method is that teams of students present lectures on new material to the rest of the class, while the instructor asks questions if there is a need to clarify concepts or delve into the reasoning behind the steps. This forces the students who present to read the text and master the material. Another cornerstone is the weekly team work period, during which students discuss problems in teams so they can challenge and help one another. Here again the instructor acts as a coach, supervising the learning process and helping students to overcome difficulties only after they have struggled with the problems. The instructor inspires students to enjoy learning mathematics and to enjoy their role as leaders. This new method encouraged students to discover knowledge and to develop their active learning ability. After two semesters of implementation this project provides strong positive evidence regarding students' engagement in the course and their improvement as active learners. It changed both students' and faculty's attitudes towards the lower level college mathematics courses. Positive academic results encourage the author to address future innovations, such as peer evaluation of student lectures and teamwork. The author believes that her approach can easily be adapted to a variety of introductory courses in other disciplines.

Student Difficulties with Equations in Physics Eugene Torigoe (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

One of the reasons students have difficulties may be related to a confusion between algebra and arithmetic. Algebraic equations express relationships between variables, while arithmetic equations express a process to solve for an unknown. Some of the student difficulties with equations in physics may be related to arithmetic approaches to problems that require an understanding of algebraic relations. In my talk I will discuss observed student difficulties with the use of equations from this perspective.

A Marriage (?) Between the Zones: Integrative Studies, Graduate Education, and the SoTL Colleen Tremonte,Kathleen Geissler, Tricha Shivas, Jill McKay, Laura Anderson (Michigan State University)

For a sundry of well-rehearsed reasons, teaching continues to be seen as a private act, one often undertaken in the 'service' of our disciplinary communities as well as our students, but one often without benefit of a systematic body of scholarship on what teaching and learning within these disciplines look like. While the absence of such a body of scholarship has direct impact on novice and expert teachers alike (and for undergraduate learning), it is of particular consequence to the graduate student instructor who usually finds herself visibly trapped between 'zones' in the academic universe she inhabits: the authorized zone of disciplinary research that readily qualifies as 'scholarship' and the unauthorized zone of theorized teaching and learning that resists such qualification. Yet this latter zone often holds as much if not more intellectual interest for students engaged in a course of graduate study. How might the scholarship of teaching and learning help connect these zones? How might a SoTL facilitate graduate students’ ability to navigate between these zones? How might it help the graduate student ‘wed’ what she learns about disciplinary epistemologies and methodologies in her own 'course of graduate study' with her 'teaching' of undergraduate courses? How might it help the graduate student instructor theorize and apply what she learns about teaching and learning in one context to other contexts? And, finally, how might unlikely sites, such as Centers for Integrative Studies, engender a marriage between the zones? This panel reports on a pilot project at Michigan State University in which graduate student instructors from different disciplines within the humanities (history, English, and philosophy), and teaching in a university-required course on Integrative Arts and Humanities (IAH201), engaged in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Specifically, it highlights how a regularly scheduled teaching assistant seminar for the course provided a site in which experienced graduate instructors could give sustained attention to 'researchable' problems in teaching and learning a common course, in tandem with course-specific discussions on pedagogy and practice. Instructors had previous teaching experience in their respective

Abstracts

99

99

disciplinary fields, where they had initially confronted instrumental problems in teaching, including the problem of 'translating' expert knowledge (their own) for students. But each now faced new challenges when teaching outside their area of subject matter expertise. Not surprisingly, each experimented with and adapted pedagogical strategies and understandings of student learning to new 'ends' when teaching IAH201. By framing and reframing such adapted strategies into researchable questions, these graduate student instructors have begun to make visible to themselves the challenges, and the promises, of a scholarship of teaching agenda. They have begun to make visible to themselves and to their peers the possibilities of a 'marriage between the zones'. The following abstracts are for individual presentations by the panelists. Colleen M. Tremonte and Kathleen Geissler - Confronting the Zones: IAH201, SoTL, and Graduate Education

This presentation sets the institutional and programmatic contexts for a pilot SoTL project conducted with graduate student instructors at Michigan State University. We will first describe the genesis of the project, including an overview of the common humanities course (IAH201) taught by graduate students, and the institutional and programmatic structures (e.g. the Center for Integrative Studies in the Arts and Humanities) that provided a space for a pilot seminar on scholarship of teaching. We will then flag two issues that emerged as most re levant to our conversations--the general challenge of becoming a reflective practitioner in the context of graduate study (moving between the zones), and the particular dilemma of adapting 'discipline -grounded' pedagogical strategies to inter-disciplinary contexts. Three graduate students will report on their individual scholarly research in teaching and learning in the IAH course. Tricha Shivas - Role Playing in Teaching IAH201: Uses and Limitations One of the main functions of a good humanities course is to help broaden the students' world views. Role playing exercises are extremely useful tools for teachers in providing students with the skills necessary to examine the circumstances faced by those in the past, developing creative methods for addressing complicated problems that they may encounter later in life, and increasing empathy for others situated in oppressed situations in the U.S. and around the world. I will discuss two different types of role playing exercises, the self-analysis exercise and the other-analysis exercise, as I have adapted them from teaching philosophy courses to teaching IAH201. I will discuss the potential benefits and limitations of such exercises in providing students with broader world views. Jill McKay - Contesting Expectations: Small Group Work Effectiveness in IAH201 Instructors' perceptions of the effectiveness of small group work with critical analyses of texts often differ from students' perceptions, especially when instructor expectations are rooted in discipline-specific soil. By comparing my own reflections on small group work effectiveness with those of my students in IAH201, I was able to identify and evaluate what types of group dynamics and heuristics work best for producing critical analyses of historical or historically situated texts. This paper will offer one particular exercise that can be used in any cross-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary course to determine what 'kinds' of group work will produce a high level of sophistication and complexity in discussions. Laura Anderson - Cultivating Life-long Critical Thinking: IAH201 The aim of engaged critical reading is understanding, two characteristics of which are the ability to relate concepts to something one finds personally valuable and the ability to apply concepts to new practical situations that one encounters. One way of engendering/fostering such understanding is to help students see that all knowledge is produced by a dialogue or interplay between theories or claims, questions, revised (or discarded) theories or claims, and new questions. In this paper I will discuss specific strategies and assignments that support students seeing this dialogue at work in IAH201 documents, and then also be able to apply this realization to any field of knowledge or inquiry.

(En)Countering Cultures: Engendering SoTL in Graduate Education at Michigan State University Colleen Tremonte, Mary Clingerman, Jennifer Hood, Emily Klochenkemper, Jeanine Mazak, Kathleen Geissler, (Michigan State University)

Although the scholarship of teaching and learning enterprise has made substantial in-roads in various disciplinary and professional communities, a number of 'cultural' barriers continue to hinder the same type of work from taking hold in graduate education. Certainly, the disciplinary focus of graduate programs' curricula and of professional communities biases towards research constitute two such barriers. Even programs that intentionally seek to prepare graduate students for teaching in the field through specific courses or seminars (e.g. teaching history) must be attentive to these pressures. In addition, university-sponsored teaching training programs often constitute another barrier. Seeking to provide TAs with the "skills, policies, syllabi, and assignments" they are thought to need when they enter the classroom, such programs are usually grounded on the assumption that teaching is a skill that can be acquired by the proper training rather than the proposition that teaching and learning is intellectual work deserving of study. Within such 'cultural' contexts, teaching is configured as disconnected from the graduate student's 'real work' in the academy. How might we circumvent such institutional, professional, and disciplinary cultural barriers? How might we provide an additional space in which graduate students would be encouraged to approach teaching as a worthy object of study--not just as a question of instrumental instrumentality? How might the scholarship of

Abstracts

100

100

teaching make use of existing institutional or programmatic frames of support in order to change the contours of what is a warrantable scholarly research agenda in graduate education across 'cultures'? Participants in this roundtable (graduate students in English, philosophy, rhetoric, and history; graduate faculty; and, university administrators) will discuss their work in a pilot project at Michigan State University that seeks to engender a SoTL ethos within graduate education by working within an already existing frame of support--a weekly seminar between graduate students teaching the university-wide integrative humanities course (IAH201) and the faculty of record. Because this seminar is a required component of the teaching assignment, it provides an institutional site in which to meet—one of the key factors in changing the culture of graduate education. Additionally, because each participant in the SoTL FOR seminar has previous experience in teaching the course, we have an established context in which to place the study of practice. Not surprisingly, a series of questions and challenges have emerged during our conversations, some expected, others not. Among the former are questions concerning teaching in general and the scholarship of teaching writ large (reflective practice, pedagogical knowledge, and research methodologies). Among the latter, however, are questions of acculturation and socialization that we believe fruitful line to pursue in an effort to (en)counter cultural barriers to SoTL in graduate education. The participants in the roundtable will discuss—and will invite others to as well—some of the following questions:

• What were the individual 'projects' initially undertaken by the graduate students in this seminar, and how did they change over time? How did this experience affect individuals? What is the role of reflective practice in this work, if at all?

• How does one negotiate the process of framing and reframing a question in teaching and learning for research? How does one negotiate questions of methodology and research?

• Is there an advantage to engaging in this work in cross-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary contexts? What are the implications of graduate student instructors connections forged in the context of teaching an integrative course outside of respective disciplinary homes and training?

• What are the challenges of undertaking a scholarship of teaching and learning project concurrent with undertaking disciplinary research? What are the very real pressures on graduate students who undertake SoTL? How does one balance SoTL with other types of scholarship when enrolled in a course of graduate study?

• How might graduate programs and institutions best support this work, if at all?

Student Learning and the Scholarship of Teaching/Learning Keith Trigwell (University of Oxford)

A variety of models of the scholarship of university teaching have been advocated since Boyer first proposed that the scholarship of teaching be considered as one of four forms of scholarship associated with university practice. These models have evolved from theoretical and empirically based analyses, and have as their core value concepts as diverse as reflection, communication, pedagogic content knowledge, scholarly activity and pedagogic research. They tend to take aspects of scholarship rather than of teaching as their starting points, and to give priority to the construction and critical review of the knowledge base for teaching. In this address I focus on a conception of the scholarship of teaching/learning that aims to accommodate current teaching/learning thinking while remaining supportive of the aims central to the project of developing a scholarship of teaching and learning.

Higher Education in the Flux of the Information Superhighway Emmanuel Udoh, David Erbach (Indiana University - Purdue University)

This paper considers the impact of emerging information technology on teaching and learning at higher education. Though agricultural and industrial ages caused major educational changes in USA, never before has an age the prospects of radical transformations in the educational system like the evolving information age. From the elementary to the tertiary educational levels, we are witnessing an explosion in the mechanisms and tools available for implementing and supporting new educational opportunities.

Latest Internet and web technologies are modifying traditional delivery system of learning by offering new means of communication and interaction. With the emergence of e -learning, fresh questions are surfacing: will the four walls dissolve, what is a virtual professor, which courses will go online or not ? Many universities are now having a mixed program of traditional and online teaching, while some like University of Phoenix are fully online. Big corporations are switching over to virtual professors because of investment and effort it takes to set up customized learning environment. Without question the traditional method of teaching and learning is at crossroads. This paper examines some approaches corporations are using to educate employees that exploit the e-learning techniques, which are being offered as alternatives to traditional practices in higher education. It looks at some of the certification drives among the online computer schools. It also delves on some developments in graphics and artificial intelligence that potentially can replace real professors with virtual professors. Ultimately, the web delivery of these emerging technologies are particularly potent and attractive to higher institutions, hence the present flux or ferment at the tertiary educational level.

Abstracts

101

101

Student-centered Learning and Changes in the Accounting Profession: Impact on a Classroom Project Ingrid Ulstad (University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire)

As is education, the accounting profession is undergoing major changes. Skill requirements for practitioners are changing significantly. This shift is not so different from that in academia where passive, lecture -centered teaching approaches with lower-level required cognitive outcomes are being replaced with active, student-centered learning approaches with higher-level expected cognitive outcomes. Changes in the two fields actually parallel and reinforce one another. A survey of business students at a regional Midwest university indicated that accounting students are aware of needed professional traits, but do not necessarily have them. If the future accounting profession requires abilities similar to those identified as right-brained traits and higher-level cognitive skills, classroom settings must develop them. My course syllabus states: Most importantly, when you finish this course you should be able to look at accounting information like financial statements and really understand some of what you are looking at. You should be able to visualize the organization and how it is doing. Academically and professionally, this is a reasonable goal. Unfortunately, this course can get bogged down in necessary terminology and rote activities. In an attempt to overcome this, I created a semester long project which involved playing a short game of Monopoly and creating financial statements. It failed. Instructors frequently focus on material coverage when developing curriculum and course content. Even as course goals are developed, the focus is on what must be taught to achieve these goals. The focus is not on student learning--how students learn material and what levels of performance demonstrate achievement of these goals. The typical approach to teaching is to ask first, what must be taught and why, and secondly, how one will teach the material well. Improvements usually come in the form of innovative teaching practices. Mine was innovative. Fortunately, a leap occurred in my understanding of the difference between teaching and learning. I translated my knowledge of best business practices to best educational practices. In business, before efforts and monies are committed to providing a product, research is conducted into the needs and (life) styles of intended users. Research results determine the product content. Only afterwards are the logistics of production and delivery determined. This should be no different in education. One should ask first, what must be learned and why, and secondly, how will students learn the material well. So, in education, before efforts and time are committed to teaching topics, research should be conducted into the needs and styles of the students. Research results should determine the topic content. Only afterwards should the logistics of production and delivery be determined. With this in mind, I revised my project. I incorporated questions and activities guided by Blooms Taxonomy. Was the project now successful? Student feedback and grades indicate it was. Was this project a significant learning experience? Yes, but in the long run probably more so for myself than for my students.

Evaluation of Dissemination of Peer-led Team Learning (PLTL) and Formation of a National Network Embracing a Common Pedagogy Pratibha Varma-Nelson (Northeastern Illinois University), Leo Gafney (National PLTL Project)

In 1999 the leadership of the Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) Workshop Project was awarded a National Dissemination grant by NSF. A central component of a four tier plan for dissemination of this project was the Workshop Project Associates (WPA) mini grant program that was established to facilitate new implementations at a variety of institutions nationwide. In addition to modest start -up funds of up to $5000 per course the program provides mentorship by senior faculty in the project to ensure successful implementation through incorporation of the critical factors identified through evaluation, that are necessary for successful adoption of the PLTL pedagogy. To date over 85 WPA grants have been awarded to faculties from several disciplines in the sciences. WPA recipients submit end-of-the project reports that provide information on the success of their implementation and evaluation of their implementation and gains in student achievement. These documents contain useful information about what makes some implementations successful while others achieve only limited success. This paper will present preliminary results of a study conducted to look at the question: What is required for a new approach to teaching and learning to be successfully introduced and then to be established as a standard part of a faculty’s and an institution’s teaching/learning practice? The question has three aspects. Using data from the WPA reports a study was undertaken to determine the success of this approach to project dissemination and initial implementation. The second part of the research question relates to institutionalization. Analyzing the WPA implementation and data from other PLTL sites the study is testing a set of critical success factors for institutionalization. A third aspect of the study involves an analysis of the model itself as a set of criteria for assessing institutionalization in general. This study grows out of more than eight years of PLTL evaluation activities that have generated a great deal of data and insights about the pedagogy. Factors necessary for a new approach to teaching and learning to become established as a standard part of a faculty’s and an institution’s teaching/learning environment will be discussed.

Abstracts

102

102

Designing and Assessing Problem-Based Learning Assignments in the Humanities Ellenmarie Wahlrab (Miami University Middletown)

Problem-based learning has as its focus an authentic problem for students to explore. What humanities-related problems will be perceived as authentic to students? And what does assessment look like in a problem-based learning environment in the humanities? This poster presentation will respond to these questions in the context of the first-year English curriculum. This presentation will address the dual challenge of developing a composition course around a productive problem that students perceive as relevant while supporting the writing development goals of the course. In a course on composition and literature, students were asked to respond to the question, What does it mean to be American? Students read essays, poems, short fiction by minority American authors, reportage on an aspect of the American experience, and a novel by a Japanese American author set in Hawaii. Students each wrote three literature essays and a final reflective essay revisiting their response to the course question. The curriculum was designed to complicate the central question through iterations of the query embedded in increasingly complex assignments. Throughout the course, PBL groups responded to a sequence of challenging questions ranging from the (relatively) straightforward What is American food and how can the class taste it? to What is their America? where students responded through selecting a sub-group of Americans and did ethnographic research to answer this question for the group they selected. The poster will illustrate the sequencing of individual essay and PBL group assignments that supported the development of student writing and meaning making. An overall schematic will be on view that offers an approach to balancing group and individual evaluations. Perhaps the largest impact this course had on my teaching was how the PBL projects called forth the articulation of specific goals by which to assess student work. Detailed rubrics for each PBL assignment will be displayed as well as critiques of each rubrics usefulness.

The Play-Doh Project: Making Thinking Visible Mark Walter (Oakton Community College)

Many projects in science visualization attempt to move an image from the instructor's mind to the student's mind. The goal of the Play-Doh project is to move an image from the student's mind to the instructor's mind by asking students to create models of their images of chemical concepts. The central question for this session is: What do we know about how students learn and visualize abstract concepts? A presentation of the Play-Doh project will catalyze a discussion about cognitive psychology and mental model repair

Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Research at Oakton Community College Mark Walter (Oakton Community College)

For the past five years, five faculty members from Oakton Community College have been team-teaching an interdisciplinary undergraduate research course. The disciplines included are Chemistry, Biology, and Medical Laboratory Technology. Forty-six students have completed the course. The research is interdisciplinary and authentic (publishable). The students work in teams and the faculty members provide mentoring and expertise. Collaborations have been established with Northwestern University, the Chicago Botanical Gardens, and the Argonne National Laboratory. Implications for re-vitalizing an introductory science course will be presented. The undergraduate research course is among the first in the nation at a community college. The paradigm at community college's is to teach and leave research to the four-year schools. We have changed this paradigm by establishing a successful undergraduate research experience at a community college. We have learned many lessons during this process. Our primary goal is to provide a research experience which is authentic, publishable, and tractable. To accomplish this goal we have created collaborations with Northwestern University to study cystic fibrosis, the Chicago Botanical Gardens to study ecosystem health, and the Argonne National Laboratory to study protein evolution. Our goal for the research is for it to be interdisciplinary and so we have built the experience, from the ground up, to be interdisciplinary. The course meets for four hours a week and all faculty members are present all the time. The students are able to see the faculty members approaching the same problem from different perspectives and the students are able to see the professors problem solve right in front of their eyes. The project has re-invigorated the teaching of the faculty members and provided an inspiring and challenging experience for the students. The lessons we have learned for interdisciplinary teaching and design of a research course will be presented.

Research on Chemistry Curricular Reform in Thirteen Chicago Area Community Colleges Mark Walter (Oakton Community College)

For the past five years, the National Science Foundation has funded a project for science curricular reform in 13 Chicago area community colleges. The goal of the project was to move the first year chemistry

Abstracts

103

103

curriculum from a traditional lecture format to a student-centered format. Longitudinal evaluation has provided insights into practices which have promoted long-lasting reform. In 1997, as a result of a Project Kaleidoscope Conference at Oakton Community College, in Des Plaines, Illinois, faculty members from several Chicago area community colleges began to discuss curricular reform. The result of these conversations was the development of a consortium of Chicago area community colleges to help each other reform their chemistry curriculum. Usually, at each community college, there was one faculty member who believed there was a better way, than the traditional lecture, to teach chemistry. But individually, the work of curricular reform was overwhelming. By bringing together isolated faculty members, and forming a Chicago team, the work was tractable. A result of these early meetings was the receipt of funding from the National Science Foundation. The NSF work began in 1998 and continued until 2003. During the first two years of the project, the members of the team mentored each other in changing both the content and the pedagogy for their first year chemistry classes. The work was guided by the material produced by the ChemLinks Coalition (centered at Beloit College), and the Modular Chemistry Consortium (Centered at the University of California at Berkeley). Each faculty member kept a log book to record their efforts. These log books, as well as all course material developed and used were submitted to the project. An outside evaluation was conducted by Elaine Seymour's group at the University of Colorado at Boulder. The summative evaluation by the Seymour group included in depth interviews with the faculty members. Fifty-two experiments were performed in curricular reform. The analysis of these experiments provides findings which are valuable in curricular reform. These findings will be presented and include the power of : 1) working as a team, 2) opening the classroom door to peer review and observation, 3) perseverance, 4) administrative support, and 5) teaching with the heart. This project has significant implication for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Mark Walter is the Principal Investigator for this project and will be presenting the findings.

A Window Into Students' Learning Goals: The Learning Goals Inventory Mark Walter (Oakton Community College)

For the past five years I have been trying to implement curricular reform to promote higher order thinking skills in my students. For the first year I felt like I was putting a square peg into a round hole. I felt a great deal of disconnect between my teaching goals and the learning goals of my students. When I saw the Angelo and Cross Teaching Goals Inventory, I thought it could be a useful tool for discovering the students' learning goals. The Teaching Goals Inventory was modified by changing the word "Teaching" in the title to "Learning" and the word "teacher" in the 52 question to the word "student". For the past five years this Learning Goals Inventory has been given to students, at the beginning of the semester, in my general chemistry, organic chemistry and biochemistry courses. The results of the inventory rank students learning goals in the areas of higher-order thinking skills, basic academic success skills, discipline -specific knowledge and skills, liberal arts and academic values, work and career preparation, and personal development. By using the Learning Goals Inventory, I am more aware of my students' learning goals. By being aware of their goals, I can adjust the activities of the course. In some semesters the Inventory shows a strong preference for higher order thinking skills, in other semesters the preference is for work and career preparation or discipline specific knowledge and skills. In those semesters where there is a strong preference for higher order thinking skills, I test out new pedagogies that are designed to promote higher order thinking skills. In those semesters where there is not a strong preference for higher order thinking skills, I employ only those strategies which I have tested previously and which I believe are successful in promoting higher order thinking skills. As a result of using the Learning Goals Inventory, I feel more connected to the students and their learning goals. At the end of the semester the students are given a tailor made evaluation instrument (based on Elaine Seymour's Student Assessment of Learning Gains Instrument) which includes additional questions about the student's individual learning goals, as established at the beginning of the semester by the Learning Goals Inventory. At the end of this evaluation instrument, students are asked to write a reflective paragraph to tell how at least one of their learning goals was met, using specific examples from the course.

Instructional Improvement in Academic Libraries: Professional Practices and Opportunities for Collaboration Scott Walter (Washington State University), Lisa Hinchliffe (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

For over a century, librarians have contributed to the educational mission of colleges and universities by providing instruction to faculty, staff, and students on the use of information resources. The manner in which this instruction has occurred has evolved in response to broader changes both in the information environment and in the institution of higher education. Over the past decade, there has been a sharp increase in the amount of direct instruction provided to faculty, staff, and students by librarians, and greater attention has been paid to the conduct and quality of instructional services in academic libraries. Despite the increased

Abstracts

104

104

importance of instructional responsibilities for many librarians now employed in academic libraries, very few librarians are prepared to teach as part of their professional education. Moreover, there has been little research on how librarians improve their teaching skills, or on how such skills are evaluated as part of the formal review of professional performance. The purpose of this study is to identify: (1) the activities that academic librarians pursue in order to become more effective teachers; (2) the ways in which library administrators have incorporated assessment of instructional performance into formal methods of professional review; and (3) the opportunities that attention to instructional improvement among academic librarians provides for substantive collaboration between academic libraries and centers for teaching and learning on campus. This study builds on the existing literature examining the professional education of academic librarians, but is unique in addressing:

1) the connections between programs designed to help librarians become more effective teachers and broader programs of instructional improvement aimed at college faculty, as a whole; 2) the need to provide a broad overview of emergent practices in instructional improvement and assessment among academic librarians; and, 3) the elements of organizational culture that reflect the commitment among an academic library staff and administration to a "culture of teaching" as part of academic librarianship.

The Center for Authentic Science Practice in Education (CASPiE): Applying Disciplinary Research in the Undergraduate Laboratory Gabriela Weaver (Purdue University), Pratibha Varma-Nelson (Northeastern Illinois University), Fred Lytle (Purdue University), William Boone (Indiana University Bloomington)

We are in the early stages of establishing the Center for Authentic Science Practice in Education (CASPiE) as a collaborative effort between Purdue University, the University of Illinois, Chicago, Ball State University, Northeastern Illinois University, and four community colleges and a comprehensive university in the Chicago area. CASPiE is intended to serve as a curriculum reform model for involving larger numbers of entering undergraduates in research experiences as part of their normal laboratory coursework. The main objective of this Center is to create a laboratory course sequence that will provide students with learning experiences that involve current research, utilize advanced instrumentation, and engage students in a process that parallels authentic research practice. Students will have the opportunity to develop an experimental procedure, collect data using advanced techniques, collaborate with peers in science working in geographically distant locations, and present their findings to both local peer groups and larger audiences. The experiments teach fundamental chemistry skills and concepts, but the topics are interdisciplinary, involving research projects from Chemistry, Biochemistry, Chemical Biology, Medicinal Chemistry, Food Science and Chemical Engineering. The goals of the Center are supported by two important tools: peer-led team learning (PLTL) and networked instrumentation. The online instrumentation resource will provide students with remote access to automated, research-level instrumentation. These instruments will be available to students in all of the Center institutions, and will be dedicated solely to teaching purposes. The PLTL model is being used to provide students with a collaborative research environment and the necessary mentoring for getting through a research experience. This is an extension of the traditional lecture-based PLTL approach. The nature of the Center activities is fundamentally about integrating research with undergraduate education. Each research project conducted by students as part of the CASPiE laboratory courses will be contributing to the development of new scientific knowledge because the students will be doing authentic research. Therefore, the laboratory experiences will advance discovery through chemistry research while also promoting new methods for learning. The CASPiE collaborative will also enhance the infrastructure for research and education at all of the partner institutions by providing access to advanced instrumentation where it would otherwise not exist and by creating a curriculum that can be shared among the partners. In this paper, we will describe the structure of the CASPiE collaborative, including descriptions of experiments and of the instrumentation network. We will describe the implementation strategies, including the PLTL model. Finally, we will give initial results from evaluation of the project goals.

Enhanced Student Learning: Using Assessment Data to Drive Faculty Development Catherine Wehlburg (Texas Christian University)

This poster will outline ways that the Center for Teaching Excellence is working with faculty to enhance learning by using assessment of student learning outcomes data as a guide for teaching-related faculty development decision-making. Literature suggests that using assessment results to inform faculty development discussions makes better use of both assessment data and the time spent in faculty development. The Office of Assessment and the Center for Teaching Excellence at Texas Christian University have collaborated for two years on presentation of workshops, but not until this year have these office collaborated on working with individual faculty and departments to increase student learning by incorporating departmental level and class level assessment results into the faculty development decision making process.

Abstracts

105

105

This poster will outline the steps that we have taken and highlight some of the positive changes that are occurring.

Preliminary Results Suggest that Students in an Online Introductory Biology Course Perform as Well as Students in a Traditional Classroom Offering of the Same Course. Nicole Turrill Welch (Middle Tennessee State University)

Many colleges and universities are increasing their offerings of online courses to meet the demands of enrollment and the schedule demands of traditional and, especially, nontraditional students. I was challenged to design and teach an online, one -semester, introductory biology course for non-science majors. My first concern when developing this course was how to deliver the heavy content of a biology course electronically in ways that appealed to multiple learning styles. My second concern was how to limit the amount of time that commuter students, those most likely to be taking the course, had to spend accessing university servers from remote sites. I addressed these concerns by programming a CD-ROM of lecture presentations complete with visuals and audio files and short written transcripts for each visual. The students also met on campus once a week for laboratory activities. I obtained permission to compare student performance in my online and traditional classroom offerings of this course. I wanted to test the hypothesis that there was no difference in student course performance in the online section versus the traditional sections. I gathered data from my Fall 2003 courses, when I taught one traditional class (four sections combined totaling 98 students) and one online class (one section of 24 students) and used the same assignments, online quizzes, and exams in both formats. The main difference between these formats was lecture delivery. I delivered the lectures via PowerPoint presentations in the traditional classroom whereas students in the online section received the lectures via the lecture CD-ROM that I programmed. Data collected were exam scores (%), course grade (%), student acquisition of knowledge measured using a 20-question pre-test and post-test, and composite ACT scores for students who received a letter grade in the course (i.e., did not withdraw). A comparison of means for exam scores and course grade showed no significant differences between the traditional and online sections. Analysis of covariance revealed that lecture format did not influence the final course grade, but study skills, assessed as exam 1 score, did. Analysis of covariance also demonstrated that lecture format did not influence student acquisition of knowledge, but prior knowledge of biology, assessed as pre-test score, did. Finally, a third analysis of covariance revealed, again, that lecture format did not influence student acquisition of knowledge, but both prior knowledge of biology, assessed as pre-test score, and composite ACT score did. I conclude from these preliminary results that student performance in this introductory biology course is independent of lecture delivery method. It concerns me that grades in my sections of this course, regardless of course format, appear dependent upon the study skills and knowledge of biology students gained from their primary and secondary education. Composite ACT score correlated significantly (P<0.001) and positively with pre-test score, post-test score, all exam scores, and course grade. It seems that if a foundation of good study skills is not established during their primary and secondary education, students have a difficult time overcoming this deficiency in my sections of this course.

Promoting Faculty Research into the Scholarship of Learning and Teaching Stephen Wilhoit (University of Dayton)

Five years ago I was appointed a Teaching Fellow at the University of Daytons Ryan C. Harris Learning Teaching Center (LTC). My task is to design and implement faculty development projects and to promote writing across curriculum. Even before taking on this job, I suspected that many of my peers were doing interesting, but largely unacknowledged, research into the scholarship of learning and teaching. From my own experience as a classroom teacher, informal conversations with my colleagues, and interactions with peers during teaching workshops, it became clear that most faculty engage in informal, reflection-based research on teaching and learning every term. At one time or another, most teachers try to answer questions central to our profession: why do some classes work well and others don't, why do students respond to certain instructional strategies and not others, what am I trying to accomplish in the classroom, why is it that teaching does not receive the attention and recognition it deserves? Unfortunately, the results of these investigations almost always remain private. As a Teaching Fellow, I wondered how I could encourage faculty to undertake more formal studies of teaching and learning and to share their findings with others. One answer emerged a year ago with the inauguration of a new on-line campus publication--The LTC Working Papers on the Scholarship of Learning and Teaching. The Working Papers invites faculty from across the curriculum to submit for peer review works-in-progress that address on the scholarship of learning and teaching. Every submission receives editorial commentary and a list of target publications the author(s) might consider as they revise their work for submission elsewhere. Many of the working papers are also posted online for all faculty to read or review. The LTC Working Papers promotes faculty research into the scholarship of learning and teaching in several ways: it encourages faculty to undertake research projects, it offers faculty a venue to air their ideas

Abstracts

106

106

and get meaningful review before they revise their manuscripts for submission elsewhere, it promotes collaboration among faculty members, and it raises the visibility of learning and teaching on campus. In my session, I will explain how The LTC Working Papers came into being, how the submission and review process works, how we help faculty find publications that might be interested in reviewing their work, how we staff the site, and how we fund our efforts. I will explain how schools can duplicate our efforts and avoid some of the problems we encountered. Those attending the session will obtain a set of directions for establishing a site of their own and copies of the documents we use to solicit and evaluate manuscripts.

Each One ,Teach One: Modeling Best Practices When Teaching Technology Katherine V. Wills, Debbie Sexton (Indiana University Purdue University, Columbus)

These co-presenters, a student and her mentor, first describe how they wrote an internal grant and secured funds to develop an online site for the IUPU-Columbus Writing Center and the W206 Creative Writing Class. The instructor models best practices of teaching technology and writing. These student-generated web sites enhance student learning by archiving resources for future referencing while encouraging innovation with new media. Secondarily, the presenters will assist attendees in designing a simple template for a course-specific archive of their own with user-friendly FrontPage or web-authoring software and the assistance of the Office of Professional Development. This model transforms teaching by encouraging undergraduates to lead class discussion as co-teachers. Also, this model shows how the instructor combines the classroom assignments with campus programs in the Writing Center. The Writing Center was one of the first virtual locations at IUPU-C to offer student web authoring. Instructors and their students from any discipline can learn to do the following in one semester with a little assistance:

• Conceptualize a Mission Statement that directs their work - www.columbus.iupui.edu/writingcenter/ • Critically analyze and apply resources and web content - www.hopetillman.com/findqual.html • Apply new media techniques - www.columbus.iupui.edu/writingcenter/writingresources.html • Innovate and integrate information technology applications • Make their work visible to a global audience -

www.columbus.iupui.edu/writingcenter/creativewriting.html • Archive their excellent work through the Literalines student literary magazine and the Awards page

for posterity - www.columbus.iupui.edu/writingcenter/literalines.html and www.columbus.iupui.edu/writingcenter/2003awards.html.

Is It Scholarship? Is It Spoon Feeding? The Theory/Praxis Dynamic in a Campus SoTL Program Arlene Wilner and Anne Law (Rider University)

This presentation offers an overview of the benefits, tensions, and challenges implicit in the BRIDGE model for fostering a campus-wide SoTL initiative. We will explain and illustrate successes and challenges, exemplifying how the theory/praxis connection is made through specific projects drawn from the last three years, how carefully selected readings can establish common ground and also clarify differences among diverse fields, and how going-public events can be designed to minimize cynicism and enhance openness. Structured on the CASTL model, BRIDGE (Bridging Research, Instruction, and Discipline -Grounded Epistemologies) draws on the insights of Thomas Angelo and K. Patricia Cross that effective classroom assessment techniques are also teaching strategies. Reflecting on the last three years, we find that projects have assembled themselves into a few large (and often overlapping) areas, revealing pedagogic affinities across disciplines in ways we did not anticipate. A cross-campus project like this presents two kinds of challenge, one internal to the annual cohort of participants and one associated with reaching out beyond the group: 1) The central mission within the BRIDGE faculty groups has been helping participants develop projects that will enable them to both assess and improve their students' learning in a selected context and then to assess their own progress and plan next steps as teacher-researchers. Helpful in this regard has been BRIDGE's simultaneous focus on discipline -based classroom research and its multi-disciplinary workshop structure: While the former allows faculty to connect pedagogy with the epistemologies that underlie their own training, the latter confers a number of advantages (e.g., analogic thinking and a non-threatening atmosphere for airing views on controversial topics, such as relationship of qualitative to quantitative data) that enhance both faculty satisfaction and the success of classroom research. 2) A significant challenge that emerges as faculty "go public" with their work via campus colloquia is responding to two sorts of resistance-skepticism about the scholarly nature of classroom inquiry projects as a genre and defensiveness expressed as a conclusion that the take-home message of SoTL is that we need to "spoon feed" our students. Therefore, "going public" events are occasions not only for sharing and assessing individual projects but also moments for educating colleagues about the benefits of reflective teaching and systematic classroom inquiry. Because BRIDGE activities begin mostly with praxis (i.e., ideas for structuring classroom-inquiry projects), it helps to find ways of "backing into" theory. BRIDGE has done this in three ways by attending to a range of campus constituents: 1) BRIDGE participants 2) prospective attendees at going-public events, and

Abstracts

107

107

3) campus experts in learning theory who provide a theoretical lens through which the projects might be viewed. Outside experts have also played key roles in campus acculturation. Overall, our goal for this conference session is to explain and exemplify aspects most easily adaptable by other campuses.

Raising Environmental Awareness through Service Learning and Ethnography Tracie Wilson (Indiana University Bloomington)

This paper examines environmental literacy within the context of service learning courses. In addition, I consider how incorporating ethnographic methods can enhance learning in such contexts. This combined approach is especially useful in making students aware of how culture shapes and frames our ideas about the environment and nature. The information that I draw from comes primarily from my experience of teaching a service learning class at Collins Living and Learning Center for the past four years. The class entitled, Animals, Society, and Animal Advocacy, focuses on the roles that culture plays in shaping human attitudes toward animals. A central focus in this course is on the cultural constructions that impact environmental issues and have direct bearing on animals such as the connection between habitat loss and urban sprawl and the negative impacts of factory farming. Key texts within the class draw from environmental anthropology, folklore, and communication studies, shedding light on how worldview influences human perceptions of nature. A central objective in this course is for students to understand the role that culture and worldview plays in how people think about the environment and how this facilitates certain courses of action. Through this process students become more aware of their own cultural constructions and worldviews and also learn about the perspectives of others, a key component in understanding the roots causes of environmental conflict. This process is facilitated by discussion-oriented class sessions made possible by relatively small class size (15-25 students). I encourage student participation by asking students to prepare written discussion questions over the readings assigned for each class and by requiring a written journal entry reflecting on the readings and service each week. Students also become more aware of important roles that cultural perspectives and individual experience play in influencing ideas through an open-ended interview project with another individual outside of class. This assignment is based on one of the fundamental tools which ethnographers use to gather information about a group or individual. Ethnography, the detailed study of a small group or individual within a specific cultural context, offers insight into how cultural constructions impact the way individuals see the environment and their place within it. Both ethnography and service learning entail “field work,” and therefore require that students confront real situations as they appear on the ground. Such encounters have the added benefit of making students aware of the complexity of issues—a key step in overcoming simplified modes of thought and a significant step in fostering environmental awareness, as well as critical thinking s kills. In assessing the effectiveness of this combination of approaches, I refer to student comments and examples of student work. Efforts to develop environmental literacy often focus primarily on the environmental sciences, overlooking the cultural components that frame human concepts of environment and nature, which are equally important. Incorporating service learning and ethnographic methods provides a useful means to cultivate lifelong learning and environmental concern in students and, in the process, fosters civic engagement.

Does Enhanced Student Interaction Play Into Higher Achievement and Satisfaction?: Assessing the Impact of Active Learning on Outcomes Bruce Wilson, Kerstin Hamann, Philip Pollock (University of Central Florida)

Over the past several years, instructors have been making increased use of asynchronous online discussion groups as complements to face-to-face lectures. Previous research suggests that student interaction is more pronounced in gender-balanced groups, in which students are more likely to post responses to other groups members, than in gender-skewed groups, in which students natural tendency to make independent, non-interactive statements is more manifest. It is still an open question, however, whether learning outcomes are related to levels of online student discourse on substantive topics. Does enhanced interaction play into higher student achievement and satisfaction? In this paper we study this relationship. Our discussion group data consists of student postings to 50 discussion groups in three different upper-level comparative politics courses taught by two different instructors in multiple sections. This large data resource1,908 messages containing 14,442 statements made by 453 students permits us to gauge levels of student interaction across different group contexts. By bringing these measures together with individual-level indicators of student achievement (course grades, GPA, and honors status) as well as aggregate indicators of course satisfaction (student evaluations), we obtain a revealing first look at the relationship between the discussion group modality and learning outcomes.

Evaluation of a Campus Wide Program that Links Department Funding to Participation in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Ben Wilson (Charles Sturt University)

Abstracts

108

108

In 2004, a program was introduced at Charles Sturt University, Australia designed to improve teaching and learning across the institution by linking departmental funding to academics participation in the scholarship of teaching and learning (the model). Traditionally, Australian universities have been research focused and the model is endeavouring to develop a culture of teaching and learning scholarship by encouraging academics to participate in a range of teaching and learning activities. Because most academics are research focused, many have not interacted with teaching and learning scholarship, particularly in the science based Faculties. In recognition of this, the model allows academics to choose from a range of activities that have been selected because of their perceived ability to improve teaching and learning. Academics can choose to participate in two activities chosen from a list that ranges from participation in teaching and learning workshops and seminars, to involvement in departmental teaching development committees, awards for teaching excellence, portfolio development, research in teaching and learning, or successful publication in education journals. The model recognises that improving teaching in this way may be a slow process for some academics and that the ultimate goal of developing a culture of scholarship in teaching and learning will require some people to undertake a significant learning process themselves. While the aims of the model are laudable, there is the possibility that academics will participate purely to qualify for the increased funding. Also, even if academics participate for all the right reasons, there is no guarantee that a culture of scholarship in teaching and learning will eventually develop. Therefore, the research described here is an evaluation of the success of the model by determining academics perceptions of the activities they choose to participate in and whether, as a result of the model, they feel that they are more able to undertake teaching and learning scholarship. Through a series of focus group discussions and questionnaires, academics from a wide range of disciplines and level of experience in the scholarship of teaching and learning will present their views of the model, and those of teaching and learning scholarship. The research will then evaluate the effectiveness of the model by examining the level of participation in, and understanding of, scholarship in teaching and learning as a result of the model. The presentation will describe the model, its aims and implementation, the evaluation project, preliminary results and actions for further research.

Growing a Campus Community of Teaching and Learning Scholars: A Replicable Teaching Fellowship Program James Zimmerman, Chantal Levesque, Roger Sell (Southwest Missouri State University)

Recent institutional planning discussions have produced a plan focused on sustaining the Teaching Fellows Program (TFP) currently supported by the SMSU Academic Development Center (ADC). We discuss the implementation of a cyclic, four-stage process that would continue to support SMSU faculty interested in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). (1) Move the Teaching Fellowship Program from the current annual cycle to a biennial funding model. (2) Introduce an additional component to the TFP focused on supporting SMSU faculty with ideas related to the SoTL whose proposals have less developed methodologies. (3) Initiate institutional support for SMSU faculty me mbers who actively pursue the SoTL and are working on issues pertinent to a national audience. (4) Raise institutional awareness of successful TFP projects and highlight the sustained SoTL research conducted by faculty on the SMSU campus. The purpose of this presentation is to demonstrate how institutions can move from a typical small-grants program to a powerful teaching fellowship program that brings together effective teaching, scholarship, and learning in a collaborative and inter-disciplinary environment. Our audience includes faculty and administrators whose institutions have a small-grants program for innovative teaching that they wish to improve and link with the scholarship of teaching and learning. As a result of attending this presentation, participants will gain ideas and practices for how typical small-grants programs can be combined with scholarship of teaching and learning initiatives on their campus to benefit both student learning and a shared knowledge base for learning and teaching.

The Student Voice: Why It Matters in SOTL? Rachel Zommick, Erik Skogsberg, Carmen Werder (Western Washington University)

First, it is important to clarify the definition of the student voice as it is used through the national cluster. As one of 12 national clusters, the student voice cluster includes Western Washington University, North Seattle Community College, University of Washington, Bothell, University of Maryland, College Park, and California State University, Long beach. As the cluster leader, the distinguishing feature of Western's SOTL initiative has been its attention to incorporating the student voice. Ever since a faculty member from our Woodring College of Education (William Lay) asked in our first year of the project, “Where are the students?” - Western has waged a concerted effort to bring students into the center of our SOTL work. In partnership with Elon University in North Carolina, Western was recognized with the first AAHE "Going Public" award in 1999 for engaging students in the scholarship of teaching and learning. For more information on this alliance, see "Student Voices in the Campus Conversation," in Invention: “Creative Thinking About Learning and Teaching", Spring 2002, vol 4, issue 1 - c.

Abstracts

109

109

In the spring of 2002 at its annual Colloquium, the Carnegie Foundation named Western Washington University as one of its national “cluster” leaders. Chosen through a competitive proposal process, Western provides leadership for a group of other institutions in its cluster who are engaged with the topic of “Sustaining the Student Voice in a Campus-Wide Learning Community.” In this leadership role, Western facilitates national and international conversations on ways to partner with students as agents of institutional change. As a result, this session will examine the transformative effects of having students engaged in the scholarship of teaching and learning. The presentation will also include the sub-study that involved looking at five major communication skills and how participation in SOTL positively affected these skills. There will also be discussions on how having students as co-inquirers affects their sense of agency and self-efficacy. And finally, the director of the campus SOTL project will present her findings on the effects on students who participate as leaders in the SOTL initiative.