Idaho State University's Center for Teaching and Learning (CeTL houses faculty development services, student support services in form of tutoring, and university academic courses such as first year seminars, clustered learning, honors and college learning strategies courses. Together, the student support tutoring services of Content Area Tutoring, the Writing Center, the Mathematics Learning Center and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) provide one of the strongest assets for student success provided by any university in the country. Housing of student support services together with faculty development in one Center provides opportunity for coordination and conversations that are rarely held where these entities are housed separately. Details on all of these services are accessible through one web link at http://www.isu.edu/ctl/.

 

Faculty development options described below have been available for over three years now at Idaho State University (ISU), so this issue will help inform those who may be new to these services.

 

(1) Newsletter Nutshell Notes issues are archived at http://www.isu.edu/ctl/nutshells/index.html  . The newsletter was begun in Wisconsin in 1991 by ISU’s current CeTL Director, and issues were numbered and archived beginning in 1992. Nutshell Notes now has a local distribution of 1850 at ISU and is accessed online by faculty from many other institutions. The major use is to convey information that is immediately practical and, over time, produces a campus culture that is cognizant of current trends in teaching, learning and thinking.

 

(2) February's thematic workshops are designed by the director in consultation with faculty. The first workshop given at ISU in 2003 with 110 registrants verified the desire by faculty for such thematic campus-wide events focused on instruction. Following the workshop, additional requests resulted from ISU faculty for presenter Bob Leamnson's book, Thinking about Teaching and Learning. In 2004, our featured presenter was Dr. Barbara Millis from the United States Air Force Academy. Dr. Millis is an internationally known expert on cooperative learning and first author of Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty with accounting professor Philip G. Cottell, Jr. Once again, the authors book will be provided to ISU attendants as part of the workshop. As result of apparent need in assessment of student learning, the director invited Dr. Peggy Maki in 2005. Maki, the former assessment director for the American Association of Higher Education, presented to over 120 faculty who also received Maki's book, Assessing for Learning. This workshop provided one of the punctuated events for ISU, and created a critical mass of individuals who understood what asseement was about and the value of it in improving education. Our most recent event in February of 2006 focused on promoting higher levels of thinking. This workshop, Building and Assessing Students’ Critical Thinking Skills by Dr. Susan Wolcott, drew the highest number of attendants yet. Participants received both a copy of Developing Reflective Judgment by Drs. King and Kitchener and a pre-print of a book on steps to higher level thinking in preparation by Dr. Wolcott.

 

(3) Smaller workshops and programs offered throughout the year result from expressed need and interest. Past workshops have involved case study discussions (mostly from Teaching and the Case Method, third edition) directed by a variety of ISU faculty. Workshops done with ITRC on knowledge survey preparation and interpretation, combined workshop/support groups in writing for scholarship based on the book, Professors as Writers, by Robert Boice and a similar manual by New Mexico State University's Tara Gray. In 2005 and 2006 the Center sponsored two book discussion groups featuring The Case of the Missing Professor and This Fine Place so Far from Home. The former book is a case study book disguised as a mystery novel, and depicts faculty in difficult situations that are sometimes grim and often uproariously funny. The second is a compilation of essays written by faculty whose life path began from blue color back grounds, some of which involved poverty and great disadvantage.

 

(4) Formative survey with consultation provides some of the most outstanding benefits possible for a short investment of time. It can be the first line of defense for a faculty member in trouble or one of the best ways for effective teachers to validate successful practices. The process requires about twenty minutes of class time to complete a formative survey (http://www.isu.edu/ctl/facultydev/extras/60%20pt.htm). Our formative survey provides a profile of one's pedagogical "fingerprint." This particular survey is based on research of practices known to promote learning in both lecture-discussion and cooperative/collaborative group instructional modalities. The results are returned to the faculty member and are owned by that faculty member. No disclosure to third parties is provided by the Center. The survey results are examined by the faculty member and, normally, a follow-up consultation that takes about twenty to thirty minutes occurs with the director of CeTL. Research shows that formative surveys followed by consultation result in course changes that greatly improve both faculty and student satisfaction (see http://www.isu.edu/ctl/nutshells/old_nutshells/1_5.htm).

 

(5) Knowledge surveys (see http://www.isu.edu/ctl/facultydev/KnowS_files/KnowS.htm) are both an assessment and a teaching improvement tool. Knowledge surveys consist of numerous items that cover the full breadth of course learning objectives and levels of understanding (e.g., Bloom levels). Students interact with the survey at the beginning, end, and during the course. Surveys at the beginning of a course provide information on student background and preparation. During the course, surveys are learning guides for students, helping them prepare for exams and reflect on their learning.

In terms of student learning, research shows that the most important effort a faculty member can make lies in the planning and organization of the course. Knowledge surveys provide an entire plan of content and disclose it to students. The disclosure is not merely one of reading; students interact with every item of the survey. Once this plan is clearly seen, one can analyze the course in sophisticated ways that allow one to target levels of learning and verify that content is delivered at that level. This in turn permits selection of appropriate pedagogies and rubrics to assure that students meet the chosen learning and thinking outcomes. Finally, surveys given at the beginning and end of the course allow one to verify success at a level of unprecedented detail. At ISU, these surveys may be done in-class or on-line through WebCT.

As assessment instruments, knowledge surveys: (1) can be used to provide formative assessments of student understanding; (2) provide reliable, quantifiable data about student understanding; (3) provide data useful to students' cognitive and meta-cognitive growth; (4) can be used by faculty to understand the effects of curricular changes and innovations; and (5) can be used by faculty and administrators to evaluate curricula and programs. Knowledge surveys meet these criteria, capture data from both cognitive and affective domains, and provide unique information that bridges that of exams and summative student evaluations.

The knowledge survey itself is a highly reliable student ratings instrument. It is not a substitute for tests and exams and does not sample the same information. Instead it supplies different information that is more useful for the purpose of designing classroom experiences that produce better learning improvement. Correlation of knowledge survey results with tests of known good reliability generally show correlations in the range of r = 0.2 to 0.5. Correlations with faculty made tests of unknown reliability can yield any correlation--all of which are meaningless from a research viewpoint, but that can be highly useful in alerting faculty to address the reason for such an unanticipated result, which is almost always improved through alternative instructional practices and developing better skill in test preparation..

 

(6) Student management teams draw on the basic quality circle concepts of Demings and Juran, and allow them to be applied in the classroom. Since 1990, faculty at over 400 other institutions have used these and verified their effectiveness. Many professors have since published on the success of the method as a development tool. A bibliography of most of these reports is provided in A Handbook for Student Management Teams (http://www.isu.edu/ctl/facultydev/webhandbook/smt.htm). The Office funds four students at a rate of about $50/student for any faculty member who wishes to tune up their course or their teaching through employing a team.

 

(7) Boot Camp for Profs® is a weeklong summer intensive program founded by the CeTL director in 1993. Camps are held annually at Leadville, Colorado, and they are described briefly at (http://www.isu.edu/ctl/nutshells/old_nutshells/6_606.htm). One camp will be held again in 2006, June 18-24. Although the camp is purposely kept small, it has become a nationally famous program that draws instructors and attendants from all states and some foreign countries. The program goes far beyond individual development and ties good practices into curriculum development and unit level (college and department level) assessment. Many attendants have subsequently won best-teaching awards, and some have started faculty development offices at their own campuses. Over sixty faculty from ISU have attended. Over the years of the program's existence, hundreds of faculty have attended from every conceivable kind of institution. There is no advertising; the camp fills now by word of mouth and has always been self-sustaining.

 

(8) National Teaching and Learning Forum® This office provides ISU with an institutional on-line subscription to "National Teaching and Learning Forum" that can be accessed only from computers on the ISU campus at http://www.ntlf.com/. This is an outstanding newsletter and carries with it a very useful searchable web site.

 

(9) Unit level development involves the director working with departments and colleges on student learning, assessment and curriculum development. It produces a working plan so that a curriculum can deliver educational outcomes that single courses cannot. Topics addressed are goals in terms of faculty aspirations, disciplinary content learning, pedagogical approaches, student learning experiences, levels of thinking to be achieved at various curricular stages, and student self-reflection.

 

For further information, use the contact information provided in the Nutshell Notes banner head.