NUTSHELL NOTES "Teaching tips in a nutshell" - The University of Colorado at Denver's One-page Newsletter for Teaching Excellence

    This is the last Nutshell Note of the millennium! This is timely, because the theme of this issue ties together much that we've done and learned together since 1992.

    Brain-based learning provides any teacher with a central unifying framework through which to evaluate concepts and models that are rapidly being added to the literature on practice of higher education. Reflecting on how the brain works can also serve as a good "crap detector? to filter out both any trendy fluff and personal biases based on little substance. For example, when one realizes that learning, at the basic level of the brain, involves self-initiated brain changes, it becomes obvious why any teaching philosophy/practice that fails to emphasize student responsibility is flawed. If we know that the brain can change physiologically in response to learning, just how good a predictor of future achievement can one measure in time, such as a test-based "IQ"? score, really be? Should benefits be better achieved by classifying and teaching students according to their "multiple intelligence type" or by treating students as unique individuals but with commonalities that arise simply from possessing a human brain? These are true critical thinking issues!

    In 1992 through 1996, we emphasized several teaching practices that involve intensive interactions with and between students. Considerations of the brain reveal that such practices result in significant increases in learning because time spent in class employing many senses, communicating with others and making decisions will build more synapses than will just taking notes and memorizing facts and terms.

    From 1997 through 1999, we emphasized "teaching systems," which are sophisticated ways of using focus and organization to maximize results in producing the learning outcomes we want. The system approach involves not merely organizing content knowledge and selecting good teaching practices, but also harnessing emotional energy and building group intelligence (essentially a "group brain" connected by communication, whose " parts" are housed in separate skulls) with our students as a way to maximize learning and with our peers in order to optimize unit effectiveness.

    Most recently (1999-2000) we emphasized an educational outcome in progressive ability to think at higher levels (Perry model). Studies on the brain verify that such learning does physically and progressively change the brain. So if we want high level thinking as an outcome, we can indeed practice so as to produce it.

    When one realizes that new knowledge becomes a part of memory through synapses that are organized then stabilized by use, it reveals that good teaching practices are those that promote and accelerate indelible brain change beyond what a student would likely be able to achieve on his or her own. When "good teaching? is seen as the practice of creating situations that maximize such effects on students? brains, it becomes evident why models that emphasize the value of learning while de-emphasizing the value of teaching should be viewed with healthy suspicion.

    Effective lessons that promote brain change just don't materialize out of thin air; these require informed planning and an investment of time and hard work by teachers. So here, at the end of the millennium, I thank all of you for the hard work that you do and for being the extraordinary teachers that you are!
 
 

    The materials should demonstrate/document: (1) integration of pedagogy and technology, (2) novel use of contemporary technologies, (3) positive impact on learning, (4) creative contribution to academic discipline, and (5) contribution to academic unit and overall campus goals to enhance teaching/learning with technology.

The submission packet should include:
(1 ) a letter of nomination from the Dean or Department Chair that specifically addresses the award criteria and any other distinguishing characteristics of the nominee's work;

(2) a narrative (4 page maximum) authored by the nominee that addresses:
    " What were your instructional goals, including learning outcomes related specifically to the use of             technology?
    " Provide a detailed description of the instructional application(s), the technologies employed, the course(s)    involved, and any other information relevant to the award criteria.
    " In what way was your integration of pedagogy and technology innovative?
    " What was novel about your application of technology?
    " What was the impact or the outcomes on student learning?
    " Describe any contributions of this instructional application to your academic discipline.
    "What has been the impact of your work towards achieving the teaching, learning and technology goals of your academic unit and your campus?
    " Describe any special efforts you made to enable this work to be successful (e.g. created partnerships, secured resources).
    " Briefly describe how the $8,000 would advance your instructional technology objectives.

(3) Two letters from students whose learning was impacted by the application. The student support letters should specifically address how their learning benefited from a technology-enhanced experience.

(4) Additional letters may be submitted. Up to two letters from other users or beneficiaries of the application should demonstrate direct knowledge of the nominee's qualifications for the award and should address the award criteria.

(5) A current copy of the nominee's curriculum vitae.

Optional: The nomination materials may include website referrals and/or selected printouts of web-based materials that illustrate the innovative use of the technology and its impact on student learning. One nominee from each CU campus will demonstrate elements of the instructional application in a 20-minute presentation to the University_wide review committee.
 
 

    Dr. Bob Leamnson, author of Thinking About Teaching and Learning, will provide the major teaching effectiveness workshop for this academic year on "brain-based learning." Bob is eminently qualified to lead this workshop. He is a biologist, a professor with several decades experience in college teaching, and a former high school teacher.

    Author (Brain-Based Learning) Eric Jensen describes brain-based learning as "learning in accord with the way the brain is naturally designed to learn. It is a multidisciplinary approach that is built on the fundamental question, "What is good for the brain"??

    Attendance is limited to 50, and attendants will receive both Jensen's Brain-Based Learning and Leamnson's Thinking About Teaching and Learning. Jensen's text, a selection at our California sister program to Boot Camp for Profs -- Beach Camp for Profs-- is a thorough teacher-oriented compilation that stresses how knowing about the brain can be a good basis for designing teaching practices. Leamnson's book is focused on the college classroom--particularly upon students who have the greatest difficulty with the challenges of college. It is written in a narrative style that only comes from having decades of teaching experience and loving it.

Ed Nuhfer, Director Teaching Effectiveness & Faculty Development
CU-Denver Campus Box 137 PO Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364
(303) 556-4915 Fax (303) 556-5855