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

    Because learning at the level of brain biology involves the establishment and stabilization of synapses, then it is reasonable to expect that proposed teaching and learning methods touted as improvements should be relatable in some way to building neural connections. Some widely touted improvements have never proven themselves in any rigorous test nor have they been able to pass muster in any serious reviewed journal.

    An extreme example began in the books of Georgi Lozanov (Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedy, 1978; The Foreign Language Teacher's Suggestopedic Manual, 1988) and has been further revived by Sheila Ostrander and Lynn Schroeder in Superlearning 2000, (1979 & 2000). A premise in these books is that study incorporating special background music results in greatly enhanced learning and retention. The authors' claims are indeed impressive. The 1979 edition claimed one can learn and retain 3000 new words in a foreign language per day; the recent edition still claims 1000. A spin-off phenomena, "The Mozart Effect," asserted that listening to music by Mozart could accomplish wonders from raising the IQ points of children to enhancing spatial skills. Subsequent investigators in The Journal of Aesthetic Education (Hetland, L., 2000, v34, n3/4, pp 105-148) and in Education Week (Zehr, M. A., 2000, v. 20, n. 4, p. 6) reported that "The Mozart Effect" fails to raise intelligence, SAT scores, grades or long-term spatial skills. Despite this fact, thousands of books and CDs on "The Mozart Effect" are still sold to avid buyers.

    Closer to home in academe is the efficacy claimed for making use of varied kinds of "learning styles." These styles are termed "visual," "auditory," "kinesthetic," "analytic" etc. in accord with a modality for which a learner shows a particular preference. The diagnosis for preference is provided by a paper test. The hypothesis is that diagnoses followed by application of teaching the material in accord with each student's own learning style will result in better learning and retention. The attraction of attention to individual differences arises because: (1) individuals differ in preferences of instruction and learning; (2) awareness of difference should make educators sensitive to learners' needs (Jonassen, D., and Grabowski, B., 1993, Handbook of Individual Differences Learning & Instruction: Lawrence Earlbaum Assoc., 488 p.) The attraction is so strong that any questioning of the validity of learning styles hypotheses is akin to heresy in some circles. Yet, a reasonable question follows: "How does delivery of material in any particular learning style promote establishment and stabilization of synapses?" In "Different Strokes for Different Folks? A Critique of Learning Styles" (Stahl, S., American Educator, Fall, 1999, pp. 27-31.) the author reviewed the literature and found that practices which tried to match teaching styles to learning styles produced no convincing improvements in students' learning.

    A similar disappointment is found when one tries to find evidence for the efficacy of "multiple intelligences" popularized by Harvard's Howard Gardner. Despite the popularity of Gardner's books, there is not a single credible journal article that shows that diagnosing a student's dominant "intelligence" and teaching to that "intelligence" results in any improved learning. Lack of proof of value has not prevented the North Central Association from specifying that: "Faculty members are exploring the uses of assessment in the context of research on multiple intelligences..." as a criteria for highest level success in assessment implementation. This shows the degree to which popular hypotheses can achieve credibility and mystique, even without proof. A popular book on a practice of dubious value will produce a large group of vocal supporters because the placebo effect alone will produce about 30% positive testimonials. Such testimonials do not constitute proof of value. It remains fair to ask: "How does delivery of material matched to any single intelligence mode promote development of stable neural connections?"
In summary, proven effective practices do make sense when considered at the level of brain biology. The same consideration can provide some defence against investing too much in "academic snake oil."
 

These are the instructions for the 2001 Teaching Enhancement Grants. The calendar for submissions now allows grant monies to be awarded at the start of a fiscal year. It also allows people to do some thinking and reflection for a proposal in a relative "downtime? portion of the year. Members of the UCD Teaching Committee will review the applications. No formal application form exists. What follows is the total information required to prepare your application.

PURPOSE and SCOPE
The teaching enhancement grants are designed to improve the quality of teaching for the students of UCD.  These grants are available only to full-time faculty at UCD. The Committee has approximately $10,000 to award this year. Funds CANNOT be used for curriculum development or faculty salaries.

Requests are limited to an upper budget request of $5000.  Course releases may be requested and should be budgeted in accord with college requirements (usually ~$3000).  Applications may include requests for staff support, hardware, materials, travel, software or other expenditures, and training workshops. This year's "Boot Camp for Profs®? will be held in Leadville, Colorado, July 22-28. If you request funding to attend, the cost is $700.00 plus your travel expense (estimate $100). Last year the college of Arts and Media applied for four spots as a team to kick-start their college assessment program. That venture worked so well that we encourage other colleges to propose similar teams.

SUBMISSION
All applications will be submitted by email at Ed_Nuhfer@ceo.cudenver.edu. Reviews will be done on-line. Deadline for submissions is Saturday June 9. Awards will be announced before the end of June.

FORMAT
Your application should include the following pages and information.  The total application is strictly limited to three pages.  NO attachments are allowed.  Please do not use a font size smaller than 10 pt. Follow the three-page format below.

Page one.  Page one of your application should include applicant(s) name(s), campus address(es), campus phone number(s), campus e-mail address(es), total dollar amount requested and title of proposal.

Page two.  Page two of your application should have: (1) the project title; (2) an abstract that describes (a) your project, (b) how it will enhance teaching at UCD and (c) the specific population of students who will be served (note-the actual numbers are not a factor in evaluation);  (3) A list of the major expected outcome(s)-maximum of three; (4) A sentence or two describing how expected outcomes will be assessed.

Page three.  Page three of your application should include an itemized budget of the expenditures proposed in this grant application. Remember, requests must not total more than $5000.
 
 

Edward 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