Students today come from all walks of life. Traditional students, straight from a high school setting, now represent only a portion of the student population in colleges and universities. This is largely due to students fulfilling needs around work, family, and obligations outside of the traditional educational setting. These students bring with them wonderful personal and professional experiences that not only enhance the classroom experience, but also shape and contribute to their educational goals and aspirations. Many students feel they should be able to utilize their life experiences as part of their educational journey. This document will examine offering credit for life experiences, and how it can be mutually beneficial for students and institutions.
Listening: An Introduction
There seems to be a growing realization of the importance of solid listening and communication skills. After all, lack of attention and respectful listening can be costly ‐ leading to mistakes, poor service, misaligned goals, wasted time and lack of teamwork.
The Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric was developed as a key deliverable of the ‘Building Capacity to Measure Essential Employability Skills’ project funded by the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)1. This handbook serves as a resource to teachers in using the Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric.
Critical thinking is one of the six skill categories within the ‘essential employability skills’ (EES) curriculum requirements for Ontario college programs – specifically, EES numbers 4 and 52. Each of these essential employability skills must be addressed (learned, practiced, evaluated) within a program. How and when these are implemented should be based on decisions regarding the program as a whole and by individual teachers.
This article examines the impact of culturally responsive pedagogy in an introduction to university course developed in collaboration with local and place-based First Nations communities, Aboriginal Access Studies and the Faculty of Education of the University of British Columbia’s Okanagan Campus. In keeping with requests that Indigenous worldviews be incorporated into curriculum, the content of EDUC 104, modelled on the University of South Carolina’s University 101 Programs, was adapted to incorporate Indigenous traditions of teaching and learning. The introductory course included a holistic approach aimed at supporting the social and emotional well-being of students. Facilitated by peer mentoring, collaborative circles of learning introduced seminal concepts and facilitated the progressive use of newly learned skills. As part of a longitudinal research, the following presents the content of interviews conducted at the conclusion of the courses. Analysis indicated that three themes emerged emphasizing the importance of the circles of learning, peer mentoring, and the relationship with the instructor. In particular, the results demonstrated the perceived value of the course from the students’ perspectives.
One of the advantages of academic-occupational integration is that it provides an opportunity to teach reading and writing skills in the context of the workplace applications, permitting literacy skills and content knowledge to develop simultaneously. This approach, a form of contextualized instruction (Mikulecky, 1998) is distinctly different from traditional approaches which see literacy skills as a prerequisite to learning content (Sticht, 1995). The purpose of this segment is to provide descriptions of a variety of ways in which instructors in community colleges are contextualizing literacy instruction in occupational content. The instructional activities are discussed in Perin (2000a).
One of the advantages of academic-occupational integration is that it provides an opportunity to teach reading and writing skills in
the context of the workplace applications, permitting literacy skills and content knowledge to develop simultaneously. This
approach, a form of contextualized instruction (Mikulecky, 1998) is distinctly different from traditional approaches which see
literacy skills as a prerequisite to learning content (Sticht, 1995). The purpose of this segment is to provide descriptions of a variety of ways in which instructors in community colleges are contextualizing literacy instruction in occupational content. The
instructional activities are discussed in Perin (2000a).
The characteristics of appropriately worded behavioral objectives and the advantages for curriculum design and implementation of a clear specification of objectives in advance of any teaching or testing have been articulated by a number of people, for example, Mager, Popham, and Sullivan. Essentially, a behavioral objective is a statement or description of intent. It is not, however, a statement of what a teacher intends to do, but rather, a statement of what the teacher intends that the student will be able to do or produce at the conclusion of some period of instruction.
A properly stated behavioral objective must describe without ambiguity the nature of learner behavior or product to be measured. Two major advantages are claimed for behavioral objectives. First, they provide clear end points toward which all can strive; and second, because they focus on expected terminal performance of students (what students are expected to be able to do), they suggest methods of assessing the extent to which objectives have been realized. The apparent logic of such an approach is obvious to all; to argue against behavioral objectives would seem to be to argue for ambiguity, if not irrationality. Nevertheless, a number of people have drawn attention to some of the difficulties and possible hazards of the approach, for example, Atkin,5 Eisner,6 and this author. It is not my intention here to go over old ground; however, I do wish to draw attention to some very serious dangers in evaluating programs from the simple instructional model implied in the behavioral approach.
The major assertion of this article is that the present curriculum-development approaches to education are limited in the types of tasks they can address and the level of proficiency they can expect from students. Such approaches may be useful as management tools, allowing the systematic management of instructional activities. However, the approaches may interfere with the quality of the educational process. It seems obvious that one of the goals of teaching reading and mathematics is to facilitate the development of proficiency in these skills. We can contrast mediocre competence with proficient performance of a task. A novice who is trained to achieve mediocre competence can follow rules and procedures with satisfactory levels of speed and accuracy, but has difficulty in applying skills to new situations and in acquiring greater expertise. In contrast, the
attainment of proficient performance implies that a person can perform a skill so well and so efficiently that it can be a building block for the acquisition of additional skills, and is easily extended to unfamiliar tasks. The contrast is between young adults who can read 150-200 words per minute, and get most questions right on comprehension tests, and students who read for enjoyment and view libraries as tools for answering questions. The contrast is between students who can generally follow the steps of a mathematical procedure to get an answer right and students who can recognize which type of mathematical
procedure is needed in order to attack a given problem. Someone who has reached mediocre competence must still concentrate on performing the task correctly. Someone who has achieved proficiency at a task can focus attention on achieving personal and vocational goals.
The advent of online learning has created the medium for cyber-bullying in the virtual classroom and also by e-mail. Bullying is usually expected in the workplace and between students in the classroom. Most recently, however, faculty members have
become surprising targets of online bullying. For many, there are no established policies nor is training provided on how to react. The current research defines the problem, reviews the findings of a cyber-bullying survey, and explores recommendations for addressing cyber-bullying through policies, training, and professional development.
The 2015-16 academic year was one of numerous student protests demanding increases in the admission of
minority students and the hiring of minority faculty members -- not to mention numerous other measures to promote
inclusivity on campus.
But what exactly do students want? While some would say that the various lists of demands of campus protests
provide much of the information, two Dartmouth College professors disagree. On Tuesday they proposed on the
political science blog The Monkey Cage a new way of measuring student interest in different forms of diversity. And they tested their system on students at Dartmouth, an admittedly nontypical student body given that the college is highly competitive in admissions.
This report focuses on data comparability of scale scores in the Teaching and Learning nternational Survey (TALIS).
Valid cross-cultural comparisons of TALIS data are vital in providing input for evidence-based policy making and in promoting the equity and effectiveness of teacher policies. For this purpose, an investigation of data comparability is a prerequisite for any meaningful cross-cultural comparison.
TALIS involves a large number of countries and economies, and has used rather strict conventional statistical methods to test comparability. Thus, many scales in TALIS do not reach the level of comparability that allows direct comparisons of scale scores. To facilitate the effective data analysis of TALIS and maximise its policy implications, this project: (1) uses a more flexible statistical method to testcomparability, and (2) investigates the level and sources of scale data incomparability.
This fall, I will be one of three lecturers teaching my department’s professional development course, where we help new graduate-student instructors learn the ropes, concurrently as they teach rhetoric for the first time. Many of them have never been in front of a college classroom. So I've been thinking a lot this summer about what they’ll be facing and how I might help prepare them.
For Black and Brown children in the United States, a major part of their schooling experience is associated with White female teachers who have no understanding of their culture. That was certainly my experience. My K-12 schooling was filled with White teachers who, at their core, were good people but unknowingly were murdering my spirit with their lack of knowledge, care, and love of my culture.
One of the reasons I love teaching is that each semester provides a fresh start: empty grade books, eager students. I also cherished this time when I was a student myself: poring over course syllabi, purchasing new textbooks, meeting my professors. Although I reside on eastern South Dakota’s frigid plains, the first day of class consistently brings me a warm feeling.
But once the newness of the semester fades, it’s not long before I casually share with a colleague something a student did or (more commonly) failed to do. This habit started in graduate school. Years ago, student shaming provided a humorous means of connecting with my fellow TAs: in my early 20s, commiserating over student issues felt normal, even cool. Perhaps, too, a case can be made that swapping stories of students’ shortcomings had little effect on our students themselves. They didn’t hear us laugh at their misspelled words or poorly constructed sentences. Yet, 10 years later, I’m haunted by the thought that I might
have spent more time complaining about my students than championing their success.
Dear Students: I think it’s time we had the talk. You know, the one couples who’ve been together for a while ometimes have to review boundaries and expectations? Your generation calls this "DTR" — short for "defining the elationship."
We definitely need to define our relationship because, first of all, it is a long-term relationship — maybe not between ou and me, specifically, but between people like you (students) and people like me (professors). And, second, it ppears to need some defining, or redefining. I used to think the boundaries and expectations were clear on both sides, but that no longer seems to be the case.
The proportion of adults in Canada with a post-secondary education is the highest among all OECD countries, and the cost of that education is roughly double the OECD average. Yet, more and more of those degree holders fall behind in the earnings scale. The share of Canadian university graduates who make less than half the national median income is the largest among all OECD countries. Sure, on average it pays to get a post-secondary education, but with the education premium narrowing, the number of low-income outliers is rising. And despite the overwhelming evidence that one’s field of study is the most important factor determining labour market outcomes, today’s students have not gravitated to more financially advantageous fields in a way that reflects the changing reality of the labour market.
Massive open online courses are often characterized as remedies to education disparities related to social class.
I’ve sat on the Curriculum Committee at two different higher education institutions. I’ve also participated in college assessment committees and accreditation committees at both the school level and institutional level. I’ve designed courses and entire programs from scratch and have revised courses and programs to meet either accreditation or institutional needs. One activity all these endeavors has in common is the development or re-development of meaningful and measurable outcomes.
Unfortunately, what I’ve discovered is that most faculty are not well-versed in curriculum design, and therefore unable to have the forethought to consider what they want their learners to know and be able to do upon completion of their course or the program as a whole. Outcomes, when considered, become like the paper tail in the game pin the tail on the donkey. They are an afterthought, and one that is attached blindly to a course or program. When working with faculty on their course or program development, I utilize the practice of backwards design in which you start with the end in mind. Outcomes are the
end we have in mind.
What is your learning style? Identifying your learning style serves you and helps you use it to your advantage to learn new skills efficiently. Your learning style is your approach to learning based on your preferences, as well as your strengths and weaknesses. Learners can be grouped into main categories:
Those who learn through reading and writing prefer to read and write rather than listen. In fact, they enjoy reading books and can follow written directions with ease. Visual learners learn best through maps and diagrams as opposed to verbal directions. While auditory learners prefer verbal directions and enjoy working in groups and discussing information. They remember best
through listening and may find it difficult to work quietly. These type of learners often read with whispering lip movements.
Notwithstanding the current emphasis on utilitarian concerns and issues of the bottom line, I would maintain that creativity is still a topic of great interest in contemporary society. The fact that we are participating in a symposium and contributing to a book entitled Creativity, Imagination, and Innovation in Education attest to this concern. In this context, Barzun has noted that in a reference book of contemporary quotations, “there are fifteen entries for Creativity and only three for Conversation, two for Wisdom, one for Contemplation, and none for Serenity or Repose.” I would agree with Barzun’s contention that “Creativity has become what divine grace and salvation were to former times. It is incessantly invoked, praised, urged, demanded, hoped for, declared achieved, or found lacking” (Barzun, 1990, p. 22). One may wonder why this is the case. And I think that here Barzun’s analogy to divine grace believe that creativity will save us.