Instructors commonly cope with a missed test or failed exam (this may also apply to quizzes) by letting students drop their lowest score. Sometimes the lowest score is replaced by an extra exam or quiz. Sometimes the tests are worth different amounts, with the first test worth less, the second worth a bit more, and the third worth more than the first two—but not as much as the final.
Readers of Faculty Focus are probably already familiar with backward design. Most readily connected with such
researchers as Grant Wiggins, Jay McTighe, and Dee Fink, this approach to course construction asks faculty to initially ignore the specific content of a class. Rather, the designer begins the process by identifying desired learning goals, and then devising optimal instruments to measure and assess them. Only thereafter does course-specific content come into play—and even then, it is brought in not for the sake of “covering” it, but as a means to achieve the previously identified learning objectives. Courses designed this way put learning first, often transcend the traditional skillset boundaries of their discipline, and usually aim to achieve more ambitious cognitive development than do classes that begin—and often end—with content mastery as the primary focus. Although the advantages of backward design are manifest, it’s probably still the exception to, rather than the rule of, course planning.
It was always the same scenario. I’d be feeling a great sense of accomplishment because I had spent hours grading a set of English papers—painstakingly labeling errors and writing helpful comments. Everything was crystal clear, and the class could now move on to the next assignment. Except it wasn’t, and we couldn’t. A few students would inevitably find their way to my office, plunk their papers down on my desk, and ask me to explain the grade. Something had to change. I knew exactly why I was assigning the grades, but I obviously needed to find a more effective way of communicating these reasons to my students.
As an instructional technologist at the University of Washington’s School of Social Work, Tom Baer is no stranger to
working with faculty who struggle to understand the role of instructional designers. It’s not unusual for him to encounter instructors reluctant to give up their go-to lecture or PowerPoint Presentation, unsure of online learning’s effectiveness or resistant to a change in teaching style.
Enrollment in online courses at colleges and universities continues to grow, along with the need for IDs who help design curriculum and implement digital tools. IDs work closely with faculty members and subject experts to create measurable learning objectives, produce course content and craft engaging activities. But during the process, faculty may give IDs the cold shoulder for fear of having to give up control or appearing less knowledgeable in front of their students.
The past millennium has witnessed a myriad of technological changes, and there has been exponential growth in the same over the past century. Yet the design of the classroom has changed relatively little over the same time period. The classroom of Aristotle was organized more or less in the same fashion as that of Thomas Aquinas or Einstein. This design emphasizes the so-called “sage on the stage” model where a lecturer addresses an auditorium of students who are expected to listen, absorb, and retain this knowledge. The model continues to be the staple of pedagogical practice in the 21st century. Although the sage-on-the-stage model still dominates, there is a great deal of research suggesting more efficient and effective ways of imparting knowledge.
International learning experiences are invaluable for students. Those who undertake education outside their country of residence develop leadership, self-reliance, language skills, intercultural understanding, sensitivity to local and global issues, and specialist skills when they participate in work placements and field schools. Employers also say that international experience gained through education makes a positive contribution to the workplace.1
Both students and educators have long recognized the value of learning abroad. Despite this, and the fact that almost all Canadian colleges and universities offer education-abroad opportunities (including semester exchanges, short-term study abroad, field school, and service learning), relatively few post-secondary students actually participate. Only 3.1 per cent of full-time university students2 and 1.1 per cent of full-time college students3in Canadian have gone abroad for part of their studies. Compared to some OECD countries, these figures are slim. In Germany, for example, fully 25 per cent of students in bachelors and masters programs have participated in a study abroad experience, and the country hopes to raise this number to 50 per cent by 2020.4
This report builds on the work of the past decade by the research team of the College Mathematics Project (CMP) and the College Student Achievement Project (CSAP) based at Seneca College, of which the authors were members. In particular, the senior author was a principal author of the final reports of both CMP and CSAP over the past several years. However, the present paper, while drawing heavily from those reports, is the responsibility of its two authors.
Partnerships between Ontario colleges and universities have become increasingly important recently for at least two
reasons. Partnerships are encouraged generally in Canada, USA, Europe and elsewhere to transcend organizational boundaries, foster synergies and stimulate change. So universities are enjoined to partner with employers to integrate education and work, with industry to foster innovation and with other universities to avoid duplication.
Colleges and institutes enhance innovation by undertaking applied research that leverages their strong connections to industry and communities. These institutions provide talent, creative ideas and facilities that generate economic and social gains.
• In the past year alone, colleges and institutes worked with over 6,300 partners in all sectors, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to develop new or adapted products, services, technology and processes.
• College and institute students are an integral part of applied research activity. Students gain relevant applied research experience through interactions with industry and community partners and are employment ready.
• Increased investments in college and institute applied research will unleash the college sector’s untapped capacity to support industry and community innovation.
Canada’s colleges and institutes foster innovation that supports economic growth and social development. They improve the productivity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and community partners through the development of new and improved technologies, processes, products and services.
This fact sheet provides a summary of the Colleges and Institutes Canada 2014-15 Survey of Applied Research Activity based on 113 responses from our members.
It’s been nearly three years since I was a fellow in the American Council on Education’s flagship leadership-training
program, yet I still reflect on what I learned there.
A central benefit of the program is the opportunity to spend time with a cross section of senior administrators from a broad array of institutions. During my fellowship, I made a point of meeting presidents and chancellors who were widely regarded as successful. I met more than 40 such CEOs via the program, and they were as different as the institutions they led. But from our conversations, some key similarities emerged in how they succeed at their jobs.
For nearly two-thirds of my 30-year career in higher education, I have served as a middle manager of one sort or another: department chair, dean, program director. For the other third, I have been middle-managed.
Of course, even as a low-level administrator, I had plenty of people above me telling me what to do. I also had people below me who, given the chance, gladly told me what to do.
The point is: I know what it’s like to be on both sides of that transaction. Specifically, I know firsthand how department chairs can make faculty lives easier, and I also know what they do (all too often) that makes faculty lives more difficult (dare I say "miserable"?). Accordingly, I’d like to identify — for the benefit of new and future department chairs especially — what I consider the five biggest morale killers for college faculty.
Colleges have a big stake in the outcome of the lawsuit that three publishers, Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications, brought against Georgia State University officials for copyright infringement. The lawsuit, now in its eighth year, challenged GSU’s policy that allowed faculty members to upload excerpts (mainly chapters) of in-copyright books for students to read and download from online course repositories.
Four years ago, a trial court held that 70 of the 75 challenged uses were fair uses. Two years ago, an appellate court sent the case back for a reassessment under a revised fair-use standard. The trial court has just recently ruled that of the 48 claims remaining in the case, only four uses, each involving multiple chapters, infringed. The question now is, What should be the remedy for those four infringements?
Readers of Faculty Focus are probably already familiar with backward design. Most readily connected with such
researchers as Grant Wiggins, Jay McTighe, and Dee Fink, this approach to course construction asks faculty to initially ignore the specific content of a class. Rather, the designer begins the process by identifying desired learning goals, and then devising optimal instruments to measure and assess them. Only thereafter does course-specific content come into play—and even then, it is brought in not for the sake of “covering” it, but as a means to achieve the previously identified learning objectives. Courses designed this way put learning first, often transcend the traditional skillset boundaries of their discipline, and usually aim to achieve more ambitious cognitive development than do classes that begin—and often end—with content mastery as the primary focus. Although the advantages of backward design are manifest, it’s probably still the exception to, rather than the rule of, course planning.
For the last 16 years, I have struggled with depression. That means I have had 16 years of highs and lows. Sixteen
years of ups and of downs. And 16 years of therapy — for 16 years I have been chasing a cure. It also means I have had 16 years to “hear things,” i.e. to be the recipient of well-meaning, but misinformed, comments. To hear good- intentioned, but unsolicited, advice. To receive encouraging yet completely misguided remarks. Remarks about my “problem.” Remarks about the state, and
severity, of my illness. Remarks about why I cannot have depression, because I do not look depressed. Because I have too much to be thankful for. Because I am too strong.
Businesses in Canada urgently need to get more innovative. According to the Science, Technology and Innovation Council, Canada is falling steadily behind its global competitors on key measures of innovation. Most notably, Canada ranks 26th among
international competitors for business spending on research and development as a share of gross domestic product, sitting at just over one-third of the threshold amount spent by the top five performing countries.
To overcome Canada’s innovation shortfall, it is essential for all players in science, technology and innovation to collaborate for change. Canada’s colleges and institutes, well-established in their communities and connected with business, government, health care and community organizations, are fast becoming innovation hotspots. By leveraging their equipment, infrastructure and the expertise of faculty and students, colleges and institutes are responding creatively to the research and development requirements of partners in small business, industry and the community — at the same time, helping students develop
innovation skills they can use throughout their work lives.
Another semester is over, and it's always a bitter sweet moment! Nevertheless, I'm glad that my students' - at least
most of them - successfully completed my courses. However, I'm also sad that another group is gone; it's a kind of a
proud parent moment --- no matter the age of my students.
Usually for a few days after a semester ends, I reflect on the things that went well and anything that could be
improved. It's in this critical examination of the latter that my teaching and classroom learning environment evolves
toward reflections of organizational growth and team-based results. My progression as an educator is driven by
continuous feedback from multiple sources. Throughout the semester, students are encouraged to provide me with
honest and candid feedback, which can be used to make my teaching along with my courses better.
Background/Context: Despite burgeoning racial and ethnic heterogeneity within the United States, many students grow up in racially
homogeneous schools and neighborhoods. This lack of interracial interaction appears to play a substantial role in shaping students racial attitudes and world views upon entering college.
Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: The aim of the study was to examine the relationships among multiple forms of precollege exposure to racial/ethnic diversity and racial attitudes (e.g., perceptions of workplace discrimination) upon entering college.
Background/Context: Past research has examined many factors that contribute to the blackwhite achievement gap. While researchers have shown that teacher perceptions of students academic ability is an important contributing factor to the gap, little research has explored the extent to which teacher perceptions of students academic ability are sustained over time or the extent to which teacher ratings of students social and behavioral skills are related to their perceptions of academic ability. The current study focuses on whether teacher perceptions of students academic ability and social and behavioral skills differ by student race and the extent to which ratings at the beginning of the school year explain racial differences in perceptions of academic ability at the end of the year.
Purpose: There are two research questions addressed in this study: (1) To what extent do kindergarten teachers rate black and white students academic ability and social and behavioral skills differently? And (2) to what extent do test scores, fall teacher perceptions of students academic ability, and social and behavioral skills explain racial differences in teacher evaluations of students academic ability in the spring of kindergarten?
Background/context: Over the past 40 years, the composition of the professoriate has changed substantially across all institutional types. Once predominantly tenure track, now nontenure-track faculty (NTTF) constitute more than 70% of the faculty. While these major changes have occurred, we know little about key stakeholders views (accreditors, policy makers, presidents) of these changes.
Purpose: In this article, we explore the following research question: What are the beliefs systems (logics) related to the changing professoriate of the key entities within the higher education organizational field?