« Back to Conference Schedule | Concurrent Session VI »
Concurrent Session V
Friday, June 13, 2:00–2:45 PM
The Role of Instructional Leader
A. Ray Petty: Inter American University of Puerto Rico - Ponce Campus, Puerto Rico/USA
This session is designed to assist participants in examining and developing their capacity for educational development. In it, they will explore key factors in creating an effective learning environment: high behavioral and academic expectations, a structured educational environment, and good management techniques. In order to promote the sharing of good practice, problems, and solutions, participants will generate, discuss, and react to specific classroom situations generated by participants.
Implementation of Educational Innovations: A Practical Model
Barbara Morgan: Brigham Young University, USA
The implementation of educational innovations has proven to be difficult for instructional designers and technologists, educational administrators, teachers, and students alike. Using a practical approach, this session will explore various models for implementing educational innovations. Recognizing that learning takes place, both from successes and failures, a case study (done during the 2006-2007 school year using one of these models), will be a highlighted example of the successes and failures which occur in the process of implementing educational innovations. Participation through questions, insights, observations, reflection, and other positive interaction is planned for this session.
Learning from an Evaluation: A Chinese Faculty-Development Model
Li, Kang (Hugo): Michigan State University, USA; Tao, Meizhong: Huazhong Agriculture University, China (PRC)
This workshop presents a Chinese faculty development model from the People’s Republic of China, and discusses its strengths and weaknesses in order to provide participants a comparative perspective on faculty development. By presenting a Chinese model, this workshop intends to engage participants in discussing the reality of, and solutions to, faculty development issues, particularly in China (PRC).
Student-generated Tests as Formative Assessment
Rie Popp Troelsen: University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
As a way of assessing students’ knowledge and competencies, students were asked to create the questions for a modified multiple-choice test. Following each question, the students also created an answer—and for each answer an explanation to why the answer is correct or not. Hence, the test, and the questions the students pose, must be structured as a formative evaluation method and thereby as a learning resource. By asking the students to generate the questions and explanations for the right answer, the producing of the test questions serves as a learning resource.
Defining, Fostering, and Publishing the Scholarship of Educational Development
Milton D. Cox: Miami University, USA; Laurie Richlin: Claremont Graduate University, USA
The profession of educational (faculty) development has come of age to the point that results of various practices can be placed into theoretical contexts and reapplied to new situations, contributing to an ongoing cycle of scholarly educational development and the resulting scholarship. Because educational developers foster scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching, we can examine faculty development from the same perspective. This session provides examples of and recommendations for fostering scholarly educational development practice and producing the scholarship of educational development.
A Lover’s Guide to University Teaching: Love in Academic Development
Peter Kandlbinder: University of Technology Sydney, Australia; Brad Wuetherick: University of Alberta, Canada
Love, desire, and pleasure are not words usually associated with student learning. Yet Rowland (1997) argues that love of the subject is a fundamental educational aim for many university teachers. This observation challenges the instrumental orientations of some forms of academic development. It raises questions about ‘the subject’ of academic development and what it might mean for those we work with to ‘love’ teaching. This interactive session explores the theme of love and academic development first raised by Rowland’s article “A Lover’s Guide to University Teaching?”
Characteristics of Successful Faculty Development Programs
Hanno van Keulen: Utrecht University, Netherlands; Riekje de Jong & Paul Deneer: Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands
Early in 2008, the fourteen research-intensive universities in the Netherlands recognized each other’s teaching certificate programs, thus showing increased appreciation of teaching in relation to research. In this session, the certificate programs are analyzed in terms of their characteristics (content, form, assessment procedure), their success (number of qualifications, enhanced student learning, external recognition), and the factors that correlate with, cause, or influence success: (1) consistency between goals, content, form, and assessment; (2) support from higher management/administration; (3) incorporation in human resource management and tenure procedures; and (4) alignment with the university’s strategic aims and long-term course and program development initiatives.
Stereotype Threat in Assessment, or Why Some Students Fail Exams
Michele DiPietro: Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Research in social psychology demonstrates that when stereotyped groups of students are evaluated, these stereotypes can be triggered in ways that sabotage students’ performance. This phenomenon, known as “stereotype threat” (ST), has serious implications for teaching. It also supports developers pushing multiculturalism, because it uses data to back up their concerns. In this very interactive—and grounded-in-research session, participants will learn the central findings of ST theory and the research behind them, and they will generate meaningful implications for equitable teaching. The workshop will include suggestions about how to incorporate these findings into our work with faculty.
Disciplinary Migration and Identities in Educational Development
Catherine Manathunga: The University of Queensland, Australia; Alison Lee: University of Technology, Sydney, Australia; Sue Clegg: Leeds Metropolitan University, UK
Educational development, an identifiable field of practice for forty years, has recruited scholars from a wide variety of other disciplines. Only recently have people undertaken educational development doctorates, building a distinct body of formal knowledge. Very little research has explored the prior disciplinary knowledge educational developers bring with them. This session draws on post-colonial theory to investigate the disciplinary migration stories of pioneer educational developers in Australia and the UK. It reflects on how these developers were recruited, whether they have retained their prior disciplinary links, and how they have used their disciplinary knowledge in educational development.
Promoting Scholarship, Research, and Evaluation in Academic Development—International Perspectives
Ranald Macdonald: Sheffield Hallam University, UK; Alison Holmes: University of Canterbury, New Zealand
This session explores two distinctive approaches to promoting scholarship, research, and evaluation in academic development. The first is the “Scholarship, Research, and Evaluation Committee” of SEDA in the UK and, second, the “Unlocking Student Learning” project and Ako Aotearoa, the National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence, in New Zealand. This session includes brief presentations, handouts, and activities (individual, pairs and plenary).