Loading…
STLHE 2015 has ended
Achieving Harmony: Tuning into Practice

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Monday, June 15
 

9:00am

Meeting - STLHE Board of Directors
Contact: Robert Lapp - rlapp@mta.ca

Monday June 15, 2015 9:00am - 5:00pm
Cypress 2 Room

12:00pm

Luncheon - STLHE 2015 Board of Directors and Conference Co-Chairs

Contact: Robert Lapp – rlapp@mta.ca


Monday June 15, 2015 12:00pm - 1:30pm
TBA

12:30pm

Luncheon - STLHE 2015 Organizing Committee
Private Location

Contact: Christine Kurbis – christine_kurbis@sfu.ca

 

Monday June 15, 2015 12:30pm - 1:30pm
Seawall Bar and Gill

2:30pm

Registration
Monday June 15, 2015 2:30pm - 4:30pm
STLHE Registration Desk

4:30pm

Meeting - Educational Developers Caucus Executive

Contact: Deb Dawson – dldawson@uwo.ca or Stephanie Chu – stephanie@sfu.ca


Monday June 15, 2015 4:30pm - 8:30pm
TBA
 
Tuesday, June 16
 

8:00am

8:00am

Registration
Tuesday June 16, 2015 8:00am - 7:00pm
STLHE Registration Desk

9:00am

9:00am

An integrated approach to educational development
Teaching and Learning initiatives, collaborations, and practices occur within various organizational systems, cultures, interpersonal dynamics, and worldviews. Process consultation (Schein, 1999) and human systems design are methods of addressing implicit, and often unnamed, forces at play – those cultural factors that constitute “the water in which we swim.” Institutional climate, conflicting agendas, unaddressed underlying issues, and unchecked assumptions are part of what process consultation calls “secondary processes” that can undermine success when overlooked.

Using participants’ prior knowledge of self, other, group, and system/environment this workshop connects participant pre-existing “know how” (Varela, 1999) in higher education to plan and implement for their own desired outcomes. The session incorporates principles from How Learning Works (Ambrose et al., 2010) with a process consultation approach to better support teaching and learning goals. A culture change approach to programmatic change or curriculum creation will also be used to help participants practice process design considerations.

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

- Identify what process consultation is and why it’s helpful to achieving goals
- Apply relevant process consultation tools to a current project or collaboration (e.g., a meeting, workshop, learning experience, curricular or programmatic reform, educational leadership, etc.)
- Use process consultation strategies to influence the implementation of a self-designed process

Speakers
avatar for Erin Yun

Erin Yun

Educational Consultant, Campus and Classroom Climate, University of British Columbia


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Mackenzie Room

9:00am

Capturing and learning from the experiences of tenure-track teaching faculty in Canada to develop a set of best practices
The Teaching Track is a type of faculty position that involves specializing in teaching and may or may not include a research mandate. These positions are being considered, debated, and implemented across Canada (e.g., Bradshaw, 2013; Chapnick, 2012) and therefore have the potential for creating division or harmony. The objective of this preconference day is to draw experiences from stakeholders from across different institutional contexts (e.g., current Teaching Track faculty, current University/College administrators) with the ultimate goal of creating a set of best practices that administrators, faculty associations, and others can use to create or strengthen an existing Tenure Track Teaching Stream.

First, we will invite a breadth of experiences and perspectives from participants centering on a few basic topics: what value the Teaching Track brings to individuals and to the institution, how Teaching Track positions differ across institutions, and what challenges people face in the Teaching Track. Next, we will use the results of the earlier discussion to collaboratively identify and imagine best practices institutions can use to successfully implement and foster the development of a Teaching Track. Participants will leave with a draft list of Ten Quick Tips for implementing a Tenure Track Teaching Stream they can bring to their institutions. To maximize the potential impact of this preconference, we will integrate results with data from an ongoing national survey led by the co-authors in a publication.

Speakers
avatar for Joanne Fox (University of British Columbia)

Joanne Fox (University of British Columbia)

Principal, Professor of Teaching, UBC Vantage College; Michael Smith Laboratories and Dept of Microbiology and Immunology
avatar for Catherine Rawn

Catherine Rawn

University of British Columbia


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Seymour Room

9:00am

Team work that works: Introduction to team-based learning
Prepared, engaged students…
A college classroom humming with active learning…
Time for rich, structured problem-solving…
What professor wouldn’t jump at the chance to create a learning environment like that?
Come find out what Team-Based Learning (TBL) is all about! In this very hands on workshop, you will learn about the important processes and procedures to successfully implement TBL. Learn how to get your students to come to class prepared and then how to use that preparation to “flip” your classroom so that class time can be better spent helping students learn how to apply course concepts to solve problems. During the workshop you will get to experience all the main instructional components of TBL from the student perspective.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Salon 3

9:00am

Meeting - Council of 3M National Teaching Fellows Executive

Contact: Jon Houseman – jon.houseman@uottawa.ca


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Thompson Room

9:00am

Meeting - National Teaching and Learning Centres' Leaders
Contacts: Stephanie Chu – stephanie@sfu.ca or Simon Bates – simon.bates@ubc.ca

Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Bayshore Salon D

9:00am

Achieving creative harmony: Tuning into arts-based approaches to education development
“To teach is not to transfer knowledge but to create the possibilities for the production or construction of knowledge” (Freire, 2000, p. 30). This hands-on experiential workshop tunes into the praxis of creativity by exploring the utilization of arts-informed (Efland, 2002), evidence-based (Petty, 2009) teaching strategies and their efficacy in promoting higher order thinking and double loop learning (Argyris, 1999). This approach to teaching and learning provides significant opportunities “that foster the capacity to construct interpretations” (Efland, 2002, p. 161) and as such are critical to the promotion of transformative learning (Dirkx, Mezirow & Cranton, 2006). Creative arts-based strategies are often overlooked as effective learning strategies in teacher education, despite the evidence that supports their use (Petty, 2009). Engagement in a creative learning process helps learners synthesize and integrate concepts and contributes to transformative learning (Author & Co Author, 2014). When implemented effectively, these innovative activities can tune into imaginations to open up new perspectives, construct alternative interpretations and assimilate learning.

Throughout the workshop, participants will engage in dynamic dialogue as they explore an experiential arts-based process and experience several dimensions of creativity. Challenges and opportunities implementing creative approaches to learning will be explored and examples of student work will be showcased and contextualized to their intended learning outcomes as situated learning. Specifically, participants will:

- Discuss critical questions related to the praxis of integrating creativity and arts-based strategies into teaching practice;
- Explore a number of arts-based, evidence-based instructional strategies; and
- Represent dynamic dialogue in an arts-based manner.

Speakers

Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 12:00pm
Chehalis Room

9:00am

Special Event - 2015 College Sector Educators Community Award Retreat

Contact: Ruth Rodgers – rodgers.ruth@gmail.com

9:00 am – Meet at Westin Bayshore Hotel, Bayshore Foyer

9:30 am – Travel by group cab to Vancouver Aquarium

10:00 am – Vancouver Aquarium Behind-the-Scenes Tour

11:45 am – Travel by group cab to lunch

12:00 pm – Lunch at Carderos Restaurant (1583 Coal Harbour Quay)

1:30 - 3:30 pm – CSEC Award Recipients Meeting, Westin Bayshore Hotel, Director Room


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 3:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

9:00am

Meeting - 2015 3M National Student Fellows Retreat
Contact: Maureen Connolly - mconnolly@brocku.ca

Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:00am - 4:00pm
Chairman Room

9:00am

9:30am

Colleagues, collaborators, friends – Assessing the certificate program in university teaching and learning in action
In 2013, the three facilitators participated in the Certificate Program in University Teaching and Learning (CPUTL) where they were tasked with developing a workshop on teaching assessment. Individual motivations for attending the CPUTL and expectations for the program differed significantly between the three facilitators. Learning to navigate and appreciate these differences helped to develop relationships that evolved from collegial, to collaborative, to friends. After successfully graduating from the CPUTL, the facilitators have continued to work together and to offer their workshop on assessment for a number of different audiences. In this interactive presentation, participants have the opportunity to experience a “meta-workshop” that provides insight into how the facilitators learned to work together and balance each other’s strengths. Facilitators will lead the learner-focused workshop designed to encourage participants to take control of assessment practices, and frame it with reflections on how the workshop has been fine-tuned through an on-going practice of assessment, reflection, and collaboration. Offering a behind-the-scenes look at how the workshop was developed will encourage participants to appreciate how different approaches and expectations between colleagues can lead to successful collaboration. Facilitators are keen to share how their positive experience in the CPUTL has influenced their teaching and learning both within and outside of academia. In doing so, the facilitators also seek to engage participants in a discussion of how they have put the skills learned in programs focused on scholarly teaching and learning, like the CPUTL, into practice to take advantage of personal, professional, and scholarly opportunities.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:30am - 10:30am
Cypress 2 Room

9:30am

Engaging the gifts of graduate students
Student engagement refers to the resources, effort and time invested by learners and their educational institutions towards enhancing student experience and development and academic outcomes (Trowler, 2010). According to research in higher education contexts (Kuh, Crurce, Shoup &, Kinzie, 2008) engaged students are more likely to persist and achieve greater academic success. The Centre for Academic and Professional Engagement (CAPE), the engagement arm of Simon Fraser University’s Office of Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Fellows has developed a unique model of student engagement by applying principles embedded within an asset-based approach, such as the framework popularized by Kretzmann &, McKnight (2006).The CAPE team includes communications and engagement officers, a professional development planner, an International Student coordinator and an Indigenous Student coordinator. These five individuals work closely together to offer graduate students a combination of professional development training, individual advising, community building, academic enrichment events, and social media spaces which support students to discover their own strengths, connect with each other, and ultimately foster a high-performing community of graduate students. In this session the five members of CAPE will present on the synthesis between an asset-based approach and an Indigenous approach (Lee Brown’s definition of indigenous leadership which situates finding one’s gift as central to developing community) and its connection to the success of graduate students. Participants will then explore this approach in a World Cafe format in order to gain a deeper understanding of how it can apply to their own contexts.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 9:30am - 10:30am
Cypress 1 Room

10:45am

Teaching assistant (TA) competencies: Testing theory through practice
The development of a national set of teaching assistant (TA) competencies for use by Canadian higher education institutions was initiated in the fall of 2012 by Teaching Assistant and Graduate Student Advancement (TAGSA), a special interest group (SIG) of the Society of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (STLHE). This work built off limited literature that delved into TA and graduate student competencies (Schonwetter & Ellis, 2007, Simpson & Smith, 1993). Since the initial meeting at the Educational Developers Caucus (EDC) conference in February, 2013, a group of professionals have come together at subsequent working group sessions at the annual EDC conference and STLHE conference to develop the competencies. Throughout the process, members of TAGSA believed in the importance of an iterative consultative process to inform the creation of the competencies (Korpan, Le-May Sheffield, & Verwoord, 2015). At the STLHE 2014 session, members decided it was time to put theory into practice and test the competencies.

Since STLHE 2014, several institutions have used the TA competencies to support graduate student development. This workshop invites participants from these institutions to share their challenges and successes in using the competencies in order to encourage small group discussion about further development and implementation at more institutions. The intended audience for this workshop is anyone involved with or interested in teaching assistant and/or graduate student development, including graduate students, educational developers, administrators, as well as participants who are interested in considering how TA competencies might be used to support graduate student development at their own institution.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 10:45am - 11:20am
Cypress 1 Room

11:25am

World Café
Small table discussion about topics defined during the opening welcome.

Drawing on seven integrated design principles, the World Café methodology is a simple, effective, and flexible format for hosting large group dialogue.

World Café is composed of five components:

1) Setting: Create a "special" environment, most often modelled after a café, i.e. small round tables covered with a checkered tablecloth, butcher block paper, colored pens, a vase of flowers, and optional "talking stick" item. There should be four chairs at each table.

2) Welcome and Introduction: The host begins with a warm welcome and an introduction to the World Café process, setting the context, sharing the Cafe Etiquette, and putting participants at ease.

3) Small Group Rounds: The process begins with the first of three or more twenty minute rounds of conversation for the small group seated around a table. At the end of the twenty minutes, each member of the group moves to a different new table. They may or may not choose to leave one person as the "table host" for the next round, who welcomes the next group and briefly fills them in on what happened in the previous round.

4) Questions: each round is prefaced with a question designed for the specific context and desired purpose of the session. The same questions can be used for more than one round, or they can be built upon each other to focus the conversation or guide its direction.

5) Harvest: After the small groups (and/or in between rounds, as desired) individuals are invited to share insights or other results from their conversations with the rest of the large group. These results are reflected visually in a variety of ways, most often using graphic recorders in the front of the room.

 


Tuesday June 16, 2015 11:25am - 12:00pm
Cypress 2 Room

12:00pm

Pre-Conference Workshop Lunch
Pre-conference lunch is intended fro pre-conference workshops participants and facilitators only. 

Tuesday June 16, 2015 12:00pm - 1:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

12:30pm

1:00pm

1:30pm

Standing to preach, moving to teach
There is an art to moving in the classroom which graduate students may not consider when planning their lessons yet in doing so can help reduce many problems in teaching. This session provides participants with ample opportunity to reflect, consider how movement can differ depending on classroom configurations, how this can affect teaching strategies(see refs), and practice fine tuning their movement in the classroom. Participants will be given two diagrams, a traditional classroom and an Active Learning Classroom (ALC), and sketch out how they would move around the room to attend to all students and what teaching strategies they could use in each room. Participants will then discuss their drawings with other participants in small groups. Next a case study will be presented on four Teaching Assistants from one course who taught the same session twice in one day in a traditional classroom and ALC. The findings from the study will be compared with the participants’ drawings and participants will plan out the most efficient route in attending to students in two classrooms. The furniture in the room will be reorganized, half reflecting a traditional room, and half in groups. Half the participants will be in the role of the instructor attending to the other half of the participants seated in the two configurations, and then switch roles. Debriefing period will conclude the session with discussions on what was learned and what they will take away, and then exit tickets.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 2:30pm
Cypress 1 Room

1:30pm

Tuning into GTAs: Querying perceived expectations and challenges in acting as educational leaders in their departments
Teaching and learning centers (TLCs) at Canadian universities face the challenge of providing contextually relevant educational development (ED) support to the campus from a typically central location (Taylor & Bédard, 2010). Often, they provide training to graduate teaching assistants (GTAs), and some centers have begun to go further, taking a distributed leadership (DL) approach through a network of discipline-specific GTAs acting as mentors to their peers. This allows for local and discipline-specific peer support, increases the reach of a TLC, and may foster a culture of teaching and learning in departments with such lead GTAs. For the lead GTAs themselves, there is the opportunity to develop leadership and pedagogical competencies, and to leverage the experience towards their CV. The value of GTA peer support has long been acknowledged (see Puccio, 1986), and the importance of DL for ED is gaining attention (see Christensen-Hughes & Mighty, 2010). While the idea is theoretically sound, how harmonious it will be in practice is not covered in the literature. The purpose of this 60 minute interactive session is to query participant interest in, and perspectives on, the idea of a lead GTA-type program for educational development in the disciplines. General themes to be developed through group activities are: (1) expectations of such a position (support, benefits, etc.), and (2) perceived challenges in taking a leadership role (e.g. departmental culture, existing GTA roles, etc.).
While the main audience for this session is GTAs, opinions from faculty members, administration, and TLC staff would also be valuable.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 2:30pm
Cypress 2 Room

1:30pm

Want your students to learn more? Designing your courses for more significant learning
Most college teachers would like their courses to be an experience in which their students achieve some kind of significant learning that lasts. But we feel frustrated and uncertain about how to get that to happen – for more students, more of the time.
This workshop will (a) expand participants’ vision of the kinds of learning that are possible and (b) familiarize participants with a process for designing courses for Significant Learning, i.e., learning that truly makes a difference in the way students think, act and feel after college.

In this workshop, we will:

- Examine the place of instructional design in the “big picture” of teaching,
- Take a close look at what each of us really wants our students to learn,
- Work through the model of Integrated Course Design that enables us to systematically design significant learning into our courses, and
- Conclude by looking at some case studies that address the question of whether this more intentional way of designing courses really makes a difference in the way students respond.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 4:30pm
Salon 1

1:30pm

A reflective practice approach to professional development: The “reflective practicum”
Schön’s (1983) concept of the “reflective practitioner” describes how professionals think in action. Argyris and Schön’s (1974) concept of “theories of action” suggests we design our actions to achieve our intentions, and we have theories, not necessarily explicit, about how to act effectively. By reflecting on how we were thinking in action, particularly in difficult interpersonal situations, we can make explicit our “theories-in-use,” the values and strategies we are actually using to design our interactions. Schön used “reflective practicum” to describe this type of learning experience.

Almost everyone espouses the importance of generating valid information about “difficult situations” so that we can make the best choice about how to act in order to “solve the problem” effectively. However, in difficult interpersonal situations we often don’t “practice what we preach” – we are not transparent about our thoughts and feelings, the strategies we are using, nor are we curious about the other person’s views of the situation, and of our thinking. We espouse “mutual learning” but we are “unilateral” (Schwarz, 2002). The result is often mistrust, misunderstanding and little learning or change.

This “theory-of-action approach to reflective practice” (Smith, 2012) has been successfully applied to professional development to create “reflective practicums” in short workshops (3-6 hours) with faculty, and over an eleven-year project with health care professionals. In this workshop we will examine the theoretical framework underlying this approach (values, assumptions and strategies), and apply it to participants’ cases about difficult interpersonal situations in their teaching or educational development experiences generated before and/or during the workshop.

Speakers
RS

Ron Smith

Concordia Univeristy
Dr. Ron Smith is a Professor Emeritus, Education Department Concordia University and a 3M National Teaching Fellow. He is the Past-Chair of the 3M Council and has served on the adjudication for the 3M.



Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 4:30pm
Thompson Room

1:30pm

An aligned approach to assessing the work of educational development centres
Increasingly, our campus teaching centre is being asked to account for its impact and make its work more transparent. Having considered many evaluation models, we adapted elements of familiar processes (i.e., Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006; Wright, 2011) to fit our local context. In creating our hybrid comprehensive model of assessment, we also applied curriculum thinking to our situation and harnessed the power of “constructive alignment” (Biggs & Tang, 2011) to help achieve harmony in our approach. Knowing that other centres are facing similar calls for evidence-based decision making in a time of fiscal restraint, we will share our year-long collaborative process for coming up with categories of evidence and an approach to assessment. In so doing, we will provide a framework and tools that others may wish to adapt. First, we will describe our approach and its links to our activities, outcomes, and assessments across all our forms of contact with faculty, staff, postdoctoral fellows, and students (graduate and undergraduate).

Then, we turn to activities designed to scope participants’ own practice, consider the role of intended learning outcomes, and focus on elements of assessment: identifying, gathering, analysing, interpreting, and disseminating evidence. Throughout, the idea that centres’ own programs and consultative work can be understood in terms of constructive alignment will be tested. By the end of the workshop, participants should be able to adapt an approach and associated materials to their own local contexts, leaving with a plan to implement at least one new step in a centre assessment process.

Speakers
avatar for Trevor Holmes

Trevor Holmes

Senior Instructional Developer, University of Waterloo
Trevor Holmes is an educational developer with a background in cultural studies and English literature. He teaches in the Women's Studies program at the University of Waterloo where he is also a Senior Instructional Developer at the Centre for Teaching Excellence.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 4:30pm
Salon 3

1:30pm

The bio-mechanics behind teaching and learning practical vocal exercises: The legacy of Jo Estill (1921-2010)
As a singer, researcher, and leader in voice mechanics and vocal pedagogy, Jo Estill’s objective was simple, yet daunting: she wanted to teach the world to sing. Though an accomplished singer herself, her ability to see the shortcomings of the then current vocal pedagogy and the questionable science upon which it was based, motivated her to create an efficient and scientifically sound program of voice instruction. Her work led to techniques that are employed across the disciplines of singing (in multiple genres), speech, and speech therapy.

Her investigation started with research into six different voice qualities: speech, falsetto, twang, sob, opera and belt. Each quality required a different configuration of the vocal tract and its various muscles. This led to the development of the figures for voice, the isolation of thirteen anatomical elements, the articulation of which can affect the quality of the voice. This developed into two courses: Figures for Voice Control, and Figure Combinations for Six Voice Qualities.

In this practical session the presenter, who teaches voice skills to lecturing faculty, speech to film and theatre students, and singing to musical theatre students, will outline the Estill Model, including the thirteen figures and the six qualities. A methodical approach for teaching these skills, including a thirteen-point diagnostic will be outlined. Attendees will be introduced to some of the figures suited to projecting the voice in the lecture hall and classroom. Some participants will undergo an Estill diagnostic assessment, and a demonstration of some techniques to enhance vocal presentation.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 1:30pm - 4:30pm
Chehalis Room

3:00pm

Assessing TA training: Teaching assistant, student and faculty perspectives
With increasing course enrollments and many graduate students holding research assistantship positions, the Department of Sociology at the University of British Columbia employs both graduate and undergraduate teaching assistants to support students enrolled in undergraduate courses. Undergraduate TAs have expectations, concerns, levels of experience, pay rates, and relationships with students and the department that differ from graduate TAs (Hogan et al., 2007). Faculty must balance needs of TAs with their own needs for assistance as well as provide mentorship and professional development opportunities to their TAs. Undergraduate students have their own learning goals that may be impacted by the TA’s knowledge and ability (Bland & Sleightholme, 2012; Shannon, Twale & Moore, 1998). Thus, an investigation into TA training is paramount. Drawing upon anonymous survey data from teaching assistants, faculty and undergraduate students as well as focus group data with TAs, this session will discuss the current UBC Sociology TA training program and present strategies for strengthening TA training. By the end of this session, participants will be able to identify: 1) training needs of both undergraduate and graduate TAs and note the implications of these differences; 2) TA training needs of faculty; 3) TA training needs of undergraduate students; and 4) strategies for best meeting the needs of these four groups. The session will conclude with participant driven discussion of best practices for TA training. Our presentation may help establish best practices for the structure of TA training programs in post-secondary institutions.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 3:00pm - 3:30pm
Cypress 2 Room

3:00pm

Tuning into teaching as craft: Conceptual change and emerging identities in a peer-based TA training program
An ongoing struggle in graduate student teaching development is not only to increase effectiveness in the classroom, but to instil an engagement in teaching as part of holistic scholarly practice (Pentecoste, Langdon, Asirvatham, Robus &, Parson, 2012, Sandi-Urena, Cooper &, Gatlin, 2011). This session will explore a model for a peer-based teaching assistant training program at a large, research-intensive university that seems to enable such a conceptual shift and encourage peer trainers and the students with whom they work to view themselves as teaching scholars and creative practitioners. Through a preliminary analysis of qualitative data from graduate student reflections and evaluations, a recent mixed-methods study, a collaborative auto-ethnography by graduate student peer trainers, and reflections from program administrators, this session will examine the question: what conditions in such a program foster an expanded view of teaching and an emerging identity as a critically reflective educator? Early analysis points to some key themes that have also emerged in graduate student professional development literature (Brower, Carlson-Dakes &, Shu Barger, 2007, Sweitzer, 2009): the ability to set defined teaching goals, shared ownership and commitment, the ability to connect practice to theory, the willingness and ability to experiment and take risks, the sense of belonging to a community, mentorship and feedback. Through experiencing discussion activities intended to move thinking around graduate student teaching support beyond “tips & tricks, participants will be invited to fine-tune their own conceptualization of graduate student teaching development, and to consider how and where graduate student teachers in their own institutions are enabled to shift pedagogical stances, take risks, share goals in short, tune into their practice.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 3:00pm - 3:30pm
Cypress 1 Room

3:35pm

Roundtable 1: Debating the value of interdisciplinarity to graduate student professional development
The extent to which interdisciplinary interactions invigorate teaching methodologies has been debated throughout educational literature. Some argue, for example, that “the traditional notion of academic disciplines . . . fails to reflect the changing context of higher education (Davies and Devlin, 2007). Others, such as Anna Jones, have suggested that “a de-decisciplined approach to generic skills has led to problems in the areas of educational policy and practice (2009). This session, led by three graduate students with experience in various interdisciplinary professional development programs at a Canadian university, will challenge participants to address these perspectives from within their own academic experience and disciplinary and/or educational development lens.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 3:35pm - 4:00pm
Cypress 1 Room

3:35pm

Roundtable 2: The development and implementation of one-hour teaching assistant workshops

Graduate student teaching assistants require training to develop from “reluctant teaching assistants into mature, capable teachers” (Siebring, 1972).  Workshops are an excellent way to foster this development, but the length of these workshops has been debated (Garet, 2001; Goodlad, 1997).  The objective of this session will be to support shorter, more frequent workshops as opposed to fewer, longer workshops as presented by a department appointed lead graduate student teaching assistant (Teaching Assistant Consultant) from September 2014 to April 2015.  These workshops were presented over lunch, for one hour, twice a month and were of two flavours: half were professional development and half were visits from faculty and lab staff that came to share their teaching stories.  A handout will be provided to participants detailing the nature of each workshop, the reception and attendance of each by graduate students, and the successes of the program (as well as suggestions for improvement).

Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes professional development effective: Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Goodlad, S. (1997). Responding to the perceived training needs of graduate teaching assistants. Studies in Higher Education, 22(1), 83-92.

Siebring, B. R. (1972). A training program for teaching assistants. Improving College and University Teaching, 20(2), 98-99.



Tuesday June 16, 2015 3:35pm - 4:00pm
Cypress 1 Room

3:35pm

Roundtable 3: Using established standards to develop teaching competencies in graduate student teaching assistants
Graduate student teaching assistants (GTA) are integral members of the teaching community in higher education. It is important that GTAs are well prepared for their significant role in undergraduate education and that their approach to teaching and learning is in harmony with the goals and practice of the teaching community in their unit or institution. The training of GTAs and opportunities for professional development tend to be ad hoc and tailored to the discipline, teaching context and level of institutional support. Recent developments by a NSF-funded initiative have articulated competencies of a model GTA and aligned GTA training program standards (http://www.bio.utk.edu/biotap/). These competencies and standards can be useful in the design or revision of training programs. The purpose of this workshop is for participants to use a rubric of these standards to compare the elements of a GTA training program developed at the University of British Columbia (UBC). Participants will then consider the alignment of their current or future GTA training programs to these standards. The effectiveness of TA training and professional development experiences can be documented using a variety of assessment tools. One TA training program developed at UBC was assessed using a self-report survey of GTAs. The results aligned well with the established standards revealing standards that were met as well deficiencies of programs which can now be addressed by the developers.

Speakers
AS

Adriana Suarez-Gonzalez (University of British Columbia)

FLEXIBLE LEARNING EVALUATION COORDINATOR, University of British Columbia
Adriana coordinates the evaluation initiatives of the different flexible learning projects that are currently underway across UBC’s faculties and departments, as well of those flexible learning projects in various planning stages. She provides consultation and assists in the development... Read More →


Tuesday June 16, 2015 3:35pm - 4:00pm
Cypress 1 Room

4:05pm

Mentee and mentor skill enhancement in a student-led peer mentorship program
Student peers are uniquely positioned to mentor one another in a way they often perceive to be less evaluative and hierarchical than faculty-student mentoring relationships (Girard & Musielak, 2012). This session will discuss the Sociology student-led peer mentorship program where graduate student mentors and undergraduate student mentees are matched based on mentees’ desired skill development and mutual areas of interest. By the end of this session, participants will be able to identify: 1) unique mentorship needs of senior undergraduate students working toward post-baccalaureate education, 2) how a peer-led mentorship program can address some of these needs, and 3) strategies for structuring a mentorship program that successfully meets undergraduate student needs and provides opportunities for graduate students to develop leadership skills. Our research is based on pre- and post-program surveys and focus groups of mentee and mentor participants. Analysis of this data reveals changes in respondents’ self-described capabilities to take on research, teaching, and interpersonal tasks. In discussing the findings, we stress the mentorship needs of senior undergraduate students completing Honours theses, applying to post-baccalaureate programs, and/or working as teaching assistants for the first time. This group of students is often overlooked within the mentorship literature focused on first year undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty (Countryman & Zinck, 2013, Goff, 2011, Le Cornu, 2005). The session will conclude with a participant-driven discussion of best practices for structuring mentorship programs. Overall, our presentation can help establish best practices for the structure of academic peer mentorship programs in post-secondary institutions.


Tuesday June 16, 2015 4:05pm - 5:00pm
Cypress 1 Room

4:05pm

TA Training – Thinking like a TA after being a student: A change in perspective

This session will focus on training techniques to help bridge the gap between undergraduate students becoming a teacher for the first time, and will be of particular interest to those running Teaching Assistant (TA) training programs, and for faculty wishing to better support first-time TA’s.

During this session, attendees will develop techniques to incorporate into TA Training programs designed to transition the perspective of new TA’s from students to first time teachers. Attendees will also develop an appreciation for some of the challenges and hurdles facing first-time TA’s, and how to better support them in their student-teacher transition.

Attendees will take part in a brief activity as if they were first time TA’s: Good TA/Bad TA.   The activity involves sharing both positive and negative experiences while had during undergrad, i.e. from the perspective of a student.  The perspective is then switched to that of a teacher, and these experiences are evaluated and commented on. The comments will be briefly discussed afterwards, with a focus on how many of the ‘good’ experiences are no longer good from the TA perspective and how the bad experiences really can happen. As a group, participants will take a step back from the activity and discuss how it was useful, how it can be adapted to different situations, and what could be added or removed depending on application. The activity also reveals to the instructor what are some of the most common perspectives of their new TA’s.



Tuesday June 16, 2015 4:05pm - 5:00pm
Cypress 2 Room

4:30pm

Meeting - Educational Developers Caucus General Meeting and Dialogue

All educational developers are welcome to attend the EDC general meeting. Updates will be provided on recent EDC activities.

Contact: Deb Dawson – dldawson@uwo.ca or Stephanie Chu – stephanie@sfu.ca


Tuesday June 16, 2015 4:30pm - 5:30pm
Seymour Room

5:00pm

Special Event - Student Welcome

Are you a student attending the STLHE conference? At this welcome event, members of the STLHE Board including the President, Conference Co-Chair, and Chair of Student Advocacy will introduce students to STLHE, highlight some of the sessions and conference activities that might be of specific interest to students, and facilitate some community-building activities.

Contacts: Robert Lapp – rlapp@mta.ca or Roselynn Verwoord – roselynn.verwoord@ubc.ca

Speakers
avatar for Robert Lapp (Mount Allison University)

Robert Lapp (Mount Allison University)

President, STLHE
In addition to being President of STLHE, I am a 3M National Teaching Fellow (2008) and Chair of the English Department at Mount Allison University. I am also interested in Integral Education, threshold concepts, experiential learning in the Humanities, and contemplative practice... Read More →
avatar for Roselynn Verwoord

Roselynn Verwoord

University of Victoria


Tuesday June 16, 2015 5:00pm - 5:30pm
Cypress 1 Room

5:30pm

Welcome Reception

Contacts: Robert Lapp – rlapp@mta.ca, Simon Bates – simon.bates@ubc.ca or Stephanie Chu – stephanie@sfu.ca 


Speakers
avatar for Stephanie Chu

Stephanie Chu

Vice Provost Teaching & Learning, Kwantlen Polytechnic University
Passionate about advancing teaching and learning and related University community and culture. Imagine what we can do together!
avatar for Simon Bates (University of British Columbia)

Simon Bates (University of British Columbia)

Senior Advisor, Teaching and Learning | Academic Director, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology., University of British Columbia
STLHE conference co-chair | Professor of Teaching in Physics and Astronomy at UBC, currently designing a new intro course for first year Physics students.
avatar for Robert Lapp (Mount Allison University)

Robert Lapp (Mount Allison University)

President, STLHE
In addition to being President of STLHE, I am a 3M National Teaching Fellow (2008) and Chair of the English Department at Mount Allison University. I am also interested in Integral Education, threshold concepts, experiential learning in the Humanities, and contemplative practice... Read More →


Tuesday June 16, 2015 5:30pm - 8:00pm
Bayshore Foyer
 
Wednesday, June 17
 

7:00am

Special Event - 2015 3M National Teaching Fellows: Beginning the journey

Speical Event - 2015 3M National Teaching Fellows: Beginning the Journey

Your continental breakfast will be provided at the meeting.

Contact: Shannon Murray - smurray@upei.ca 


Wednesday June 17, 2015 7:00am - 8:30am
Chairman Room

7:30am

Meeting - Special Interest Group (SIG): College Sector Educators Community (CSEC) Annual General Meeting

You are welcome to bring your continental breakfast to the meeting.

Contact: Tim Loblaw – tloblaw@bowvalleycollege.ca


Wednesday June 17, 2015 7:30am - 8:30am
Mackenzie Room

7:30am

8:30am

9:30am

Keynote 01: Applying principles of learning to teaching - with or without technology
Dr. Marsha Lovett is Diretor of the Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence and Educational Innovation, and a Teaching Professor in the Department of Psychology, both at Carnegie Mellon University. At the Eberly Center, she applies theoretical and empirical research on how students learn to improve teaching practice. In her research, Dr. Lovett studies learning, memory, and problem solving. She has published more than fifty articles on learning and instruction, co-authored the book How Learning Works: 7 Research-based principles for smart teaching, and developed several innovative, educational technologies, including StatTutor and the Learning Dashboard. 



Wednesday June 17, 2015 9:30am - 10:45am
Bayshore Ballroom

10:45am

Nutrition Break
Wednesday June 17, 2015 10:45am - 11:15am
Bayshore Foyer

11:15am

CON01.04 - Play it: Impacts of experiential learning and authentic assessment in undergraduate music theory
This presentation describes an innovative redesign of undergraduate music theory curricula, which traditionally rely on written exercises for assessment, to feature hands-on music making at the piano as a central component of the instructional design (implemented following Wiggins and McTighe 1998). Using technology, students learn experientially (following Kolb 1984) and aurally through activities that apply their theoretical understanding to creative tasks at the highest levels of Bloom's taxonomy (Anderson and Krathwohl 2001), such as improvisation and composition. Quantitative and qualitative results from an impact study completed in fall 2013 are shared, which show not only a marked impact on how (and how well) students learned music theory, but also a dramatic expansion of what (i.e., which skills) they acquired in the course and a positive shift in their attitudes about the value and relevance of music theory. Broadly speaking, this curricular innovation produced far more significant learning results (in the sense of Fink 2013). This study responds to an ongoing dissonance between the applied, artistic matters of musical performance and the academic, systematic tasks of music theory. By learning about this pedagogical intervention and its documented results and engaging in a dialogue about them, participants will be able to articulate the value of creative activities and applied, authentic assessment to the teaching and learning of highly technical and systematic concepts. Though focused on disciplinary teaching within music theory, the presentation emphasizes findings that can be applied just as well in other pedagogical fields.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.

Kolb. D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Chairman Room

11:15am

CON01.07 - From caving to robots: Integration of experiential learning into a curriculum
The coalescence of experiential and interdisciplinary learning opportunities in conjunction with the traditional classroom experience is an important aspiration for Universities but one that involves careful instructional planning and strong institutional (and faculty) support (Porter et al., 2012). The creation of Interdisciplinary Experiences (IE) courses at McMaster University in 2013 has provided students in the Arts & Science and Integrated Science programs with an opportunity to take courses offering unique learning experiences that significantly complement more traditional, lecture-based courses (Davis, 1995; McMaster University, 2015). The courses are for credit towards degree requirements and open to students from both the Faculties of Science and Humanities. This discussion aims to cover the creation, implementation, logistics, assessment and resulting student feedback from IE courses.

There have been nine unique IE courses run over the last two years, covering a diverse range of topics. Some courses, such as the aptly named ‘Electronics for the Rest of Us!’ have been based around a task, such as designing and building an electronic device of choice while others, like the ‘Kentucky Caving Field Course’, take students into the field, experiencing the science and culture of the Kentucky, USA cave system.

This discussion will give participants an opportunity to actively participate in sharing reactions and feedback to the challenges and successes of the IE courses. Within the session we will work through the process of creating such courses based upon discussion around the room while taking into account potential logistical challenges and assessment methods.

Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary Courses and Team Teaching: New Arrangements for Learning. Phoenix: American Council on Education and Oryx Press.

McMaster University. (2015). Experiential Learning – Arts & Science Program. Retrieved from http://artsci.mcmaster.ca/experiential-learning/

Porter, G., King, J., Goodkin, N., & Chan, C. (2012). Experiential Learning in a Common Core Curriculum: Student Expectations, Evaluations, and the Way Forward. International Education Studies, 5, 24-38.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Salon 2

11:15am

CON01.08 - “Over Easy” flipped experience: preparing faculty to effectively implement flipped teaching
In 2012, flipped teaching had established itself as a rapidly growing practice in teaching and learning (Goodwin & Miller, 2013). Flipped teaching is a practice that opens up in-class time for active learning strategies by moving the lecture content from in the classroom to prior to class, often in the form of videos (McLaughlin et al., 2014). At our institution, we wanted to create a professional development opportunity for our faculty members to begin utilizing this practice effectively. As a result, we developed and offered the “Over Easy” Flipped Experience. This workshop was designed to be very practical. To achieve this, the workshop we offered was flipped. This meant that faculty participants were required to explore and complete online materials prior to attending. Goals of the workshop were for participants to be able to articulate what flipped teaching is and why it would be used, to create and distribute a lecture video, and to create a student-centred lesson plan to use in conjunction with the flipped pre-class materials. The workshop has now been offered three times. Attendees of this interactive session will be provided with specific details of the design and structure of this workshop and given the opportunity to discuss strategies for developing faculty skills in using flipped teaching. Evidence will also be presented on the effectiveness of this workshop in terms of how many participants went on to flip their classes, how many employed other techniques and strategies presented, and any feedback they have for improving the workshop.

McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., & Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 236-243.

Goodwin, B., & Miller, K. (2013). Research Says / Evidence on Flipped Classrooms Is Still Coming In. Educational Leadership, 70(6).

Speakers
avatar for Ryan Banow (University of Saskatchewan)

Ryan Banow (University of Saskatchewan)

Instructional Designer, University of Saskatchewan



Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Salon 3

11:15am

CON01.05 - Are there perks to being a Twitter wallflower? Exploring peripheral Twitter participation in public relations education
Increasingly, instructors at all academic levels and across a variety of disciplines are introducing social networking tools in their classes – likely in response to the participatory culture that has evolved from the Web 2.0 technology that has nurtured a generation of “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001). As a social media instructor, I witnessed young people engaged in social networking as a “living technology” (Kennedy, Judd, Churchward, Gary & Krause, 2008, p.119), facilitating their social lives, but were reticent when asked to migrate to the social networks that have become the “learning technology” (Kennedy, et. al., 2008) of the classroom. Kennedy, et. al. (2008) has described the migration from living to learning technologies as neither automatic, nor guaranteed (p. 119), resulting in non- and peripheral participation among students, despite the digital native rhetoric, and the situated learning opportunities afforded by the publicness of the tool. At Humber College, public relations (PR) students are encouraged to use a Twitter hashtag, #humberpr, which has evolved into an online community of practice, where students, faculty and industry experts intersect. My research explores the experience of the PR student who remains on the periphery of #humberpr, including: negotiation of power dynamics; barriers to the migration from a living to a learning technology; and the learning of the peripheral player. Although focused on PR students, my findings should prove relevant to educators across all disciplines. 

Kennedy, G.E., Judd, T.S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K-L. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 24 (1), p 108-122. Retrieved from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet24/kennedy.html

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, Part 1. On the Horizon. Sept-Oct. 2001. 9 (5), (pp. 1-6). Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prenskyper cent20-per cent20digitalper cent20natives,per cent20digitalper cent20immigrantsper cent20-per cent20part1.pdf


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Director Room

11:15am

CON01.01 - Investigating the influence of learning attitudes on students' choice of major
Less than a year in to their university experience, students are faced with perhaps the most important decision of their undergraduate careers: their choice of major. While universities and departments invest significant time and effort in curriculum design, course design, advising, and outreach activities intended to support students in their choice, previous work has shown that students’ attitudes towards a discipline at the beginning of first year - prior to any of these interventions - can substantially influence their choice of major. This presentation will share the results of a recent investigation of how students’ attitudes towards chemistry change over the course of their first year, and how attitudes, academic achievement, and pedagogy may combine to influence students’ choice of major. The investigation was based on the analysis of a large database of students’ grades, majors, and responses to a widely used attitudinal survey administered at the beginning and end of each first-year term. We also conducted a series of focus groups with 1st and 2nd year students to develop a more complete understanding of influential factors, including how pedagogy impacts students’ perceptions of a scientific discipline. Although the present work focuses on grades and attitudes in chemistry, the tools, processes, and general trends of this investigation should be applicable to any learning discipline. This work was carried out with the ultimate goal of guiding recruitment and retention efforts to bring them into better harmony with the factors that bear the greatest influence on students’ decisions.

Barbera, J., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C. E., & Perkins, K. K. (2008). Modifying and Validating the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Use in Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(10), 1435. doi:10.1021/ed085p1435

Perkins, K. K., & Gratny, M. (2010). Who Becomes a Physics Major? A Long-term Longitudinal Study Examining the Roles of Pre-college Beliefs about Physics and Learning Physics, Interest, and Academic Achievement. Physics Education Research Conference, 1289(1), 253–256. doi:10.1063/1.3515214


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Mackenzie Room

11:15am

CON01.02 - Research on teaching philosophy statements from a learning perspective
Teaching philosophy statements have become a vital document that allow people to quickly know an individual's beliefs about teaching and learning, along with their intended practices. Research on teaching philosophy statements (e.g., Kaplan et al., 2007; Schönwetter, et al., 2002) reveals a range of criteria and resulting rubrics and frameworks to develop and evaluate quality statements. These rubrics outline criteria for graduate students to use for self-assessment during the writing process as well as for those hiring, mentoring, and giving feedback. In this presentation, we report on an interdisciplinary research project that looked for evidence in a sample of 80 teaching philosophy statements of a deep learning/student focused approach to teaching (Trigwell & Prosser, 2004) as well as disciplinary differences. Statements were written by graduate students from a range of disciplines participating in a 35-hour seminar on teaching and learning. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used in coding and analyzing the same data set with agreement and disagreement found in the data. We are now at the stage of verifying core categories that emerged during qualitative analysis and seeking explanations in the literature. The aim of our session is to present ways of evaluating an individual’s beliefs about teaching from a learning perspective.

Kaplan, M., Meizlish, D., O’Neal C., & Wright M. C. (2007). A research-based rubric for developing statements of teaching philosophy. In D. R. Robertson & L. B. Nilson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty instructional and organizational developers, 26, 42–262. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

Schönwetter, D.J., Sokal, L., Friesen, M. & Taylor, K.L. (2002) Teaching philosophies reconsidered: A conceptual model for the development and evaluation of teaching philosophy statements, International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 83-97.

Trigwell, K. & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and Use of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409-424.

Speakers
avatar for Arshad Ahmad

Arshad Ahmad

Associate Vice-President, Teaching and Learning & Director, MIIETL, McMaster University
Dr. Arshad Ahmad is the Associate Vice-President Teaching and Learning and Director of Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL) at McMaster University. He is the Past Coordinator of the 3MNTF program and a 3M National Teaching Fellow. He is the Past... Read More →
avatar for Janette Barrington

Janette Barrington

Associate Director, Educational Development, McMaster University
Janette Barrington is Manager, Strategic Initiatives, McMaster Institute for Innovation & Excellence in Teaching & Learning (MIIETL). She holds a PhD in Educational Technology and is actively involved in research on interdisciplinary perspectives on teaching and learning in higher... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Seymour Room

11:15am

CON01.06 - Art-making in health professions education: From research to practice
There is strong evidence supporting the personal and professional benefits for medical students of exposure to art. There is limited information on the value or potential role of art-making in relation to medical education. We explored the role of art-making within medical education by analyzing 76 artist statements submitted with visual artwork by students, residents, and practitioners to a national health care student/practitioner art exhibit. We analyzed the data inductively using grounded theory strategies and this generated eight themes: enhancing learning, escaping constraints, balancing life and work, surviving, expressing self identity and discovering professional identity, bearing witness, healing self and others, and advocating change. These themes attest to the instrumental, humanistic and other impacts of art-making in the context of medical education and practice. In this interactive session, we will draw upon research findings from a recent qualitative study to show how the practice of art-making can play a valuable role in the education of health professionals. We will also explore several stories of how art-making has offered a powerful humanizing influence through fostering new insight, increasing empathy and enhancing communicative and relational competence amongst students in the health professions. A selection of images of artworks created by medical students will be used to stimulate dialogue amongst session participants and elicit ideas about how art-making could be incorporated into many aspects of health professions education. These ideas will be recorded live in a mind-map and made available to participants after the session along with a list of resources. 

Dissanayake, E. (1995). Homo aestheticus: Where art comes from and why. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Goldie, J. (2012). The formation of professional identity in medical students: Considerations for Educators. Medical Teacher. 34, e641-e648. 

Kumagai, A.K. (2012). Perspective: Acts of interpretation: A philosophical approach to using creative arts in medical education. Academic Medicine. 87, 1138-1144.

Siegel, M. (1995). More than words: the generative power of transmediation for learning. Canadian Journal of Education. 20, 455-475.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Salon 1

11:15am

CON01.10 - Student diversity in context: Structural factors enhancing the composition of classrooms and classroom dynamics‏
Frequent and appropriately structured classroom interactions between students with diverse life experiences have been shown to have positive learning outcomes (Chang, Astin, & Kim, 2004; Denson & Bowman, 2013; Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002; Nelson Laird, 2005). However, factors influencing student composition at the course level (rather than faculty or school level) have remained largely unexplored. To this end we examine organizational factors enhancing classroom diversity. Much sociological thought acknowledges the significance of multiple ways of seeing and knowing, making a systemic analysis of factors influencing classroom diversity particularly relevant for sociological teaching. In this paper we consider student enrollment trends in Introduction to Sociology courses at University of British Columbia from 2004 to 2013 based on student academic year level, degree program, admission average, age, gender, international/domestic status, and citizenship. We examine course composition in relation to course medium (online or face to face), term placement (summer or winter), number of credits (3 or 6) and other relevant characteristics. Our preliminary findings suggest that structural factors alter classroom diversity composition in particular ways and should be taken into account in creating positive learning environments conducive to student enrichment. During the session we will engage participants in a discussion about their own teaching experiences in relation to these findings. By the end of this session, participants will be able to articulate three factors influencing student composition at the course level. 

References: 

Chang, M. J., Astin, A. W., & Kim, D. (2004). Cross-racial interaction among undergraduates: Some consequences, causes, and patterns. Research in Higher Education, 45(5), 529‑553.

Denson, N., & Bowman, N. (2013). University diversity and preparation for a global society: the role of diversity in shaping intergroup attitudes and civic outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 38(4), 555-570. 

Gurin, P., Dey, E., Hurtado, S. & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330-366.

Nelson Laird, T. F. (2005). College students’ experiences with diversity and their effects on academic self-confidence, social agency, and disposition toward critical thinking. Research in Higher Education, 46(4), 365‑387.

Speakers

Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Cypress 2 Room

11:15am

CON01.03 - Tracking learning outcomes and assessment results in learning management systems
The changing landscapes for post-secondary education are increasingly requiring colleges and universities to measure educational quality, be more accountable and demonstrate how programs are maintaining standards. Measuring educational quality is more complex than simply measuring inputs and outputs (UNESCO 1990, 2000). Accrediting bodies such as the Accreditation Council for Business Schools & Programs (ACBSP) require institutions to explicitly show evidence of how course and program learning outcomes are measured and aligned with an appropriate assessment strategy. Measuring learning outcomes includes examining course and program designs, pedagogy and faculty philosophies on learning and teaching (Bresciani et al., 2010).  This interactive presentation will have participants examine and classify the level of learning outcomes presented and then determine the types of assessment strategies that would align with the learning outcomes. Strategies for tracking student success of each learning outcome using a data base and learning management system will be presented. Participants will then engage in discussions to determine the benefits and challenges to creating and managing these tracking processes and if such processes contribute to learning and teaching and academic improvements (Nusche, 2008). 

References:

Bresciani, M. J., Gardner, M. M., & Hickmott, J. (2010). Demonstrating Student Success: A Practical Guide to Outcomes-Based Assessment of Learning and Development in Student Affairs. Stylus Publishing, LLC. PO Box 605, Herndon, VA 20172-0605.

Nusche, D. (2008). Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: A comparative review of selected practices (No. 15). OECD Publishing.

UNESCO (2000). Dakar framework for action. Education for all: Meeting our collective commitments. Adopted by the World Education Forum, Dakar, Senegal, April 26-28, 1999. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121147e.pdf



Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Thompson Room

11:15am

CON01.09 - Harmonic progression: Adapting an evaluation tool for online courses to a new setting
Evaluating online learning involves evaluating educational design, technology use, and “online instructional practices that integrate technology appropriately for developing and delivering quality online courses” (Bangert, 2008, p. 28). Research shows that classroom-based evaluation tools do not adequately capture the relationships between content, pedagogy, and technology in online courses (Berk, 2013). In response to this evidence, the Faculty of Arts and Science, which offers a large variety of online courses and programs, sought an alternative to the collective agreement-endorsed, university-wide evaluation tool, which is designed for classroom learning. An instrument developed by Bangert (2004) to assess constructivist-compatible online teaching practices, the Student Evaluation of Online Teaching Effectiveness (SEOTE), was adapted and piloted in 2014. The evaluation tool, like a harmonic chord, has different meanings in different contexts, some of which are discordant. This presentation explores those contexts, and explains the process by which consonance was achieved over two pilot phases. Using Stobart's (2009) validity framework as a guide, this process included negotiations with the university’s faculty association, statistical analyses of the data, and student and instructor focus groups to ascertain the tool’s usefulness. Audience members will be stimulated to consider factors that differentiate effective evaluation of online courses from classroom-based teaching. They will gain insight into strategies for introducing a new evaluation tool in a unionized environment, and methodologies for evaluating the tool itself. During the presentation, the audience will be invited to brainstorm items on which an online instructor/course could be assessed, which will then be compared to the SEOTE.

References:

Bangert, A. W. (2008). The development and validation of the student evaluation of online teaching effectiveness. Computers in the Schools, 25 (1-2), 25–47.

Bangert, A. W. (2004). The seven principles of of good practice: A framework for evaluating online teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(3), 217–232.

Berk, R. A. (2013). Face-to-Face versus Online Course Evaluations: A “Consumer's Guide" to Seven Strategies. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 9(1). http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no1/berk_0313.htm

Stobart, G. (2009). Determining validity in national curriculum assessments. Educational Research, 51(2), 161–179. doi:10.1080/00131880902891305



Wednesday June 17, 2015 11:15am - 11:45am
Cypress 1 Room

12:00pm

CON02.09 - Using curriculum mapping to help institutions visualise change
STLHE members have a long history of working to inspire institutional change, not least through curriculum review, (re)design and transformation (Wolf and Christensen Hughes, 2008). We (the authors) wanted a simple, non proprietary and user-friendly method for visually mapping academic-program courses in order to support our university-wide curricular work with departments and faculties. Curricular maps: save time by allowing curriculum committees to visualise the implications of potential curricular changes before the substantial work of making them is actually undertaken; have the advantage of motivating change, as colleagues can see the logic (or otherwise) of the existing course sequence and where there are barriers to student progress; and represent a clear way of communicating to students regarding their program choices, best path to degree and progress to-date. The goals of this session are to: (i) help others who might wish to develop something similar, (ii) document the potential of visual curricular maps for motivating change and (iii) have participants share experiences and think about possible opportunities for implementation at home. The session will be interactive and experiential. Participants will have a chance to: (i) try out the curricular mapping process our academic departments go through (ii) directly experience how visualisation of curricular issues can save time and resources, as well as supporting a faster transition to a student-centred curriculum and (iii) ask questions and establish community. 

Dawson, T. (2013). A guide to program and curriculum planning. Victoria, BC: The Learning and Teaching Centre, University of Victoria.

Wolf, P. & Christensen Hughes, J. (Eds.). (2007, Winter). Curriculum development in higher education: Faculty-driven processes and practices. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Salon 2

12:00pm

CON02.12 - Deploying autonomous project teams in educational development
Educational development work is necessarily driven by and aligned to institutional priorities in learning, teaching and curriculum development (Gibbs, 2013). In practice however, Educational Developers also need to respond to emerging priorities, arising needs and serendipitous opportunities as and when they present themselves (Gosling, 2009; Roche, 2003). The variable nature of such issues requires balancing a setting of medium to long-term direction with strategies which are emergent and unplanned. The concept of autonomous project teams (e.g., Clark & Wheelwright, 1992) within organizational effectiveness research offers insights into how we can respond effectively and efficiently with existing personnel to meet new challenges. Through this lens, we have examined one Centre’s approach to structuring tasks, problem solving, accountability, and collaboration to uncover how and why this approach works within our context. Additionally, we offer insight into how an infrastructure of autonomous project teams can be created and implemented and we identify ways to facilitate that process. During this presentation, we will share our experiences and initial outcomes of a study of use of this strategy by one educational development unit and invite colleagues attending to see their practice through the lens of autonomous project teams, and evaluate fit with their context and structure.

Clark, K. B., & Wheelwright, S. C. (1992). Organizing and leading “heavyweight” development teams. California Management Review, 34(3), 9-28.

Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1), 4-14. 

Gosling, D. (2009). Educational development in the UK: a complex and contradictory reality. International Journal for Academic Development, 14(1), 5-18.

Roche, V. (2003). Being an agent of change. In Kahn, P. & Baume, D. (Eds.), A guide to staff and educational development (pp. 171-191). London: Kogan Page.

Speakers
avatar for Carolyn Hoessler

Carolyn Hoessler

Program and Curriculum Development Specialist, GMCTE at the University of Saskatchewan
Carolyn Hoessler (Program and Curriculum Specialist) is a program and curriculum development specialist with 8 years of educational development experience. Her areas of specialty and focus include supporting faculty with curricular innovation, assessment of program outcomes, program... Read More →
avatar for Nancy K Turner (University of Saskatchewan)

Nancy K Turner (University of Saskatchewan)

Director, Teaching and Learning Enhancement, University of Saskatchewan


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Cypress 2 Room

12:00pm

CON02.03 - Australian universities’ use of learning analytics for increased student retention
As learning analytics utilizing “big data” relating to student performance become more sophisticated, individual teaching academics are being encouraged to leverage this rich information for the improvement of student success and the student experience (Beer, Jones & Clark 2012, Ferguson 2012, Clow 2013). This presentation reports findings from a national, federally-funded study including 29 Australian universities and over 400 university teachers, determining the maturity of the universities’ implementation of learning analytics for the improvement of student retention. Data was collected via an institutional level survey, an academic level survey and semi-structured interviews of teaching academics. Twenty-two institutions and over 350 teaching academics from across Australia responded to the institutional/individual surveys relating to their use/intentions for use of Learning Analytics data for the purposes of student retention and success. Survey and interview findings reveal that the use of analytics is embraced more actively by senior university leaders and teaching and learning and institutional research professionals than by individuals teaching in the classroom. Recommendations will be made relating to the increased readiness, encouragement and engagement of university teachers in learning analytics with student retention as an outcome. Participants will engage in a structured activity considering a formal model for universities’ implementation of learning analytics for student retention. They will be asked to determine the maturity level of their institutions in the use of learning analytics as well as how they feel that their own role and experience affects their view of the analytics wave that is changing how we support students worldwide. 

Beer, C., Jones, D., & Clark, D. (2012). Analytics and complexity: Learning and leading for the future. In M. Brown, M Hartnett & T. Stewart (Eds.), Future Challenges, Sustainable Futures (proceedings ASCILITE, Wellington, 2012), (pp.78-87). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/ wellington12/ 2012/images/custom/asclite2012_proceedings.pdf

Clow, D. (2013). An overview of learning analytics, 

Ferguson, R. 2012. Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317. doi:10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051816


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Mackenzie Room

12:00pm

CON02.11 - Exploring the impact of a fall break policy on student mental health outcomes
Increasing attention is being paid to the mental health of university and college students as they report higher levels of stress and anxiety than that of the general population (Stallman, 2010). As mental illness commonly develops between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four (Eisenberg, Golberstein, Gollust, & Hefner, 2007) post-secondary students are at particular risk. In fact, the higher stress levels associated with being a first year university student alone lead to higher dropout rates than either anxiety or depression (Tamin, 2013). Many universities across Ontario are implementing a policy for a fall break in hopes of alleviating students’ stress and anxiety in order to improve mental health, heighten retention, and increase academic productivity. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of an educational policy change to institute a fall break on student stress and retention. A mixed methods methodology is used to collect self-reported qualitative and quantitative indicators of stress and academic achievement along with objective measures of academic achievement and retention using a three-year longitudinal cross-sectional survey design. The Fall Break did decrease students overall stress. Students agree the break was beneficial, that workload did not increase as a result of the break (before or after) and that stress did not increase as a result. The group reporting the greatest benefit was first year students. This research provides comprehensive evidence regarding the utility of a Fall Break to reduce stress and increase retention in order to inform effective education policies in this respect.

Eisenberg, D., Gollust, S. E., Golberstein, E., & Hefner, J. L (2007). Prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and suicidality among university students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77(4), 534-542.

Stallman, H. M. (2010). Psychological distress in university students: A comparison with general population data. Australian Psychologist, 45(4), 249-257.

Tamin, S. K. (2013). Relevance of mental health issues in university student dropouts. Occupational Medicine, 63(6), 410-414.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Cypress 1 Room

12:00pm

CON02.02 - An analysis of the quality of student-led asynchronous discussions in on-line and blended learning courses
In this study we examine the pedagogical value of student-led asynchronous on-line discussions used in a first-year undergraduate Criminology class at Simon Fraser University. The course is offered in both distance education and blended-learning (includes weekly two-hour lectures) formats. Once during the term, each student produces an on-line presentation (PowerPoint format - no voice over or camera required) and two discussion questions and is also responsible for facilitating student discussion. Each student is also an assigned discussant for four different presentations during the course. In 2013, students were invited to complete an on-line survey regarding student perceptions of the delivery of this course. Our project emerged during our analysis of the 2013 survey which showed that not all students were fans of the online presentations and discussions. As instructors and teaching assistants we wanted to evaluate our perceptions because we felt that for the most part, the on-line discussions were of considerably higher quality than what we had experienced leading traditional first-year tutorials in-person discussions. The on-line discussion posts were often well-edited, thoughtful, engaging, and evidenced critical thinking. Despite the fact that students didn’t necessarily agree (Paechter & Maier 2010), our research findings support the value of well-designed and moderated asynchronous discussions in an on-line educational setting (Andresen, 2009). Finally, we address study-specific implications and advantages for EAL (English Additional Language) students and the use of on-line tutorial technology (Zeng & Takatsuka, 2009; Dang & Robertson, 2010). Opportunities for audience feedback and questions will be encouraged throughout. 

References:

Andresen, M. A. (2009). Asynchronous discussion forums: Success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 249-257.

Dang, T. T., & Robertson, M. (2010). Pedagogical lessons from students' participation in Web 2.0. [Article]. TESOL in Context, 20(2), 5-26. 

Paechter, M., & Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students' experiences and preferences in e-learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 292-297. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004

Zeng, G., & Takatsuka, S. (2009). Text-based peer–peer collaborative dialogue in a computer-mediated learning environment in the EFL context. System, 37(3), 434-446.

Speakers
SF

Sheri Fabian

Dr. Sheri Fabian is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University. Her teaching and research focus on minorities and justice, qualitative research methods, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. She is a mentor for the graduate student Certificate... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Bayshore Salon EF

12:00pm

CON02.07 - Building a harmonious and effective community of learners: The challenges of fostering peer interaction in online courses
Creating situations to promote effective interaction between students in online courses presents a greater challenge than in the face-to-face environment of traditional classrooms. Yet, because interaction is a key component of learning, we need to find effective ways to implement it in the online environment. As others have pointed out, “the main vehicle of communication in an online learning community is online discussion.” However, to be successful, those involved in online discussion need the opportunity to communicate with one another. That is, they need to work together as a community. According to M. Moallem, ”a community of learners cannot exist if its members do not care for and understand each other’s feelings.” Given that students practically never see each other’s facial expressions in the online environment, this presents a particular challenge. Promoting a successful community of learners in computer-facilitated courses therefore requires careful consideration. Responding to these challenges, this presentation will focus on ways to promote communication. We will discuss 2 strategies that were implemented in an on-line course on Paris: 1. The creation of a discussion forum where students uploaded their assignments and subsequently commented on the work of their peers; 2. The creation of working groups through which the foundational principles of collaboration were established. Students were then provided with opportunities to contribute to the creation of a community of learners. After presenting their findings, the presenters will initiate an interactive discussion, inviting those interested to share their views on the challenges of online interaction.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, 2(2), 87-105.

Moallem, M. (2003). An interactive online course: A collaborative design model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4), 85-103.

Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2014). Guidelines for facilitating the development of learning communities in online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 220-232.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Director Room

12:00pm

CON02.10 - From mobile access to multi-device learning ecologies: A case study
As mobile access is turning into primary access, many universities and organizations find themselves constantly challenged to keep up with student expectations. At the same time, we have moved further into an age of networked information and students have easier access to better quality educational resources outside of university than ever before. Faced with these opportunities, university instructor and software interaction designer Paul Hibbitts has pushed the boundaries of his multi-device course companions in order to improve learner experience and better support an open and ever-evolving learning ecology. In this presentation, Paul will present a multi-device course companion case study then share for discussion two recently published learning and education models: 1) a learning + technology development model which attempts to further unify learner needs, experience, and technology and 2) a multi-device learning ecology diagnostic tool and framework.

Allen, Michael. (2012) Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An Agile Model for Developing the Best Learning Experiences. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Quinn, C. (2012) The Mobile Academy: mLearning for Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/John Wiley

Vai, M. and Sosulski, K. (2011). The Essential Guide to Online Course Design: A Standards-Based Guide (Essentials of Online Learning). NY, New York: Routledge.

Speakers
avatar for Paul Hibbitts

Paul Hibbitts

Educator, Interaction Designer and Open Source Developer, Hibbitts Design / Simon Fraser University
For over 20 years Paul has delivered design solutions, customized training and practical strategies for organizations such as SAP BusinessObjects, The Canadian Real Estate Association and The University of British Columbia. Combining his professional user experience design skill set... Read More →



Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Salon 3

12:00pm

CON02.01 - Realizing SoTL through teamwork: Faculty, staff and students working together
Our teaching and learning development grants program is facilitated by a team of individuals that includes faculty and graduate students, from a range of disciplines, and support staff. The non-competitive grants program provides faculty with $5-10K and other supports to investigate questions about teaching and learning. It is designed to enhance individual faculty knowledge and practice and to engage them in teaching as a socially situated practice (Team authored, in press). We employ Norton’s (2009) notion of “pedagogical action research” as a working framework by supporting faculty members’ efforts to produce research evidence at a micro level (through their individual projects) with the aim of dissemination resulting in changes at the meso (course and departmental) and macro (institutional) levels. The foci of this session are the values underpinning our practice and how we accomplish our work as a team. Our teamwork is advantaged by our diverse roles and disciplinary perspectives, yet we are guided by a shared vision unencumbered by pre-existing hierarchical relationships. Together we facilitate the grants process, read relevant literature, conduct ongoing evaluation of the program (Team authored, in press), co-present and co-author publications. The session begins with attendees sharing (in pairs) if and how grants programs at their institutions are conducted and ends with a period of “critical questioning” where participants probe more deeply the practices and values presented by both facilitators and participants. This session will be of most interest to those involved in the conduct of, or wanting to develop similar teams and grants programs.

(Team authored) (in press). The intentional design of a SoTL initiative. New Directions in Teaching and Learning.

(Team authored) (in press). Evaluating a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Grants Program: Our Framework, Process, Initial Findings and Reflections. Studies in Educational Evaluation.

Norton, Lin. S. (2009). Action Research in Teaching and Learning: A Practical Guide to Conducting Pedagogical Research in Universities. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Bayshore Salon D

12:00pm

CON02.04 - Tuning in on tacit knowledge

Tuning in on teaching practice in any discipline may well run up against a problem of tacit knowledge--knowledge crucial to the discipline’s ways of thinking and practicing, but by nature obscure. Teachers who omit to make their tacit knowledge explicit in the classroom cause learning bottlenecks for their students. Tacit knowledge can be made explicit to its teacher owner, with positive effect on her teaching, in an interview that invites her to address how she thinks and practices in work her students, lacking her tacit knowledge, find impossible to master (Middendorf & Pace, 2004). We have conducted half a dozen such 90-minute to two-hour interviews with university teachers in different disciplines. We present qualitative analyses of those interviews which find across disciplines common themes and elements in teachers’ tacit knowledge and common impacts on teachers’ practice and thinking when tacit knowledge becomes explicit. Quoting from our interviews, we show through different analytical lenses, including phenomenology and narrative identity theory, how teachers regardless of discipline gravitate to intrinsically hermeneutic understandings of their disciplines, instinctively value provisionality of judgment, assume crucial disciplinary relationships of parts to wholes, embody in Heideggerian terms their ways of thinking and practicing (Van Manen, 1990), implicitly trust key disciplinary processes, willingly inhabit liminal spaces and, in recalling how they came to the understandings their students find so difficult to master, surface crucial aspects of their professional identities. We seek discussion with our audience of the effects on teaching and learning of unearthing and variously analyzing tacit knowledge across many disciplines.

Middendorf, J. & Pace, D. (2004). Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2004(98), 1-12. 

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: State of New York Press.



Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Seymour Room

12:00pm

CON02.06 - My students are revolting! The use of humour as a classroom management strategy
Conflicts, disengagement and silos are realities that teachers face. There many ways to address these challenges; one of the most often employed, but least studied strategies is the use of affiliative humor (Avolio, Howell & Sosik 1999; McCartney-Matthews 2011). Recent events have highlighted the way that humour can be a point of unity or division.

The presenter has worked in a variety of post-secondary settings, from large research universities to small private schools to polytechnics. These schools have been in North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe. Humour was always a strategy employed to address classroom management. Now as a member of a faculty development team there has been an opportunity to conduct deeper study into how and why humour works to bring learners together.

This session will explore the benefits of instructor usage of positively-valenced humour in the classroom, focusing on its ability to reduce barriers between the instructor and learner, as well as between learners. The presenter will draw from prior research on the role of humour in organizations and educational anthropology (Collins 2012; Treece 2010; Vogler 2011). The audience will not leave with a list of knock-knock jokes, but they will gain an insight into how humour might be used to strengthen enhance engagement and improve classroom management.

Avolio, B.J., Howell, J.M. & Sosik, J.J. (1999) A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: Humor as a moderator of leadership style effects. Academy of Management Journal 42(2), 219-227.

Collins, P.E. (2012). Leading higher education organizations: The role of humor. MA Thesis. Gonzaga University.

McCartney-Matthews, M.L. (2011). A funny thing happpened on the way to the hippocampus: The effects of humor on student achievement and memory retention. EdD Dissertation. Arizona State University.

Treece, B.P. (2010). Humor as a desired leadership quality compared across four professional fields in Findlay and Hancock County, Ohio. EdD Dissertation. Northcentral University.

Vogler, W.B. (2011). Humor and work: Toward a more contextual understanding of humor in the workplace. PhD Dissertation. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Speakers
avatar for Jeff Logan (SAIT Polytechnic)

Jeff Logan (SAIT Polytechnic)

Faculty Development, SAIT Polytechnic


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Chairman Room

12:00pm

CON02.05 - Using role-immersion games like the 'Reacting to the Past' series in larger classes
Historical simulations have long if infrequently been used in classrooms, and recently a much more intense variation, promoted by the 'Reacting to the Past' consortium, has been advanced. Using terms like role-playing and role-immersion to distinguish them from much tamer versions (model UNs and the like) of the practice, these games have been touted as producing a large number of benefits and postive outcomes for students. However, the games were originally developed for classes at Barnard (NY), and are often designed for no more than about 20 students at a time. Over the last four years I have adapted one extant game and designed two role-immersion games, using them six times in first-year history classes of 80 students. I will discuss what mechanisms I have used including modifications of game rules as well as the use of factions and faction leaders, speaking rules, character descriptions, and indeterminate factions. I will also discuss the relative degrees of success, and my plans for the future.

Carnes, Mark C. (2014). Minds on Fire: How role-immersion games transform college. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674735354

Flaherty, Colleen. (2014, August 27). “Minds on Fire.” Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/08/27/book-advocates-reacting-past-pedagogy

Lang, James. (2014, September 29). "Stop Blaming Students for Your Listless Classroom: How the Use of Games as a Teaching Methodology Has the Potential to Break the Long History of Student Disengagement in College Learning." (Part 3) The Chronicle of Higher Education.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Thompson Room

12:00pm

CON02.08 - I flipped my tutorials: A case study of implementing active learning strategies in Engineering
Faculty Learning Communities (Cox, 2004) have been designed to introduce professors to a variety of active learning strategies (Prince, 2004) in the Faculty of Engineering at a large, research-intensive North American public university. After participating for more than a year a chemical Engineering professor and her teaching assistant (TA) decided to restructure their course to make it more student-centered. This resulted in a course where multiple active learning strategies (open-ended student response system, peer-review assignments, online quizzes and flipped tutorials) were used by both the instructor in class and the TA in tutorials. During this interactive session, the instructor, TA and educational developer will discuss the activities undertaken during the term. Several of the strategies will be used during the course of the session (e.g. open-ended response system, online quizzes and videos). Recommendations will be provided for future implementation of these strategies. The instructor and TA will share their reflections on the trajectory they followed in shifting from a teacher-centered approach to a more student-centered, evidence based teaching practice. We will share the results of a student survey and discuss how the instructor plans to respond to student feedback in future iterations of the course. We will provide examples where feedback was mixed, such as in the peer review exercises, invite participants to share their own experiences with similar strategies, and brainstorm ways to move forward given the contextual constraints.

Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. New directions for teaching and learning, 97, 5-23.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of engineering education, 93, 223-231.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:00pm - 12:30pm
Salon 1

12:30pm

Lunch
Wednesday June 17, 2015 12:30pm - 1:45pm
Bayshore Foyer

1:45pm

CON03.CreativeDiscussion01 - Go outside and learn
Join this session to leave the four walls of the conference session, explore ways to apply the ‘outside world’, be it the natural or the built environment, to aspects of your teaching and your students’ learning. Nesbit and Mayer (2010) point to the affective learning gains, especially student beliefs about the course topic, as a result of field trips. Other studies (e.g., Matsuoka, 2010) show that exposure to nature enhances academic performance. Activities conducted in green space can reduce the symptoms of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD (e.g., Taylor & Kuo, 2009). 

This session, which will take place entirely outdoors (rain or shine) has an application for teachers of any discipline, and for educational developers working with teachers. At times, you might take your students outside, while at other times, maybe you can bring the ‘outside’ in. We will work through individual and small group work and by modeling of techniques I use in my own teaching and facilitation.

This session might also help you to find new ways to motivate students by making connections to their daily lives and interests. Could these strategies enhance your students' understanding of course material and help them achieve the learning outcomes of the course? Leave with at least three ideas you can apply to your teaching and/or facilitating that brings the inside out, or the outside in, as a way to add some ‘fresh air’ to your next course or seminar. We will even get some fresh air and do a bit of ‘nature-watching’ in the process!

Matsuoka, R. (2010). Student performance and high school landscapes: Examining the links. Landscape Urban Planning, 97, 273-82

Nesbit, S. and A. Mayer. (2010). Shifting Attitudes: The Influence of Field Trip Experiences on Student Beliefs. Transformative Dialogues. Volume 4. Issue 2. November, 2010.

Taylor, A, & Kuo, F. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12, 402-9

Speakers
avatar for Alice Cassidy

Alice Cassidy

Principal, In View Education and Professional Development
Alice Cassidy is an educational developer, science educator and wildlife biologist. She has designed, taught and coordinated courses at the University of British Columbia, and led large-scale educational programs. As a consultant, she leads workshops on teaching and learning. She... Read More →



Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
STLHE Registration Desk

1:45pm

CON03.06 - A meaningful plan: Using a “portfolio of practice” approach to strategic planning in higher education
Strategic planning has become common practice at universities. Most strategic planning processes, however, are adopted from corporate domains (Ellis, 2010)—with little research evidence to support the efficacy of these models within post-secondary environments. Furthermore, teaching and learning centers have often been at the periphery of centralized strategic planning processes (Gibbs, 2006). Such centers may now find themselves facing requirements to engage in strategic planning without the benefit of established processes that adequately fit their contexts and purposes. The Educational Development Unit at the University of Calgary engaged in a process that explicitly merged collaborative strategic planning techniques, current higher education research (Mueller, 2015), and wisdom of practice (Weimer, 2001) in order to create a living strategic plan. This portfolio of practice approach allows us to reflect on and document our educational development beliefs and practices in an inclusive and collaborative manner, while also creating a research-informed and contextually-driven strategic plan. By the end of this interactive session, participants should be able to: (a) evaluate the portfolio of practice strategic planning model, and (b) adapt components of the model to meet their own institutional contexts. The presenters will provide an overview of the strategic planning process that has been implemented at the Educational Development Unit. Paired and small group discussion will be used to generate ideas about how such a process might be used at participants’ home institutions. The session will conclude with an open-group debrief to critically evaluate this strategic planning approach. 


Ellis, S. E. (2010). Introduction to strategic planning in student affairs: A model for process and elements of a plan. New Directions for Student Services, 132, 5-16. doi: 0.1002/ss.371

Gibbs, G. (2006). Supporting educational development within departments. International Journal for Academic Development, 1(1), 27-37. doi: 10.1080/1360144960010104

Mueller, R. (2015). Do values drive the plan? Investigating the nature and role of organizational values in university strategic planning. Tertiary Education and Management, 21(1). doi: 10.1080/13583883.2014.998270

Weimer, M. (2001). Learning more from the wisdom of practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 86, 45-56. doi: 10.1002/tl.15

Speakers
avatar for Robin Alison Mueller (University of Calgary)

Robin Alison Mueller (University of Calgary)

Educational Development Consultant (Faculty), University of Calgary
avatar for Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny is Director of the Educational Development Unit in the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Thompson Room

1:45pm

CON03.08 - Incorporating active listening into day to day practices of educational development

Active listening has been defined as a state of hearing the other person, avoiding premature judgment, reflecting understanding, clarifying information, summarizing, and sharing (Hoppe, 2011). Active listening is considered a critical communication skill in administrative, leadership and management as well as in a variety of occupational and therapeutic fields (Hoppe, 2011; Romero et al., 2001; Slizewski, 1995; Weger, et al., 2014). However there is no research that addresses active listening within an Educational Development context. As Educational developers we engage in consultation, needs assessment, workshop and program design and facilitation, program coordination, program evaluation, and variety of other processes all of which rely heavily on the practice of active listening skills. Although active listening is highly valued, it is often deprioritized when in competition with other components of educational development processes (facilitation, program coordination, etc.) for our attention and resources. In this 60 minute interactive workshop we will engage participants in small group, guided practice, and brainstorming activities to identify unconscious acts of self-projection during active listening, and recognize the ethical hazards involved in self-projection. Participants will develop processes of self-monitoring and work to find an appropriate ethical and practical balance between self and other when actively listening.



• Hoppe, M. H. (2011). Active listening: Improve your ability to listen and lead Pfeiffer. 

• Romero, D. B., & Ebrary Academic Complete (Canada) Subscription Collection. (2001). The business of listening: A practical guide to effective listening. Menlo Park, Calif: Crisp Learning. 

• Slizewski, P. (1995). Tips for active listening. HR Focus, 72(5), 7.

• Weger, H., Castle Bell, G., Minei, E. M., & Robinson, M. C. (2014). The relative effectiveness of active listening in initial interactions. International Journal of Listening, 28(1), 13-31. doi:10.1080/10904018.2013.813234


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Director Room

1:45pm

CON03.09 - Pursuing professional pedagogical growth through peer observation of teaching: Come one, come all, come hear all about it!
Peer observation of teaching (POT) has been shown to help teachers develop new skills (Cairns, Bissell, & Bovill, 2013) and become more aware of their own teaching (O’Keefe, Lecouteur, Miller, and McGowan, 2009). There is also an apparent reciprocal benefit for both the teacher being observed and the observer. It is speculated that this process allows teachers to reflect on each other’s perspectives and learn from one another (Cairns et al., 2013). Moreover, learning appears to occur regardless of one’s level of expertise, seniority, or faculty status (Bell & Cooper, 2013). Despite POT being an internationally recognized strategy to enhance the quality of teaching and learning in higher education (McMahon, Barrett & O’Neill, 2007), it is not practiced in all institutions. A POT initiative was introduced on our campus which uses a framework of reciprocal classroom observations and reflections amongst peers. This interactive workshop will provide participants with an opportunity to reflect on and share the types of feedback they have received regarding their classroom teaching. In addition, participants will learn about the different POT models that exist in higher education, including the Peer Collaboration Network (PCN) operating at our institution. The benefits of the PCN model, as well as challenges and solutions to keep in mind when developing a similar initiative, will also be discussed. Through this discussion participants will take away the value of POT as a means of engaging in on-going professional pedagogical growth and fine-tuning educational practice. 

Bell, M., & Cooper, P. (2013). Peer observation of teaching university departments: A framework for implementation. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1), 60-73.

Cairns, A. M., Bissell, V., & Bovill, C. (2013). Evaluation of a pilot peer observation of teaching scheme for chair-side tutors at Glasgow University dental school. British Dental Journal, 214(11), 573-576.

McMahon, T., Barrett, T., & O’Neill, G. (2007). Using observation of teaching to improve quality: Finding your way through the muddle of competing conceptions, confusion of practice and mutually exclusive intentions. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(4), 499-511.

O’Keefe, M., Lecouteur, A., Miller, J., & McGowan, U. (2009). The colleague development program: A multidisciplinary program of peer observation partnerships. Medical Teacher, 31(12), 1060-1065.

Lead Speaker(s)
avatar for Judy AK Bornais

Judy AK Bornais

Experiential Learning Specialist, Teaching Leadership Chair, University of Windsor
Judy Bornais is currently an Experiential Learning Specialist with the Faculty of Nursing. She feels that teaching has been at the core of her work as a practitioner and academic. Teaching nursing students appealed to Judy as an opportunity to make a broader contribution to health... Read More →

Speakers

Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Salon 1

1:45pm

CON03.11 - Taking your teaching beyond your classroom: Teaching practice and educational leadership
Educational leadership includes extending the reach and impact of teaching beyond the classroom (The University of British Columbia, 2014). The objective of this panel is to offer examples of educational leadership to inspire reflection, dialogue and action (Cunningham & Cordeiro, 2006). In what ways can faculty, graduate students and instructional development staff extend their teaching practices beyond their current courses and classrooms through educational leadership (Carr, 2014)? Following an introduction to educational leadership as conceptualized at University of British Columbia, the panel will present examples of student-centered educational leadership initiatives undertaken by University of British Columbia faculty that produce significant impacts on student learning and teaching careers. The panel will support the conference theme “Achieving harmony: Tuning into practice” by providing examples of how teaching practice and educational leadership approaches can be combined to spark teaching collaboration among faculty and extend their teaching practices beyond their typical professional contexts. Panelists will highlight how students, teachers, and educational institutions can benefit from these forms of educational leadership. In this session, participants will:

• Explore the diverse experiences of teachers who have pursued educational leadership initiatives that extended their teaching practice across a wide range of interdisciplinary, institutional, and student learning environments;

• Share their own teaching practices with other session participants and collaboratively identify potential educational leadership opportunities to extend their teaching practices beyond their courses and classrooms;

• Identify and share with session participants one or more concrete examples of teaching initiatives that could make a significant impact on teaching and learning at their own institutions.


Carr, W. (2014). Teaching and learning beyond the classroom. Education Canada, 54(4), 24-27.

Cunningham, W. G., & Cordeiro, P. A. (2006). Educational leadership: A problem-based approach. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

The University of British Columbia. (2014). Guide to reappointment, promotion, and tenure procedures at University of British Columbia 2014/2015. Vancouver, B.C.: The University of British Columbia.

Speakers
avatar for Joanne Fox (University of British Columbia)

Joanne Fox (University of British Columbia)

Principal, Professor of Teaching, UBC Vantage College; Michael Smith Laboratories and Dept of Microbiology and Immunology
avatar for Christina Hendricks

Christina Hendricks

Professor of Teaching in Philosophy, Academic Director, Centre for Teaching, Learning & Technology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Philosophy, OER, open textbooks, open pedagogy
avatar for Catherine Rawn

Catherine Rawn

University of British Columbia



Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Salon 3

1:45pm

CON03.03 - Cohort-building and enabling risk and growth
In the IASK Program (Integrated Analytical Skills and Knowledge), students enroll in six integrated, thematic, interdisciplinary courses that aim to foster complex evaluativistic epistemological beliefs (Brownlee 2009) in a cohort-based learning environment. Pizzolato (2008) found that students often “short circuit” their own learning, refusing risk in favour of “getting a grade.” One of IASK’s goals is to intervene in this process by fostering a greater willingness to take intellectual risk. A strong, mutually supportive student cohort is crucial and demands that attention be paid to both “heart and head,” the linking of affective emotional stances to “availing” (Muis 2004) attitudes toward learning and knowledge. We begin this workshop with an interactive cohort-building exercise focused on intellectual risk. Psycho-drama activities will be used to map our relationships with risk onto both body and space to move participants from intellectual, at times anxiety driven, responses to “gut level” or intuitive understandings of complex concepts (Landy, 2003). Such exercises encourage deep learning, making space for “heart responses” emblematic of risk and vulnerability, which in turn foster group cohesion (Corey, 2011). We will conclude with a group discussion of the relationship between cohort-building and a harmonious “whole student” approach to epistemological development, asking participants to reflect on the relationship between “head and heart” in their classrooms and the practical ways that this cohesiveness might be better achieved. The workshop addresses the “Learners consideration and support” stream and contributes to the field of personal epistemology by linking theory to classroom practice for the fostering of positive learning environments.

References:

Brownlee, J., Walker, S., Lennox, S., Exley, B., & Pearce, S. (2009). The first year university experience: Using personal epistemology to understand effective learning and teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 58(5), 599-618.

Corey, G. (2000). Theory and practice of group counseling. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

Landy, R. J. (2003). Drama Therapy with Adults. In C. E. Schaefer (Ed.) , Play Therapy with Adults (pp. 15-32). New York: J. Wiley.

Pizzolato, J. E. (2007). Meaning making inside and outside the academic arena: Investigating the contextuality of epistemological development in college students. Journal of General Education, 56, 228-251.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

CON03.12 - Exploring the contextual variables and ethical ideologies that help inform decisions about everyday moral dilemmas in teaching
Educators are regularly confronted with moral dilemmas for which there are no easy solutions. Increasing course sizes and program enrolments coupled with a new consumerist attitude towards education have only further exacerbated the quantity and quality of students’ requests for special academic consideration (Macfarlane, 2004). Extensions, late submissions, and grade bumps – once rare – are now commonplace. However, there is very little in the pedagogical literature that addresses these everyday dilemmas. In a culture of transparency, unspoken policies that inform these requests are the form of learner consideration that is the least transparent to students and educators alike. This session will explore some of the variables that contribute to the complexity of these dilemmas, and the ethical ideologies that can inform their resolution. Our goal is not to provide best practices, but rather to facilitate reflection about how individuals make these decisions. Participants will be presented with fictional vignettes of real-life teaching dilemmas, and asked how they would resolve them, using clicker voting and group discussion. We will then describe the notions of relativism and idealism as two axes that define Forsyth’s (1980) four ethical ideologies, and help participants identify their own ethical ideology as it applies to teaching. Finally, we will look at centralization of academic integrity (cf. Neufeld & Dianda, 2007), and explore its parallels with issues around ethical dilemmas in teaching. With participant engagement, we will look at both sides of the debate around centralization of special academic consideration to further illustrate the inherent complexity of teaching with integrity. 

Neufeld, J., & Dianda, J. (2007). Academic dishonesty: A survey of policies and procedures at Ontario Universities. Council of Ontario Universities.

Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(1), 175-21.

Macfarlane, B. (2004). Teaching with integrity: The ethics of higher education practice. New York, NY: Routledge.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Cypress 1 Room

1:45pm

CON03.13 - Head, heart, hands and home: A meaningful way to support students navigate choice
Students are faced with increasing pressure to “do it all”; perform well academically, get involved, give back, get career-related experience, and have a variety of meaningful learning moments. With all these pressures the burden of choice falls to the student to select from an overwhelming array of on and off campus opportunities - but which opportunities are the “right” ones?

Head, Heart, Hands and Home is a reflection model and tool that advisors can use to support students as they begin to answer their own questions of “what should I do?”  This model can be used to help students; reflect on previous experiences, make decisions about the present and plan for the future.

The Head, Heart, Hands and Home model is derived from several bodies of literature; transformational education theory, student development theory, sustainability education literature and is informed by critical, place-based and aboriginal pedagogies.  This model embraces a holistic view of the student and supports them in identifying value and making meaning from their experiences.

This interactive session will bring this model to life through meaningful reflection and purposeful conversation.  There will be a short presentation that introduces the model and frames the context and challenge.  This will be followed by a live session where attendees are facilitated in groups to work through audience generated cases.  Attendees will get a chance to apply the tool in reflective conversation and leave confident in their ability to apply it in future conversations with students.

Astin, A. (1984) "A developmental theory for higher education" Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 [4], 297–308

Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3-12.

Mezirow, J. (1991) Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Sipos, Y. Battisti, B., & Grimm, K. (2008). Achieving transformative sustainability learning: engaging head, hands and heart, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9(1), 68-86.



Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Cypress 2 Room

1:45pm

CON03.07 - Leading change with learning spaces
Students need to be actively engaged in the classroom in order to create opportunities for meaningful, deep learning. Students are also “likely to adopt the mode of learning signaled by the existing layout and type of furniture” (JISC, 2006, p.25). Only recently has there has been an increasing focus in higher education on the transformation of the physical learning environment on campus based on what we know about how students learn (Jamieson, 2000). How does a university develop this shift towards thinking about learning spaces? Ten years ago, the Provost gave our teaching and learning centre the opportunity to lead the process of redesigning learning spaces. This decision, while historically not seen as a role for a teaching and learning centre, was seen as an opportunity to enact change across the institution. This interactive session will focus on exploring and discussing a ten-year process on how our university has changed to make learning spaces a strategic priority. Participants will reflect on and discuss the key elements of success and how it could apply to their own university teaching and learning initiatives. 

Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P. G., & Trevitt, A.C.F. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning environments. Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 221-237.

Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). (2006). Designing spaces for effective learning: A guide to 21st Century learning space design. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISClearningspaces.pdf


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Chairman Room

1:45pm

CON03.04 - How do you partner with student scholars?
Whether you are keen to engage students as partners in particular initiatives (Felten et al., 2013), or as co-inquirers who shape research, (Dunne & Zandstra, 2011) or as agents in transformative learning experiences and multiple perspectives (Cook-Sather, 2013), this session addresses several puposes.Healthy partnerships come with its challenges, including dismantling entrenched structures of authority or sharing power meaningfully (Delpish et al., 2010). Establishing partnerships is hard, and the democratizing potential of the students as change agents can sometimes be overstated (Weller et al., 2013). Last year, the McMaster Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL) named enhanced student partnerships as a central goal in its strategic plan. MIIETL implemented a novel student scholar program that has grown from 16 to about 50 students. Student partners are full members of institute project teams, and involved in much of MIIETL’s core business. We provide brief perspectives from students, faculty, and staff involved in this initiative, and map these on to established models of student engagement (e.g., Healey et al.). Most of the session will be devoted to exchanging implementation strategies, successes and challenges with the audience.This session exemplifies the conference theme of Achieving Harmony, Tuning Into Practice, with a particular focus on transforming the relationships between students, faculty and staff. Participant outcomes include learning about the existing literature on students as partners, examples of several case studies that will build on that scholarship highlighting possibilities for engaging students as change agents in their own contexts.

Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 186-198. **Note the year was wrong in the abstract. Should be (Cook-Sather 2014).

Dunne, E. & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as Change Agents. New Ways of Engaging with Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Bristol: HE Subject Centre for Education. Retrieved from: http://escalate.ac.uk/downloads/8247.pdf.

Felten, P., Bagg, J., Bumbry, M., Hill, J., Hornsby, K., Pratt, M., & Weller, S. (2013). A call for expanding inclusive student engagement in SOTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(2), 63-74.

Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014) Engagement through Partnership: Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. York: HE Academy. Retrieved from: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher-education

Speakers
avatar for Arshad Ahmad

Arshad Ahmad

Associate Vice-President, Teaching and Learning & Director, MIIETL, McMaster University
Dr. Arshad Ahmad is the Associate Vice-President Teaching and Learning and Director of Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL) at McMaster University. He is the Past Coordinator of the 3MNTF program and a 3M National Teaching Fellow. He is the Past... Read More →
avatar for Elizabeth Marquis

Elizabeth Marquis

McMaster University
Beth Marquis is an Assistant Professor in the Arts & Science Program and the McMaster Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL).


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

CON03.05 - Exploring links between learning environments and student well-being
Although campus health has traditionally been the responsibility of student services, recent literature and public health models suggest that diverse players across the institution can play a role in creating healthy campus communities in higher education (American College Health Association, 2014; Keeling, 2014; Tsouros, Dowding, Thompson & Dooris, 1998; Washburn, Teo, Knodel, & Morris, 2013). There is growing interest in in creating conditions for well-being in higher education, with particular attention to the learning environment. This session will present the results of original research exploring the links between learning environments and student well-being at a comprehensive, Canadian institution. Over 1000 student responses were collected through a participatory action research study involving 14 faculty members. The session will present the rationale for the Well-being in Learning Environments project, the process of working collaboratively with campus partners and the results, both in terms the original research conducted and resources created. The Well-being in Learning Environments project, a partnership between the Teaching and Learning Centre and Health Promotion, has garnered national and international attention and was recognized with an Innovation Award from the Canadian Association of College and University Student Services in June 2014. Participants will have an increased understanding of the links between learning environments and student well-being and how learning environments can be shaped to contribute to student well-being. In addition, participants will discuss how the research findings can be used as a catalyst for collaboration at their institution, to create conditions for well-being in learning environments.

References:

American College Health Association (2014). Healthy Campus 2020 Objectives. Retrieved from http://www.acha.org/HealthyCampus/objectives.cfm

Keeling, R. (2014). An Ethic of Care in Higher Education: Well-being and Learning. Journal of College and Character, 15(3), 141-148.

Tsouros, A., Dowding, G., Thompson, J. & Dooris, M. (1998). Health Promoting Universities: Concept, Experience and Framework for Action. World Health Organization: Geneva.

Washburn, C., Teo, S., Knoedel, R., & Morris, J. (2013). Post-Secondary Student Mental Health: A Guide to a Systemic Approach. Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) and the Canadian Association of Colleges and University Student Services (CACUSS).



Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

CON03.10 - Leadership to advance scholarly teaching at post-secondary institutions
A panel of teaching centre leaders from a variety of post-secondary institutions will facilitate a discussion on academic institutional leadership and support for scholarly teaching. The aim of the session is to have an open sharing of ideas and discussion with teaching and learning leaders on creating a supportive scholarly teaching culture, mitigating research challenges (i.e. research ethics boards, supporting faculty transition to human subject research, grants/funds and “acceptance”), and connecting scholarly teaching communities with other communities provincially, nationally and internationally. This session will also focus on the multiple entry points faculty can come to being engaged in a culture of scholarly teaching at the post-secondary level. The panelists will first share the practices currently working at their institutions and then the floor will be open for participants to contribute their successful practices, ask questions and help build a collection of ideas for leaders to take back to their institutions.

Hubball, H.T., & Albon, S. (2007). Developing a Faculty Learning Community: Enhancing the Scholarship of Teaching, Learning and Curriculum Practice. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 18(2),119-142.

Hubball, H.T., Clarke, A., & Poole, G. (2010). Ten-year Reflections on Mentoring SoTL Research in a Research-Intensive University. (Accepted). International Journal for Academic Development.

Speakers
avatar for Peter Arthur

Peter Arthur

University of British Columbia Okanagan
avatar for Stephanie Chu

Stephanie Chu

Vice Provost Teaching & Learning, Kwantlen Polytechnic University
Passionate about advancing teaching and learning and related University community and culture. Imagine what we can do together!
avatar for Gary Hunt

Gary Hunt

Coordinator, Teaching and Learning Support, Thompson Rivers University
TRU
avatar for Liesel Knaack

Liesel Knaack

Director, Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning, Vancouver Island University
Liesel is the director of the Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning at VIU. The centre supports faculty and students with learning technologies, pedagogical design, online learning and scholarly teaching and learning. Liesel was formerly a K-12 teacher and Associate Professor... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Salon 2

1:45pm

CON03.CreativeDiscussion02 - Tuning into dissonance and resonance in post-secondary communities of practice
How can post-secondary institutions remain responsive to emerging requirements and not just reactive to short term conditions? We live in times of great uncertainty and rapid change that call us all to respond with our highest capabilities. Traditionally, the culture of academia reinforces a habit of separation, and while we are beginning to use collaborative approaches with our students, we have yet to fully embrace these concepts among faculty. We know for our students that learning, as a social phenomenon, is catalyzed in holding environments designed with developmental intention. What might be possible if we more intentionally create faculty learning environments that support and challenge us at the leading edge of our potential?

Communities of practice (CoPs) are ideal holding environments to create a bridge across difference, and assist us in continually stepping into the unknown. This involves first recognizing and surfacing dissonance or resonance as an embodied feeling in the present moment, choosing to sit with it and be curious, and then opening to new possibilities. During this one hour deep dive conversation, participants will experience a mini CoP based on Dr. McAlister’s recent research, and the work of Cox and Richlin (2004), Palmer and Zajonc (2010), Scharmer (2009), and Wenger (1998). Presencing techniques will be used to explore emerging themes from the conference, and then to consider how CoPs might fit within the culture of our own institutions. 

References:

Cox, M., & Richlin, L. (eds.) (2004). Building faculty learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. (No. 97). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palmer, P. & Zajonc, A. (2010). The heart of higher education: A call to renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Speakers

Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
STLHE Registration Desk

1:45pm

CON03.CreativeDiscussion03 - Writing into our teaching challenges: Four creative writing exercises to deepen reflective practice
Numerous studies have shown that writing about traumatic or otherwise stressful events in our lives makes us healthier and helps us function better as professionals (Pennebaker 2004). As educators, we face potentially stressful experiences every day, especially as we engage with our most challenging students. As such, the positive impact of personal journaling on teaching practice specifically is also well established (Stevens and Cooper 2009).

Recently, education researchers have begun to consider whether creative writing in multiple genres – that is, beyond mere diarizing – might also assist in fostering academic reflective practice (Rath & Edgington, 2014). Rath and Edgington suggest the use of poetry to prompt reflection upon teaching. I would like to expand upon this suggestion by making the case, through this interactive workshop, that writing exercises normally reserved for fiction writing classes may also provide powerful opportunities for teachers in all fields to reflect deeply on their practice as educators.

In this workshop session, participants will explore a recent traumatic or otherwise stressful teaching situation from their own experience using four creative writing exercises. These writing prompts were originally devised to help fiction writers delve more deeply into the psychologies of their characters and the trajectory of their stories; now we will repurpose them to help us tune into our own teaching practice. This workshop will be a creative experiment with the potential to yield real insight into our behaviour as educators.

Pennebaker, J.W. (2004) Writing to Heal: A Guided Journal for Recovering from Trauma and Emotional Upheaval. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Rath, J., & Edgington, U. (2014) There is Rhyme and Reason: Using Creative Writing to Enable and Enhance Academic Reflective Practice (abstract). Australian Association for Research in Education conference.

Stevens, D.D., & Cooper J.E. (2009) Journal Keeping: How to Use Reflective Writing for Effective Learning, Teaching, Professional Insight, and Positive Change. Sterling, VA: Stylus.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
STLHE Registration Desk

1:45pm

CON03.01 3M Welcome to My Class - Tuning into the fun in teaching – how to stop worrying and embrace creativity
"Take everything you like seriously, except yourselves." Rudyard Kipling

Worry about being taken seriously can wring the fun out of a course and stifle the creativity of teachers and learners. In this interactive workshop we will discuss our experiences of embracing creativity in our teaching across a variety of disciplines in higher education including arts, sciences and medicine. Gardner (2008, p. 162) is firm about the connection between disciplines and creativity: “… creativity goes hand in glove with disciplinary thinking”. Activation of imagination provokes learning because it is meaningful, “sticky,” and memorable (James & Brookfield, 2014). We will briefly review the literature on creativity, discussing a number of techniques for developing new approaches to teaching existing content, and providing examples of how these can be applied in the classroom using approaches described by Pink (2005) and Catmull & Wallace (2014). We will lead a discussion on how to combine unexpected elements to teach in new ways, how to find new angles on old topics and how to find ways to employ fun and creative approaches in seemingly “serious” fields. The workshop includes a live interactive exercise in creativity for the participants. Through interactive exercises and discussion, participants will generate a repertoire of ways to combine unexpected elements of creativity and play in their teaching. 

References:
1. Gardner, H. (2008). 5 Minds for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

2. James, A., & Brookfield, S. D. (2014). Engaging Imagination: Helping Students Become Creative and Reflective Thinkers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

3. Pink, D. H. (2005). A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future. New York, NY: Riverhead.

4. Catmull, E., & Wallace, A. (2014). Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration. New York, NY: Random House.



Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

CON03.02 - Promoting teamwork skills using peer assessment in team-based learning

Teamwork has been identified as a critical professional skill (Hughes, 2011; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003), and is a key learning outcome in undergraduate education (Biggs & Tang, 2011). Research (e.g. Biggs, 1996; Riebe, Roepen, Santarelli & Marchioro, 2010) suggests that deliberately teaching and assessing teamwork is an effective way to build teamwork skills. This workshop will model the use of concept mapping for a mini-team based activity, as a potential method for students to build a common understanding of teamwork. Participants will use our tested teamwork instrument to assess their own and others teamwork skills as demonstrated in the mini-team based activity. This method has been adopted because assessment of teamwork is often inferred from a myriad of attitudes and behaviors, and is sometimes overlooked in favour of assessing a group-based product. This complicates the student and instructor’s ability to develop and track performance of teamwork as an outcome. Identifying performance criteria and behavioral markers indicative of teamwork skills is highly valuable in building the quality of individual student contributions to a team such that targeted feedback can be provided and outcomes improved. In our research, we psychometrically tested the TeamUp rubric (Hastie, Fahy & Parratt, 2014), developed from criteria in the AAC& U teamwork Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) rubric. Peers, class facilitators and research assistants undertook measurement of individual teamwork skills. By using this tool peers were able to provide highly reliable assessment of individual teamwork skills. Furthermore, a modified version of the tool was developed based on the results of these analyses. It is assumed that development and mastery of these skills will enhance student success within the professional sector, by preparing them to be effective team members. Following the workshop activities will be a discussion of the possible application, contextual issues, and institutional implications of assessing teamwork as a desired undergraduate outcome.

References:

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education, 32(3), 347-364.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. McGraw-Hill International.

Hastie, C., Fahy, K., & Parratt, J. (2014). The development of a rubric for peer assessment of individual teamwork skills in undergraduate midwifery students. Women and Birth, 27(3), 220-226.

Hughes, R. L., & Jones, S. K. (2011). Developing and assessing college student teamwork skills. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011, 53-64.

Kozlowski, S. W., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. Handbook of psychology.

Riebe, L., Roepen, D., Santarelli, B., & Marchioro, G. (2010). Teamwork: effectively teaching an employability skill. Education and Training, 52(6/7), 528-539.




Wednesday June 17, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon D

3:00pm

CON04.CreativeDiscussion01 - YO-GAgné’s events of instruction (Achieving harmony – tuning into practice)
Limited Capacity seats available

For intentional learning to occur, we have to attend physically to the learning environment, to be mentally prepared to learn, and to be tuned into the present moment. Whether we are in the classroom or at the computer, such body-mind harmony is a desirable state conducive to learning. Today, more than ever, students are faced with numerous distractions while trying to engage in the learning process. Many believe that they are capable of successfully navigating this challenging new environment, but it is often not the case. While we need to think of innovative ways to help students tune into the learning process, we might also look for inspiration in traditional and even ancient forms of teaching, learning, and practice, because while the technology evolves rapidly, human brains and behaviors do not change at the same pace. Yoga is a millennia old practice of achieving harmony of the mind, body, and spirit. Similarly to Gagné’s “Nine Events of Instruction,” a traditional Hatha Yoga class has, at the core of its structure, several mandatory events that aim to bring practitioners into the present moment, to prepare them for learning and practice both physically and mentally, and to guide, reinforce, and enhance retention. In this session, we will examine a traditional Hatha Yoga class in light of "events of instruction" and discuss possible strategies for helping students immerse in and get most out of the learning experience.

Farhi, D. (2006), Teaching Yoga: Exploring the Teacher-Student Relationship. Rodmell Press.

Gagné, R.M. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction (4th ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Kirschner, P. A., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist., 48:3, 169-183, doi: 10.1080/00461520.2013.804395

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Speakers
avatar for Maristela Petrovic-Dzerdz (Carleton University)

Maristela Petrovic-Dzerdz (Carleton University)

Instructional Design Coordinator, Carleton University
Education, Pedagogy, Distance Education, Instructional Design


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
STLHE Registration Desk

3:00pm

CON04.CreativeDiscussion03 - Applying a concurrent experiential learning model: Peer leadership within an outdoor orientation program.
Brock BaseCamp has operated an outdoor orientation program for incoming students at Brock University from 2009 to 2015. From the program’s inception, peer leadership has been a foundation for the program model and delivery. Each orientation trip is facilitated by upper year students whose main tasks are delivery of the orientation program curriculum, leadership of the wilderness experience, acting as ambassadors for the institution and building relationships for future transitional support throughout the incoming students’ university experience. Peer mentorship has been shown to have a positive impact on academic success (Tremblay & Rodger, 2003), ability to foster personal and professional growth (Glass & Walter, 2000), and social support (Allen, McManus & Russell, 1999). The BaseCamp approach to peer leadership is influenced by a concurrent experiential learning model, with both the learners and leaders achieving educative and personal goals together. By employing a concurrent experiential learning model, the BaseCamp program is able to focus on the learning experiences for both the incoming students and the peer leaders. This workshop will present our concurrent model, offer suggestions for pedagogical design and delivery, and speak to some of the lessons we have encountered throughout our five years of program delivery. Expect both a presentation of our program model and small group discussions regarding experiential learning techniques and their relationship to peer mentorship.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
STLHE Registration Desk

3:00pm

CON04.09 - Getting to impact: Connecting evidence and practice
In light of rising pressures for transparency in post-secondary institutions in Canada, the need for evidence-based assessment of what we do is rapidly increasing. Yet, despite student cries for getting added value for their education (Fullan, 1993), there is little credible evidence to guide instructors in how to connect evidence and decision-making with practice. However, in this climate of change, successful teaching and learning centres are engaging key stakeholders in tracking how well various programs and services are working, and deciding on what evidence results in positive effects on teaching and learning (Healey, 2013; Scott, 2013). 

Drawing from and building upon this work, this presentation aims to describe the experiences of developing and implementing an impact assessment framework that integrates evidence with practice (Impact Plus) at McMaster University. We will provide tools to engage participants in: exploring what impact means; what counts as evidence; and, how impact is assessed within their own centres. By presenting preliminary findings from our ongoing study within Education Development, we will present tools and processes, and explore common challenges to and facilitators of getting to impact. Through paired dialogue, participants will discuss ways of translating these assessment approaches into effective strategies within their own contexts. Using newly developed performance indicators (ED-DEV, McMaster) for programs and activities, participants will come away with ideas for connecting evidence and practice for making informed decisions. 

Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer

Healey, M., Bradford, M., Roberts, C., & Knight, Y. (2013). Collaborative discipline-based curriculum change: applying change academy processes at department level, International Journal of Academic Development, 18, 31-44.

Scott, G. (2003). Effective change management in higher education, Educause review, Nov. 65-80.

Speakers
avatar for Janette Barrington

Janette Barrington

Associate Director, Educational Development, McMaster University
Janette Barrington is Manager, Strategic Initiatives, McMaster Institute for Innovation & Excellence in Teaching & Learning (MIIETL). She holds a PhD in Educational Technology and is actively involved in research on interdisciplinary perspectives on teaching and learning in higher... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Salon 1

3:00pm

CON04.01 - 3M National Student Fellowship - Describing processes that nurture a culture of student educational leadership in post secondary institutions

This past year, I actively engaged in processes at my home university to encourage colleagues and students to get involved in the 3MNSF program: both as applicants and as professionals/practitioners who can finesse the institutional processes to make it possible for students to see themselves as potential candidates. Nurturing student leadership is not unique to the 3MNSF program. Chickering’s early work (1969) proposed guidelines, of a sort, for the environments and processes that contribute to leadership development in students. Kolb (1984) and, more recently, Komives, et al (2011) have also suggested ongoing considerations that make it more likely for students not only to see themselves as leaders, but also to seek out courses and learning /mentoring experiences that explicitly teach and value this aspect of learning in the post-secondary context. This session will describe the actions taken at one institution to nurture a culture of student educational leadership and invites participants to describe the processes that are enacted at their institutions. Small group description and discussion and large group consolidation of patterns and salient features will allow us to formulate suggestions applicable for colleagues ready to begin this process and colleagues ready to refine their existing processes.

Paolo Freire (1970) cautions that “it is not our role to speak to the people about our view of the world, nor to attempt to impose that view on them, but rather to dialogue with the people about their view and ours” (p. 96). This session hopes to enact this sentiment.


Chickering, A.W. (1969) Education and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press

Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall

Komives, S.R., Dugan, J.P., Owen, J.E., Slack, C., and Wagner, W. (Eds) (2011) The Handbook for Student Leadership Development. San Francisco: Jossey Bass



Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

3:00pm

CON04.05 - Sustained harmony: Building an institutional culture for the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning (SoTL)
Post-secondary institutions are placing growing emphasis on the importance of both the practice and scholarship of teaching and learning. Individuals and networks of practice (Roxå & Mårtensson, 2009; Roxå, Mårtensson, & Alveteg, 2011) across institutions are using SoTL’s cycle of systematic inquiry and dissemination to establish, implement, and investigate initiatives related to enriching the quality of our teaching and learning environments. In turn, engagement in the SoTL helps to establish a reciprocal culture of teaching and learning that is supported by SoTL, and a SoTL culture that is supported by a strong culture for teaching and learning. Recent research has focused on the importance of taking an integrated, multi-level approach to supporting the practice and scholarship of teaching and learning in post-secondary institutions (Williams et al., 2013). In this interactive session, participants will actively explore a multi-level framework for building a sustained culture for the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning, through both small group and large group discussion. The framework is based on a recent case study at the University of Guelph, which presents three catalysts for supporting engagement in the SoTL across multiple institutional levels: Leadership Commitment; Reward and Recognition; and Integrated Networks for Sustained Support (Kenny, Watson, & Desmarais, in press). By the end of this session, participants will be able to evaluate their own institutional context and use this framework to identify specific actions and opportunities for building and supporting a sustained culture for the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning. 

References:

Kenny, N., Watson, G. P. L., & Desmarais, S. (in press). Building sustained action: Supporting an institutional practice of SoTL at the University of Guelph. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. 

Roxå, T., & Mårtensson, K. (2009). Significant conversations and significant networks–exploring the backstage of the teaching arena. Studies in Higher Education, 34(5), 547-559. 

Roxå, T., Mårtensson, K., & Alveteg, M. (2011). Understanding and influencing teaching and learning cultures at university: a network approach. Higher Education, 62(1), 99-111. 

Williams, A. L., Verwoord, V., Beery, T. A., Dalton, H., McKinnon, J., Strickland, K., . . . Poole, G. (2013). The power of social networks: A model for weaving the scholarship of teaching and learning into institutional culture. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2), 49-62.

Speakers
avatar for Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny is Director of the Educational Development Unit in the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary
avatar for Gavan Watson

Gavan Watson

Associate Director, eLearning, Western University
Gavan P.L. Watson is the Associate Director, eLearning at Western University’s Teaching Support Centre and is the past chair of the Council of Ontario Educational Developers. With a PhD in environmental education, Gavan has a professional background in educational development and... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Seymour Room

3:00pm

CON04.10 - Coaching as a learning methodology in one University's Academic Leadership Development Program
While coaching is rapidly becoming a recognized, and evidence-based approach to learning and change (Stober and Grant, 2006; Nekoranec and Fourrier, 2013), and there is a large body of literature with respect to the development of skills in coaching practice (Blakey and Day, 2012; Britton, 2013), research on its efficacy in the higher education setting is just emerging. Given the conference theme of Achieving Harmony: Tuning into Practice, we note that coaching fosters learning (according to the principles of Ambrose, Bridges, and Lovett, 2010) that supports and sustains development, surfaces and explores complexity, gauges readiness for change, and helps reach action. The session explores the idea of bringing this value to our teaching, and to “student” learning in the context of developing educators. Participants will walk away with a preliminary understanding of: (i) how adapting a coaching methodology can accelerate learning, encourage greater accountability and an increased capacity to self-direct and self-correct, and enhance academic leadership development, and (ii) the flow of a coaching conversation in this context. The session will start with a brief introduction to the use of coaching as a learning methodology in a University’s Academic Leadership Development program, followed by a live coaching demonstration to help participants contextualize this work. After this, participants will engage in a peer coaching exercise and experience coaching and being coached. There will be an opportunity at the end to ask questions of the facilitators.

References:

Blakey, J., & Day, I. (2012). Challenging coaching: Going beyond traditional coaching to face the FACTS. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Britton, J. J. (2013). From one to many. best practices for team and group coaching. Ontario: John Wiley & Sons.\

Nekoranec, W., & Fourrier, D. (2013). Coaching managers through change. Training & Development, May, 26-29.

Stober, D. R., & Grant, A. M. (Eds.). (2006). Evidence based coaching handbook: Putting best practices to work for your clients. Hoboken N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Salon 2

3:00pm

CON04.11 - Addressing food insecurity through social innovation: improving the educational experience of physical and engineering science students through multi-disciplinary teamwork
Canadians waste ~40% of all food produced, while ~13% of Canadian households are food insecure (Gooch et al. 2010, Tarasuk et al. 2014). Given the many resources Canada has, there is a disconnect preventing every Canadian from having access to safe, nutritious, healthy food. To address these issues, students from multiple disciplines were brought together to develop solutions to reduce food insecurity and waste. Specifically, computer science students were tasked to work with community partners, local experts, and colleagues from disciplines spanning the physical and social sciences, to develop mobile and web-based apps to quantify and reduce food insecurity and waste. This talk explores the experiences of students, faculty, and partners over the course of a three year study of community-engaged scholarship within a third year computer science classroom. The talk will also provide observations from extracurricular events (e.g. hackathons) run parallel to the classroom. _x000D_
To capture student experience, attendees will be placed in multidisciplinary teams, and tasked with developing a prototype app that will quantify or reduce food insecurity or waste. Attendees will explore solution creation and refinement by understanding and integrating discipline specific knowledge, while also addressing community partners needs, and the intended users of their app. Attendees will learn the importance of communication, understanding and working with experts from multiple domains, and understanding the target audience of social innovation. Attendees will learn of the benefits of a community-engaged physical and engineering science classrooms, and of multidisciplinary student teams.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Salon 3

3:00pm

CON04.13 - Dissonance or harmony? Reflections on alignment between students-as-partners principles and practices in post-secondary Institutions in Canada
How do faculty and students meaningfully engage in partnerships to improve teaching and learning? What structural and institutional mechanisms support this kind of engagement? How do power differences between faculty and students impact engagement, particularly for students? Within the context of these questions, we (one faculty, one graduate student, and one undergraduate) examine Canadian cases to incorporate the principles of students-as-partners in teaching, research and institutional practices. Informed by international literature on students-as-partners (see Cook-Sather, Bovill, and Felten, 2014; Healey, Flint, and Harrington, 2014; Werder and Otis, 2010) as well as critical and feminist pedagogy (Fraser, 2009; Freire, 2000) we seek to identify sites of harmony and sites of dissonance between students-as-partners principles and practices, to help teaching and learning become more responsive to the tensions inherent in efforts to adopt students-as-partners principles. Specifically, this session includes: 1) a brief introduction to the literature on students-as-partners, 2) examples of student-faculty partnership from our own institutional contexts, and 3) participant discussion (using a jigsaw) of examples of student-as-partners practices they have adopted or have seen adopted. Participants will be invited to identify sites of harmony (cases where participants believe the principles have been successfully applied in practice), sites of dissonance (cases where participants believe the principles have not been successfully applied in practice) and strategies for reducing dissonance. This session is of interest to faculty and students who are curious about engaging in partnership activities, educational developers who may be supporting partnership activities, and educational administrators involved in institutional change efforts.

Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., and Felten, P. (2014). Engaging Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. New York: Columbia University Press. 

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc. 

Healey, M., Flint, A., and Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: HE Academy. 

Werder, C., and Otis, M. (2010). (Eds.) Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Cypress 2 Room

3:00pm

CON04.04 - Blending billionaires, beavers and banditos
In September 2014, the North American Studies program in the Faculty of Arts at Wilfrid Laurier launched a new, introductory course: Billionaires, Beavers, and Banditos. The aim was clear: provide first year students with innovative learning environments to facilitate the transition to university. We also wanted students to critically disrupt concepts including identity, citizenship, race, business, and the nation state. The course incorporated blended, active, interdisciplinary, and low risk/high reward learning. Students were required to assume greater ownership, becoming more ‘free range’ in the management of their course time and work. Still, a curricular framework was intentionally designed to foster university level skills development and learning habits, suited to competencies needed as dynamic life-long learners and ‘free range’, independent thinkers. This interactive session begins with a presentation of the course as a case study, demonstrating how a teaching environment that integrates technology facilitates blended learning to effectively transform a large lecture class to maximize engagement between instructors and students (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004). Preliminary evidence from the first offerings of the course will be reviewed. Colleagues in the sciences seem to have embraced blended learning more readily (Talbert, 2014), but similar approaches can be used in arts courses to achieve smaller class sizes and more active and engaged participation by a larger number of students. Modeling some of the active learning strategies used in the course, participants in this interactive session will work together to brainstorm and adapt a toolkit of proven teaching and learning strategies applicable to other large, introductory, university courses in the arts. 

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.

Talbert, R. (2014, December). Exploring the Flipped Learning Model. Educational Development. Lecture conducted from Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Mackenzie Room

3:00pm

CON04.07 - Hold the phone: Tuning into mobile technology in higher education
This interactive session invites participants to discuss and explore the practical implications of working with mobile technology in our classrooms. Smartphone and tablet computer ownership continues to grow in Canada (comScore, 2014). Mobile devices are a capable and pervasive personal technology, with many people accessing content on multiple screens and devices throughout the day. The market penetration and the technical maturity of these devices do not of course translate smoothly into universal acceptance in our educational institutions. Some argue that these devices drive new forms of digital divide, for example between students able to ‘amplify’ their learning experiences and those who are distracted (Halverson & Halverson, 2012). A further divide exists between institutions and teachers who engage with these technologies, and those that seek to restrict or block their presence. It is challenging for educators and students to navigate the inevitable slippages in the educational application of consumer technologies: informal versus formal use, private communication versus public collaboration, consumption versus production of content, and so on. This is an especially pressing issue as institutions start moving towards a Bring Your Own Device model of IT services, one that recognises how these devices can cut across many dimensions of academics’ and students’ lives in ways that sometimes render traditional campus boundaries or classroom walls irrelevant. Bring your smartphones and tablets to explore playful conventions to design engaging learning activities that utilize mobile devices. Participants will share approaches and discuss obstacles to the acceptance and adoption of these technologies within formal learning spaces.

Cameron, D. (2009). Mashup: Digital media and drama conventions. In M. Anderson, J. Carroll, & D. Cameron (Eds.), Drama Education with Digital Technology (pp. 52 - 66). London: Continuum.

comScore (2014). 2014 Canada digital future in focus. http://www.comscore.com/Insights/Presentations-and-Whitepapers/2014/2014-Canada-Digital-Future-in-Focus.

Halverson, E. R., & Halverson, R. (2012). The design and assessment of 21st century learning environments. Recorded presentation, Centre for Research on Computer Supported Learning and Cognition, The University of Sydney. http://webconf.ucc.usyd.edu.au/p7ek82a56rw/

Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). NMC Horizon Report: 2012 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Chairman Room

3:00pm

CON04.12 - Fostering lifelong learners in business education through the program-level integration of creative learning portfolios
Sheridan College’s Pilon School of Business Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) programs vision is to develop students “as lifelong learners to ensure that their transition to … work environments is smooth and seamless” (Bedrow & Evers, 2011, p. 407). This mandate calls on a mindset of transformational learning (Jarvis, 2006) embracing reflection (Brookfield, 2012), and culminating in the mastery of key employability competencies (Wagner, 2008). The Creative Learning Portfolio (CLP) (reflection and Desire2Learn ePortfolio tool) has been strategically integrated into the degrees. This approach is a unique Business school program-level implementation and a graduation requirement. Our CLP model encompasses an Introductory CLPs course (first year), Advanced CLPs course (final year), and curriculum and work place learning integration throughout the program. We adopted Zubizaretta’s (2009) learning portfolio model (experiences/reflection, evidence/documentation, and mentoring/collaboration).  In this interactive workshop, we will showcase the BBA programs’ CLP design and delivery model, experiences and lessons learned from the Introduction to CLPs course and curriculum integration activities (to 200+ students in Fall 2014/Winter 2015), student samples, and engage in interactive/reflective dialogue. As a result of this workshop, participants will be able to:

• Explore strategies for integrating and scaffolding portfolio learning and ePortfolios into program(s) and/or course(s).
• Inquire and reflect upon learning experiences including successes and setbacks to enable the fine-tuning of personal practice. 
• Nurture the reflective process and help learners purposefully develop metacognition skills for lifelong learning.
• Access reference list of relevant research papers._

References:

Berdrow, I. and Evers, F.T. (2010). Bases of Competence: A Framework for Facilitating Reflective Learner-Centered Educational Environments, Journal of Management Education. 35(3): 406-427.

Brookfield, S. D. (2012). Teaching for Critical thinking: Tools and Techniques to Help Students Question Their Assumptions. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Jarvis, P. (2006). Towards a comprehensive theory of human learning: Lifelong learning and the learning society, Vol 1. New York, NY: Routledge.

Wagner, T. (2008). The Global Achievement Gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need and what can we do about it. NY: Basic Books.

Zubizaretta, J. (2009). The Learning Portfolio: Reflective Practice for Improving Student Learning, 2nd Edition; San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Cypress 1 Room

3:00pm

CON04.08 - Turning the tables: Bringing Aboriginal pedagogies into academic practice
I attended a roundtable focused on “Indigenizing The Classroom,” hoping to learn about “best practices” for incorporating Aboriginal pedagogies in post-secondary courses. Instead, presenters focused on incorporating indigenous content. When I asked presenters to comment on how they used Aboriginal pedagogies, they responded: “there aren’t any,” “it would be inappropriate,” and “it is impossible.” I was unsatisfied. Each Aboriginal community maintains its own protocols and philosophies concerning how to teach and learn in a good way. Some of these pedagogies are grounded in specific environments, languages, relationships, and systems. It is neither possible nor appropriate to extract these highly localized philosophies and practices from their cultural contexts. Yet there are several Aboriginal practices and philosophies that are more generalized, that can be mobilized effectively in post-secondary classrooms. These approaches include valuing oral testimony; seeking wisdom from one’s elders; sharing findings with one’s community; and taking a four-directions approach (especially engaging heart, body, and spirit in addition to the mind). In 2014, I put my research on Aboriginal pedagogies into practice, with outstanding outcomes for students and myself. In “Turning the Tables,” I present my findings, drawing from cutting-edge scholarship on “Indigenizing the Academy,” student feedback, and my own experiences. This presentation will explain how Aboriginal pedagogies work, with practical examples related to instruction, student engagement, assignments, and evaluation. I will demonstrate how decentring colonial educational approaches can acknowledge and encourage both cultural and scholastic diversity. Attendees will be invited to reflect on their own teaching practice in a circle discussion.

Battiste, M. (2013). Decolonizing education: Nourishing the learning spirit. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing Limited.

Graveline, F. J. (1998). Circle Works: Transforming Eurocentric consciousness. Halifax: Fernwood.

Hill, E. (2012). A critique of the call to ‘always indigenize!’. Peninsula 2(1). Retrieved from http://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/peninsula/article/view/11513/3212

Mihesuah, D. A. and Wilson, A. C. (Eds.). (2004). Indigenizing the academy: Transforming scholarship and empowering communities. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Director Room

3:00pm

CON04.02 - First day boot camp show and tell: How we moved beyond discussing the syllabus
Delivered just prior to a new academic year, MacEwan University’s First Day Boot Camp workshop offers faculty members strategies and activities for engaging students’ attention and encouraging their active involvement in a class, right from day one. Our STLHE session will combine condensed versions of Boot Camp activities we have found most interesting and motivating for faculty, with a look behind the scenes at how our Boot Camp has been built. Participants will have the opportunity to learn strategies both for stimulating student enthusiasm and for designing Boot Camp sessions that succeed in attracting faculty members even during a very busy time of year. Faculty members interested in grabbing students’ attention right from the first day of class will learn about carousel-style graffiti, techniques for managing power dynamics, avoiding information overload, and more. Educational developers seeking to hold similar First Day of Class workshops at their own institutions will benefit from the perspective of the presenters who also designed and facilitate the Boot Camp – an educational developer and two curriculum coordinators, all of whom teach – and the lessons we have learned about creating a session faculty will find appealing and useful.

M. Bart. (2009, July 6). How to use the first day of class to set the tone for entire semester. [Web log article]. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-classroom-management/how-to-use-the-first-day-of-class-to-set-the-tone-for-entire-semester/

M. Weimer. (2013, January 9). First day of class activities that create a climate for learning. [Web log article.] Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/first-day-of-class-activities-that-create-a-climate-for-learning/

Speakers
avatar for Paul Martin

Paul Martin

Faculty Development Coordinator, MacEwan University


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Bayshore Salon D

3:00pm

CON04.03 - Curricular resonance: Making space for transformative learning through assessment

The relationship between assessment and transformative learning is a complicated and generally under-examined one (Fostaty-Young, 2012). In this session we aim to explore the pedagogical processes at play in the intersection of assessment with transformative learning. Building on Troop’s (2014) work with graduate students, you’ll have the opportunity to examine the relevance to your own instructional context of keyword writing (Luce-Kapler, 2004), critical analysis through journal keeping and other instructional and assessment strategies that have been found to make space for transformative learning. After a brief introduction to the research that informs conceptions of and supports for transformative learning, questions to be explored through guided small group discussion include: How might we use a harmonized (or aligned) curriculum to construct the dissonance that’s a necessary catalyst for transformative learning? How can we then assess (measure and observe) transformative learning? What are the inherent challenges with assessing transformative learning? In what ways does assessment enable and/or constrain the learning process? The intended learning outcomes for the session are that participants will: (a) Identify the inherent challenges and constraints of supporting and assessing transformative learning in their own instructional context and (b) Apply a framework to make curricular space to support the potential for transformative learning to occur and be assessed.

References: 

Fostaty-Young, S. (2012). Transformative Effects of Learning & Assessment Focused Educational Development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 

Luce-Kapler, R. (2004). Writing with, through, and beyond the text: An ecology of language. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Troop, M .(2014). Traversing Creative Space, Transforming Higher Education: A Contemporary Curricular View of Teaching and Learning. Unpublished doctoral disseration. Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.



Speakers
avatar for Meagan Troop (University of Guelph)

Meagan Troop (University of Guelph)

Curriculum Consultant for the International Institute for Critical Studies in Improvisation, University of Guelph
SF

Sue Fostaty Young

Educational Developer, Queen's University
Sue is an Educational Developer and the Programs Manager of the Queen's University CTL. Her responsibilities include the development and delivery of programming for graduate students' and post-doctoral fellows' teaching development.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Bayshore Salon EF

3:00pm

CON04.06 - Active eLearning: Adapting established F2F teaching strategies to fit eLearning environments
Active learning techniques are widely used by instructors in face-to-face (F2F) classes in order to engage students in collaborative learning. This session will explore the adaption of F2F active learning strategies to fit eLearning environments. Specifically, the session will focus on a technique that combines Project-Based Learning (PBL) and the jigsaw method. In an eLearning environment, the two methods can be combined seamlessly if instructors can offer the right production tools to students. In this session, I will introduce four teaching tools that can be used to create learning objects by students employing PBL. The four tools are: Zaption, Educreations, Popplet, and VideoScribe. The jigsaw method will be modeled as session participants will be divided into small groups of 3-5. Each group will then examine one of the four teaching tools provided by the facilitator. The ‘experts’ on each tool will then share their expertise and insight with the rest of the session participants. Through eLearning teaching tool analysis, individual and small group work, and facilitated discussion, participants in this session will: (a) examine four eLearning teaching tools that can be used to facilitate active learning in an eLearning environment, (b) identify opportunities for these tools to be used to foster collaborative learning, active learning, or authentic assessment, and (c) use these eLearning teaching tools in their own instruction or introduce them to instructors whom they support.

Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978).The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Jonassen, D. H., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B.B.(1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26. 

King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30-35. 

Hung, V.H.K., Keppell, M. & Jong, M.S.Y.(2004). Learners as producers: Using project based learning to enhance meaningful learning through digital video production. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21stASCILITE Conference (pp. 428-436). Perth, 5-8 December.

Speakers
avatar for Yasmien Mills (University of Victoria)

Yasmien Mills (University of Victoria)

Instructor, University of Victoria and Camosun
I have been an educator in higher ed for about 15 yrs. Recently, I've become more involved in Educational Technology. I have worked in Teaching Support Centres at Western University as well as Royal Roads University. In those roles I focused mostly on faculty development. But I... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
Thompson Room

3:00pm

CON04.CreativeDiscussion02 - What if you were an atom? Role playing as a mean to covey practical concepts in applied sciences
Role playing is a form of psychodrama, where individuals act adopted roles, accordingly improvising behavior in a structured setting. Role playing is often used for training professionals or in classrooms with subjects such as law, literature, history, languages, biology and other sciences. In higher education, role playing can be a strategy for student engagement in large classes: even when not all students are directly involved, role playing sessions are powerful means to induce independent thinking and active participation in the whole class. In the authors experience, interesting results have emerged applying role playing to the teaching of physical phenomena or technology apparatuses and processes: guiding students to behave for example as atoms in a water molecule, or electrical charges in a modern computer has very positive implications on class engagement and the understanding of critical concepts.

The discussion is addressed to teachers and teaching staff interested in methodologies for "participatory learning" and students engagement in large classes. The proposal targets a 50-minute deep-dice conversation:

(10 mins) Introducing literature guidelines for role playing in classroom

(20 mins ) Case Studies: description of results emerged applying role playing to the teaching of physical phenomena or technology apparatuses and processes 

(20 mins): DISCUSSION: Attendees are encouraged to (i) comment on feasibility, limitations and benefits of introducing role playing in their area of expertise (ii) discuss the potential of role playing for student engagement and as a way to increase material learning and assessment skills


Wednesday June 17, 2015 3:00pm - 4:00pm
STLHE Registration Desk

4:00pm

POSTER.01 - An interdepartmental curriculum map as a foundation for undergraduate life sciences curriculum reform
The Faculty of Science at Simon Fraser University is home to three life science departments: Biological Sciences (BISC), Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology (BPK), and Molecular Biology and Biochemistry (MBB). The BISC and MBB departments are in charge of the core lower division life science courses that serve to prepare undergraduates from all three departments for program-specific upper division courses. In order to ensure that these core courses are meeting the needs of students and faculty across the life sciences, we have conducted a systematic review of the undergraduate curriculum. This process was challenging due to the diversity of programs that undergraduates go on to complete (seven majors across the three departments) and the volume of information that was analyzed. We generated one large curriculum map with extensive input from faculty in all three departments. Instructors were guided through the process of writing learning outcomes for all of the core courses and many of the electives. We mapped learning outcomes from each course against those from core prerequisite courses and against program-level learning outcomes. This process allowed us to identify key concepts that were redundant between courses or that were omitted or under-emphasized in the curriculum. These areas of redundancy and overlap will be used as the foundation for change in the curriculum.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.02 - Discovery, redesign and fine-tuning: Laying the foundations for leadership competency building within students pursuing a four-year undergraduate business degree program.
In recent years, research has supported the need for undergraduate business students to be exposed to the attributes of leadership and the responsibilities of being a leader in the world of business (Kosicek, 2008; Getz, 2009). The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a cumulative development in leadership competency building amongst undergraduate business students in a Canadian university as they progress through each of their four years within their program. Results were to inform the necessary curriculum design changes thus ensuring this needed leadership foundation. Data was collected using focus groups comprised of students from all four years. A series of open ended questions were asked with respect to the areas of content, continuity, connection and flow from year one organizational behavior, to year two human resource management, to year three management skills leading up to a new year four leadership capstone course. Results revealed deficiencies in all areas and therefore strongly supported the need for better coordination, integration, and sequencing to produce the scaffolding for successful leadership competency building. The new fourth year capstone course will allow the students to apply first, second and third year principles of transactional leadership capabilities to the identification and improvement of their transformational leadership capabilities. The course will require students to build a leadership learning portfolio (LLP) comprising a number of reflections on their four-year commerce program journey, in and outside the classroom (courses; career building experiences; community engagement initiatives; exchange and cross-cultural experiences; volunteer work; professional relationship building).


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.04 - New interdisciplinary science course for first-year faculty of science students: Overview and results from the pilot
Transitioning to university can be a daunting endeavour, with student success dependent on a myriad of effects (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Understanding how to navigate university systems, who to meet, how to get help, how to study and what goals to set can be hard to grasp (Valle et al., 2003). This session provides an overview of the new interdisciplinary foundations course, which piloted in Fall 2014, for first-year Faculty of Science students that i) provides a taste of research-based learning and develops essential skills that are important for their undergraduate degree and future academic or career plans, ii) exposes students to a wide range of departments and programs in the Faculty of Science, and iii) invites students to reflect on their academic journey and how it may be changing as a result of the course. This customized approach that intentionally teaches about institutional resources and expectations while offering opportunities to create networks of support is essential for student success and retention (Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, & Gonyea, 2008) and speaks to a number of considerations highlighted in the literature (e.g., Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro, Lovett, & Norman, 2010). Other factors considered included balancing the needs of the Faculty, the resources available, and the goals, demands and interests of the students. In this poster presentation, we will describe the course’s design, structure and implementation, a key component of the course (week-long mini-research projects completed in small groups with support from upper-level science students), and preliminary results from a pedagogical study looking at student impact and perception.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the Effects of Student Engagement on First-Year College Grades and Persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. http://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.0.0019

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How College Affects Students: A Third Decade Of Research. Jossey-Bass Higher & Adult Education.

Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Núnez, J. C., González-Pienda, J., Rodríguez, S., & Piñeiro, I. (2003). Multiple goals, motivation and academic learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(1), 71–87. http://doi.org/10.1348/000709903762869923


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.46 - A comparison of selected undergraduate physiology programs in North America and the United Kingdom
_x000D_Introduction: There are few resources that provide a systematic comparison of the structure and content of undergraduate physiology programs from different institutions. We used web-based resources to examine the content currently covered in the undergraduate programs of established physiology departments in North America and the United Kingdom._x000D_ Methods: Institutions were selected using online university rankings. Data acquisition was performed in two steps. First, preliminary data were collected from an online search conducted using available websites for the institution and department/program of interest. Secondly, a member of the department (usually an undergraduate advisor) was contacted and asked to confirm/correct the details collected online._x000D_ Results: We found that: i) most degree programs require a similar quantity and variety of prerequisite basic science courses; ii) the number of core physiology courses required varies greatly from institution to institution, but the average student will take 5 core physiology courses as part of their degree program; iii) a large number of physiology-specific courses are offered in most departments; however, only a relatively small proportion of those courses are lab-based, animal-based, or have a distinct cellular focus; iv) all programs studied appeared to use a systems approach to instruction, with common key physiological systems identified._x000D_ Discussion: Overall, we have illustrated important demographic and program features from 15 institutions across North America and the United Kingdom. We believe this information may help provide better reference guidelines for educating undergraduate physiology students, to promote consistency within the degree level expectations of undergraduate physiology majors, regardless of the institution attended.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.05 - Slow facilitation: A collective, evidence-based approach to designing peer supports for teaching development
Mentorship has been documented as an effective approach to professional development in many disciplines (De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004). A growing body of evidence informs several different types of peer mentorship initiatives in higher education, including those that focus on professional development, progression to disciplinary maturity, and teaching development (Huston & Weaver, 2008). However, the success of peer mentorship initiatives appears to be partly dependent on how well they take contextual demands into consideration (Bernstein, Jonson, & Smith, 2000). 

The University of Calgary has recently implemented an institution-wide teaching awards program, which has generated a cohort of award winners who are both interested in and committed to contributing to peer support of teaching development on campus. In the effort to decide how the group would do this in a meaningful and sustainable way, the Educational Development Unit has facilitated a slow process of exploration and iterative decision making in order to establish a unique, evidence-based, context-driven peer support initiative for teaching development. 

After engaging with this poster presentation, participants should be able to: (a) conceptualize the process of slow facilitation, (b) imagine how slow facilitation for the purpose of developing a peer mentorship initiative would look at their home institution, and (c) develop one idea for starting a slow facilitation process. The presenter will provide an overview and artefacts of the slow facilitation process, and participate in interactive discussions about how such a process could be implemented at participants’ home institutions. 

Bernstein, D. J., Jonson, J., & Smith, K. (2000). An examination of the implementation of peer review of teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 83, 73-86. doi: 10.1002/tl.8306

De Janasz, S. C., & Sullivan, S. E. (2004). Multiple mentoring in academe: Developing the professorial network. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 263-283. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2002.07.001

Huston, T., & Weaver, C. L. (2008). Peer coaching: Professional development for experienced faculty. Innovation in Higher Education, 33(5), 5-20. doi: 10.1007/s10755-007-9061-9

Speakers
avatar for Robin Alison Mueller (University of Calgary)

Robin Alison Mueller (University of Calgary)

Educational Development Consultant (Faculty), University of Calgary


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.07 - Skill enhancement through teaching assistant training
With more than 60 teaching assistants annually helping educate over 3,000 undergraduate students, TAs play a critical role in undergraduate education in the Sociology Department at the University of British Columbia. TAs take on a variety of responsibilities including marking, lecturing, facilitating workshops, invigilating exams, interacting with students in office hours and via email, and leading discussion groups. Novice TA skills can range widely thus effective TA training is paramount. Our TA training consists of four workshops and an evaluation session held at the beginning of the academic year. These workshops focus on skill building through case studies where participants discuss scenarios, with opportunities for veteran TAs to share their experiences and for new TAs to voice their concerns. Emphasis is placed on skills that can be easily adapted, such as professional communication. Each workshop encourages students to interact, promoting a high level of peer social support and collaboration. We conclude with an evaluation session where participants provide feedback that guides future workshops. This poster provides a detailed overview of our TA training program, including the program learning goals and structure as well as plans for revision based on feedback from participants, reviews of best practices, and consultation with faculty members. By the end of this facilitated poster session, participants will be able to identify the key goals of each of four training sessions and articulate the ways in which the program supports both undergraduate and graduate student teaching assistants in their skill development.

Hogan, T. P., Norcross, J. C., Cannon, J. T., & Karpiak, C. P. (2007). Working with and training undergraduates as teaching assistants. Teaching of Psychology, 34(3), 187-190.

Pentecost, T. C. (2012). Graduate teaching assistant training that forsters student-centered instruction and professional development. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(6), 68-75.

Shannon, D. M., Twale, D. J., Moore, M. S. (1998). TA teaching effectiveness: The impact of training and teacher experience. The Journal of Higher Education, 69(4), 440-466.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.06 - 3M National Teaching Fellowship Program: Impact study
As part of a three year study we have collected and analyzed data regarding the impact of the 3M National Teaching Fellowship through focus groups, a national survey, and the collection of archival material. Throughout our study, we maintain a focus on how this award has evolved over time, the impact on the individual, institution, the STLHE community at large, and the broader Canadian context. In our poster we will highlight findings from our national survey that targets 3M Fellows, educational developers, faculty, students, and administrators. We share a preliminary assessment of how the 3M national teaching fellowship program makes a difference to Canadian higher education. Do award-winning teachers in departments and across institutions continue to make significant contributions to learning and teaching after receiving the award? What impact have the almo st 300 3M National Teaching Fellows had, if any, on Canadian higher education? And how would one know? Although focused on the 3M National Teaching Fellowship, this poster explores how successful programs might go about measuring their impact.

Ahmad, A., Stockley, D, & Moore, R. (2013). 3M fellows making a mark in Canadian higher education. In D. Salter (Ed), Cases on quality teaching practices in higher education (pp. 182-190).

Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Brawer, J., Steinert, Y., St-Cyr, J., Watters, K., & Wood-Dauphinee, S. (2006). The significance and impact of a faculty teaching award: Disparate perceptions of department chairs and award recipients. Medical Teacher, 28 (7), 614–617.

Lead Speaker(s)
Speakers
avatar for Arshad Ahmad

Arshad Ahmad

Associate Vice-President, Teaching and Learning & Director, MIIETL, McMaster University
Dr. Arshad Ahmad is the Associate Vice-President Teaching and Learning and Director of Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL) at McMaster University. He is the Past Coordinator of the 3MNTF program and a 3M National Teaching Fellow. He is the Past... Read More →
RS

Ron Smith

Concordia Univeristy
Dr. Ron Smith is a Professor Emeritus, Education Department Concordia University and a 3M National Teaching Fellow. He is the Past-Chair of the 3M Council and has served on the adjudication for the 3M.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.08 - Competency based strategies to support faculty development
The urgent call to transform and reform educational practices rings loud across higher educational landscapes, nationally and internationally (Cohen & Kisker, 2010; Hutchings, Huber, & Ciccone, 2011). According to higher education leaders, a major paradigm shift is needed in the way educators view student learning and evaluation (Bass, 2012; Bain, 2004). To assist faculty at a multisite, multi-program nursing college to successfully transform their teaching practices, a structured faculty development program was implemented to promote the effective use of evidence-based learner-centered strategies. This presentation will examine a new faculty development model to promote the effective use of evidence-based pedagogies to optimize student learning. The framework of the faculty development program includes: (a) the formation of a culture that supports and recognizes scholarly teaching, (b) the formation of an organizational infrastructure that facilitates the successful implementation of the faculty development program across a multi-campus, multistate, undergraduate nursing college, and (c) the use of evidence-based pedagogical strategies to ensure positive student learning experiences and achievement of learning outcomes. This new faculty development model guides, develops, and evaluates the pedagogical knowledge base and learner-centered strategies educators need to optimize student learning. The learner-centered strategies were added to the end of course survey which evaluates faculty. Evaluation of the model includes end of course student survey results and grade distribution over a two year period. 

Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bass, R. (2012). Disrupting ourselves: The problem of learning in higher education. Educause Review, March/April, 2012. 

Cohen, A.M. & Kisker, C.B . (2010). The shaping of American higher education: Emergence and growth of the contemporary system. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hutchings, P., Huber, M.T., & Ciccone, A. (2011). The scholarship of teaching and learning reconsidered: Institutional integration and impact. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.09 - A mentoring model: Support structures and resources for community building
Mentoring is an integral aspect of both personal and professional development. Through our research, we are inquiring into the various resources, strategies, theories and frameworks that support effective mentoring relationships at the post-secondary level. Research has identified mentoring as one of the key methods in assisting teachers in their professional growth since it provides mentees with practical support that helps them gain self-confidence, solve problems and apply critical thinking skills to situations affecting student learning (Crow 2007,Hubball et al. 2010). This poster presentation provides an example of an investigation of mentors working with in service K-12 teachers providing small group and one-on-one support, resources, theory, and feedback to support the critical examination and assessment of teaching practice. In this model, mentors engage in relationship building and co-construct a community of practice, collaborating with teachers as they participate in three inquiry-based field studies and a portfolio of their learning. To support mentors, we are developing a shared resource ‘bank’ that can be accessed by mentors and program staff to support teacher learning and encourage leadership. Paraphrasing and questioning prompts, community building activities, and generational and learning style tools are examples of these resources. This poster will provide details of the Mentor/Mentee relationship and the tools included in the resource bank. A QRC will be included for access to resources that others can use to support a mentoring model in their own context.

Crow, G.M., 2007. The professional and organizational socialization of new English head-teachers in school reform contexts. Educational management, administration & leadership, 35 (1), 51–71.

Hubball, H., Clarke, A., and Poole, G., 2010. Ten-year reflections on mentoring SoTL research in a research-intensive university. International Journal for Academic Development, 15 (2), 117–129.

Speakers

Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.10 - A dietetics professional practice course transformed: Students as creators of knowledge
The project team redeveloped, evaluated and refined a pre-practicum professional practice course for the Dietetics program. Stakeholder feedback highlighted issues students experience transitioning to professional environments, which provided the impetus for the project. These issues included: low learning engagement and difficulty applying foundational knowledge during practicum. The pilot course incorporated self-directed learning approaches in order to increase learning engagement and knowledge recall during practicum. Research shows that active, self-directed learning builds self-efficacy, successful performance, and workplace leadership (Boyer et al., 2014). In the pilot course, student groups researched subjects surrounding preparation for practice with the support of professional advisors. Each group identified learning needs, researched this narrowed topic, and created educational content (including media for online sharing, and an interactive workshop for peers). Evaluation showed the pilot course supported student engagement and ownership of learning. Students reported their technological and networking skills improved, and they valued the student-led workshops. Michel et al. (2009) noted similar findings; students in active-learning environments were more participative, accountable, and able to retain knowledge. Students shared that the student-created-media was of greatest value during practicum preparation, when opportunities for exposure to experiential learning in practice settings were not yet available. These results show promise for applying similar pedagogical approaches in preparing for asynchronous learning in professional programs. The objectives of this facilitated poster session are: (1) to share experiences with a course re-design initiative and its effect on learning, and (2) to discuss with attendees strategies to address gaps between academic learning and professional practice. 

Boyer, S.L., Edmondson, D.R., Artis, A.B. and Fleming, D. (2014) Self-directed learning: a tool for lifelong learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 36, 20. doi: 10.1177/0273475313494010

Michel, N., Cater, J., & Varela, O. (2009). Active versus passive teaching styles: An empirical study of student learning outcomes. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(4), 397-418. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.20025



Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.11 - Building community, encouraging support: Three streams of student mentoring in University of British Columbia Sociology
Graduate students in the Department of Sociology at the University of British Columbia have been organizing the Sociology Student Mentorship Program since 2010. Approximately 36 students participate in the program annually. This poster provides a detailed overview of the three program streams: undergraduate mentoring, teaching assistant mentoring, and graduate student mentoring. This group of students is often overlooked within the mentorship literature focused on first year undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty (Countryman & Zinck, 2013; Goff, 2011; Le Cornu, 2005). The poster also includes information about the program goals, structure and events. Student photos and experiences are profiled. This facilitated poster session will enable participants to engage directly with the organizers of the peer-mentorship program to discuss experiences, challenges and best practices. By the end of the poster session, participants will be able to identify the key characteristics of each mentorship stream and will be able to articulate the ways in which the program supports mentoring partnerships throughout the term. Overall, our presentation can help establish best practices for the structure of academic peer mentorship programs in post-secondary institutions. 

References:

Countryman, J . & Zinck, A. (2013). Building connections in the first-year undergraduate experience. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 1-18.

Goff, L. (2011). Evaluating the outcomes of a peer-mentoring program for students transitioning to postsecondary education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-13.

Le Cornu, R. (2005). Peer mentoring: Engaging pre-service teachers in mentoring one another. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 13(3), 355-366.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.12 - Do we need to teach in harmony? Developing a food science concept inventory to measure learning effectiveness and fine-tune our teaching practices
The need of a common evaluation tool to assess student learning was identified in an introductory food science course. The course attracts a diverse audience in both science and arts discipline that have an interest in food. The challenge of student prior knowledge of food is compounded by increased enrollment and a course that operates with multi-sections and instructors using different teaching strategies. A concept inventory was developed to measure student knowledge and identify student misconceptions (Adam & Wieman, 2010). Concept inventory is a set of multiple-choice questions where the distractors (wrong answers) are purposely designed to represent commonly held misconceptions. It can be used to identify how many students in a class have mastered a concept and common misconceptions within the class (Garvin-Doxas et al. 2007). Concept Inventories have been developed for undergraduate biology (Kalas et al.,2013) and physics (Adams & Wieman, 2011) courses. This poster session presents the first concept inventory for food science education (FSCI). Common student misconceptions were identified by analysis of exam results (n=229) and a student survey using open ended questions (n=73 ) followed by two student focus groups. Eleven multiple choice questions were developed and tested in 4 sections (n=435) at the start and end of the course. Expert interviews (n=10) were used to evaluate the distractors and modifications to FSCI are reported. These results and their value in the assessment of teaching effectiveness are discussed. The food science topics introduced in this course are prerequisites to study within a food science curriculum. A subset of the questions could be used to test retention at start of senior level courses. How else can we use the FSCI? Teach to the concepts explicitly? Aim to improve the post-test results? How can we use post test results to improve teaching and eventually student learning? We look forward to hearing your candid feedback on these questions.

Adams WK, and Wieman CE. 2010. Development and validation of instruments to measure learning of expert-like thinking. Int J Sci Educ 33:1-24. DOI:10.1080/09500693.2010.512369

Garvin-Doxas K, Klymkowsky M, Elrod S. 2007. Building, using, and maximizing the impact of concept inventories in the biological sciences: report on a National Science Foundation sponsored conference on the construction of concept inventories in the biological sciences. CBE Life Sci Educ 6:277-282. doi: 10.1187/cbe.07-05-0031

Kalas P, O’Neill A, Pollock C, Birol G. 2013. Development of a meiosis concept inventory. CBE Life Sci Educ 12:655-664. doi: 10.1187/cbe.12-10-0174

Speakers
avatar for Judy Chan

Judy Chan

Education Consultant, Faculty Liaison, University of British Columbia
UBC


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.13 - Easing the shock: Improving first generation transfer student success in their transition to a 4-year institution
Community college transfer students are a rapidly growing subset of the student population at research institutions. In spite of their growing numbers, strategies to support their adjustment at the university level have largely been neglected. Difficulty with academic, social and psychological adjustment (Laanan, 2004) to the university take a toll on transfer students’ academic performance resulting in a GPA drop in the first year (termed “transfer shock”;Hills, 1965). This phenomenon is exacerbated for students in STEM majors, traditionally underrepresented minorities (URM) and first generation students. Transfer shock puts transfer students at a disadvantage in their future academic endeavors because their resulting graduation GPA may not be highly competitive. Most studies on the community college post-transfer experience have concentrated on understanding and measuring students' difficulty at the new institution, but little is known about the systematic implementation of interventions to facilitate the adjustment process and reduce the transfer shock.

We will present the preliminary results of a longitudinal randomized control study, which examines the effect of an intervention designed to reduce transfer shock for 67 URM and/or first generation STEM transfer students at a large four-year university. The intervention implemented a model that combines a two-week research intensive, seminars, and peer mentoring. The program is designed to improve academic motivation and identity, resulting in improvements in students’ academic achievement. We will present the findings on the impact of the program on students’ first and second quarter GPA, as well as academic/psychological adjustment measures.

Laanan, F. S. (2004). Studying transfer students: Part I: Instrument design and implications. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 28(4), 331-351.

Hills, John R. "Transfer shock: The academic performance of the junior college transfer." The Journal of Experimental Educational (1965): 201-215.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.14 - Two successful strategies for improving students’ academic writing and study skills in Australia
Many of the University of Newcastle (UoN), Australia’s students come from backgrounds including low SES, first-in-family and mature students, and they are underprepared to succeed at university study. UoN has recently implemented two strategies (one synchronous and one asynchronous) that provide academic writing and study skills to help these students achieve academic success. A student mentoring drop-in service utilising the skills of post-graduate students has been implemented to offer just-in-time assistance to students. Peer-supported writing programs available at other Australian rural university campuses were investigated (Dooley, Mc Niece & Martin, 2012; Williamson and Goldsmith, 2013) and the program initiated. The drop-in replaces individual consultations and structured workshops, and allows ‘just in time’ style support from post-graduate students in an open door fashion. A second support service, econsult, provides written feedback on a piece of writing by email. In 2010-11 we began exploring options for support that would best cater for students who were time poor, and juggling a variety of commitments that included study. As email usage is one of the most commonly held skills (Gray, et al, 2009) this was seen as the most effective method of making the service widely available. Any student can post their selected piece of writing and questions to the econsult address, and they are provided detailed personalised feedback within two days. This is especially helpful for students with multiple external commitments. Also, as most support offered is synchronous, it more closely aligns with the asynchronous nature of online and blended course delivery.

References:

Dooley, S., Mc Niece, A., & Martin, J. (2012, November). Undergraduate students as academic skills tutors: A transformative experience. Paper presented at Students Support Student Learning (SSSL) Symposium, Victoria University, Melbourne. Retrieved from http://www.aall.org.au/sites/default/files/SSSL%20Symposium%202012%20eBook_0.pdf

Gray, K., Kennedy, G., Waycott, J., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Chang, R., Judd, t., Bishop, A., Maton, K. and Krause, K (2009). Educating the Net Generation – A Toolkit for Educators in Australian Universities – 2009. Support for the original work was provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Retrieved from http://www.netgen.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/toolkit/NetGenToolkit.pdf

Williamson, F. & Goldsmith, R. (2013) PASSwrite: Recalibrating student academic literacies development. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice. 10(2). Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol10/iss2/r


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.44 - Learner-centered simulations for pre-graduate nursing students: Tuning into their clinical practice needs
Nursing students in our accelerated undergraduate program participate in structured simulations in all clinical courses throughout their two-year program of study. This poster will discuss the pilot use of impromptu student-driven simulations to prepare pre-graduation students for their final practicum. At least half of the class comes into consolidation following a community placement and experience anxiety related to their skill level and lack of recent practice in a hospital setting. The purpose of the pilot was to help students feel more confident about their upcoming placement by practicing self-identified skills and techniques in the context of a situation as close to reality as possible._x000D_
_x000D_
Senior students were invited to sign up ahead of time, specify their learning needs (e.g. giving injections, focused health assessment, prioritizing, etc.), and identify their upcoming clinical placement (e.g. medicine, surgery, etc.). Student groups of six or less worked together in the lab for 2- 4 hours just prior to the start of their practicum. Two faculty members experienced in simulation learning led the scenarios and debriefing sessions. Little preliminary work was done on the simulations. Most scenario development was tailored to the students in the scenario and done on the fly. Pre-simulation briefing was very important to ensure “a psychologically safe context for learning” and active engagement of student learners who did not know each other very well (Rudolph, Raemer & Simon, 2014). Highlights of this learner-centered activity as well as feedback from both students and faculty involved will be shared in this poster._x000D_
_x000D_
Onda, E.L. (2012). Situated cognition: Its relationship to simulation in nursing education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8, e273-e280._x000D_
_x000D_
Rudolph, J.W., Raemer, D.B., & Simon, R. (2014). Establishing a safe container for learning in simulation: The role of the presimulation briefing. Simulation in Healthcare, 9(6), 339-349._x000D_
_x000D_
Wooley, N.N. & Jarvis, Y. (2007). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: A model for teaching and learning clinical skils in a technologically rich and authentic learning environment. Nurse Education Today, 27, 73-79.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.45 - Development of an exit survey to evaluate undergraduate student learning experiences
All University departments are required to undertake internal and external review of their undergraduate programs. Self-assessment is a key component of this process, and student surveys are one commonly used metric of student satisfaction with their educational experiences._x000D_ Informed by historical student experience data from our department and newly conducted student focus group data, we developed an undergraduate student exit survey to evaluate student perspectives of their learning experiences. Our instrument used a combination of selected items from past departmental survey instruments, items from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and newly developed items to reflect departmental needs and local context. Our instrument was further refined through peer checking (review by colleagues) and pilot testing. We hope such a systematic approach to student experience survey development informs attendees’ practice at their own institutions._x000D_ Data collected from the survey will be used for internal and external review, and to guide and assess program improvement initiatives, current educational practice, and educational goals. In addition to the benefits to our own programs, we believe this survey contains many general questions about the students’ academic experiences, and would easily be applied to other programs. In relation to the programs offered by our department, we have identified through the survey a number of strengths, as well as opportunities to modify our educational practices. We believe we have developed a reliable instrument to track changes in student perceptions of their educational experiences in response to program modification over time.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.15 - Teaching students argumentation visually with the dialectical map
There is a growing interest in argumentation, its pedagogical significance, and the teaching of argumentation skills. Research has found correlations between students’ argumentation skills and their critical thinking process, which is central to higher education. However, evidence shows that students often lack good argumentation skills. This presentation introduces a newly developed argumentation visualization tool, the Dialectical Map (DM), which facilitates the teaching of argumentation skills. The DM is a hybrid of argument maps and argument vee diagrams . Students create DMs by identifying and composing claims, evidence, and warrants in a computer-supported environment. They then draw an integrated conclusion by evaluating arguments and counterarguments in a visually hierarchical structure. In a lab experiment and two implementations in university-level biology classes, preliminary findings show improvements in students’ argumentation skills over time. Students’ improved argumentation skills showed transfer, with matching improvements in writing styles, organization of information, and reasoning skills. Students responded very positively to the DM. One student said, “It challenged us to learn how to argue effectively.” Another said, “The DM challenged my ability to argue a topic. I thought I had skills [in argumentation] before, but I don't think I was actually very skilled.” The presentation includes the concept of argumentation and its role in teaching and learning. Diagrams are given on how to construct a DM. We then present findings from our case studies using the DM and conclude the presentation with a brief discussion.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.16 - Tuning into student perceptions of eportfolio use for reflective learning and leadership development
Creating 21st century leaders is the focus of a MBA program in Southwestern Ontario. To build leadership capacity among MBA students through reflective learning, ePortfolios were used as an intervention in a thirteen-week course. ePortfolios have been used for reflective learning in higher education and teacher education (Jafari & Kaufman, 2006), but few studies have explored its use among business students (Eynon, Gambio, & Török, 2014). This mixed-methods study investigated student perceptions of ePortfolio use to support transformative learning and leadership development in a MBA program. Analyses of pre-and post-intervention surveys reveal that students’ initial positive attitudes towards ePortfolios were sustained throughout the course as a tool for reflection and communication. Interviews with students, faculty, administrators and staff and content analyses suggest students engaged in transformative learning and leadership development by demonstrating awareness of their leadership strengths, how their awareness changed the way they lead, what type of leader they wanted to become, and the type of leader they were becoming. However, sustaining continued ePortfolio use throughout the program was a challenge. Strategic implementation of ePortfolios from the beginning of the MBA program and support throughout the program modules is needed to help students sustain ePortfolio use and benefit from continued self-reflection for leadership development. The poster presentation will engage participants by sharing ePortfolio exemplars, excerpts from interviews, and a reflective activity to generate shared understanding of how students perceive integration of ePortfolios into a MBA program. 

Eynon, B., Gambino, L. M., & Török, J. (2014). What difference can an ePortfolio make? A Field Report from the Connect to Learning Project. LaGuardia Community College (CUNY). 

Jafari, A., & Kaufman, C. (2006). Handbook of research on ePortfolios. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.17 - Tuning into technology: An autobiographical study of the development of teachers' educational technology competencies
This presentation reports the results of a retrospective study of the life-long, technology learning experiences of a sample of technology-literate teachers to determine if there are transformative patterns of experience explaining the development of their information technology (IT) competencies. The teachers completed IT autobiographies that included a timeline of the major IT milestones for the past 40 years and spaces to write biographical explanations of their personal experiences with the particular milestones that were relevant to them. To assist recall, each milestone was graphically illustrated and verbally captioned to explain its historical significance. Mixed-methods analyses of the autobiographies indicated that emergent technologies frequently set trends that supported the learning of both those technologies and IT in general. One example is that a quantitative comparison of the teachers’ education experiences indicated that informal education was significantly more important than formal education for the development of their IT competencies. Another example is that a qualitative analysis of the IT autobiographies indicated there were several common patterns of experience that have facilitated the development of teachers’ IT competencies. Some of these included parents’ purchases of home computers, access to computer games, the presence of IT mentors, and the availability of IT equipment at their schools. 

References:

Anderson, S., Groulx, J., & Maninger, R. (2012). Relationships among pre-service teachers’ technology-related abilities, beliefs, and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(3), 321-338.

Aubrey, C., & Dahl, S. (2014). The confidence and competence in information and communication technologies of practitioners, parents and young children in the early years foundation stage. Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development, 34(1), 94-108.

Prestige, S. (2012). The beliefs behind teachers that influences their ICT practices. Computers and Education, 58, 449-458.

Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12-33.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.18 - Women and gamification: Disassembling the gendered classroom
This poster examines the literature in both traditional gaming and educational technology spheres, and uses feminist theory and user demographics to deconstruct enthusiasm for existing instructional gamification methods. Current literature shows that gamified learning environments, including systems using engagement tools such as badges, leaderboards, and so forth, can discourage female and female-identified students from participation or competition due to lack of familiarity, lack of representation, and perceived gender bias. Additionally, literature examining higher education instructional settings reveals that gamified online learning environments can disproportionately encourage male success and perpetuate stereotypes about female educational successes in spite of measured aptitude. Use of gamification elements like scoreboards, use of “violent language”, and mandatory self-identification can discourage and lead to the disengagement of female learners. Additionally, as males represent a disproportionate number of video gamers in their personal time, they are at a distinct advantage regarding video game mechanics, controls, and familiarity with competition structure. Conversely, some gamification methods, particularly those which encourage or facilitate community building, like discussion forums or other collaborative formats, can encourage female participation in online learning environments, and should be explored further to maximize student successes. Because gamification has been identified as a valuable tool to encourage engagement in learners across a broad population group, further research is needed to determine best next-steps for better encouraging female learner success without compromising long-established male learner successes in this type of learning environment.

Ahuja, M. K., & Thatcher, J. B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory oftrying: Effects of work environment and gender on post-adoption information technologyuse. MIS Quarterly, 29, 427–459.

Cassell, J., & Jenkins, H (1998). From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and computer games.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Christy, K., & Fox, J. (2014). Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype threat andsocial comparison explanations for women's math performance. Computers &Education, 78, 66–77. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.005

Deterding, S., Björk, S., Nacke, L., Dixon, D., & Lawley, E. (2013). Designing gamification:Creating gameful and playful experiences. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on HumanFactors in Computing Systems: Changing Perspectives, Paris, France. 3263–3266.doi:10.1145/2468356.2479662


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

Special Event - SFU Teaching and Learning Players

Contact: Sarah Louise Turner – sarah_turner@sfu.ca


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.19 - Barriers faced by undergraduate students when reading primary literature
This investigation uncovers student attitudes and approaches to reading life sciences primary literature. Personal, anecdotal (Spiegelberg, 2014), and systematic (van Lacum, Ossevoort, Buikema & Goedhart, 2012) observations suggest that undergraduate students follow a text-based reading strategy, and avoid making independent conclusions based on results and methodology. While the student process of deep vs. surface learning has been examined for several decades (Marton & Säljö, 1976), it needs more investigation into student practices of interpreting biomedical literature (van Lacum, et al.). In this inquiry, students enrolled in a 1st year general biology course (HSCI100 – Human Biology), or a 4th year seminar course (HSCI477 – Senior Seminar in Vaccine Immunology) were assigned a primary literature article, and their reading strategies were assessed by survey. In both classes, we found that students rated the methods section as the least important for helping them understand the paper. Fourth year students spent more time reading the results section than first year students, however, they emphasized text rather than interpretation of figures. Given these observations, activities and assessments should cultivate student appreciation of methodology and direct students into reading practices that emphasize independent interpretation of results. These findings will be used as a basis for further inquiry into individual student reading strategies. Ultimately, these data will inform the design of layered assessments that build student skills in this practice from first year to fourth year.

Reference List:

Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11. 

Spiegelberg, B.D. (2014). A focused assignment encouraging deep reading in undergraduate biochemistry. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42(1), 1-5. 

van Lacum, E., Ossevoort, M., Buikema, H. & Goedhart, M. (2012). First experiences with reading primary literature by undergraduate life science students. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1795-1821.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.20 - Exploring undergraduates' learning strategies and metacognition in an introductory science course
In introductory science and math courses, several students struggle with adopting appropriate study strategies for learning the course material (Grove & Bretz, 2012; Lynch & Trujillo, 2011). As such, scholars call for curriculum and pedagogy that improves students’ learning strategies and metacognition (Tanner, 2012). That is, for curriculum and pedagogy that encourages students to control, evaluate, plan, and monitor their learning (Anderson & Nashon, 2007). This presentation will provide an overview of a mixed methods research project that investigated the catalysts for metacognitive change in a large, second-year organic chemistry course. This course has a reputation of being difficult and as such, the instructor developed several formative resources (i.e. in-class quizzes, study strategy workshops) to provide students with explicit feedback on their learning strategies. A case study approach employing a metacognitive instrument, classroom observations, and one-on-one interviews offered a window into the supports and barriers students perceived as prompting them to address and/or change their approaches to learning. Analysis of the data revealed summative assessments (i.e. midterm and final examinations) as overshadowing the use and usefulness of the resources designed specifically to enhance student learning and metacognition. As such, several students struggled with the course content and found it hard to make effective adjustments to their learning strategies. Ideally, the presentation of this research will engage STLHE scholars in discussions about how we may balance formative and summative assessment in higher education to enhance students’ learning strategies and metacognition.

Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2007). Predators of knowledge construction: Interpreting students' metacognition in an amusement park physics program. Science Education, 91(2), 298-320.

Grove, N. P., & Bretz, S. L. (2012). A continuum of learning: from rote memorization to meaningful learning in organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 201-208

Lynch, D. J., & Trujillo, H. (2011). Motivational beliefs and learning strategies in organic chemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(1351-1365).

Tanner, K. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE - Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113-120.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.21 - Expose yourself to the scholarship of teaching and learning
Forms of research, like human bodies, have multiple entry points which, when identified and understood, can be used to ease the transition into new fields of research. In this poster, we will use the human body as a metaphor to explain how researchers from diverse disciplines can use familiar entry points to ease their transition into the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). As a universal and inherently meaningful feature of life for necessarily embodied human beings, the body is a uniquely relatable metaphorical source of identity. In academia, our identities as researchers are similarly crucial to our sense of who we are and how we navigate and explore our own and other disciplines.

This poster highlights visual representations of the connections between the elements and systems of research with their analogues in the human body, as well as the connections between systems within each member of that metaphorical pair. For example, in the body, two of the digestive system’s primary functions are to absorb nutrients and eliminate waste; comparatively, when we, as researchers, are sifting through countless books and articles in search of evidence, it is imperative we are critical and efficient – absorbing the good, and eliminating the bad. Entry points, system elements, means and types of connections, and functions will be represented to help those entering SoTL better situate themselves in this new field, along the way demystifying its vocabulary and expectations, making it less intimidating and more accessible.

Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Hutchings, P. & Shulman, L.S. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new developments. Change, September/October, 1999, 10‐15.

Meyer, J. & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practicing within the disciplines. Occasional Report No 4, Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses Project, Universities of Edinburgh, Coventry and Durham.

Shulman, L.S. (2000). Inventing the future. In P. Hutchings (Ed.), Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning. Menlo Park, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.22 - Faculty perceptions of challenges and enablers of effective teaching
The University of British Columbia (University of British Columbia), home to both campus-wide and Faculty-specific teaching and learning centres, hosts numerous initiatives targeting the improvement of student learning and the student experience. This includes the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (Faculty of Science, launched in 2007) and the Flexible Learning Initiative (University of British Columbia wide, launched in 2013). In fall 2014, University of British Columbia ran a campus-wide survey on teaching practices with the following goals: a) Establishing baseline information of teaching practices and attitudes among faculty, b) Measuring the impact of existing teaching and learning initiatives such as those mentioned above, and c) Recognizing the conditions leading to change in practices and attitudes around teaching (Borrego & Henderson, 2014). This survey was a modified version of a tool used to investigate the teaching climate at University of British Columbia in 2008. Over 1000 faculty with teaching responsibilities across 10 Faculties responded to the 2014 survey. In this session we will discuss the comments and insights shared by participants around the following issues: the biggest challenges for teaching; changes that could be made at University of British Columbia to help faculty teach more effectively; and factors that have improved their teaching. In this session we will be sharing our methodology and preliminary results on the main challenges and enablers of effective teaching practice at this large research-intensive institution. We will also discuss with the audience connections to existing research (Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro, Lovett, & Norman, 2010; Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, & Whitt, 2005) and the connections and implications of our findings for their institutional contexts.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Borrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014). Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(2), 220–252. doi:10.1002/jee.20040.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Speakers
avatar for Andrea Han (University of British Columbia)

Andrea Han (University of British Columbia)

Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology - Senior Manager, Curriculum and Special Projects, University of British Columbia
avatar for Simon Bates (University of British Columbia)

Simon Bates (University of British Columbia)

Senior Advisor, Teaching and Learning | Academic Director, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology., University of British Columbia
STLHE conference co-chair | Professor of Teaching in Physics and Astronomy at UBC, currently designing a new intro course for first year Physics students.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.23 - Insights from the inaugural cohort of an innovative first-year undergraduate program for international students
This poster presentation showcases innovative aspects of a new first-year undergraduate program for international students at the University of British Columbia. Launched in September 2014, University of British Columbia Vantage College (www.vantagecollege.University of British Columbia.ca) provides a venue for international students who wish to pursue undergraduate studies in Applied Science, Arts, Management or Science, yet who do not meet direct entry English language requirements. Students complete a rigorous first year of credit-bearing courses that prepares them for their second year of study. Courses in the Vantage One program are connected using interdisciplinary approaches and following a language and content integrated learning model (Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010; Crandall & Kaufman, 2002). For each content course (e.g., Physics, Political Science, Psychology), students attend a linked academic English tutorial that enhances students’ comprehension of the concepts and topics, while simultaneously raising their awareness of the language resources used in the respective disciplinary fields. This presentation will outline the Vantage One Program curriculum structure and ways in which collaborative teaching practices are adopted, together with some initial program evaluation findings related to student expectations and perceptions. These preliminary findings from our first student cohort are drawn from quantitative and qualitative analyses of student surveys. A student-facing report of these results was developed and shared with current students to support and enrich their learning experience. Details about the program structure, students in our first cohort, teaching approaches, and program evaluation will be shared, leaving the audience with some innovative ideas to implement in their own programs and teaching.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crandall, J. A., & Kaufman, D. (Eds.). (2002). Content-based instruction in higher education settings. Alexandria, VA: TESOL, Inc.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.24 - Institutional teaching cultures: Tuning our attention to process metrics in an era of assessment and accountability
There are increasing demands to find metrics that account for the quality of student learning and teaching (Chalmers, 2008), yet many of the currently available metrics focus on inputs and outputs. To create a more harmonious and holistic view of the quality of teaching and learning, we advocate for also identifying process and outcome metrics that can demonstrate the value, importance, and enhancement of the quality of teaching that our institutions provide. An institutional culture that values teaching quality is likely to improve student learning (Cox, McIntosh, Reason, & Terenzini, 2011). By including process metrics, we can document institutional teaching cultures and provide useful benchmarks for institutions in their ongoing enhancement of teaching and learning. Continuing from preliminary work presented lasted year (Wolf et al, 2014) and based on results from our pilot study at three Ontario institutions, we have refined the Teaching Culture Perception Survey (TCPS). This survey aims to assess educators’ current perceptions of their institutional teaching culture, as well as their perceptions of the importance of various components that comprise a teaching culture. For this interactive poster, we will update participants on our expanding project that now involves over 10 institutions from Ontario and Quebec working collaboratively to tune and test the TCPS. Participants will have an opportunity to share their insights and provide feedback on the revised TCPS, by discussing our current process and outcome indicators and identifying additional ones to consider. 

Chalmers, D., (2008). Indicators of University Teaching and Learning Quality, Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Australia. 

Cox, B. E., McIntosh, K. L., Reason, R. D., & Terenzini, P. T. (2011). A culture of teaching: Policy, perception, and practice in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 52(8), 808-829.

Hénard, F., & Roseveare, D. (2012). Fostering Quality Teaching in Higher Education: Policies and Practices: An IMHE Guide for Higher Education Institutions, Institutional Management in Higher Education, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development www.oecd.org/edu/imhe.

Wolf, P., Ellis, D., Grose, J., Goff, L., Dawson, D., Meadows, K., Doci, F., & Borin, P. (2014). Documenting and transforming institutional teaching cultures. Presented at the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, June 17-20, 2014: Kingston ON.

Speakers
avatar for Erika Kustra

Erika Kustra

Chair, Educational Developers Caucus
Erika Kustra became an educational developer in 1999, beginning to facilitate sessions earlier during her graduate and postdoctoral work in physiological psychology. She has been the EDC Secretary, STLHE Newsletter Editor, and participated in EDC Action Groups. In the last six years... Read More →


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.25 - Iterative practice, iterative pedagogy: Integrating writing and studio education to foster reflective teaching and transformative learning in the first-year graphic design Classroom
This poster highlights the preliminary findings of a Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) pilot project in design education exploring how the design concept of iteration – understood as a practice including research, (re)drafting, reflecting and revising – fosters critical engagement in the first-year Graphic Design classroom. Critical engagement and discourse are fundamental to the process of transformative learning (Mezirow, 2003; Cranton, 2006). They are also fundamental to the process of making: students must recognize preconceptions, undertake research, understand, deconstruct and draw upon the work of other designers, present and discuss their own designs, and provide constructive feedback on the work of their peers. Yet first-year students often lack the necessary skills to productively undertake these processes, and overestimate their abilities to do so as a result of unarticulated habits of mind and unexamined assumptions about research and learning. Research suggests that integrating writing into disciplinary learning contexts can promote critical thinking and deep learning (Bean, 2011). Taking this as its starting point, this pilot project, a cross-disciplinary collaboration between a writing specialist and two design instructors, sought to integrate discipline-specific writing activities into design studio pedagogy. The project’s preliminary findings suggest that these writing tasks supported first-years’ iterative reflective processes and skills development, providing them with the means and opportunities to challenge habits of mind and engage critically with their work, both on their own and in the studio classroom. The poster will also highlight the ways in which the collaborative assignment design process was itself iterative, fostering reflective teaching practice among academic support staff and discipline-specific faculty. 

References: 

Bean, J.C. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom, 2nd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: a guide for educators of adults, 2nd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, J. (2003).Transformative Learning as Discourse. Journal of Transformative Education 1(1), 58-63.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.26 - Peer feedback on writing: Is more better? A pilot study
A good deal of SoTL literature shows that engaging in peer feedback can help improve student writing (e.g., Topping, 1998; Cho & MacArthur, 2010; Cho & Cho, 2011; Crossman & Kite, 2012). Still, there are some gaps in the literature. First, most studies published on this topic consider the effect of peer feedback on revisions to a single essay, rather than on whether students use peer comments on one essay when writing another essay. In addition, there is little in the literature about a “dose-response” curve: is peer feedback more effective in improving writing after a certain number of such activities, and/or are there diminishing returns after quite a few sessions? We designed a study to address these gaps by linking the comments given and received on essays to how students change their writing on later essays, in a course in which students write 12 essays over a year and engage in one hour of peer feedback every week. In this poster we report on a pilot study with one section of this course during 2013-2014. We collected all essays and peer comments from the participants in the study, as well as comments by the instructor on those essays. We have coded the peer comments and are in the process of coding instructor comments and the essays themselves. The poster will show our research design, data collection methods, and plan for data analysis for this very complex study with a large amount of qualitative data.

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

Cho, Y. H., & Cho, K. (2010). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 629–643. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1

Crossman, J. M., & Kite, S. L. (2012). Facilitating improved writing among students through directed peer review. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(3), 219–229. http://doi.org/10.1177/1469787412452980

Topping, K. (1998). Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249

Speakers
avatar for Christina Hendricks

Christina Hendricks

Professor of Teaching in Philosophy, Academic Director, Centre for Teaching, Learning & Technology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Philosophy, OER, open textbooks, open pedagogy


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.27 - Reflecting on diagnostic errors: Taking a second look is not enough
It is generally accepted that human reasoning is consistent with a “dual process” model and that cognitive errors are associated with a rapid, non-analytical “System 1” process (Kahneman, 2012). Reflective practice (Schön, 1983) on the other hand is associated with analytical thinking (System 2) and is generally assumed to result in fewer errors (Mamede et al. 2004, 2007). This dual-process model, made popular by Daniel Kahneman has been highly influential in medical education and several authors recommend higher education interventions that help medical residents identify cognitive biases and encourage analytic thought (Croskerry, 2003). A series of experiments investigated several key assumptions of the cognitive biases approach to medical reasoning, demonstrating that diagnostic accuracy is not affected by instruction in generalizable reasoning strategies (Monteiro et al. 2015; Norman et al. 2014.; Sherbino et al., 2014; Sherbino et al., 2012). In one study, participants instructed to be more careful and analytic were not significantly more accurate (45%) than participants instructed to diagnose quickly (44.5%) (Norman et al., 2014). In another study, revising a previous incorrect diagnosis resulted in a small benefit, increasing accuracy from 32% to 45% (p< 0.05) for revised diagnoses (Monteiro et al.). However diagnoses that were not revised were far more accurate (62.5%). We will discuss the results of these studies in the context of reflective practice in higher education more broadly. 

1. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking. Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

2. Norman, G., Sherbino, J., Dore, K., Wood, T., Young, M., Gaissmaier, W., ... & Monteiro, S. (2014). The etiology of diagnostic errors: a controlled trial of system 1 versus system 2 reasoning. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 277-284.

3. Monteiro, S.D., Sherbino, J., Patel, A., Mazzetti, I., Norman, G. and Howey E. Reflecting on diagnostic errors: Taking a second look is not enough. Journal of General Internal Medicine. In Press.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.28 - SoTL snakes and ladders: Variations on a theme
This poster outlines results from an in-depth study at one Ontario institution that explored how academics develop an identity as scholars of teaching and learning. Each of these persons works in a different discipline; they represent diverse backgrounds, and yet, there are similarities in their accounts, particularly around the supports from which they have benefited and the challenges they have encountered. These themes will be compared to the results of two larger studies: Wuetherick, Yu, and Greer’s (in press) overview of SoTL work at the University of Saskatchewan and Poole and Simmons’ (2013) international study to engage you in building a comparative example of the major themes. You will be invited to interact with the poster by helping create a snakes and ladders game, responding to the original study questions: 1) What draws you to this work? 2) What supports you in this work? 3) What challenges you in this work? 4) What could support you further? and 5) What are the outcomes of this work? Your participation will give you an opportunity to consider and discuss how obstacles to SoTL might be overcome and SoTL supports enhanced in your own setting. The intention is to have you play further variations on the theme at your own institution. 

References:

Poole, G., & Simmons, N. (2013). The contributions of the scholarship of teaching and learning to quality enhancement in Canada. In G. Gordon, & R. Land (Eds.), Quality enhancement in higher education: International perspectives (pp. 118-128). London: Routledge.

Wuetherick, B., Yu, S., & Greer, J. (in press). Exploring the SoTL landscape at the university of Saskatchewan. In N. Simmons (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in Canada: Institutional impact. New Directions in Teaching and Learning.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.29 - Teaching team work skills to undergraduate students: How many teaching strategies do you use?
Teams perform best in achieving their shared goals when individuals within the team have both the necessary discipline knowledge and the skills to engage effectively in the process of teamwork (Hughes & Jones, 2011). Employers want graduates who not only have the required technical knowledge and skills, but have also developed ‘soft skills’ like teamwork (Hood et al., 2013). Teaching and assessing teamwork skills is difficult, usually not done well or not done at all (Hughes & Jones, 2011). There is a growing body of literature on the development of teamwork skills, although there is little evidence in the literature that teamwork skills have been systematically taught or assessed in the health professions. Since the focus on teaching and assessing teamwork skills is relatively new and resources are only beginning to emerge, it is reasonable to assume that academics themselves do not necessarily have well developed teamwork skills nor strategies to cultivate such skills in their students. What is lacking in the literature is evidence of how critical reflection influences how academics teach and assess teamwork skills. Multidisciplinary researchers from health sciences investigated how academics teach and assess teamwork skills. Critical self-reflection was a valuable strategy for academics to improve how they teach and assess teamwork skills. Key recommendations for academics actively teaching and assessing teamwork skills include integrating teamwork skills into the curriculum and allowing time for students to develop their skills across the curriculum. Strategies for developing effective teamwork skills included specific training about teamwork dynamics, conflict management and critical self-reflection. Findings from the study add to the evidence that critical reflection enhances team work teaching. 

References:

Hood, K., Cant, R., Baulch, J., Gilbee, A., Leech, M., Anderson, A., & Davies, K. (2013). Prior experience of interprofessional learning enhances undergraduate nursing and healthcare students' professional identity and attitudes to teamwork. Nurse Education in Practice, 14(2), 1-617-122. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2013.07.013

Hughes, R.L., & Jones, S. K. (2011). Developing and assessing college student teamwork skills. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(149), 53-64. doi: 10.1002/ir.380



Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.30 - The impact of practice on graduate students’ confidence to give a lecture
In this poster session, we will present findings from a study conducted at the University of Guelph that measured changes in graduate students’ confidence to lecture after delivering a practice lecture and providing/receiving feedback. Participants can expect to identify ways to nurture instructor self-confidence in teaching and to reflect on the role of confidence in their own teaching practice. Teaching workshops are one of the most common forms of professional development for teaching assistants at institutions across Canada. Yet research has suggested that workshops have limited long-term impact on teaching behaviour and attitudes, and student learning (Prieto & Meyers, 2001). With an interest in improving the efficacy of teaching workshops in improving teaching attitudes, and building on Boman’s work (2013), we designed this study to explore the relationship between practice lecturing and graduate student confidence to give a lecture. Our specific research question was “What impact, if any, does practice have on graduate students’ confidence to give a lecture?” Following from this question, we asked “Should practice be incorporated into graduate student teaching development workshops?” Our poster will not only present findings from this study, but will actively engage poster viewers through dialogue with presenters and the poster itself in considering opportunities for incorporating practice in their own experience as educators and life-long learners. 

References:

Boman, J. (2013). Graduate student teaching development: Evaluating the effectiveness of training in relation to graduate student characteristics. Canadian Journal of Higher Education 43(1): 100-114.

Boman, J. (2008). Outcomes of a graduate teaching assistant training program (Ph.D. Dissertation). The University of Western Ontario, Canada.

Prieto, L. R., & Meyers, S. (2001). The teaching assistant training handbook: How to prepare TAs for their responsibilities. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.

Speakers
avatar for Meagan Troop (University of Guelph)

Meagan Troop (University of Guelph)

Curriculum Consultant for the International Institute for Critical Studies in Improvisation, University of Guelph


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.31 - The impact of processing skills on students’ use of research resources
Interdisciplinary, active-learning First-Year Seminars increase students’ processing skills (e.g., reading critically, conducting independent research) (Murray & Summerlee, 2007) and long-term grade-point averages (Summerlee & Murray, 2010). This interactive session will explore the association between students’ processing skills and use of different research resources. A total of 1256 students enrolled in a First-Year Seminar between Fall 2011 and Winter 2014 completed anonymous paper-and-pen questionnaires at semester end to assess their frequency of using different research resources and level of processing skills. More frequent use of scholarly articles was associated with greater skills conducting independent research, reading critically, using a variety of resources, and using the library. Students who less frequently relied on their instructor or teaching assistants reported better collaboration skills and comfort with independent research. Students who less frequently used the Internet as a research resource reported greater skills using the library and a variety of sources. Students less skilled at using a variety of sources more commonly used Wikipedia. This session will allow participants to engage in a discussion with each other and the presenters on how to foster students’ collaboration and critical reading skills along with savvy navigation of library systems as a means to increase the quality of students’ research resource reliance. This session is particularly relevant to instructors, librarians, and others working with first-year students, but may also be of interest to those focused on improving research skills and resource use for students at all levels.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.32 - Using easily accessible aggregate LMS and SEoT data to evaluate learning design, learner engagement and perceived course value
Learning analytics research may allow higher education to make better use of ‘big educational data’ for learning design (Ferguson, 2012; Lockyer et al., 2013). In this exploratory study we have brought together several sets of data from our institution to examine whether aggregated course-level data can be used to assess the relationships between different elements of course engagement: course and assessment structure, student online activity, and perceived course value. We explored aggregate course-level data (Learning Management System data and course evaluation (SEoT) data (Marsh, 2007)) from 26 online courses, rather than individual learner data, with the goal of discovering approaches that may be generalizable across higher education institutions, while avoiding use of sensitive personal information. Our preliminary results indicate that online courses in which students spend more time on peer interaction activities (mainly the discussion forum) receive higher evaluation scores, while the relationship between time spent on course content pages and perceived value is not as clear. Having an emphasis on effort-based assessments, on the other hand, and organizing course materials into modules, is associated with higher perceived value. This work demonstrates the value of pooled, easily accessible, and anonymous data for high-level inferences regarding learning in online courses. Specifically, our analysis suggests that courses whose activities and assessments are more demanding of learner time are, in fact, associated with increased perceived value, especially when students use their time in the course to interact with peers. Results also show that course structure can contribute to productive interactions, but not as simply as one would think. _x000D_
_x000D_
Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317._x000D_
_x000D_
Marsh, H. W. (2007). Students’ Evaluations of University Teaching: Dimensionality, Reliability, Validity, Potential Biases and Usefulness. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.) The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: An Evidence-Based Perspective (pp319-383). Springer Netherlands._x000D_
_x000D_
Lockyer, L., Heathcote, E., & Dawson, S. (2013). Informing pedagogical action: Aligning learning analytics with learning design. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1439-1459. doi:10.1177/000276421347936

Speakers
avatar for Ido Roll

Ido Roll

Director, Institute for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, University of British Columbia
Technology can Help folks be eager learners Fruitful in context


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

Sponsor Exhibition
Exhibiting Sponsors
  • BCcampus
  • Turning Technologies
  • Steelcase
  • ReadSpeaker
  • iClicker/Macmillan New Ventures
  • ProctorU
  • lynda.com

Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.33 - Effectiveness of collaborative group work in a first-year Health Sciences course
Group work is frequently used to promote collaboration skills and critical thinking in post-secondary education (Kågesten & Engelbrecht, 2007). The value of group work is well established in professional education and senior level courses in a variety of disciplines; this study examines the group work experience in a first-year undergraduate setting (Bourner et al., 2001; Brown & McIlroy, 2011; Pauli et al., 2008). First year students are unique in that they are just beginning to build conceptual foundations and may lack the confidence in their knowledge base to fully engage in active learning activities for fear of being judged as “not smart”. This poster presentation will outline the findings of a study undertaken to investigate the effect of group work on student learning experience and course outcomes in a first year health sciences course. Specifically, students completed a modified Student Feedback on Group Work questionnaire (SFGWQ) after the completion of a group Journal Club group presentation (Bourner et al., 2001). Overall, students reported a positive learning experience as a result of the group project (82%), and data suggests that this group project contributed to building important collaboration skills; particularly working with others, planning, and time management. 95% of students also reported that the group project helped improve their critical thinking skills. This poster presentation will highlight the benefits and challenges of using group work and tips on how to structure group work to promote a positive learning experience. _x000D_
_x000D_
Bourner, J., Hughes, M., & Bourner, T. (2001). First-year Undergraduate Experiences of Group Project Work. [Article]. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(1), 19-39. doi: 10.1080/02602930020022264_x000D_
_x000D_
Brown, C. A., & McIlroy, K. (2011). Group work in healthcare students' education: what do we think we are doing? [Article]. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(6), 687-699. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2010.483275_x000D_
_x000D_
Kågesten, O., & Engelbrecht, J. (2007). Student group presentations: a learning instrument in undergraduate mathematics for engineering students. [Article]. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32(3), 303-314. doi: 10.1080/03043790701276833_x000D_
_x000D_
Pauli, R., Mohiyeddini, C., Bray, D., Michie, F., & Street, B. (2008). Individual differences in negative group work experiences in collaborative student learning. [Article]. Educational Psychology, 28(1), 47-58. doi: 10.1080/01443410701413746

Lead Speaker(s)
FA

Fabiola Aparicio-Ting (University of Calgary)

Assistant Director, Health & Society, BHSc program; Instructor, Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary

Speakers

Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.34 - Electronic portfolio assessment: Developing a rubric for student evaluation in a course setting at the undergraduate level
An electronic portfolio (ePortfolio), known at McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario) as the Learning Portfolio, is an online platform for students to organize content to help reflect on and learn from their experiences. Students can include multimedia, such as documents, graphics, and audio files. ePortfolios can be used as an educational tool to support deep learning (Gambino, 2014). Following a review of the literature, Eynon et al. (2014) concluded that: “ePortfolio helps students to construct purposeful identities as learners” (p. 98). Furthermore, ePortfolios are useful in enhancing meaningful learning of curricular (Chang, 2001) and co-curricular content (Brown, 2002). One challenge in the use of ePortfolios is objective assessment in light of the often-subjective nature of artifacts. Since each student, and their learning experience, is unique, the style and content of their portfolios could vary widely. Despite this diversity, students must be assessed using an objective scale. We have developed a rubric to address this need. Our rubric evaluates ePortfolio content on four components: reflections, artifacts, writing mechanics, and professionalism. Reflection assessment includes students viewing their learning experience through a variety of “lenses”: the self lens, a reflection of their personal development; the binoculars, a reflection of their academic and professional development; and the social lens, a reflection of how the educational experience can benefit others on a societal level. Other components evaluate presentation and layout, use of multimedia, and general clarity in meaning and writing. As ePortfolios play a larger role in the post-secondary learning process, finding effective assessment strategies will become increasingly important for successful incorporation into course design and implementation.

Brown, J. O. (2002). Know thyself: The impact of portfolio development on adult learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 52(3), 228-245. doi:10.1177/0741713602052003005

Chang, C. (2001). Construction and evaluation of a web-based learning portfolio system: An electronic assessment tool. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 144-155. doi: 10.1080/13558000010030194

Eynon, B., Gambino, L., Torok, J. (2014). What Difference Can ePortfolio Make? A Field Report from the Connect to Learning Project. International Journal of ePortfolio, 4(1), 95-114. Retrieved from http://www.theijep.com/pdf/IJEP127.pdf

Gambino, L. M. (2014). Putting E-Portfolios at the center of our learning. Peer Review, 16(1), 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.niu.edu/p20network/readiness-activities/ePortfolio-materials/Gambino-Peer-Review-2014.pdf


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.36 - Examining changes in faculty teaching and sustainability of changes after professional development
This paper examines the relationship among changes in faculty conceptions, approaches, and practices of teaching after professional development, employing a mixed-method approach, with interviews, surveys, and classroom observations, to triangulate the relationship among faculty conceptions, approaches, and practices of teaching. Conceptions are examined with a semi-structured interview protocol designed to explore participants’ understanding of teaching (Light 2008). The Approaches to Teaching Inventory, a Likert-scale instrument, is used to measure approaches (Trigwell 2004). Instructional practices are analyzed by coding video recordings of classroom sessions with a protocol that tracks observable instructor and student activities in defined time intervals (Smith 2013). Interviews and classroom observations are coded by at least two raters, with inter-rater agreement at greater than 0.7 and 0.8 respectively. Three case studies are chosen because of their different patterns of changes in conceptions of teaching. Two observations emerge from these case studies. First, conceptions of teaching inform instructional practices, whereas approaches can be disconnected. From our data, the three instructors have similar approaches but different conceptions, and their instructional practices have observable differences informed by their conceptions. Second, sustainable changes in practices may be associated with changes in conceptions. One instructor, whose conception did not change, attempted new instructional practices but reverted to transmission-based practices in the second implementation of the course. The other two instructors, who developed acquisition-based and conceptual-change conceptions, sustained their new practices._x000D_
_x000D_
Light G, Calkins S (2008). The experience of faculty development: Patterns of variation in conceptions of teaching. International Journal for Academic Development 13: 27-40._x000D_
Smith MK, Jones FHM, Gilbert SL, Wieman CE (2013). The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A new instrument to characterize university STEM classroom practices. CBE Life Sciences Education 12: 618-627._x000D_
Trigwell K, Prosser M (2004). Development and use of the approaches to teaching inventory. Educational Psychology Review 16: 409-424.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.37 - Observing TAs’ teaching: Improving practice
Peer teaching observations between graduate students is not a widely adopted practice. This poster will demonstrate how observations conducted by peer mentors observing new TAs were an effective way to provide formative feedback, build confidence and promote professional development. Contributors, experienced TAs and one faculty mentor, identify many aspects associated with conducting teaching observations, such as: 1) introducing new graduate students to this “situated act” (Edgerton, 1991) as academic best practice; 2) that observing does not occur only in the classroom; 3) how kinds of changes – technical, pedagogical, and critical (Bell, 2001) – were required, prevalent, or surprising; and 4) how the initial observation led to new TAs working towards refining aspects of their teaching practice. Suggestions for preparing TAs for teaching observations, including observation protocols and relationship building, are discussed, as well as questions to prompt viewer dialogue. Several handouts will be provided. These will include: observation protocol forms used by contributors, relevant resources to help begin a TA peer observation program.

Bell, M. (2001). Supported reflective practice: a programme of peer observation and feedback for academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 6 (1) 29-39.

Edgerton, R. (1991). The teaching portfolio as a display of best work. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Higher Education, Washington, DC.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.38 - Prevalence of academic misconduct on written tests: How to measure it and how to stop it!
Self-reports suggest over 50% of Canadian university students cheat at some point in their academic career (Christensen Hughes & McCabe, 2006). A recent survey suggests only a small number of students are punished for cheating, and true values of academic misconduct (AM) are difficult to obtain (Moore, 2014). We had a concern that students were performing AM by altering written tests and resubmitting them for higher grades; thereby compromising the integrity of our current assessment style. Therefore, we objectively quantified the prevalence of AM on written tests in 11 senior courses. All student midterms were scanned and any midterm submitted for re-grading was compared to its original for evidence of AM. Student characteristics, test details, and course information were also recorded. Results show that this form of AM was rare; prevalent on


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.39 - Tuning into practice: Engaging entry-to-practice doctor of pharmacy students using simulation in a physical assessment course
The shift in pharmacy practice to a more advanced role has necessitated the restructuring of programs and course material that include opportunities for students to develop knowledge, skills and attitudes in topics such as communication, physical assessment and clinical decision-making (Frankel, Louizos, & Austin, 2014). This shift has provided increased opportunities for the inclusion of innovative educational technologies allowing students to practice clinical skills in a safe environment._x000D_
This poster will describe the evolution of a physical assessment course for students enrolled in an entry-to-practice Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) program with an emphasis on the use of simulation in the laboratory component. Observation and course evaluation data suggested that the original delivery methods of lecture followed by practice of assessment in the lab be reworked to better reflect the needs of students in a pharmacy program._x000D_
Conference participants will see examples of techniques used in the course and will be encouraged to share their experiences with the use of simulation._x000D_
Emerging evidence supports the use of simulation in pharmacy education and may include techniques such as role play, case study examples and use of human patient simulators (Skoy, Eukel, & Frenzel, 2013; Vyas, Bray, & Wilson, 2013). Opportunities for students to engage with the course material through the use of case examples and simulation were initiated in every lab. Student feedback was elicited through weekly and course evaluations. Including simulation as part of a physical assessment course may increase student engagement and support a positive impact on future clinical practice.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.40 - Evidence-based recommendations to improve the accuracy of peer-evaluation of written assignments.
Peer-evaluation is used frequently in higher education, as both a supplement to instructor grading (Sho, Schunn & Charney, 2006), and as a replacement to instructor grading (Harris, 2011). Many factors likely contribute to the success of any peer-review activity (skill level, number of assessments etc.), however these are not well defined (Topping, 2010). The accuracy and reliability of peer-evaluations is an important consideration, as research has shown examples at both ends of the spectrum (Sho et al., 2006, Yankulov & Couto, 2012). The objective of this study was to systematically determine which factors (course, assignment and student related) have the strongest influence on the accuracy of peer-assessment. We identified 17 variables and ranked their correlations with accuracy and reliability across three courses from different disciplines that used peer-assessment on written assignments (research proposals, term papers) over four years (>1000 peer-reviews). We then altered the single most significant variable in one course to confirm our prediction. We demonstrate that the number of reviews completed per reviewer has the greatest influence on the accuracy of peer-assessment. Our calculations suggest that six reviews must be completed per reviewer to achieve quantitative peer assessment that is no different from the instructor. Effective training, previous experience and strong academic abilities in the reviewers may reduce this number. This poster will provide evidence based suggestions for instructors to encourage accurate peer-evaluations in their classrooms. Importantly, it will also indentify factors that don’t seem to influence the success of peer-evaluation, allowing flexibility for instructors._x000D_
_x000D_
References:_x000D_
1. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication 23 (3), 260-294._x000D_
2. Harris, J. R. (2011). Peer assessment in large undergraduate classes: and evaluation of a procedure for marking laboratory reports and a review of related practices. Advances in Physiology Education 35, 178-187._x000D_
3. Topping, K. J. (2010). Methodological quandaries in studying process and outcomes in peer assessment. Learning and Instruction 20, 339-343._x000D_
4. Yankulov K, Couto R. (2012). Peer Review in Class: Metrics and Variations in a Senior Course. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 40 (3), 161-168.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.41 - Using PhotoVoice to learn about complexity and interconnectedness in the context of social inequity and health.
Students studying Health Sciences are often required to take courses that focus on the role that social inequalities play in impacting health. This includes issues related to social structures, culture, and history, such as poverty and oppression. These courses aim to prepare students to understand that both individual and population health are impacted by a range of intersecting social, environmental, and biophysical factors. The interaction between such an array of health determinants makes this a complex issue to learn about, particularly in large undergraduate classes where student engagement and discussion can be difficult to elicit (Hanover Research, 2010; Valerien, 1991). This poster describes the development of a PhotoVoice assignment: a novel method of analysis which uses photography to represent and express points of view and lived realities. PhotoVoice has been used in a variety of university classroom settings (Chandler & Baldwin, 2010; Cook & Rust, 2013). This project was developed to test if a more experiential approach supported student learning outcomes and assisted students in understanding the interconnectedness of the topic. Findings from survey data and focus groups will be outlined on the poster. Participants will also be able to interact with the poster using a QR Code that will take their cell or tablet to a website that contains more information about the project and examples of student work._x000D_
_x000D_
Learning outcomes:_x000D_
• Understand how PhotoVoice can transition students from an individual to a social perspective._x000D_
• Access resources so that participants can explore these methods in their own practice._x000D_
_x000D_
References:_x000D_
_x000D_
Chandler, L., & Baldwin, C. (2010). Views from the Water’s Edge: The Impact of Images in Communicating Perspectives of Climate Change. In M. Raesch (Ed.), Mapping Minds, pp. 95-106. Oxford, UK: Interdisciplinary Press._x000D_
Cook, K., & Rust, C. (2013). Connecting to Our Community: Utilizing PhotoVoice as a Pedagogical Tool to Connect College Students to Science. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 8(2), 339–357._x000D_
Hanover Research. (2010). Strategies for Teaching Large Undergraduate Classes. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from https://www.baruch.cuny.edu/facultyhandbook/documents/LargeClasses_StrategiesforTeaching.pdf_x000D_
Valerien, J. (1991). Innovations for Large Classes: A Guide for Teachers and Administrators. Paris: UNESCO.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.42 - Understanding the curve: Implications of norm-referenced grading in large introductory science courses
Curving grades in introductory science courses is a common practice, with approximately half of chemistry and physics professors and one-quarter of biology professors reporting that they grade on a curve (Goubeaud, 2010). Proponents argue curving accounts for changes in the difficulty of exams, guards against grade inflation, and is a tool for ranking students and evaluating potential for graduate school (Sadler, 2005). However, critics argue that curving grades does not provide a valid measure of the degree of content mastery (Goubeaud, 2010). Despite the contentious debate over whether curving student grades is a valid assessment strategy, little empirical research has examined this practice. We will present the results of our study which examined the effects of curving introductory chemistry grades at a large, four-year university using data from over 16,000 students enrolled between 2008 and 2013. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to model students’ chemistry course grades as function of individual- and class-level characteristics. Results indicate that students’ grades were associated not only with their own prior achievement, but also with the prior achievement of students in their class. Being in a class with students who scored higher on the SAT and chemistry placement exam was associated with a decrease in student grades. This suggests that, as a result of curving, student grades are not representative of their own competency.Because the distribution of students varies substantially across classes, curving artificially deflates students’ grades in higher-achieving classes and inflates grades in lower-achieving classes. 

Goubeaud, K. (2010). How is science learning assessed at the postsecondary level? Assessment and grading practices in college biology, chemistry and physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(3), 237-245.

Sadler, D. R. (2005). Interpretations of criteria‐based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175-194.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

4:00pm

POSTER.43 - You can’t change what you can’t measure: Measuring teaching practices and student learning to promote improvement in introductory science classes
In order improve, we have to be able to measure, but measurement in introductory science courses has often been limited to examinations designed for grading purposes and course evaluations to assess instructor effectiveness. The data from these measures do not provide the comprehensive understanding of student learning and pedagogy that is needed to promote change and improve student learning. We have expanded assessment efforts in introductory science courses at a large 4-year institution to focus on students’ conceptual understanding of course material, students’ mindsets, pedagogical approaches, and classroom interactions. Conceptual understanding is measured through assessments that are aligned with individual course learning goals. Student mindsets are assessed using the C-LASS (Adams et al., 2006) to assess the extent of expert thinking. Finally, pedagogical approaches and classroom interactions are measured using the General Observation and Reflection Tool, an application to record observations and reflections related to learning activities (Smith et al., 2013). Measures are implemented throughout the course in order to assess outcomes and quantify change. The triangulation of these instruments, in conjunction with regular classroom assessments, student characteristics and prior achievement provide a thorough picture of course instruction and student learning. This allows instructors and departments to measure change and make evidence-based decisions. We will present an overview of the tools and assessment strategies that have been used to measure student learning and pedagogical approaches at our institution, and how these measures have promoted change. 

Adams, W. K., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N. D., & Wieman, C. E. (2006). New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 2(1), 010101.

Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate STEM (COPUS): a new instrument to characterize university STEM classroom practices. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618-627.


Wednesday June 17, 2015 4:00pm - 5:30pm
Bayshore Foyer

5:30pm

Special Event - 3M National Teaching Fellows Reunion Dinner

The dinner will take place at Bistro 101, Granville Island. 

A shuttle bus will leave the Westin Bayshore Hotel immediately after the poster session at 5:30 pm bound for the restaurant. You are on your own after dinner to explore Granville Island or take a short cab ride back to the hotel. 3M Fellows, their spouses and friends are welcome.

Contact: Jon Houseman – jon.houseman@uottawa.ca


Wednesday June 17, 2015 5:30pm - 10:00pm
Bayshore Foyer
 
Thursday, June 18
 

7:30am

MEETING: Special Interest Group (SIG): Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Annual General Meeting

You are welcome to bring your continental breakfast to the meeting!

Contact: Janice Miller-Young – jmyoung@mtroyal.ca

Thursday June 18, 2015 7:30am - 8:30am
Mackenzie Room

7:30am

Continental Breakfast
Activity during breakfast sponsored by Turning Technologies

Thursday June 18, 2015 7:30am - 8:30am
Bayshore Foyer

7:30am

Registration
Thursday June 18, 2015 7:30am - 4:00pm
STLHE Registration Desk

8:30am

Announcements
Thursday June 18, 2015 8:30am - 8:45am
Bayshore Ballroom

8:45am

Keynote 02: 5 High impact teaching practices
Dr. L. Dee Fink is a nationally and internationally-recognized consultant on college teaching and faculty development. In his presentation he will discuss 'If we want our teaching to have a major impact on student learning, what are some ideas that can help us do that?.' Since 1990, the scholars of teaching and learning have been generating new ideas about college-level teaching - every year, every year. All of these are good ideas, but which ones have the most potential to have a high impact on student enggagement and student learning? He is the author of Creating Significant Learning Expereicnes: An integarated approach to designing college courses (Jossey-Bass, orig. Ed. 2003; updated ed., 2013) and co-editor of Designing Courses for Significant Learning, Issue #119 in the quarterly series New Directions for Teaching and Learning (Jossey-Bass, Fall 2009).



Thursday June 18, 2015 8:45am - 10:00am
Bayshore Ballroom

10:00am

Nutrition Break
Thursday June 18, 2015 10:00am - 10:30am
Bayshore Foyer

10:30am

CON05.07 - Small number's adventures in mathematics and language

The main aim of this workshop is to discuss the following question: how can we increase students' engagement with academic concepts in a way they find attractive, interesting, and thought provoking?

To steer this discussion we will share our experience from our attempt to use popular media to promote and teach concepts coming from seemingly unconnected areas: First Nations' languages and mathematics. We will also show a selection of clips from animated films about Small Number, a young boy who recognizes mathematics in everything around him. We will give a few examples how the films have been used as learning resources in various forms, nationally and internationally. The Small Number stories have been translated and narrated into several First Nations' languages. 

We invite everyone who has experimented with or is thinking about using popular media in teaching to join us for this session. Some of the questions that we intend to discuss include: Are popular media appropriate vehicles to communicate 'high culture' with students? What do we gain or/and lose when we adjust complex and possibly trandisciplinary ideas to the format of a particular medium? How do we measure the impact that a learning resource in the pop cultural format makes, both locally and globally? And what happens when our learning resources get their (pop cultural) lives on their own?

References:

Jungic, V., & Mac Lean, M., (2011). Small Number: Breaking the pattern, CMS Notes, Volume 43 No. 6, 10-13

Singh, S., (2013). The Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.




Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Salon 2

10:30am

CON05.04 - Leadership team coaching to develop teaching and learning capacity in a business school
This session explores a case study of developing a new leadership team dedicated to improving teaching and learning culture and practices within an existing local academic unit. We will expose and examine key conditions and requirements for fostering collective leadership and creating new structures for change at the local level within a comprehensive university setting. We will share how visioning and strategic planning including visual facilitation techniques (Sibbett, 2011) and leadership team coaching methods (Hawkins, 2011) resulted in collective vision, shared strategic priorities, and action plans. We will draw on socio-cultural and socio-material educational research (Fenwick and Nerland, 2014), and we will share the story of moving from single-point to collective ownership over professional development at a Vancouver business school.After we briefly describe the context and share results from our experience, participants will use image-based tools (Martel and Tiernan, n.d.) and facilitated discussion to explore the following question: 

What conditions must be in place to foster collaborative and collective ownership around teaching and learning in disciplines?This session will appeal to experienced educational developers, faculty leaders, and committee chairs interested in organizational change, professional and work-based learning, and socio-cultural theory.

Fenwick, T. and Nerland, M. eds. (2014). Reconceptualizing professional learning: Sociomaterial knowledges, practices, and responsibilities. New York: Routledge.

Hawkins, P. (2011). Leadership team coaching: Developing collective transformational leadership. London: Kogan Page.

Martell, C., & Tiernan, T. (n.d.). VisualsSpeak. Retrieved December 12, 2014, from http://www.visualsspeak.com/

Sibbett, D. (2009). Visual teams: Graphic tools for commitment, innovation and high performance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.



Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Chairman Room

10:30am

CON05.05 - Threshold concepts in higher education
Threshold concepts “can be considered as akin to a portal, opening up a new and previously inaccessible way of thinking about something” (Meyer & Land, 2003, p.1). More than just key concepts or pieces of knowledge, threshold concepts represent an entirely new way of understanding a subject, one that can be troublesome but ultimately transformative for the learner. Emerging out of a large-scale collaborative project involving universities across the United Kingdom, threshold concepts have recently generated a great deal of interest internationally, including being labeled as an innovation with the potential to provoke a major shift in higher education (Sharples et al, 2014). Originally focused on improving teaching and learning within disciplines, recent studies illustrate that threshold concepts are also useful for initiating cross- and inter-disciplinary discourses (Carmichael, 2010). As such, the adoption of threshold concepts for curricular and pedagogical investigations could prove significantly beneficial for institutions, departments, and individual educators. This interactive session will begin with an introduction to the threshold concepts framework, share recent disciplinary and interdisciplinary research in the area, and engage the audience in conversation around using the threshold concepts framework to fine-tune practice. Participants will be guided in developing an understanding of threshold concepts in their field and in recognizing potential areas of application and navigating possible challenges. It is expected participants will leave with both increased knowledge of threshold concepts and the skills to begin their own work/study in this area.

Carmichael, P. (2010). Threshold concepts, disciplinary differences and cross-disciplinary discourse. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 7(2), 53–71.

Meyer, J.H.F. & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines. In: Rust, C. (Ed.) Improving Student Learning: Improving Student Learning Theory and Practice–Ten Years On. Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford 

Sharples, M., Adams, A., Ferguson, R, Gaved, M. McAndrew, P., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2014). Innovating Pedagogy 2014: Open University Innovation Report 3. Milton Keynes: The Open University. Available from http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/innovating/?p=3

Speakers
avatar for Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw

PhD student/instructor, University of British Columbia
I’m working on a PhD in Education. I love technology, and am fascinated by the impact it has on people and society.I wear Converse most of the time.I’m always cynical, generally irreverent, and often offensive.I knit. A lot.


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Director Room

10:30am

CON05.02 - Students' perceptions of self-directed learning: Meaning, experiences, and value
Canadian post-secondary institutions aim to graduate critical thinkers, lifelong learners, and people who work well with others. But how do students develop these skills? Self-directed learning (SDL) is promoted as a process for developing student aptitude for lifelong independent and social learning (Brookfield, 2009). For instructors, students’ perceptions of their experiences with SDL provide critical input to informing the facilitation of this process (Raidal & Volet, 2009). This workshop presents findings from a course-based SoTL inquiry project designed to understand the experiences of 17 upper-level undergraduate students enrolled in a special topics SDL course using formal debate and seminar activities. Thematic analysis of a pre/post qualitative survey revealed students’ initially sensed uncertainty–yet satisfaction–in setting their own learning goals and charting their own learning paths. In moving through the SDL process, uncertainty transitioned into appreciating different ways of learning, which gave rise to an intrinsic sense of fulfillment in achieving their own learning goals. This workshop is organized into two parts: first, an overview of the project’s findings framed within the SDL literature, and second, participants sharing examples of their successes and challenges in facilitating SDL and discussing strategies to effectively prepare students for SDL. The intended outcome is to generate ideas for instructors to better design and support students through course-based SDL activities. This session will be of interest to faculty interested in using SDL in classrooms, educational developers who support instructors in using SDL, and educational administrators interested in learning more about the course-level application of SDL._x000D_
_x000D_
_x000D_
Brookfield, S. (2009). Self-Directed Learning. In R. Maclean & D. N. Wilson (eds.), International Handbook of Education for the Changing World of Work: Bridging Academic and Vocational Learning (pp. 2615-2627). Bonn: Springer._x000D_
_x000D_
Raidal, S. L., & Volet, S. E. (2009). Preclinical students’ predispositions towards social forms of instruction and self-directed learning: a challenge for the development of autonomous and collaborative learners. Higher Education, 57(5), 577–596.


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Seymour Room

10:30am

CON05.10 - Bridging campus and community through flexible learning: Continuing professional education for Aboriginal learners
The Certificate in Aboriginal Health and Community Administration provides an excellent example of flexible learning and continuing professional development for Indigenous adult learners that links campus with community and workplace needs. Offered in partnership between the University of British Columbia Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Heath and University of British Columbia Continuing Studies, this blended-learning program draws approximately two-dozen learners annually from urban and rural settings who are interested in building administration skills in communication, leadership, human resources, information management, policy development and research, in order to strengthen the health and capacity of Indigenous communities. In this session, the certificate partners will use group discussion and case studies to highlight the design elements that facilitate the success of the program for this group of learners, noting how Indigenous approaches to teaching and learning are woven throughout the ten-month, blended-learning experience. They will explore the benefits of the online format (Kawalilak, Wells, Connell & Beamer, 2012) and how having Elders and instructors grounded in Indigenous andragogy leading the sessions and opening circles, ensures there is space for the learners to bring their whole selves to the experiential residential components.(Chase, Charnley & McLean, 2010) The presenters will outline how the program design supports participants to bring their extensive work experience to the courses, as they integrate and apply the new concepts to their home communities through the assignments. Case studies highlighting challenging moments in program implementation will also be shared for group discussion, analysis and consideration for those thinking of designing similar programs at their home institutions.

Chase, M, Charnley, K. & McLean, S. (2010). Recognizing Aboriginal oral tradition through blended learning: A success story. In F. Sudweeks, H. Hrachovec & C. Ess, (Eds). Proceedings Cultural Attitudes Towards Communication and Technology (pp.19-27). Murdoch, Australia: Murdoch University. 

Kawalilak, C., Wells, N., Connell, L. & Beamer, K. (2012). E-learning access, opportunities, and challenges for Aboriginal adult learners located in rural communities. College Quarterly, 15 (2).


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Cypress 2 Room

10:30am

CON05.09 - Creating, implementing and evaluating flipped classroom e-learning
There are numerous approaches to flipped learning. We define flipped learning as structured learning that occurs outside the traditional classroom setting. Students are exposed to content before coming to class, freeing up class time for deeper learning (versus information transfer). In our program, we create e-learning modules that typically consist of videos with embedded questions that guide student inquiry. Students are given related assignments that they do independently or collaboratively. During class, active learning strategies are used to further explore the e-learning content and homework assignments. This session will focus on our flipped learning approach--specifically the development and implementation of e-learning modules, and evaluation of their impact on student learning. Faculty of Nursing and the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology will share a template for designing and developing e-learning modules for flipped learning. Some questions to guide our discussion are: What types of didactic content are appropriate for e-learning module conversion? When creating videos for e-learning modules, how should content be recorded and edited to promote student engagement and learning? What other instructional technology can be used to enhance collaborative learning among students and between students and faculty? How are guest speakers best utilized in e-videos? We will provide examples of videos that facilitate learning. This session will include how rubrics are used to guide student learning; and how faculty use them for formative and summative evaluations. In our program, we design specific learning objectives and rubrics to accompany our e-learning modules, class activities and graded assignments.

Grossman, R. (2008). Structures for facilitating student reflection. College Teaching, 57(1), 15-22.

Kiteley, R., & Ormrod, G. (2009). Towards a team-based, collaborative approach to embedding e-learning within undergraduate nursing programmes. Nurse Education Today, 29, 623-629. 

Ryan, M., & Ryan, M. (2012). Theorising a model for teaching and assessing reflective learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(2), 244-257. 

The University of British Columbia Flipped Network (2014). Available at: http://flippedlab.learning.University of British Columbia.ca/2013/09/14/flipped-lab-examining-what-works-in-a-flipped-classroom



Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Cypress 1 Room

10:30am

CON05.01 - Exploring the integration of SoTL research results in institutional processes
This interactive panel and discussion addresses the follow question: How can we encourage the application of SoTL research by adapting or developing institutional processes to increase SoTL use. Support for creative and scholarly work on teaching and learning has evolved in parallel with a growing emphasis in the wider research community on the complimentary activity of knowledge mobilization and the use of research by practitioners. While we have made significant progress in supporting the ‘supply’ side of SoTL research, we have not had the same success in cultivating the ‘demand’ side. The goal of this session is to explore ideas on how institutions can better support the application of existing SoTL research to advance teaching and leaning. In the first half of the session panel members will initiate the discussion by summarizing recent pilot studies, from three Canadian universities, where SoTL knowledge mobilization was imbedded in institutional processes. Panelists will report from the perspectives of multiple roles (as faculty, students, educational developer and institutional executive). These examples are at early stages of evaluation and institutional integration. At the end of the session participants will: have shared and discussed institutional examples of knowledge mobilization practice; considered how current practice at their institution might be further integrate existing SoTL research to enhance institutional processes (beyond individual faculty work); identified potential steps to further this approach at their institutions to enhance institutional planning and goal setting. We look forward to learning from others about their interests, ideas and progress in this area. 

References:
Haigh, N., Gossman, P., & Jiao, X. (2011). Undertaking an institutional ‘stock-take’of SoTL: New Zealand university case studies. Higher Education Research & Development, 30 (1), 9-23.

Hutchings, P., Borin, P., Keesing-Styles, L., Martin, L., Michael, R., Scharff, L., Simpkins, S. & Ismail, A. (2013). The scholarship of teaching and learning in an age of accountability: building bridges. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2), 35-47.

McKinney, K. (2003). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: How can we do better? The Teaching Professor, August-September: 1,5,8.

Wright, M. C., Finelli, C. J., Meizlish, D., & Bergom, I. (2011). Facilitating the scholarship of teaching and learning at a research university. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43 (2), 50-56.


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Mackenzie Room

10:30am

CON05.08 - Quiet voices: Processes to better hear sessional instructors in awards for teaching
The literature on teaching awards describes three purposes for introducing and sustaining teaching awards in higher education: to publicly acknowledge (or be seen to acknowledge) support for teaching; to recognize teaching excellence; and, to encourage or inspire teaching excellence (Carusetta, 2001; Van Note Chism, 2006). What goes unstated in this literature is that these purposes, and the award criteria, presuppose the winners as faculty members at the institution. Much of the existing literature has focused on the impact of teaching awards – whether for contributions to teaching culture or incentivizing improvement – and methods to ensure criteria and evaluation validity and equity (Halse et al, 2007). However, “equity” in this literature has been limited to award distribution across gender, discipline, classroom context and age; discussions of equity have not yet taken into account instructor status within the institution. Specifically, these discussions have not yet engaged with how the opportunity to win these awards for sessional, or contract instructors, is impacted by award criteria and processes.

It is to this discussion we turn in our 45-minute interactive workshop. In the workshop we introduce representative examples of teaching awards, criteria, processes and winner profiles from Ontario institutions and national bodies. We then demonstrate how existing award criteria largely forecloses the likelihood of sessional instructors being nominated and selected for teaching awards. We then work collaboratively with participants to envision teaching award criteria and processes more likely to include sessional instructors. The overarching aim of this workshop is to interrogate existing processes and criteria of teaching awards in Canada and to envision alternate and more inclusive futures.


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Salon 3

10:30am

CON05.03 - Constructing integrated testlets across disciplines

An integrated testlet (IT) is a new tool which assesses students’ understanding of complex ideas (Anderson & Krawthohl, 2001) through a set of scaffolded multiple-choice items, each adopting an answer-until-correct format. Students answer each item within an IT until the correct answer is revealed to them, and they then advance to the next item with full knowledge of, and benefit from, answers to previous items. ITs can be valid and efficient replacements for free-response questions, as they assess complex cognitive processes while also rewarding partial knowledge (Slepkov & Shiell, 2014). The extent of scaffolding within an IT, denoted the “testlet integration”, can vary from weakly- to strongly-integrated, depending upon how much the instructor desires previous items within an IT to assist students in answering later items (Shiell & Slepkov, 2015). ITs were originally conceived within strongly-cumulative disciplines such as physics and math and now find themselves at a pivotal point, awaiting widespread adoption across other disciplines. In this session, we shall first introduce the purpose and some advantages of ITs, and then engage delegates, as teaching experts in their own field, in considering ITs within their discipline. By the end of this collaborative conversation delegates will have learned how their discipline can benefit, and to what extent, from ITs, and also contributed to the discussion of whether the extent of testlet integration is necessarily discipline-specific.



Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

Slepkov, A.D. & Shiell, R. C. (2014). Comparison of integrated testlet and constructed-response question formats. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10, 020120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020120

Shiell, R.C. & Slepkov, A. D. (2015). Integrated testlets: A new form of expert-student collaborative testing. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 8, 31-40 (in press).



Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Thompson Room

10:30am

CON05.06 - Integrating community based learning and research into undergraduate teaching
Universities are under increasing pressure to develop program outcomes that relate student learning to the ‘real world’. Community based learning and research (CBLR) provides students with opportunities to relate their classroom learning to community interests, developing their competencies and skills as practitioners of their discipline. A substantial body of research (e.g., Conway, Amel, & Gerwien, 2009; Yorio & Ye, 2012) has demonstrated the benefits of CBLR on student learning; well-designed CBLR courses and programs contribute to the academic, personal, social, and civic development of students.

The objective of this session is to demonstrate the integration of CBLR into undergraduate courses and programs. Participants will be provided with examples of courses that involve local and global community partners and vary in the degree to which they incorporate CBLR. Challenges, solutions, and rewards associated with the implementation of CBLR (Hondagneu-Sotelo & Raskoff, 1994) will be considered.

During the session, speakers will share their experiences as instructors who have taught CBLR courses and as Associate Deans who have advocated for the integration of CBLR into the core curriculum of their faculty. In breakout groups moderated by session speakers, participants will share their experiences, and get feedback on strategies to implement CBLR into their courses and programs. The session will conclude with a summary of the most salient ideas and themes that emerged for participants during the session.

References 

Conway, J. M., Amel, E. L., & Gerwien, D. P. (2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning’s effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 233-245.

Hondagneu-Sotelo, P., & Raskoff, S. (1994). Community service-learning: Promises and problems. Teaching Sociology, 22, 248–254.

Yorio, P. L., & Ye, F. F. (2012). A meta-analysis on the effects of service-learning on the social, personal, and cognitive outcomes of learning. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 11, 9-27.


Thursday June 18, 2015 10:30am - 11:15am
Salon 1

11:30am

CON06.03 - Solving the puzzle of learning outcomes and curriculum: How do the pieces fit?
Effective student learning begins with well-designed programs. Integration of a learning outcomes and assessment approach into a curriculum improvement cycle is now the norm in curriculum design. Careful attention to constructive alignment in courses and programs clearly enhances the understanding of links between learning goals, learning activities, and assessment (Biggs, 2014; Hubball et al., 2007). It is essential for faculty to understand the elements and sequence of the curriculum improvement cycle. What is the cycle? Where are learning outcomes situated in the cycle? What is involved with program assessment? When does all this have to be done? Intended for faculty, curriculum committees, and administrators, the purpose of this session is to present and engage participants in developing a curriculum improvement process appropriate for their use. A continuous improvement model for curriculum development, based on published literature, will form the basis of the session. In small groups, participants will discuss the elements of an effective program assessment plan with emphasis on program learning outcomes in the context of their institutions. At the end of the session, participants should be able to name and describe the key stages in curriculum design and improvement, and make recommendations for direct and indirect assessment of their program-level learning outcomes. Well written program learning outcomes presented in the context of curriculum improvement benefit students, faculty and other stakeholders in understanding the rationale and structure of program design. Making transparent a fine-tuned curriculum design and assessment plan provides evidence of high quality educational experiences for students. 

References:

Anonymous, The educational value of course-level learning objectives/outcomes. Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon. Retrieved from http://www.cmu.edu/teaching/resources/Teaching/CourseDesign/Objectives/CourseLearningObjectivesValue.pdf
Biggs, J. (2014). Constructive alignment in university teaching. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 1, 5-22. 

Hubball, H., Gold, N., Mighty, J., & Britnell, J. (2007). Supporting the implementation of externally generated learning outcomes and learning-centred curriculum development: an integrated framework. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Winter 2007, 112, 93-105.

Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perception of the learning environment and academic outcomes: implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 27-52.

Speakers
avatar for Peter Arthur

Peter Arthur

University of British Columbia Okanagan
avatar for Stephanie Chu

Stephanie Chu

Vice Provost Teaching & Learning, Kwantlen Polytechnic University
Passionate about advancing teaching and learning and related University community and culture. Imagine what we can do together!
avatar for Gary Hunt

Gary Hunt

Coordinator, Teaching and Learning Support, Thompson Rivers University
TRU
avatar for Liesel Knaack

Liesel Knaack

Director, Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning, Vancouver Island University
Liesel is the director of the Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning at VIU. The centre supports faculty and students with learning technologies, pedagogical design, online learning and scholarly teaching and learning. Liesel was formerly a K-12 teacher and Associate Professor... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Bayshore Salon EF

11:30am

CON06.06 - Achieving harmony in educational development practice: What does that look like?
Two recent Western Canadian studies provide an in-depth investigation of current educational development and professional learning structures and practices within 35 Canadian colleges, institutes, and universities in BC and Alberta (Randall et al. 2013; Wilson & Kwong See, S. 2015). With organizational change in post-secondary institutions occurring at a rapid and often disruptive rate globally, nationally and provincially, these studies were able to provide an overview of the dimensions of educational development structures and describe current models of practice in these two provinces. But the educational development landscape is changing and so are the mandates for teaching and learning centres/units. In BC for example, almost 60% of reporting educational development centres have sustained their current mandate and model for five years or less. Are changes in educational development structure and practice achieving harmony within post- secondary institutions? Are Teaching and Learning Centre personnel prepared to support, even lead, rapidly moving institutional changes? This highly interactive workshop focuses on the benefits and drawbacks of a range of educational development and professional learning models. Participants will be asked to reflect on current structures and practices within their own institutions and then align their context with their preferred educational development model. Participants will leave the workshop having contributed to the analysis of sustaining and inhibiting factors for educational development leadership. The researchers will share key findings from their educational development and professional learning studies.

References:

Amundsen, C., & Wilson, M. (2012). Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 90-126. doi: 10.3102/0034654312438409

Randall, N., Heaslip, P., & Morrison, D. (2013). Campus-based Educational Development & Professional Learning: Dimensions & Directions. Vancouver, BC, Canada: BCcampus.

Stes, A., Min-Leliveld, M., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2010). The impact of instructional development in higher education: The state-of-the-art of the research. Educational Research Review, 5, 25-49. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2009.07.001

Wilson, M., & Kwong See, S. (2015). Campus-based Educational Development in Alberta Post-Secondary Institutions. Edmonton, AB, Canada: University of Alberta.



Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Thompson Room

11:30am

CON06.CreativeDiscussion01 - Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation Page Turners: Not your average book club!
Book clubs are popular not only for recreational reading, but also in educational settings to support teachers in “tuning into practice” (Kooy, 2009). Online, hybrid and face-to-face professional book clubs enhance community, and inspire cross-disciplinary discussions and networks. This deep-dive conversation analyzes the Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation's (CTSI) Page Turners, a multi-session book club model for faculty, developed and offered through CTSI at the University of Toronto. Based on the concept of literature circles (Lin, 2002), book club participants are in charge of their own learning, assisted by a facilitator who helps establish group norms, and sets the stage to maximize individual accountability and the development of positive interdependence. During this deep-dive conversation participants will be provided with an overview of the model, debrief a small group text protocol and engage in discussion in order to:
• examine how this book club model supports pedagogical professional development through the exploration of educational ideas, reflection on practice, discussion of innovation in teaching and aspirations for student learning 
• consider evidence-based design features, including practical tips on book club structure, determining group norms, building inclusion, establishing roles and responsibilities, and assessing learning
• analyze the value of using text protocols and other reading/discussion formats for facilitation (Lipton & Wellman, 2003) 
• determine applications of book club models in their own contexts and to serve a variety of professional learning needs.
Sample books that encourage instructors to explore pedagogical theory and research and practical student engagement techniques (e.g., Barkley, 2010) will be shared. 

References:

Barkley, E.F. (2010). Student engagement techniques. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lin, C-H. (2002). Literature circles. Eric Digest.file://localhost/Retrieved from http/::www.ericdigests.org:2003-3:circles.htm

Lipton, L. & Wellman, B. (2003). Mentoring matters: A practical guide to learning-focused relationships (2nd Ed). Sherman, CT: Mira Via.

Kooy, M. (2009). Collaborations and conversations in communities of learning: Professional development that matters. In C.C. Craig (Ed.), The Association of Teacher Educators’ Teacher Education Yearbook XVII: Teacher Learning in Small Group Settings (pp. 5-22). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Publication/Rowan & Littlefield.


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
STLHE Registration Desk

11:30am

CON06.01 - Wellness and self-care for teachers: Practical solutions, and a call for change
This interactive workshop will focus on practices of self-care, wellness and balance for teachers in higher education. Autonomy with the promise of pursuing research and teaching in a collegial atmosphere are the ultimate pay off for becoming a professor. No wonder Susan Adams in a 2013 Forbes article named “university professor” as one of the least stressful jobs! In reality, stress, fatigue and burnout are not uncommon among post-secondary teachers who face pressing multiple demands from their personal and professional lives while dealing with swiftly changing institutions. These are the not-so-secret but seldom publicly acknowledged results of a work ethic focused on achievement against all odds and with a ‘do whatever it takes even if it ruins you’ attitude. These habits are often formed as students and are linked to achievement and recognition in young scholars. However, they may in fact set the stage for discord, lack of productivity and dissatisfaction by mid or later career. This workshop will discuss recent literature on wellness and focus on sharing practical strategies and solutions aimed at enhancing individual teacher self-care. We will also discuss our collective responsibility to change teaching culture to foster wellness as a core principle at an institutional level.

Sources:

Adams, Susan. (2013). The Least Stressful Jobs of 2013. Forbes, January 3, 2013. http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/01/03/the-least-stressful-jobs-of-2013/ Accessed January 9, 2015.

Hubball, H., & West, D. (2008). Faculty wellness strategies: Critical foundations for the scholarship of teaching and learning. Transformative Dialogues, Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(1), 1-11, Article 2.

Kabat-Zinn, Jon. Full Catastrophe Living (Revised Edition): Using the Wisdom of the Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. New York: Bantam, 2013.


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

11:30am

CON06.05 - Creating SoTL concertos for institutional impact
Scholarship of teaching and learning can have a positive impact on educational quality at various levels such as institutional, disciplinary, and national (Poole, Taylor, & Thompson, 2007) but little work has assessed this impact, particularly at the institutional level (Poole & Simmons, 2013; Wuetherick & Yu, 2013). The purpose of the session is therefore to build on our 2014 presentation of work in progress to discuss: How can post-secondary institutions in Canada create a crescendo in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) programs and practices such that they impact institutional pedagogical climates? We (authors for an upcoming special issue of New Directions in Teaching and Learning) will offer several institutional case studies as variations on a theme to provide examples and evidence of the potential impact of SoTL initiatives. A concerto is a piece for solo instrument and orchestra. Taking these case studies as solo lines, your role as workshop participants will be as the orchestra. In small and large groups you will draw parallels and explore distinctions in the case studies, outline challenges, and suggest recommendations for synthesized models. Your role in the concerto is to consider the merits of various practices, approaches to assessing impact, and make suggestions for resolving continuing challenges with this work such that you can implement successful practices at your own institution. 

References:

Poole, G., & Simmons, N. (2013). The contributions of the scholarship of teaching and learning to quality enhancement in Canada. In G. Gordon, & R. Land (Eds.), Quality enhancement in higher education: International perspectives. London: Routledge.

Poole, G., Taylor, L., & Thompson, J. (2007). Using the scholarship of teaching and learning at disciplinary, national and institutional levels to strategically improve the quality of post-secondary education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(2). 

Wuetherick, B., & Yu, S. (2013). The Canadian teaching commons: Exploring the state of SoTL in Canadian higher education. Presented at the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning annual conference, Raleigh, October 3-5.

Speakers
avatar for Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny

Natasha Kenny is Director of the Educational Development Unit in the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary
avatar for Elizabeth Marquis

Elizabeth Marquis

McMaster University
Beth Marquis is an Assistant Professor in the Arts & Science Program and the McMaster Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL).
avatar for Roselynn Verwoord

Roselynn Verwoord

University of Victoria
avatar for Gavan Watson

Gavan Watson

Associate Director, eLearning, Western University
Gavan P.L. Watson is the Associate Director, eLearning at Western University’s Teaching Support Centre and is the past chair of the Council of Ontario Educational Developers. With a PhD in environmental education, Gavan has a professional background in educational development and... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Seymour Room

11:30am

CON06.07 - Reaching the high notes: Evidencing your leadership in learning and teaching
In this interactive session we will consider the nature of academic leadership and evidencing the impact of academic leaders. In the UK, fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) is increasingly being seen as a benchmark of faculty and institutional credibility and professionalism and a focus on the student learning experience. Fellowships are available in four categories and, to achieve Senior and Principal Fellowship, applicants are required to evidence their academic leadership and their impact and influence on students, colleagues and the sector more broadly. Professor Cryan, Vice Chancellor of the University of Huddersfield where 100% of faculty have achieved fellowship, has stated that all staff had benefited from the process ‘which had translated into better teaching and improved academic performance by students’ (Cryan 2014). This session – co-presented by academic developers from the UK and Canada – will provide an opportunity for participants to consider the relevance of a sector-wide national framework for benchmarking professionalism in the leadership of learning and teaching such as the UK Professional Standards Framework (HEA 2011). Discussion will be prompted by short video sequences filmed with academics in the UK who have successfully gained recognition for their achievements and their academic leadership discussing the benefits that the process recognition has brought. Participants will debate the implications of professional recognition in the higher education sector in Canada and elsewhere. We will also consider how such a recognition framework could operate and, through it, how best to evidence achievements in teaching and supporting learning and in academic leadership.

References:

Cryan, B. (2014, March 5) Students in dark on teaching credentials. Times Higher No 2.141.

Higher Education Academy (2011) UK Professional Standards Framework. Retrieved from: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/professional-recognition/uk-professional-standards-framework-ukpsf

Speakers
avatar for Celia Popovic

Celia Popovic

Director Teaching Commons, York University
Susan Vail, associate vice-president teaching and learning at York University, has announced that Celia Popovic has been appointed to the position of director of York University’s Teaching Commons.“I am so pleased that Dr. Popovic will now have the opportunity to share her pedagogical... Read More →



Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Chairman Room

11:30am

CON06.10 - Teaching and/or leadership? Leadership and/or teaching? Common threads, Common purpose?
Depending on how you conceive of leadership (leader as guide, etc.) and how you conceive of teaching (teacher as guide, etc.), you could be forgiven for using the labels interchangeably – they seem to share overlapping skill sets. What are seen as the best practices in some types of leadership (e.g., servant leadership, Spears, 2010) might inform our teaching practices and what are seen as best teaching practices (Samples & Copeland, 2013) might inform us as leaders. Yet, while many committed teachers shy away from taking on explicit leadership roles, often citing workload and stress concerns, Parker Palmer (2000, p.74) reminds us that “”Leadership” is a concept we often resist. …. But if it is true that we are made for community, then leadership is everyone’s vocation, and it can be an evasion to insist that it is not”. During this guided discussion, which will include a variety of solo, partner and small group activities, we will explore how these conceptions of teaching and leadership might encourage us to consider accepting more explicit leadership opportunities, to refine our decision making about what leadership opportunities we want to nurture or decline, and/or to expand our conceptualization of what might constitute leadership within the diverse landscape of academic culture. By the end of the discussion, participants will have better questions to consider when making decisions about their potential contributions to collegial leadership in their departments, institutions, or disciplines.

Palmer, P. J. (2000). Let your life speak: Listening for the voice of vocation. San Francisco, CA: Wiley & Sons.

Samples, J. W., & Copeland, S. E. (2013). The universality of good teaching: A study of descriptors across disciplines. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 176-188.

Spears, L. C. (2010). Character and servant leadership: Ten characteristics of effective, caring leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1, 25-30.


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Salon 2

11:30am

CON06.08 - Illuminating scholarship to students: The role of librarian-faculty course collaborations
Faculty-librarian collaborations can lead to effective assignments, in-class activities and resources that guide students towards better research and writing (Kuh, 2008). Bolan et al. (2014) identifying criteria for effective faculty-librarian collaboration, highlight that, for collaborative success, faculty and librarians should work together towards shared learning outcomes, ensuring that their learning activities tune students into the practice of scholarship. Information literacy, the set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyze, and use information (Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015), is often the starting point for building an effective collaboration as it is a competency that both faculty and librarians have refined throughout their academic experiences (Bennett, O., & Gilbert, K., 2009; Brasley, 2008; Gunnarsson et al., 2014). Join us for an interactive session highlighting collaborative strategies such as designing homework for finding scholarly references, in-class discussions and assignments on avoiding plagiarism, copyright cleared readings linked on course websites, online resource guides for students, and in-class visits by librarians with examples that integrate research tools into students’ growing understanding of scholarship. Through individual, small and whole group activities, we will share our experiences and seek your examples, questions and comments. Let’s combine our experiences to improve literacy and scholarship amongst our students. You will leave the session with links to a web guide summarizing our collaborative philosophy, and our examples. We believe that when faculty, librarians and others work together, their shared passion for illuminating scholarship really translates the scholarly narrative into something visible, doable and beautiful.

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2015). Introduction to information literacy.http://www.ala.org/acrl/issues/infolit/overview/intro

Bennett, O., & Gilbert, K. (2009). Extending liaison collaboration: Partnering with faculty in support of a student learning community. Reference Services Review, 37(2), 131-142. doi:10.1108/00907320910957170

Brasley, S. S. (2008). Effective librarian and discipline faculty collaboration models for integrating information literacy into the fabric of an academic institution. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(114), 71-88. doi:10.1002/tl.318

Bolan, J, P. Bellamy, J. Szurmak, R. Vine. (2014). A Partnership for Academic and Student Success: Educational Developers, Librarians and Lessons Learned University of Toronto. 2014 STLHE Conference.

Gunnarsson, J., Kulesza, W., and Pettersson, A. (2014). Teaching international students how to avoid plagiarism: Librarians and faculty in collaboration. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(3-4), 413-417.

Kuh, GD (2008). High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them and Why They Matter. AAC&U Publications.

Lead Speaker(s)
Speakers
avatar for Alice Cassidy

Alice Cassidy

Principal, In View Education and Professional Development
Alice Cassidy is an educational developer, science educator and wildlife biologist. She has designed, taught and coordinated courses at the University of British Columbia, and led large-scale educational programs. As a consultant, she leads workshops on teaching and learning. She... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Director Room

11:30am

CON06.04 - Facilitating learners' workplace research
Introduction: Workplace learning may be well recognized yet the integration of graduate research into the workplace is less common. It can provide meaningful opportunities for learners to generate new evidence that is valuable for learners and the workplace. A model to support learners and supervisors in workplace research (Helyer, 2011; Liyanage, et al. 2013) that was created for online distance graduate program provides an example for facilitating graduate students’ workplace research. Analysis of retrospective and prospective evaluation data provides strong evidence of the model’s effectiveness for students and is considered in light of Cooke’s model for building research capacity (2005).

Objectives: Participants will be able to: (a) assess the potential of modifying an established model for facilitating workplace research for their discipline and (b) judge the value of the ideas shared by colleagues for supporting and growing learners’ opportunities to do workplace research.

Approach: After a brief introduction to the model and evaluation findings, participants will assess the model, explore ideas for applying the model in different contexts, suggest challenges, and ways to modify the model for their own discipline. Ideas generated will be distributed post-session.

Conclusion: Participation in workplace research requires careful design and planning, collaboration and the right support. Enhancing awareness of facilitators of workplace research can spark ideas for overcoming barriers that impede the growth of meaningful workplace research. 

References:

Cooke, J. (2005). A framework to evaluate research capacity building in health care. BMC Family Practice, 6, 44. doi:10.1186/1471-2296-6-44

Helyer, H. (2011). Aligning higher education with the world of work. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 1(2), 95-105. doi: 10.1108/20423891111128872

Liyanage, L., Strachan, R., Penlington, R., & Casselde, B. (2013). Design of educational systems for work based learning (WBL): The learner experience. Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning, 3(1), 51-61. doi: 10.1108/20423891311294984


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Mackenzie Room

11:30am

CON06.09 - Physical spaces shape head spaces: Transforming teaching practices (Sponsored by STEELCASE - 2015 Gold Sponsor)
An industrial model of spatial and behavioral conditioning and the corresponding didactic teaching practices that they promote has been education’s norms for over a century . Today, multiple, diverse and powerful forces are pushing higher education to reconsider how to make teaching practice more effective. In this session, we will explore how our physical spaces need to change to promote new modes of teaching and learning and share examples of how new active learning spaces have changed both the “how” and the “what” of learning. We will then engage participants in an interactive session using the Steelcase Design Thinking Protocol that progresses from “Know” to “Wonder” to “Learn”. First, we will engage you in a discussion of what you already KNOW: (1) think back to a time you did your best work, (2) think back to a powerful learning e xperience, (3) where do you believe your students do their best learning, and (4) can you describe in detail what physical space(s) you were in for each? We will then pose the question, “WHAT DO YOU WONDER?” If you believe education is about learning, what responsibility do we have as educators and/or education administrators to focus on how best to foster learning instead of how to promote teaching? Finally, we will end with WHAT DID YOU LEARN about what you can do next? This form of intention setting helps to translate ideas into action, and to change our headspace so we can make progress in transforming teaching practice.


Scott-Webber, L. (2004). In_sync: Environment behavior theory and the design of learning places. MI: The Society for College and University Planning.

Hackett, J. P. (2007). Preparing for the perfect product launch. Harvard Business Review, pp 45-50

This session is sponsored by STEELCASE (2015 Gold Sponsor)





Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Salon 1

11:30am

CON06.11 - Small FLICS to big flips: A step-by-step process to flip your classroom
Flipped Learner-Centred Interactive Classroom Strategies (FLICS) provides a framework to create deep learning experiences for students using active learning strategies. Flipped learning flips the traditional homework vs. class time paradigm (Gerstein, 2012; Strayer, 2011). Lectures along with other resources and activities are moved online to focus class time on activities that allow instructors and students to work together with the course material (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). As flipping the entire classroom or course can be a daunting task it has been suggested that starting small with microflips (Buemi, 2014) should alleviate the anxiety of flipping an entire course. In such, FLICS was developed to facilitate the step-by-step process of supporting instructors to create a flipped learning environment. By starting small, instructors are able to focus on creating a positive, adaptable meaningful learning experience for both instructor and students. Current flipped frameworks (Gerstein, 2012; Strayer, 2011) provide a high-level conceptual overview of how a flipped classroom works. The FLICS model, however, provides a visual step-by-step guide to flipped learning by integrating and sequencing online and classroom activities while highlighting the role of both instructor and student in the learning process. This interactive session will provide an opportunity for participants to collaborate with peers, share ideas, and develop practical skills to flip their own classroom by providing participants the opportunity to:

1. Conceptualize how to incorporate a flipped approach into their educational practice
2. Discuss the instructor and student roles in flipped learning
3. Create their own flipped lesson using FLICS

References:

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom. Reach every student in every class every day. ISTE, Eugene: Oregon.

Buemi, S. (2014, April). Microflipping: a modest twist on the ‘flipped’ classroom. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Microflipping-a-Modest-Twist/145951/?cid=wb&utm_source=wb&utm_medium=en

Gerstein, J. (2012). The flipped classroom model: A full picture. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/doc/98582232/Jackie-Gerstein-The-Flipped-Classroom-Model

Strayer, J. (2011). Flipped Classroom: The flipped classroom infographic. Retrieved from http://www.knewton.com/flipped-classroom/



Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Salon 3

11:30am

CON06.13 - Lightboard 101: Creating naturally engaging video content for flipped learning
At a growing number of educational institutions, faculty have been using a Lightboard to create engaging instructional videos for online and blended learning environments, allowing the instructor to employ gestures as he or she would in a typical classroom setting. Creating engaging online content can be a challenge. Have you ever found it difficult to explain something without using your hands or waving your arms? Gestures are among our most heavily relied-upon student engagement tools, and we often use them as such without even realizing it. Gestures also aid learning, since they “provide the material that ‘glues’ layers of perceptually accessible entities and abstract concepts" (Roth & Welzel, 2001 p.103). It is not surprising that many educators who excel in the classroom face challenges creating engaging instructional videos, since many instructional video production techniques are not conducive to the integration of gestures; even when screen capture software incorporates the instructor's face on camera, it is still difficult for the instructor to interact with the content by pointing, annotating, drawing, etc. During this interactive session, you will find out what the Lightboard is, learn how it is used, and discover its possibilities as a teaching tool. Through testimonials, student feedback and educator feedback, you will witness how the Lightboard is transforming virtual learning environments and impacting student learning. You will view Lightboard-created content, observe the intuitive video creation process and perhaps even get the opportunity to try your hand at using it! 

Roth, W.-M.,& Welzel, M. (2001). From Activity to gestures and scientific language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 103-136.

Flevares, L. M., & Perry, M. (2001). How many do you see? The use of nonspoken representations in first-grade mathematics lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 330-345.

Speakers
avatar for Lisa Buchanan (Humber College)

Lisa Buchanan (Humber College)

Professor, Sport Management, Humber College


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Cypress 2 Room

11:30am

CON06.CreativeDiscussion02 - The harmony of dissonance: Teaching and learning players
As instructors and leaders in the educational community the desire to constantly transform our teaching practice and create meaningful learning opportunities for students remains a constant priority. Augusto Boal, founder of the Theatre of the Oppressed and a student of Paolo Friere, stated that, “To transform is to be transformed. The action is, in itself transforming “ (Boal, 1979, p. xxi). Through this interactive session, designed collectively by faculty, graduate students and educational developers, the “actors” will transform themselves into characters that face dissonance in their teaching practice. This Theatre for Living format (Diamond, 2007) will explore issues including academic integrity, English as an additional language, technology use in the classroom, student motivation and more through short lightly-scripted and improvised scenes. In this active space where everyone (audience and actor, alike) become creators, participants are able to re-imagine problems and conundrums, explore creative possibilities without fear of failure and honour the personal and relational dynamics inherent in any issue. Meant to provoke dialogue and engage the senses, facilitated conversation will follow each of the scenes. Each scene will be influenced by current research in the aforementioned topics and provide an opportunity for participants to share their own practices and ways of addressing issues. Due to the improvisatory nature of this session, there will also be the opportunity to incorporate relevant themes that emerge throughout the conference.

Boal, A. (1979) Theatre of the oppressed. New York, NY: Theatre Communications Group.

Diamond, D. (2007) Theatre for living. Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing.

Speakers
SF

Sheri Fabian

Dr. Sheri Fabian is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University. Her teaching and research focus on minorities and justice, qualitative research methods, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. She is a mentor for the graduate student Certificate... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
STLHE Registration Desk

11:30am

CON06.02 - Designing and implementing meaningful assessments
Learning effective research, analytical, and written communication skills are crucial to the development of competent graduates across disciplines. Yet the means by which evaluations cultivate or appraise these skills are limitless. Effective assessments vary according to subject, class size, composition, level, and so on, although at their core, pedagogically sound evaluations should align with the learning objectives of any given course or program. To be perceived as worthwhile, however, these arrangements must also be relevant to, and advance, students’ educational and vocational aspirations. Instructors are increasingly compelled to meet two, sometimes competing, obligations in their courses: to provide flexible and responsive learning opportunities for all students while also adhering to specific and measurable learning outcomes. This session will explore approaches instructors can use to improve the impact of their assignments without multiplying their workload or compromising the integrity of their learning outcomes. Drawing on specific examples from our teaching, including the use of individual learning plans and creative projects, we will outline how evaluations can be constructed to maintain rigor and enhance course-related learning. This is a participatory session intended to provide an overview of successful assessment design and implementation strategies. While we will present a couple approaches instructors can use to create meaningful assessments, significant emphasis will be placed on attendees sharing ideas and resources concerning implementation, challenges surrounding the use of specific forms of evaluation, and potential obstacles to effective execution.


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Bayshore Salon D

11:30am

CON06.12 - Sources of inspiration: Tuning into specialized student needs for new approaches to teaching and learning
Many of the “high notes” in higher education lie in transformative learning (Mezirow, 1997) and threshold knowledge (Meyer & Land, 2005). Students often view their instructors as the conductor leading them through these transformative moments to changes in perception. Yet, there are times when this dynamic is reversed – when the students lead the way towards new teaching approaches. These are rich opportunities that we, as instructors, can miss if we are not “tuned in” to the potential insights revealed when students struggle with course content. This workshop highlights examples from four different subjects within two disciplinary contexts (English and Biological Sciences) in which the broader pedagogical approach to a subject was modified as a result of “tuning in” to the learning challenges students encountered. In English, strategies were developed for students who were facing language proficiency issues. In molecular biology, human anatomy and physiology, accommodations were developed for a visually impaired student. The common chord among the disciplines was that the accommodation for these individuals resulted in the development of better pedagogical models for the broader classroom population. In addition to seeing various discipline-specific examples, this hour-long interactive session will require participants to engage in the learning activity developed for the visually impaired student. Participants will also have the opportunity to share their own experiences with meeting specialized needs, and work with the presenters to see how those attempts may (or may not) lead towards a new pedagogical model. 

References:

Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49 (3), 373 – 388. doi:10.1007/s10734-004-6779-5 

Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (74), 5–12. doi:10.1002/ace.7401

Speakers
avatar for Richelle Monaghan (Wilfrid Laurier University)

Richelle Monaghan (Wilfrid Laurier University)

Assistant Professor, Head of Science Programming in Public Health, Wilfrid Laurier University


Thursday June 18, 2015 11:30am - 12:30pm
Cypress 1 Room

12:30pm

Lunch
Thursday June 18, 2015 12:30pm - 1:45pm
Bayshore Foyer

12:45pm

STLHE Annual General Meeting

You are welcome to bring your lunch!

Contact: Robert Lapp – rlapp@mta.ca


Thursday June 18, 2015 12:45pm - 1:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.50 - Harmonizing the curriculum: Linking first-year writing with content courses
Students dread the first-year writing class, often considering it a hurdle to jump before they can get on to the real work of the university. Linking the writing course with a content course in a student’s major or general education requirements is a way of positioning writing as central to learning, particularly if writing is not just performed in the composition class but is also woven into the fabric of the content class. The presenter will describe efforts to create a linked course (first year writing and art history, a requirement for all first year students) at an art and design university, illustrating that writing is key to every learning environment, inside or outside of the academy. As Mauk (2003) has suggested, we need to imagine writing as something that happens outside the confines of the composition or other academic course by “recasting the classroom as the place where(ever) the student is carrying out the practices of writing” (p. 385). This interactive presentation uses this course as an example of ways that writing faculty can reach out and collaborate with counterparts in other disciplines to create linked courses (Luebke, 2002) The presenter will give a brief overview of the course and will engage participants at the roundtable in an activity to help them envision connections among writing and content areas in order to establish similar pairings on their own campuses.

References:

Cargill, K., & Karlikoff, B. (2007). Linked Courses at the Twenty-First Century Metropolitan University. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 35(2), 181-190.

Luebke, S. (2002, May 7). Using Linked Courses in the General Education Curriculum. Retrieved January 5, 2015, from http://aw.colostate.edu/articles/luebke_2002.htm

Mauk, J. (2003). Location, Location, Location: The ‘Real’ (E)states of Being, Writing and Thinking in Composition. College English, 65(4), 368-388.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.51 - Are we graduating global citizens?
In recent years there has been increased rhetoric regarding the supposed outcomes of internationalization activities producing global citizens. In this discussion, Kyra will outline the findings of a mixed methods study which investigated the intercultural development scores and perceptions of intercultural and global learning of upper level students in regional British Columbian universities. The results indicate that participants significantly overestimated their intercultural development. Furthermore, focus group discussions revealed student perceptions of the influence of curriculum and pedagogy on their intercultural and global learning was intermittent and that in some cases administrative, curricular and pedagogical choices may even entrench stereotypes and strengthen biases. These findings will be outlined and followed by round table discussion to address the following questions:

1. How can higher education better prepare students across disciplines to be effective professionals and citizens in increasingly multicultural and globalized settings?

2. Which elements of programs designed to foster “global citizenship” should be addressed in order to meet learning outcomes?

References:

Andreotti, V. (2011). The question of the “other” in global citizenship education: postcolonialanalysis of telling case studies in England. In L. Shultz, A.A. Abdi & G.H. Richardson (Eds.). Global citizenship education in post-secondary institutions: Theories, practices, policies (pp.140-157). New York, N.Y.: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.

Brunstien, W. I. (2007). The global campus: Challenges and opportunities for higher education in North America. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 398-413. doi:10.1177/1028315307303918

Lee, A., Poch, R., Shaw, M.,& Williams, R. (2012). Engaging diversity in undergraduate classrooms: A pedagogy for developing intercultural competence. ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 38, Number 2.

Otten, M. (2009). Academicus interculturalis?Negotiating interculturality in academiccommunities of practice. Intercultural Education, 20(5), 407-417. doi: 10.1080/14675980903371266


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.25 - Creating the pathway: Using open badges to support personalized learning
Learning pathways, defined as the route in which an individual takes to acquire new learning, are highly complex. In interviews by the Centre for Research in Education, Equity and Work, adult learners described their own learning pathways as “…a ‘way of bettering, expanding, learning, a way of doing this towards a goal’, and ‘the journey you take to gain knowledge, to better yourself (Harris, Rainey, and Summer, 2006, p33.)” However, this path to betterment was also noted to be circuitous and fragmented. While attempting to grow skill sets and knowledge in an area, learners found their path to often veer off in unexpected directions. Open badges, which provide visual representations of a learner’s achievements combined with the required evidence, are emerging as a tool to support personal learning pathways. While it is too soon to see how open badges will affect higher education institutions, to provide people the ability to choose the path of their learning based on their own, “personal agency, to define steps that may seem more like hops, and to think about ways to do things that aren’t sequential or even seemingly rational.” (Casili) is a way by which open badges can provide both formal (e.g. degree programs, courses, etc.) and informal (e.g. workshops, MOOCs, etc.) learning a unified structure that brings clarity, purpose and recognition to diverse learning opportunities. This session will explore how University X's open badge pilot is creating a framework to support personalized and authentic learning experiences within a higher education institution.

Casili, C. (2013). Badge pathways: part 1, the paraquel. Retrieved from https://carlacasilli.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/badge-pathways-part-1-the-paraquel/.

Glover, I. (2013). Open badges: A visual method of recognising achievement and increasing learner motivation. Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 2(1). doi:10.7190/seej.v1i1.66

Grant, S. & Shawgo, K.E. (2013). Digital badges: An annotated research bibliography. Retrieved from http://hastac.org/digital-badges-bibliography

Harris, R., Rainey, L., & Summer, R. (2006). Crazy Paving or Stepping Stones: Learning pathways within and between vocational education and training and higher education. NCVER, Adelaide.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon D

1:45pm

RTD.26 - Developing social justice literacy for educational developers
As scholars argue, simply having a diverse campus population or a unit dedicated to equity and inclusion, or just agreeing with the importance of social justice does not automatically make the university an equitable and inclusive place (Ahmed, 2012; Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2009). While institutional leadership in changing its systemic inequality continues to be crucial, educators and scholars have begun discussing social justice literacy as an essential skill for students and faculty to have (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2009; Tharp, 2012). The premise of this session is that having social justice illteracy blocks us from seeing, let alone critically reflecting upon and interrupting, injustice deeply entrenched in historically stratified institutional and social structures, which many of us are socialized and (mis)educated to see as “normal” (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2009; 2012). Without this literacy, educational developer can neither join nor effectively support students, faculty, and other colleagues working toward social justice across campus. This roundtable session will present a few case study scenarios that illustrate social justice work being misunderstood and hampered by educational developers. Instead of providing fixed answers or prescriptive tips, the objective of the session is to begin strategizing how as educational developers in various specialized roles can begin to develop social justice literacy individually and collectively in our own institutional contexts. 

Keywords: social justice, educational developers, teaching and learning, reflective practice

References:

Ahmed, S. (2007). The language of diversity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(2), 235–256.

Sensoy, Ö., & DiAngelo, R. (2009). Developing social justice literacy: An open letter to our faculty colleagues. The Phi Delta Kappan, 90(5), 345–352.

Sensoy, Ö., & DiAngelo, R. J. (2012). Is everyone really equal?: An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Tharp, D. S. (2012). Perspectives: A language for social justice. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(3), 21–23.

Speakers
avatar for Erin Yun

Erin Yun

Educational Consultant, Campus and Classroom Climate, University of British Columbia


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon D

1:45pm

RTD.27 - Strategic planning in an educational development centre: Motivation, management, and messiness
A well-designed and implemented strategic planning process is considered key to advancement in higher education (Hinton, 2012). A functional process offers many benefits to an educational development centre. For example, it provides a forum for conversations about important issues, may be a source of information about progress and achievement, and can be organized to facilitate resource allocation and accreditation (Hinton, 2012; Shah, 2013). Abundant literature exists to help educational development centre personnel create a strategic plan. Planning is typically depicted as a linear process, beginning with selection of a model followed by a series of steps that culminate in a written plan. Authors tend to downplay the complexity of the process--which exists because human beings are key players in this activity (West, 2008). Our own experience is that strategic planning processes are not simplistic and predictable, but can benefit from existing tools and resources. Join us at this roundtable to hear about the “goals-based” strategic planning process one educational development centre undertook and to share your own experiences of strategic planning. Drawing from relevant literature, the presenters will outline typical steps for preparing a strategic plan and highlight challenges involved in creating a plan, including confusion in terminology. Together, we will generate ideas for productively moving forward in the strategic planning process.

References:

Hinton, K. (2012). A practical guide to strategic planning in higher education. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning. 

Shah, M. (2013). Renewing strategic planning in universities at a time of uncertainty. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 17(1), 24-29. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2012.679753

West, A. (2008). Being strategic in HE management. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 12(3), 73-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603100802181133

Speakers
avatar for Isabeau Iqbal

Isabeau Iqbal

Educational Developer, University of British Columbia
Isabeau consults with instructors on teaching and learning matters, facilitates processes and workshops designed to improve teaching and student learning in higher education, and is involved with various formative peer review of teaching initiatives at the University of British Columbia... Read More →



Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon D

1:45pm

RTD.28 - Setting our sights: Exploring alternative career routes in educational development
Pathways into educational development are highly varied and often serendipitous (McDonald, 2010). As educational developers, we have diverse titles, roles, and responsibilities, and over time we shift from “new developers” to “experienced developers” (Sorcinelli & Austin, 2010). Career progress is often described as moving from entry-level, to senior, to director of a teaching and learning centre (Dawson, Britnell, & Hitchcock, 2010) and witnessed in shifts to faculty, administrative, or specialist roles. These career paths offer existing maps; however, for new or varied career routes, how do individuals identify what mountaintops to pursue next, what trails to follow, or when to forge new ones? What literature can we draw on when deciding? What signposts suggest that we are developing as developers? How might we plan for, conceive of, and experience career success? This session is for questioners, whether new or experienced travellers in educational development. Through group discussion and some guided individual reflection, we will explore diverse strategies for (re)defining routes and goals for career progression and success. Learning outcomes include: 
• identifying experiences and ideas that have disrupted assumed paths and opened up new possibilities for careers;
• articulating how we are (re)imagining possibilities for career progression;
• identifying resources that may inform future exploration; and
• identifying possible next steps in achieving harmony and integration between values and career design.

This session is informed by literature on orientations (Land, 2001), threshold concepts in the careers of educational developers (Timmermans, 2014), and insights on academic culture (Sorcinelli & Austin, 2010).

References:

Dawson, D., Britnell, J., & Hitchcock, A. (2010). Developing competency models of faculty developers: Using World Café to foster dialogue. In L. B. Nilson & J. E. Miller (Eds.), To Improve the Academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development, Volume 28 (pp. 3-24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

McDonald, J. (2010). Charting pathways into the field of educational development. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Issue 122, 37-45. doi:10.1002/tl.396 

Sorcinelli, M. D., & Austin, A. E. (2010). Educational developers: The multiple structures and influences that support our work. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Issue 122, 25-36. doi:10.1002/tl.395 

Timmermans, J. (2014). Identifying threshold concepts in the careers of educational developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 19, 305-317. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2014.895731

Speakers
avatar for Carolyn Hoessler

Carolyn Hoessler

Program and Curriculum Development Specialist, GMCTE at the University of Saskatchewan
Carolyn Hoessler (Program and Curriculum Specialist) is a program and curriculum development specialist with 8 years of educational development experience. Her areas of specialty and focus include supporting faculty with curricular innovation, assessment of program outcomes, program... Read More →
avatar for Isabeau Iqbal

Isabeau Iqbal

Educational Developer, University of British Columbia
Isabeau consults with instructors on teaching and learning matters, facilitates processes and workshops designed to improve teaching and student learning in higher education, and is involved with various formative peer review of teaching initiatives at the University of British Columbia... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon D

1:45pm

RTD.29 - Trends and challenges within graduate student professional development programs
Graduate Student Professional Development (GSPD) is concerned with equipping graduate students with transferable skills—skills valued across multiple employment sectors (private, public, non-profit), and not isolated solely to academic contexts (SSHRC, 2012). In the changing world of work PhD graduates are finding a highly competitive environment even for temporary contract work (HEQCO, 2013). The approach adopted at many Canadian research-intensive institutions has been the development of centralized professional development programs. The most common approach adopted by GSPD programs has been one-off workshops (or 'just-in-time' training), which promise to imbue graduate students with career-readiness skills. Yet one of the major issues inherent within these programs is the inability to evaluate the impact of these programs in terms of significant learning (Fink, 2003). New trends are challenging the assumption that graduate students need to develop discrete skills. For example, Porter and Phelps (2014) advocate an integrative approach which embeds professional experiences as inherently part of a student’s graduate work. Rather than viewing graduate student’s skills as deficits, an attribute-based, capacity-building approach is used to synthesize the curricular and co-curricular aspects of a student’s learning. In this 20-minute roundtable discussion, the facilitators will engage participants in conversations regarding current trends and issues related to GSPD. Participants can expect to gain a deeper understanding of the issues within GSPD and be infused with new ideas to improve programming for graduate students. 

References:

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences. San Francisco: CA, Jossey-Bass, 27-59.

HEQCO (2013). So you want to earn a PhD? The attraction, realities and outcomes of pursuing a doctorate. Toronto, ON: Maldonado, Wiggers, & Arnold. Retrieved from: http://www.heqco.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/At%20Issue%20Doctoral%20ENGLISH.pdf

Porter, S.D & Phelps, J.M. (2014) Beyond Skills: An Integrative Approach to Doctoral Student Preparation for Diverse Careers. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(3), 54-67. 

SSHRC (2012). Graduate Student Professional Development: A Survey with Recommendations. Ottawa, On: Rose, M. Retrieved from SSHRC website: www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.30 - Tuning in to inner ways of knowing: Contemplative practices in higher education
Contemplative practices in higher education have the potential to significantly impact the quality of teaching and learning. Practices such as mindfulness and introspection activities, meditation, yoga, journaling, drawing, music, reflective visual prompts, storytelling and even the use of non-conventional instructional spaces such as teaching classes in natural surrounds can help students contemplate course content in new ways (Barbezat & Pingree, 2012). For instructors, teaching and practicing such activities can help us maintain a connection to a sense of purpose of the work we do (Palmer & Zajonc, 2010). For students, contemplative practices can increase their abilities to problem solve, focus attention, forge deeper connections with material, and build compassion (Barbezat & Pingree, 2012). Teaching and learning centres can play an important role in supporting faculty members, instructors and TAs by introducing programs that use and practice these activities. This session aims to provide a discussion space for sharing participants’ ideas and experiences with contemplative practices, both within the classroom and as institutional initiatives. We will discuss our own experience introducing and exploring contemplative activities, both personally and through our work in the teaching centre. We will also discuss the challenges of incorporating this type of pedagogy in academic settings that are increasingly assessment driven.

Barbezat, D. & Pingree, A. (2012). Contemplative pedagogy: The special role of teaching and learning centres. In J.E. Groccia & L.a Cruz (Eds.), To Improve the Academy (pp.177- 183.) Vol. 31, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Palmer, P.J. & Zajonc, A. (2010). The heart of higher education: A call to renewal. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Speakers
avatar for Lianne Fisher

Lianne Fisher

Educational Developer, Brock University
Lianne Fisher works in educational development at the Centre for Pedagogical Innovation at Brock University.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.31 - A scientific and applied approach to education: Translation of knowledge from the laboratory to the classroom
The fields of cognitive psychology and education have typically worked in parallel to understand and improve learning, with researchers examining learning in laboratories and educators promoting learning in classrooms (Fischer et al., 2007). Recent work connecting basic cognitive research and educational practice have identified methods for optimizing learning by translating lab-based research to real-world classroom environments (Dunlosky et al., 2013). The theme of this roundtable session is to discuss this translational research, which has unprecedented potential for higher education to foster lifelong learning behaviors and improve student retention. We will provide an overview of broad theoretical frameworks of memory and learning in cognitive psychology, with real classroom examples of their applications; e.g., applying the cognitive load theory to instructional design (Mayer, 2003). We will engage the audience in discussions about effective strategies by asking them to first identify challenges for instructors and students (e.g., test anxiety, ineffective use of multimedia technology in the classroom). We will discuss ways to integrate cognitive research and pedagogical strategies to address those challenges. We will conclude with an exploration of a new teaching and learning Institute fostering similar insights into scholarship and research in the lab and in the classroom. The ultimate goal is to get people to think of the underlying cognitive processes of various educational practices, and develop ways to support teaching and learning strategies based on a scientific understanding of human memory and attention. 

1. Fischer, K. W., Daniel, D. B., Immordino‐Yang, M. H., Stern, E., Battro, A., & Koizumi, H. (2007). Why mind, brain, and education? Why now? Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 1-2.

2. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58.

3. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and instruction, 13(2), 125-139.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.32 - Ultrasound-integrated pronunciation tutorials
The Japanese language program is the largest language programme at University of British Columbia with more than 1,500 students enrolled every year. It is also known to be the most diverse in terms of learners’ language backgrounds, with speakers of English, Mandarin, Cantonese and Korean from local, international students, and immigrant backgrounds. Although instructors are aware of the need for pronunciation education, time limitations and a lack of effective teaching and learning methods often prevent students from acquiring pronunciation efficiently. Since September 2014 we have adopted a flexible learning style by utilizing video tutorials in 100-level Japanese language courses. The tutorials, consisting of instructional and exercise videos and online quizzes, were developed through a collaborative project between the Japanese program and the Department of Linguistics. Ultrasound videos and animated diagrams were employed in order to display airflow, tongue position and movements within the mouth. Thus, the technique of ultrasound imaging for teaching L2 sounds (Gick et al., 2008) was adapted to an autonomous style of pronunciation learning, and the interference of L1 phonology (Toda, 2003) was explained without terminology. Prior to class, the students watched videos on the targeted sound(s); in class, they participated in a 10-minute small group activity including peer-review of the sound(s). To evaluate the effectiveness of this approach, three data sources were gathered: instructors’ observation, students’ feedback/reflection, and students’ pronunciation of the targeted sound(s). Overall, this approach increased students’ phonological awareness. Session participants will review the tutorials and discuss the value to them. 

References:

Gick, B., Bernhardt, B., Bacsfalvi, P., & Wilson, I. (2008). Ultrasound imaging applications in second language acquisition. In J. G. H. Edwards and M. L. Zampini (eds.), Phonology and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 309-322). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. 

Toda, T. (2003). Second Language Speech Perception and Production: Acquisition of Phonological Contrasts in Japanese. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.



Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.43 - Teaching and learning councils: Engaging faculty in changing institutional teaching practices
Post-secondary institutions aim to provide high-quality education through a commitment to student success, community engagement and associated scholarship. Individual faculty members’ primary role in creating quality educational experiences is traditionally accomplished through their individual teaching and committee activities. Although faculty members can play a critical role in producing a harmonious institutional approach to defining and operationalizing quality post-secondary education (Fullan, 2007), they rarely have opportunities to do so. One such opportunity can be created through an institutional teaching and learning council, which provides an innovative way for faculty to work with colleagues beyond their own Faculty, advance teaching practice, support student success across the university and create and implement original educational initiatives (Katz, Earl, & Jafaar, 2009). This session reports on experiences in two Canadian universities who have recently established teaching and learning councils to help advance a culture of scholarly teaching and empower faculty members to affect institutional change in teaching practices (Warhust, 2006). Through a roundtable discussion, the processes used in these two institutions will be summarized and participants will share their own experiences in engaging faculty at the institutional level. By the end of the session, participants should be able to identify effective structures and processes for facilitating institutional level faculty engagement in enhancing teaching and learning and overcoming challenges to such participation.

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. 

Katz, S., Earl, L. & Ben Jaafar, S. (2009). Building and connecting learning communities: The power of networks for school improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Warhurst, R. P. (2006). “We Really Felt Part of Something”: Participatory learning among peers within a university teaching-development community of practice. International Journal of Academic Development, 11(2), 111 – 122. doi: 10.1080/13601440600924462

Speakers
avatar for Liesel Knaack

Liesel Knaack

Director, Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning, Vancouver Island University
Liesel is the director of the Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning at VIU. The centre supports faculty and students with learning technologies, pedagogical design, online learning and scholarly teaching and learning. Liesel was formerly a K-12 teacher and Associate Professor... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.44 - An investigation of transformational and transactional leadership used by professors and its impact on student learning and engagement
Today’s students are evolving and consequently require teaching methods that incorporate a more situational-sensing leadership approach. This exploratory paper brings together two relevant bodies of literature: transactional and transformational leadership (Judge & Piccolo, 2004) and specific learning styles/approaches within teaching and learning research. The paper addresses the learning styles of an accommodator, diverger, converger and assimilator (Kolb, 1984); as well as surface and deep approaches to learning (Caudill, Murphy & Young, 2008). When professors attempt to best match their leadership approaches to student learning styles, and to develop more “tuned in” ways of delivering lectures, engagement can be enhanced. Students can observe professors developing effective situational sensing leadership and teaching methods. Professors’ use of transformational leadership approaches can inspire and motivate students to participate, while at the same time utilization of transactional leadership can provide students with contingent rewards to increase engagement. A primary survey was administered to a sample population of undergraduate Business students, consisting of qualitative questions on teaching and learning. Findings emphasize the necessity of fostering better techniques for professor-student relations; elements of the most productive learning environments for students; and the importance of relating theory to real world examples in order to increase student participation. Findings also reveal the necessity for professors to have a mindset of adapting leadership and teaching methods in order to close the current learning gaps. Lastly, the paper concludes with discussions on specific feedback from students on how professors can “tune into practice” to effectively increase professor-student engagement and cohesiveness.

Caudill, Eve M., J. William Murphy and Mark R. Young. (2008). Evaluating Experiential Learning Activities. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, Vol. 13: 28-33, 36, 38.

Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755-768.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.45 - Building a community of practice for teaching-track faculty
Teaching is a creative process that often occurs in isolation, in the context of one’s own classes. People whose careers are centred squarely on teaching (e.g., sessional instructors, tenure-track teaching faculty) may risk isolation. To address this issue, the University of British Columbia Instructor Network was formed in 2009 to cultivate professional development and collegiality among teaching-track faculty at the University of British Columbia (see The University of British Columbia, 2014). The Instructor Network is exclusive to tenure-track teaching faculty, providing identity and connection to faculty in this relatively rare and sometimes misunderstood position. In 2009, we struck a Steering Committee for the Instructor Network. In its first year, the Steering Committee created a comprehensive cross-faculty listserv and website. Since then, the Steering Committee has organized an annual series of events for Network members. Given increased recognition and influence of the Network, the Steering Committee recently organized a “re-visioning session” to obtain feedback from Network members regarding the goals and future of the Instructor Network. We will begin this Roundtable Discussion by briefly sharing the current mandate and structure of the Instructor Network and the results of the re-visioning session. Following from the interests of the group, the ensuing conversation may focus on the importance of community among teaching-track faculty, and/or the challenges and opportunities associated with establishing a grass-roots community of practice (Wenger, 1998). Participants in this Roundtable Discussion will leave with ideas and strategies to develop a community of teaching practitioners at their own institutions.

The University of British Columbia. (2014). Guide to Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Procedures at University of British Columbia 2014/2015. Vancouver, B.C.: The University of British Columbia. 

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.46 - Creating opportunities for international collaboration and dialogue: A joint program for Canadian and Japanese university education managers and developers
In order to foster understanding, share experiences and resources, and to develop meaningful and sustainable collaborative partnerships an educational developers and manager program was developed between partner institutions in Canada and Japan. This initiative was part of the Educational Management and Leadership program in Japan which cultivated leaders or change agents that can drive educational improvement and reform at individual universities. It provided participants with the opportunity to build or improve expertise, skills and capabilities for designing, enabling and managing educational improvements at institutional level as well as promoting good teaching at the individual level. Groups of Japanese academic leaders participated in a week-long intensive program at a Canadian university which included a series of workshops focused on aspect of educational development and leadership, individual consultations and meeting with relevant Canadian stakeholders designed to support the participants in developing their own project or initiative. The purpose of this session is to describe the program that was developed in partnership with a Canadian Centre for Teaching and Learning and a Japanese University Center for the Advancement of Higher Education and to consider the rationales and benefits for internationalization (Knight, 2008, Chap.11) in educational development for the host Canadian institution and the selected Japanese participants and their institutions. This session will highlight the opportunities that exist for institutions in Japan and Canada to collaborate. Participant will learn about this program, but also discuss the similarities, differences, challenges and opportunities for collaboration that can be developed with other international institutions of Higher Education. 

Knight, J. (2008) Higher Education in Turmoil, The Changing World of Internationalization, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.48 - Lessons learned: A discussion of a TA training program for graduate students
In the intense job market of higher education today, the importance providing graduate students with adequate opportunities for engaging in the practice of teaching is becoming increasingly apparent. (Nyquist, 1991; Pannapacker, 2012) At the same time, many departments often find it extremely difficult to create change in the face of a diversity of opinions and the inertia of long-sustained traditions.(Carlson, 2013) Based on our experience creating a new TA training program, and also a recent study by Jennifer S. Boman, we will lead a roundtable discussion of how TA training programs can create substantive change in the learning experiences of teaching assistants.(Boman, 2013) Topics we hope to touch on include financial and logistical challenges, partnerships with outside experts, and introducing students to the fundamentals of teaching theory and practice within the unique context of the courses offered by one’s department. Finally, we hope to discuss ways to encourage professional development without taking time away from more traditional scholarly and academic pursuits. 

References:

Boman, J. S. (2013). Graduate Student Teaching Development: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Training in Relation to Graduate Student Characteristics. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(1), 100–114.

Carlson, A. D. (2013, November 6). Hard Lessons From the Front Lines of Change. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Nyquist, J. D. (Ed.). (1991). Preparing the professoriate of tomorrow to teach: selected readings in TA training. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Pub. Co.

Pannapacker, W. (2012). Should Students Be Encouraged to Pursue Graduate Education in the Humanities? Journal of Markets and Morality, 15(2), 445–53.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.49 - Does it blend? Preparing to teach a blended course: Lessons learned in helping instructors transform a course
The research is clear that teaching a blended course produces enhanced learning outcomes for students. (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). However successfully teaching a blended course requires instructors to adopt a new approach to teaching, learn new skills, and to rethink their course design. This is a time-consuming and intellectually-challenging task for instructors who are already carrying a full teaching and research load. How can a university motivate and support instructors to explore teaching in a blended learning environment and help them (re)design their course to incorporate active learning (Freeman, S., 2014, 8410-8415) (.Wieman, C. E. 2014, 8319–8320) in both the online and face-to-face contexts for an enhanced learning experience? At University of British Columbia, we have developed a cohort-based blended course on blended course design (T-BLE). This roundtable discussion will summarize lessons learned about designing and delivering three successful iterations of a blended course to prepare instructors to design and deliver their own blended courses. It will also include the voices of T-BLE participants who will provide feedback from their perspectives both as students in T-BLE and as instructors designing their blended courses. Working collaboratively, participants will:

- identify challenges and potential solutions when implementing blended learning in their (specific) contexts
- explore avenues to introduce instructors to the pedagogy of blended teaching and learning
- consider administrative, design and teaching strategies for motivating and supporting instructors as they move to a blended learning environment.

References:
1 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2010.

2. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

3 Wieman, C. E. (2014). Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8319–8320. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407304111


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Mackenzie Room

1:45pm

RTD.55 - How to do educational leadership for student learning? Preliminary findings from a staff training programme in educational leadership
At Roskilde University we have developed a staff training programme in educational leadership. The objectives are three-fold. A. to qualify the educational leaders in leadership; B. to create a good and strong framework around the institution's study programmes (degrees) and C. to prepare the leaders to actively work with staff motivation and quality enhancement of teaching for student learning. The programme provides the participants with both knowledge about learning and teaching, and with a forum for peer reflection and sharing of experiences of how best to navigate the known and unknown waters between many stakeholders and to navigate between regulations and opportunities, management and vision. An important goal of the programme is to facilitate the building of communities of practice (Wenger, 1998 & 2000) by sharing knowledge and engaging the participants in reflexive and innovative dialogues about their practice as leaders. The great challenge for the Heads of Studies is to motivate and manage the teachers, who are also researchers, as well as providing opportunities for developing contiguous teaching activities that lead to deep learning (Gibbs et.al, 2008). In the roundtable we will discuss how to develop educational leadership for improved student learning outcome – what is needed?


Gibbs G., Knapper C. & Piccinin, S. (2008), Disciplinary and Contextually Appropriate Approaches to Leadership of Teaching in Research-Intensive Academic Departments in Higher Education in Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 62, no. 4, Oct 2008, pp 416-436

Wenger, E. (2000) Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems Organization May 2000 vol. 7 (2), pp 225-24

Wenger, E. (1998), Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Lead Speaker(s)
avatar for Sidsel Winther (Roskilde University)

Sidsel Winther (Roskilde University)

Denmark, Roskilde, Roskilde University

Speakers

Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.52 - Self-care in higher education: Finding balance and promoting mental well-being
Students in higher education experience unique stressors, including the rigours of academic life (assignment deadlines, tests, conducting research), financial pressures (educational costs as well as a variety of life expenses), navigating new social situations and relationships, and learning to live independently. High levels of stress are known to adversely effect academic performance as well as personal well-being. Myers, Sweeney, Popick, Wesley, Bordfeld and Fingerhut (2012) found a positive relationship between educating graduate psychology students about self-care practices and competency in managing stress levels. Napoli and Bonifas (2011) discussed strategies for creating an atmosphere of mindfulness in the classroom for social work students through participation in a mindfulness training program. After a comprehensive review of 136 graduate psychology programs, Bamonti, Keelan, Larson, Mentrikoski, Randall, Sly, Travers and McNeil (2014) urged programs to consider implementing a proactive and healthful focus, encouraging wellness. How can we as graduate students develop within ourselves and support one another in methods of self-care, and how can we support undergraduate students we work with as TAs in finding balance through self-care? As citizens of higher education communities, how do we foster an increase in the inherent value conferred upon self-care and mental well-being? In this 20 minute engaging, round-table discussion, participants will discover the benefits of self-care, explore what self-care might look like in their own life, and investigate the ways in which they can support undergraduate students in taking greater self-care.

Bamonti, P. M., Keelan, C. M., Larson, N., Mentrikoski, J. M, Randall, C. L., Sly, S. K., and McNeil, D. W. (2014). Promoting ethical behavior by cultivating a culture of self-care during graduate training: A call to action. Training And Education In Professional Psychology, 8(4), 253-260.

Myers, S. B., Sweeney, A. C., Popick, V., Wesley, K., Bordfeld, A., and Fingerhut, R. (2012). Self-care practices and perceived stress levels among psychology graduate students. Training And Education In Professional Psychology, 6(1), 55-66.

Napoli, M., and Bonifas, R. (2011). From Theory Toward Empathic Self-Care: Creating a Mindful Classroom for Social Work Students. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 30(6), 635-649.

Speakers
avatar for Nicole Gardner

Nicole Gardner

Nicole Gardner
I am a graduate certificate student at UVic in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (LATHE) and a PhD student in Sustainable Education through Nipissing University in North Bay, Ontario. I have a Master's in Educational Psychology and Leadership Studies from UVic in Measurement... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.53 - Student as producer: Enhancing student learning through meaningful collaboration
The “student as producer” pedagogical model emphasizes the role of the student as collaborators in the production of knowledge (Neary & Winn, 2013). In this model, the university's approaches to learning and research are closer aligned; for example, students, similar to researchers, are asked to share their work beyond the walls of the classroom and not just with their immediate instructor or advisor (Bruff, 2013). This round-table session will examine how educators, through the embrace of open pedagogies, can support learners in their role as active participants in both their learning and their institution's intellectual output. It will explore case studies from multiple open courses, assignments, and projects at University of British Columbia and other institutions that asked learners to not only be students but also creators, authors, researchers, performers, instructors, scholars, designers, and problem solvers. The session will provide an in-depth discussion on the how choices around accessible curriculum, remixable content, and extendible technologies can impact student abilities to fully participate and engage as equals in their learning. It will also explore best practices for how institutions can establish sustainable frameworks that support emerging pedagogical practices, open education initiatives, and modern web trends, such as open badges, leading to authentic learning experiences that empower students. Participants will be encouraged to discuss and reflect on how the “student as producer” model can be applied at their their home institutions in order to support teaching practices where “the student is encouraged and supported in being not just a student-consumer but rather a productive, critical, digitally literate social individual” (Winn, 2011).

Bruff, D. (2013). Students as producers: An introduction. Retrieved from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/2013/09/students-as-producers-an-introduction/

Neary, M. and Winn, J. (2009). The student as producer: Reinventing the student experience in higher education, in Neary, M, Stevenson, H and Bell, L (ed) The future of higher education: Pedagogy, policy and the student experience, pp 126-38, London: Continuum

Winn, J. (2011). Pedagogy, technology and student as producer. Retrieved from http://joss.blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/2011/01/28/pedagogy-technology-and-student-as-producer/


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.33 - Academics in the open: Exploring networked, participatory, and open practices
In recent years there has been increasing attention given to conceptions of “openness” in teaching, learning, and scholarship. Openness in education can take many forms: the use of open educational resources in the classroom; opening access to learning through venues like MOOCs; or the use of open, networked, participatory practices to share and collaborate (Price 2013). While some see only benefits of openness, others worry about the possible implications for academic institutions, identities, and practices (Weller, 2011). Yet as openness gains popularity, academics today find themselves in a position where they can either shape, or be shaped by, these practices (Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2012). During this roundtable discussion, we will look at some of the emerging practices of open and networked scholarship and unpack some of the scholarly and media discourse that surrounds it. In particular we will consider: 

- the practices of scholarly participation in online spaces (blogs, social media) and the notions of identity and digital literacy they entail
- the place of open educational resources (open textbooks, open journals, open online courses) and questions of quality, access, and accreditation 
- the impact of open and networked scholarship on higher education systems and practices (pedagogy, tenure)

Participants will be asked to take an active part in the discussion, and will leave with an increased understanding of what it means to be an open and networked scholar and how open practices might benefit their practice. 

Price, D. (2013). Open: How we'll work, live and learn in the future. [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com 

Weller, M. (2011). The digital scholar: How technology is transforming scholarly practice. [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.co.uk.

Veletsianos, G. & Kimmons, R. (2012). Assumptions and Challenges of Open Scholarship. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 13(4), 166-189.

Speakers
avatar for Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw

PhD student/instructor, University of British Columbia
I’m working on a PhD in Education. I love technology, and am fascinated by the impact it has on people and society.I wear Converse most of the time.I’m always cynical, generally irreverent, and often offensive.I knit. A lot.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.34 - Creating a community of writers: Blog-based writing in the active learning classroom
Approaches to teaching disciplinary argumentation that emphasize writing as a social activity help advance students along the novice-expert continuum as they learn to write in the disciplines and genres of higher education (Bazerman, 1994; Peck-MacDonald, 1984). However, while many faculty now assign authentic disciplinary genres, specify particular audiences requiring tailored rhetorical strategies, deploy collaborative writing, and utilize peer review, the feedback loop remains that of assignment submission and evaluation, with the professor-examiner as primary audience (Giltrow, 2012). More faculty are addressing the domains of knowledge that constitute discourse communities: subject knowledge, genre knowledge, rhetorical knowledge, and writing process knowledge (Beaufort, 2007). Yet creating a truly collaborative discourse community in the classroom itself has remained a significant challenge. Recent developments in the design of active learning environments and the availability of blogging platforms now present new opportunities to faculty willing to experiment to address this challenge. This roundtable discussion will present a preliminary framework for matching an active learning classroom environment with a course blogging platform, and then engage participants in a critical discussion of how this framework might be adaptable across content areas. The framework is based on implementations in a writing-intensive environmental literacy course, and a computer programming course on modeling for science majors.

Speakers
avatar for Ian MacKenzie (Dawson College)

Ian MacKenzie (Dawson College)

Founding Director, Writing in the Disciplines at Dawson, Dawson College
WAC&WID, blog-based writing, faculty learning communities, environmental literacy, sustainabilty education, carpentry, skiing, canoe tripping, the weather...


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.35 - Guideline and instructional design to address privacy concerns in using open platforms for teaching and learning
The use of open platforms in higher education has rapidly expanded to include (but not limited to): building an entire course website; allowing group authoring; and providing a personal portfolio. University of British Columbia widely uses WordPress as an open platform. The popularity of Blogs is ascribed to its flexibility - with the owner having fine-grained control and management over the visibility of the content. Unlike closed-course systems (e.g. Blackboard), contents in Blogs is not - by default - locked behind a registration system. This public-facing content can be improved and iterated upon while students can publish their own content which can be kept beyond a single term. As the popularity of Blogs increases, so do concerns and issues relating to information security and personal privacy. Without providing clear guidelines to bring users’ attention to privacy setting at the beginning of blog-based courses, instructors and students alike are often unaware of the potential risks until a concern is raised. We, a team of instructional designers and technical staff, have worked to prevent and resolve privacy issues and set clear guidelines for course instructors and students.

University of British Columbia Blogs. (n.d.). In University of British Columbia’s e-Learning website. Retrieved from http://elearning.University of British Columbia.ca/blogs/

Schroeder, A., Minocha, S., & Schneider, C. (2010). The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of using social software in higher and further education teaching and learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(3), 159-174. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00347.x


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.36 - If I record it, will they learn? Who benefits from the use of lecture capture technology?
Postsecondary institutions in Canada and abroad are increasingly investing significant financial and people resources in implementing lecture capture technologies, which allow instructors to record their lectures, or part of their lectures, and make them available on the web for students to see at any time and any place (Ford et al., 2012; Owlston et al., 2011). In 2013 the research team from two Canadian institutions collected data from 1,891 students and 13 instructors about their use of lecture capture technology in their learning. In addition to collecting data on learners viewing habits, the uses of lecture capture and student final grades, all participants also completed the teaching/learning approaches questionnaire, which determines whether participants used a surface or deep approach to learning. Participants' demographic data were collected too. In this session we will discuss the preliminary results of our research project. Participants will explore a difference in the ways different student subgroups (female/male; surface/deep learners; ESL/non-ESL, etc.) use lecture capture, investigate students’ perception of its benefits, and brainstorm situations in which lecture capture technology can best support learning and teaching in different contexts. This will also be an opportunity for participants to reflect on broader issues of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and the role educational developers can and should play.

Euzent, P., Martin, T., Moskal, P., & Moskal, P. (2011). Assessing student performance and perceptions in lecture capture vs. face-to-face course delivery. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 295-307. 

Ford, M. B., Burns, C. E., Mitch, N., & Gomez, M. M. (2012). The effectiveness of classroom capture technology. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(3), 191-201. 

Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D., & Wideman, H. (2011). Lecture capture in large undergraduate classes: What is the impact on the teaching and learning environment? The Internet and Higher Education, 14 (4), 262-268.

Shaw, G. P., & Molnar, D. (2011). Non-native English language speakers benefit most from the use of lecture capture in medical school. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 39(6), 416-420.

Speakers
avatar for Patrick Lyons

Patrick Lyons

Director, Teaching and Learning, Carleton University
Patrick Lyons is the Director, Teaching and Learning in the Office of the Associate Vice-President Teaching and Learning at Carleton University. He is responsible for the leadership and direction for Carleton’s initiatives in blended and online learning, educational development... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.38 - Participant intentions in MOOCs: Defining success for learners in open courses
In early 2015, a western Canadian university offered its first two open courses through the Canvas open course network: 1) learning technologies and 2) innovation in the circumpolar north. Research on both courses is being conducted to determine participants’ activity levels, both planned (participants’ pre-course estimates) and actual (posts to discussion forums and completion of assignments). At the beginning of the study, the researchers believed that completion rates were a poor method of judging success of open courses since they do not take into account the intentions of the participants. For example, some registrants may simply be looking to learn about one or two aspects of the topic, so may be unlikely to complete the entire course, whereas someone whose intention at the start is to complete the course, may have a higher level of participation (Hill, 2013). For this study, participants were asked at the beginning of the courses to indicate the category that best described their planned level of participation: An observer, a drop-in, a passive participant, an active participant, or unsure. These categories are similar to those used in research conducted on the HarvardX MOOCs (Reich, 2014). These results were then compared to actual participation in the courses. This roundtable will explore the findings of the comparison, as well as provide an opportunity for discussion of how this should inform the design and delivery of future iterations of open courses.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.39 - Participatory lectures from the ground up: Using disciplinary knowledge, personality and background to develop engaging lectures
In a time when there are so many different models of interactive classroom pedagogy to choose from, how do you decide on which one is right for your teaching style and personality? Or when is it best to go it alone and develop your own approach? Roundtable participants will share experiences and brainstorm ideas to these and other questions relevant to creating an interactive classroom model that works for them. Through a university grant program I have been awarded three sequential grants on how to use disciplinary knowledge, background and personality to build meaningful student participation into lecture courses. In keeping with deWinstanley and Bjork (2002) I have “assumed that the fundamental goal of the lecture is to increase student learning beyond what they can learn from the textbook” (p. 19). When I moved from small-class critique-oriented teaching to large lecture courses, active learning moved from during class to sometime afterwards, when students would engage with the material through activities and assignments. Over the last three years I have striven to bring meaningful in-class learning back to my courses. To do this I have experimented with in-lecture activities that have run from a few minutes to three hours; students have worked individually and in groups up to ten; I’ve used clickers, overhead projectors, cell phone cameras and discussion boards; student have worked on paper, computers and shouted out answers. Bring your problems, questions or share your solutions in this lively discussion.

deWinstanley, P. A., & Bjork, R. A. (2002). Successful Lecturing: Presenting Information in Ways That Engage Effective Processing. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2002(89), 19–31. doi:10.1002/tl.44



Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.40 - The meaning of service learning reflected through e-learning portfolios
The purpose of this session is to introduce educators to the idea of harmonizing the use of e-learning portfolios with service learning to foster creative learning opportunities for students. Students understanding of the three key outcomes in a service learning course: discovering one’s own personal values and beliefs, understanding diversity, and promoting civic engagement and social responsibility are assessed through reflective components contained within the e-learning portfolio with the use of a rubric. Participants in the conference will be introduced to a service learning course and how e-learning portfolios can enhance student learning and meaning of the three key outcomes. E-learning portfolios offer opportunity for learners to engage in critical reflection through the use of multimedia to make connections between the learning that happens in different contexts, beyond the classroom (Tosh et al., 2005). Service learning is an experiential learning approach that intentionally connects the service experience to academic coursework. Service learning allows students to engage in activities that address human/community connections, incorporates reflection, and embraces the concept of reciprocity between the student and the person/agency being served (Gillis & MacLellan, 2010). The combination of e-learning portfolios and service learning inspires deep learning for students through creative reflection on the meaning of how their in-class and out-of-class experiences fit together (Fullan & Langworthy, 2013). The e-learning portfolio captures the significant occurrences in a student’s life beyond the formal academic and allows them to share these experiences using an integrative learning approach. 

Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2013). Towards a New End: New Pedagogies for Deep Learning. Seattle, WA: Collaborative Impact. Retrieved from www.newpedagogies.org.

Gillis, A., & MacLellan, M. (2010). Service learning with vulnerable populations: Review of the literature. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 7(1). Art. 41, 1-27. doi: 10.2202/1548-923x.2041.

Tosh, D., Penny Light, T., Fleming, K., & Haywood, J. (2005). Engagement with electronic portfolios: Challenges from the student perspective. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 31(3), 89-110.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon EF

1:45pm

RTD.01 - Balancing learner and educator participation in learning: A protective empowering approach
The degree of participation in the teaching-learning process is influenced by learner and educator views of how people learn at any given moment. Regardless of the formal or informal signature pedagogies (Shulman, 2005) chosen by educators to guide their practices, there is an on-going quest to achieve harmony in balancing what and how much the learner and educator each do in the learning process. A research-based theory of protective empowering developed by the author in hospital settings (Chiovitti, 2008; 2011) was expanded to teaching and learning in higher education using grounded theory methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and a modified integrative review methodology (Cooper, 1984; Whittemore & Knalf, 2005). At this roundtable, protective empowering framework is shared. Participants are invited to imagine, tune-in, self-reflect, and dialogue about two questions: 1. Are protective dimensions (stepping-in) and empowering dimensions (stepping-back) important to you in teaching and learning? 2. How well does the process of protective empowering and its six main actions and sub- actions resonate with your own experiences with learners? As will be shown, protective and empowering dimensions of teaching-learning co-exist harmoniously as a deliberate process accomplished through six main actions of: 1. ‘Respecting learners’ 2. ‘Not taking the learner’s behaviour personally’, 3. ‘Keeping learners safe (well-being)’, 4. ‘Encouraging learners’, 5. ‘Authentic relating’, and, 6. ‘Interactive teaching’. One or more of these six main actions can come to the forefront depending upon the learners’ immediate needs. The goal of protective empowering is to invite learner(s) views and participation at every opportunity. 

References

Chiovitti, R.F. (2011). Theory of protective empowering for balancing patient safety and choices. Nursing Ethics, 18(1), 88-101.doi:10.1177/0969733010386169

Chiovitti, R.F. (2008). Nurses’ meaning of caring with patients in acute psychiatric hospital settings: A grounded theory study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45 (2), 203-23.doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.08.018.

Cooper, H.M. (1984). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews, 2nd edition. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

Shulman, L.S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134 (3), 52-59. 

Whittemore, J.E. & Knalf, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing 52, (5), 546-553.doi:10.111/J.1365-2648.2005.03621.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.02 - Creating interdisciplinary harmony in teaching and learning research: SoTL research fellows and the intentional development of community
Embedding the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) within macro-level institutional contexts can be challenging. Workload (Brew, 2010), confusion about SoTL (Boshier, 2009), and a widespread undervaluing of teaching (Chalmers, 2011; Walker, Baepler & Cohen, 2008) can dissuade faculty from engaging in such scholarship. This is exacerbated by the need to cultivate a new sense of scholarly identity as one begins working in a new field or leadership role (Galloway & Jones, 2012; Manathunga, 2007; Simmons et al., 2013; Tremonte, 2011). Our participant-led research assesses an initiative supporting SoTL scholars in an institutional context that values their work on their own projects while seeding collaboration across disciplines. Like a musical ensemble experts from across campus convened to work together in SoTL research, but also to showcase their own “solo” research. Cross-appointed Fellows are responsible for teaching, research and service in their home departments, but conduct SoTL research of their own design in our Institute. Fellows meet regularly to discuss project progress, exchange feedback and ideas, discuss literature in the field, and offer peer support. Uniquely, this program was initially facilitated by a visiting scholar with experience in both faculty development and identity formation, in collaboration with the Associate Director (Research) and a Research Coordinator. Based on preliminary results of a systematic study, the perceived benefits and challenges of such a model will be shared along with the processes we followed, and roundtable participants will be invited to ask questions about our findings and methods.

References:

Boshier, R. (2009). Why is the scholarship of teaching and learning such a hard sell? Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 1–15. 

Brew, A. (2010). Transforming academic practice through scholarship. International Journal for Academic Development, 15(2), 105–116. 

Chalmers, D. (2011). Progress and challenges to the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 25–38. 

Galloway, K., & Jones, P. (2012). Scholarship in the discipline and higher education: The need for a fusion epistemology focused on academic identity. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 931–933. 

Manathunga, C. (2007). ‘Unhomely’ academic developer identities: More post-colonial explorations. International Journal for Academic Development, 12(1), 25-34.

Simmons, N., Abrahamson, E., Deshler, J.M., Kensington-Miller, B., Manarin, K., Morón-García, S., … Renc-Roe, J. (2013). Conflicts and configurations in a liminal space: SoTL scholars’ identity development. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(2): 9-21.

Tremonte, C. M. (2011). Window shopping: Fashioning a scholarship of interdisciplinary teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu

Speakers
RC

Robert Cockcroft

McMaster University
avatar for Trevor Holmes

Trevor Holmes

Senior Instructional Developer, University of Waterloo
Trevor Holmes is an educational developer with a background in cultural studies and English literature. He teaches in the Women's Studies program at the University of Waterloo where he is also a Senior Instructional Developer at the Centre for Teaching Excellence.
avatar for Elizabeth Marquis

Elizabeth Marquis

McMaster University
Beth Marquis is an Assistant Professor in the Arts & Science Program and the McMaster Institute for Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and Learning (MIIETL).


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.04 - Engaging students as partners in teaching and learning: A necessity for fine-tuning teaching practices?
There has traditionally been a separation between faculty and student perspectives on teaching practices that leads to dissonance. This is largely because of the fundamentally different roles of the two parties in learning (Cook-Sather, 2014). However, a theme of engaging students as change agents in the classroom to actively collaborate, co-produce, and co-inquire has emerged in recent pedagogical literature (Dunne & Zandstra, 2011). Educators that engage in this learning model have reported a better understanding of the needs of a classroom due to quality student feedback. Students externalize learning in a way that allows for a greater understanding of concepts (Mihans et al., 2008). Most importantly, students and faculty are more conscious of their presence and effect on each other when engaged in learning together. This allows for critical reflection and subsequent fine-tuning of teaching principles resulting in deeper learning. (Cook-Sather, 2014). 

At STLHE 2014, we presented the perspectives of students, faculty, and institute staff partnering on SOTL projects within our institute. We focused on the challenges stemming from these novel partnerships as well as their successes. This discussion will present the findings of a follow-up project through real examples of how student-faculty partnerships might be structured and documents feedback and advice from current partnership participants at McMaster University. Attendees of this discussion will be asked to reflect on their interactions with students in learning environments. We will provide strategies to incorporate components of partnership into teaching practices to change understandings of teaching and learning through widened perspectives gained through a deeper connection with students. 

References:

Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Multiplying perspectives and improving practice: What can happen when undergraduate students collaborate with college faculty to explore teaching and learning. Instructional Science, 42(1), 31-46.

Dunne, E., Zandstra, R., Brown, T., & Nurser, T. (2011). Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education.

Mihans, I. I., Richard, J., Long, D. T., & Felten, P. (2008). Power and expertise: Student-faculty collaboration in course design and the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), Article 16


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.06 - Teaching qualitative research methods: An experiential approach
As instructors of qualitative research methods, we ask students to trust in the research process, and ultimately in themselves as learners and emergent researchers, as we facilitate their experience “to form abstract conceptualizations” and to implement a qualitative methodological approach in their understanding of social phenomenon (Mitchell & Poutiative, 2001; McClellan & Hyle, 2012, p. 240). We emphasize active or experiential learning-“learning by doing,” the benefits of which are clearly outlined in the research literature regarding student engagement in learning, decision-making and problem-solving, and “realized linkages between academic study and ‘real world’ problems” (Retallick & Steiner, 2009, as cited in Teixera-Port, Cameron, and Schulman, 2011, p. 245). We encourage our students to become knowledge producers and insert themselves in the qualitative process: “The agency of the researcher is also being acknowledged more and more as an ideological force,” often intimidating and uncomfortable for students as they struggle with how they know what they know and their own ontological and epistemological challenge of self-discovery through the research process. In this roundtable discussion, we share a variety of techniques we use in our classrooms to encourage students to embrace the practice of qualitative research processes including in class exercises that assist in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data (see Janesick, 2011). In addition, we support reflective practices as our students find their voices, and narrate their research experience and themselves into the final product. Moreover, students have the opportunity to reflect upon the process and their project once completed.

Janesick, V. J. (2011). Stretching" exercises for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

McClellan, R., & Hyle, A. E. (2012). Experiential Learning: Dissolving Classroom and Research Borders. Journal of Experiential Education, 35(1), 238-252. doi: 10.1177/105382591203500103

Mitchell, M. M., & Poutiatine, M. I. (2001). Finding an Experiential Approach in Graduate Leadership Curricula. Journal of Experiential Education, 24(3), 179-185. doi: 10.1177/105382590102400309

Teixeira-Poit, S. M., Cameron, A. E., & Schulman, M. D. (2011). Experiential Learning and Research Ethics: Enhancing Knowledge through Action. Teaching Sociology, 39(3), 244-258. doi: 10.2307/41308952

Speakers
SF

Sheri Fabian

Dr. Sheri Fabian is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University. Her teaching and research focus on minorities and justice, qualitative research methods, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. She is a mentor for the graduate student Certificate... Read More →


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.07 - The impact of dual credit programs on Ontario college students
Dual Credit Programs were introduced to the province of Ontario in 2005 as part of a broader educational reform initiative designed to help more students graduate high school and transition to college. The number of Ontario Dual Credit Programs has grown tremendously over the years but research has not kept pace with program expansion so I conducted a study to help fill the research gap. Specifically, I analyzed the college student records of 168 students who participated in dual credit courses and activities and subsequent postsecondary programs at Humber Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning in Toronto. I also examined the records of a matched comparison group of 168 non-dual credit participants who attended postsecondary education at the same institution and at the same time as the dual credit participants. Data from the 236 college student records showed that students who completed Dual Credit Programs and comparators with no dual credit experience differed in college success but not college persistence. In this roundtable discussion, I will share the particulars of my findings as well as their implications for policy and practice. Participants will be encouraged to discuss these findings in view of their own research, experiences, and context. 

Armstrong, D., Desbiens, B., & Yeo, G. (2006). Report on the analytical review of phase 9 School/College/Work Initiative pilot B dual credit/dual program 2005-2006. Retrieved from http://cgtat.org/Resources%20CGTAT/SCWI%20Prov%20Review%20of%20Ph09%20Pilot%20Bs.pdf

Philpott-Skilton, L. (2013). High school/college transition: A case study examining the impact of a Dual Credit Program at Fleming College. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto). Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/35928/3/Philpott-Skilton_Linda_201306_Phd_thesis.pdf

Whitaker, C. (2011). The impact of dual credit on college access and participation: An Ontario case study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto). Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/29641/6/Whitaker_Christopher_201106_PhD_thesis.pdf


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.08 - Tuning into Faculty and TA development in China: What we achieved and learned
The field of faculty development in higher education in China is rapidly changing and growing (Huang, Li, & Kuang, 2012). Despite this growth, there is scant literature (in English) about delivering faculty professional development programs in China (for examples, see Huang, Li, & Kuang, 2012; Wong & Fang, 2012), and nothing specifically about teaching assistants (TAs)._x000D_
_x000D_
In April 2015, an invited team of educational specialists traveled to one university in central China to research and deliver faculty and TA development programs. Delivering material developed in one country to another highlighted the challenges faced regarding culture, language, and many aspects of the different educational systems, but also highlighted similarities (Thanh, 2014). A common issue identified is how to evaluate the efficacy of the professional development programs (Huang, Li, & Kuang, 2012; Wong & Fang, 2012) especially due to the non-transferability of Western-based pedagogies to Confucian heritage cultures (Thanh, 2014)._x000D_
_x000D_
In this session, the team will share their approach and process to delivering instruction to faculty and TAs. Included will be preliminary results from the study undertaken that looked at different aspects of the programming, including its effectiveness and transferability. Participants will be encouraged to ask questions and discuss how these challenges and successes resonate with internationalization and globalization of higher education._x000D_
_x000D_
References:_x000D_
Huang, H., Li, X., & Kuang, Y. (2012). Faculty development in engineering colleges in mainland China: _x000D_
The humanities perspective. IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning _x000D_
for Engineering (TALE), August 20–23, 2012, Hong Kong. _x000D_
_x000D_
Thanh, P. T. H. (2014). Implementing cross-culture pedagogies: Cooperative learning at Confucian _x000D_
heritage cultures. Springer online. Retrieved April, 2015 _x000D_
http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789814451901_x000D_
_x000D_
Wong, J. G., & Fang, Y. (2012). Improving Clinical Teaching in China: Initial Report of a Multihospital Pilot _x000D_
Faculty Development Effort, Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal, 24:4, 355-_x000D_
360, DOI:10.1080/10401334.2012.719801

Speakers
JG

Jane Gair (University of Victoria)

Assistant Teaching Professor, University of Victoria


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.09 - Using peer support to fine-tune your teaching practice
The scholarship into the roles mentors can play in academia has tended to focused on mentoring younger scholars' research careers, but there is a growing body of work exploring how mentoring and other forms of peer support can also help post-secondary instructors become better teachers (see, for example, Boyle and Boice, 1998; Kanuka, 2005; Kanuka 2006; Reder and Gallagher, 2006). Whether it be through traditional one-on-one mentoring relationships or mentoring circles, communities of practice or the Instructional Skills Workshop, less-experienced instructors can learn from more-experienced instructors, and instructors at all levels can learn from each other's ideas, strategies, successes and failures. I clearly cannot do anything I had planned to do, since my one-hour workshop was cut down to 20 minutes. What I will do instead is have a one-page handout of the workshop for participants, which I will review with them and answer any questions. They can then take that suggested format back to their home institutions and run a workshop themselves. This will help them begin a dialogue as to which peer support programs might be welcome and effective at their own institutions. 

Boyle, P., & Boice, R. (1998). Systematic mentoring for new faculty teachers and graduate teaching assistants. Innovative Higher Education, 22, 157–179.

Kanuka, Heather. (2005). Does mentoring make a difference? Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, #39. Centre for Leadership in Learning, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.

Kanuka, Heather. (2006). Mentoring provides benefits for faculty and institutions. Teaching and Learning Exchange. University of Alberta. Edmonton, AB.

Reder, M., & Gallagher, E. V. (2006). Transforming a teaching culture through peer mentoring: Connecticut College’s Johnson teaching seminar for incoming faculty. To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional and Organizational Development, 25, 327-344.


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.10 - What is undergraduate research? Student and faculty perceptions
According to the Council on Undergraduate Research, undergraduate research is “an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate student that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline. (http://www.cur.org/about_cur/). A number of educators and researchers have broadened this definition to include formative experiences underlying the ability to engage in independent research that makes an original contribution (e.g., Beckman & Hensel, 2004; Healey, 2005). To investigate perceptions of undergraduate research, we developed an online survey for a random sample of undergraduate students and faculty. Using a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree), participants rated their perceptions of different activities as research activities, such as attending a research presentation, attending an artistic event, taking a methods course, using the library to find resources for a paper or a project, receiving a competitive award for mentored research. In the roundtable session, participants will first reflect on their perceptions of undergraduate research. We will then present the student and faculty findings from our study. Finally, we will encourage discussion of how to broaden perceptions of undergraduate research in our disciplines and institutions.

References :

Beckman, M., & Hensel, N. (2004). Making explicit the implicit: Defining undergraduate research. CUR Quarterly, 29(4), 40-44. 

Healey, M. (2005) Linking research and teaching: Disciplinary spaces. In R. Barnett (Ed.) Reshaping the university: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching, pp. 30-42. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.

Speakers
CV

Connie Varnhagen (University of Alberta)

Academic Director, Undergraduate Research Initiative
Undergraduate Research: A question can take you anywhere


Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.54 - Out of tune? Lack of harmony between students’ and teachers’ expectations in higher education
Active learning seems to be a key word in university teaching and learning these days, but how do the students relate to this concept in a university setting? My PhD project is based on action research at Roskilde University (RU), Denmark. RU has a strong focus on the students’ research activity, and the degree courses are almost all based on 50% student activity in problem-based project work and 50 % in courses (Andersen & Heilesen, 2014). Through observation and interviews with students and teachers I am currently investigating correlations and discrepancies between teachers’ and students’ attitudes and experiences related to university teaching and learning. My findings indicate that even though all students appreciate active participation in problem-based project work, they have a different approach when it comes to active learning activities in courses. Even though many students like active participation in the above-mentioned areas, they tend to associate active learning in courses with secondary school teaching methods, and expect “real” university courses primarily to be conducted as one-way lectures. Thus, there seems to be a surprising lack of harmony between the teachers’ active learning approach and the students´ concept of learning (expectations) (Varnava-Marouchou, 2009). This discrepancy can prove to be a serious obstacle to student motivation (Illeris, 2007). In the roundtable discussion we will discuss how this lack of harmony between students and teachers can be understood. We will share experiences as well as research-based knowledge on the subject in order to understand this challenge and reflect upon possible solutions.

Andersen & Heilesen (2014): The Roskilde Model: Problem-oriented learning and projectwork. Springer.

Illeris (2007): How we learn: Learning and non-learning in school and beyond. Routledge.

Varnava-Marouchou (2009): How can students´ conceptions of learning improve their learning outcomes? In: Nygaard, Claus & Courtney, Nigel: Improving students´ learning outcomes. Copenhagen Business School Press.

Speakers

Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Seymour Room

1:45pm

RTD.11 - 'You learn no matter what happens': Approaches to harmonizing assessment of situated learning with discipline practice and situational realities
In situated learning scenarios student learning opportunities arise in unexpected ways. In such cases, learning objectives, assessment, evaluation, course organization and teaching strategies do not follow traditional models. The challenge for educators is to identify and capitalize on these opportunities while harmonizing assessment and evaluation with learning objectives and a changing context. Our curriculum includes industry-sponsored project courses in Information Technology that give students the opportunity to solve real-life problems in a discipline-specific manner. These courses are offered to large classes of 100+ students organized in teams of four with each team assigned an industry client who outlines a project, and a faculty supervisor who provides assessment, evaluation and practical guidance. Several theories apply: situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; McLellan, 1995), experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984), and elements of problem- and project-based learning. Course learning objectives are the same for all students and must be assessed and evaluated fairly despite changing situational realities as we deal with a significant degree of variability in many aspects including the level of technical difficulty, project-specific requirements and supervision. Students and participants in course delivery (i.e., instructor, supervisors and clients) play discipline-specific roles. Besides innovation in course organization and teaching strategies, we developed a high-level formative assessment marking schema with components that supervisors adapt as required. Participants will learn about our innovative solution and how this model could be adapted and applied to their specific discipline. This roundtable would be most interesting to instructors of courses with practical components and curriculum developers.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

McLellan, H. (1995). Situated learning perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.



Thursday June 18, 2015 1:45pm - 2:45pm
Bayshore Salon ABC

1:45pm

RTD.12 - An investigation of students’ engagement with peers and assigned readings in annotation-enhanced discussion forums
Engaging with texts by scribbling comments in the margins is an ancient tradition (Howard, 2005). Online discussions can be enhanced by allowing students to use annotation tools to do just that—insert comments in the margins beside the excerpt of interest rather than posting a reply at the bottom of the post (Xin, Glass, Feenberg, Bures, & Abrami, 2011). The purpose of our study was to examine how students commented on each other’s written responses to course readings in annotation-enhanced online discussion forums, and how this process contributed to their learning. To facilitate students’ critical engagement with readings, we implemented an instructional process called the “triple-entry notebook” (Kooy & Kanevsky, 1996) that required them to prepare a response to each reading that included a summary, selected highlights with reflections, and a lingering question. Classmates posted their responses and commented on each other’s in small groups on a discussion forum augmented with an annotation tool called Marginalia. This tool allowed students