Teaching-Learning Academy
8-9 February 2006 Highlights
Ø A total of 59 people participated in this round of TLA (34 students, 15 faculty, and 10 staff)
This week’s dialogue elicited the following “promising directions” in each of the themed areas that emerged from earlier study group dialogue. Asterisks mark recurring directions.
EXTENDING COMMUNITY
W@12
§ Campus interest groups could be formed as a way of extending community around particular issues.
§ WWU could serve as more of a resource to help the Bellingham community – perhaps if there was some kind of organizational structure to plug community members into WWU.
§ The Waterfront proposal on the Learning Commons put forward by the TLA and the Center for Service-Learning included provisions for a dialogue center – this proposal could be advanced and further supported.
W@3
§ More informal learning structures could be structured to create open communication.
§ More rewards and incentives could be created to recognize faculty/staff/student interaction with the community.
R@12
§ Community could be recognized as having multiple dimensions: on/off campus, WWU, academics, departments with more opportunities to connect existing groups.
§ Link academic advising to (Bellingham) community mentors.
§ Neighborhood Associations could include a student member living in that community.
§ * Provide ways for more community members to come to campus. *
§ ** Expand the official “advising community” to include upper-class students who could mentor younger students. **
R@3
§ More interdepartmental communication could be fostered within the campus.
§ * Find more ways to bring Bellingham/outside community members to come to campus. *
§ Establish more opportunities for interaction between international students and US students on campus.
§ A more prominent web presence for activities of interest to both WWU and Bellingham communities could be established.
§ A more formal entrance to WWU could be developed (that bridges campus to surrounding neighborhood).
EXPANDING ADVISING
W@12
§ **A program could be established where upper-class students (including grad students) could mentor first-year (or transfer) students, could include an informal dialogue session perhaps weekly. **
§ **The open call for proposals dealing with the improvement of the first-year/new student experience at WWU sponsored by the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education (due March 10) offers up to $5,000 grants might be a source of support for such a peer advising project.**
W@3
§ **A Big Brother, Big Sister kind of mentoring program could be established with upper-class students assigned to new students to talk about a range of issues concerning school or social life. Upper-class students could get credit and perhaps make it required for new students with credit. Could involve one-to-one or group dialogue.
§ Students could have more voice in advertising campus resources so that the peer culture could influence students to use these resources mores.
R@12
§ **Older students could be paired with younger/new students to give guidance and share experiences because of the greater ease of connecting with other students. **
R@3
§ ** Upper class students could mentor/advise first-year/new students perhaps for credit. **
§ ** Upper class students could be paired with first-year/new students based on some shared interest. **
§ ** Departments could email undeclared majors who might have an interest in their major in an attempt to connect undeclared students with graduating seniors for a “let’s talk” exchange.**
ENGAGING INTERACTIVE LEARNING
W@12
§ ***Compile best teaching practices for creating interaction on a DVD that would include modeling those practices. A task force of students/faculty could identify examples of interactive teaching, film class interactions, and create a DVD of best practices. ***
§ ***More ways to incorporate Power Point as (only) a tool for creating interaction could be identified. (Perhaps these ideas could be included in the best interactive practices DVD.)***
§ A workshop could be developed where faculty can work in the company of each other to make their classes more interactive (including revising their lectures to be more interactive).
W@3
§ ***More practices for creating interaction in large classes could be identified. ***
§ More “discussion labs” could be created outside the regular class time.
§ The internet could be used more for online forums to discuss lecture material.
R@12
§ More physical structures for encouraging interactive learning could be created.
§ People with expertise in creating interactive learning spaces could be identified.
§ ****More classes could offer community-based learning experiences for credit. ****
§ A regular professional development series on interactive practices with student presenters could be created that would parallel the First Thursday development series.
R@3
§ More individuals (including students) could assume more responsibility for fostering interaction.
§ ****More opportunities for applying classroom learning to outside of class experiences could be provided. ****
§ More students could prepare more for class and interact more with their texts to ensure better engagement.
§ More opportunities for students to work in cohorts could be developed.
§ More attention could be paid to the use of responders/clickers in large lectures, including the dangers of overuse.
DIVERSIFYING ASSESSMENT
W@3
§ Grades could be based on an array of products: tests, projects, essays, etc.
§ More time could be freed up for faculty to provide feedback to students on their writing (perhaps with more grad student assistance).
§ Student facilitators could be used more to facilitate dialogue, create a smaller class feel, and provide more individual oral feedback.