Focus on Assessment – Again! This past Friday we had a Faculty Talking Circle on Online Assessment. It was a rich discussion and a very honest conversation! During the weekend, I did a bit more thinking about what we discussed. Here are a few thoughts. Some of you may know that our family recently added two new members to it! Edgar and Daisy (perky ears!), two precocious little border collies. Right now they are about 12 weeks old and are still learning many things - so are we. Just after we took the siblings home we arranged a visit with the veterinarian for a check-up. One of the things we mentioned was that Edgar had the habit of bolting his food while Daisy would take a mouthful, walk a bit of a distance away and carefully chew what she had before returning to get another mouthful. By that time, Edgar may have eaten all of his portion and most of hers. It didn’t seem fair or equal! We didn’t want Edgar to end up being a fat little dog, especially at Daisy’s expense, so we thought about limiting his food intake or feeding Daisy separately. The vet told us to take a deep breath and relax. Just keep adding food to the dish; puppies self-regulate and limiting Edgar’s food intake might be harmful. He is likely moving through a growth spurt and, judging from his body type, he will likely be a bigger dog. Trying to be equal wouldn’t be fair; especially to Edgar. Yet, as educators we consistently fall into the trap of “fair must be equal”. We don’t want to be seen as favoring particular students and we sometimes hesitate about providing extra resources, support, time or opportunity, because “it wouldn’t be fair to the rest of the class”. Why should a particular student get an extension on their project? They had better have some dire circumstances! How will they understand about deadlines and the “real world”? But fair isn’t equal. Fair is about giving every student the chance to thrive and succeed, and some students will need different kinds of support than others. Another example. Although I don’t often think of it as such, I have a learning accommodation. I wear eyeglasses. Without my beloved blue spectacles, I would be hard pressed to complete most tasks. If I had been taught in an environment where decisions were based solely on keeping all things equal, I should not have been permitted to wear them. Why should I be able to wear glasses while others did not? The fact that the others did not need glasses is immaterial. It’s not fair! It’s not equal! But, as educators, we think little of having students with glasses or hearing aids. They don’t get accommodations, they have aids that do little to interfere with our planning and practice. And, we do have many students who receive accommodations; and we do our best to support them. We have students who need extra time to process, students who need a scribe (graphomotor issues), students who need readers, students who need interpretation, and students who need different colour papers. We are trying to be fair by removing some of the barriers that might interfere with their learning. Their extra time, prepared notes, relaxed deadline, reader, or scribe is my glasses. Friday’s Discussion That brings me back to the Friday Talking Circle on Assessment. Originally I had intended the session to be a bit of an idea exchange. I invited a colleague from Lakeland College, Mabyn Grinde, to join us for the session, as she is working through many of the same challenges with the faculty there. Over twenty instructors were able to attend, as well as Joan Wall and Kerry Taillefer, who would help field questions! The plan was simple. Share some of the assessment principles seek input from instructors. Ask instructors to share some of their current challenges related to online assessment. Elicit a few suggestions and successes from each other that might improve our practices. Oh, and yes, maybe also talk about the new UDL 1.5 time requirement for conducting assessments. However, the 1.5 UDL (Universal Design for Learning) requirement quickly became the major focus of our discussion. The discussion became passionate and, at times, pointed. It was an honest conversation! We were concerned about what is fair, what is equal and whether students might get an unfair advantage. From my understanding the move to universal 1.5 timing for assessments was intended to allow students who may not have had learning challenges formally assessed, to be given the extra time. Since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, many of our students may have struggled in isolation, with barriers to achievement such as inadequate technology or Wi-Fi access, anxiety or uncertainly related to the pandemic, childcare and other familial or relational obligations, shared use of technology (one computer for a whole family to do their work on), employment responsibilities and other stressors. Students who do not have these stressors would likely not take advantage of the extra time, but those who need the extra accommodation would be able to use it. Many of the faculty in the talking circle were, for the most part, very sympathetic to the concept of time and a half. Our students are under a lot of pressure and this decision seemed to come from a caring place. Never the less, there were a lot of questions and concerns related to this move.
Compounding the issues raised by the faculty is the fact that many of the established, closed-answer assessments (especially those with right/wrong answers) no longer work in an online world where students can screen capture and instant message. Open-ended assessments require more time to ideate, build, design effective scoring guides for, and mark! Getting More Context As special guests, I invited William Hamilton (Assistive Technology) and Kerry Taillefer (Testing Centre & Learning Support) to help address some of the emergent questions that might bubble up in the talking circle. Recently, William, Kerry, Joan and I were charged with helping the faculty learn about the 1.5 UDL requirement and it has been a bit of a challenge. The decision has also affected our roles and department staffing! William unfortunately could not attend the Friday talking circle. He did send along a few messages though:
Kerry provided some excellent points to consider as we work our way through this change. She has been looking into research on this matter and found out that:
Kerry suggested that we should work with our students to prepare them for the exams, make them aware of test-taking strategies and help them avoid stressing before or over-thinking during assessments. She also suggested talking with students about on how cheating in the short term can have long-term repercussions when they are asked to apply information with an incomplete understanding. I was extremely glad to have Kerry there. A number of instructors in the circle affirmed her observations about students using or abusing extra time. At the same time, we could all agree that: “there are no magic wands” and one-size does not fit all. However, as instructional faculty and faculty support, we needed to “find ways forward”. Then we shifted gears to discuss some solutions. Finding Ways Forward
At this point Mabyn was able to share some of the ways that the faculty at Lakeland have responded to the need reality of online assessment. Some instructors at Lakeland had success with open-book and oral exams. It was a big shift away from the typical battery of 200 multiple-choice questions. The success of open book exams had much to do with the structure of them and the challenge found in them. Students were given a set block of time (a day?) to explore questions that spoke to the big questions of the course and their program. In oral exams, with some carefully crafted questions and strategic probing, instructors could find out very quickly who knew and could make connections, and who could not. Some of the instructors Mabyn worked with also had success in constructing case-study types of questions that required longer answer responses. In all three cases, making sure that the marking criteria (rubrics) are clear was essential. One instructor shared that, after conducting these new assessments, he had a much better picture of “who got it” than he did from the old multiple-choice exams. He could see how students were intersecting ideas and applying them. Some of the other suggestions shared during the session for addressing the challenge of online assessment (and even the UDL 1.5 requirement) included:
Last week I shared some handy websites from Taylor Institute (U of C). Here are a couple of others that people shared on Friday. Websites: https://learninginnovation.ca/student-cc/ (Lethbridge College Centre for Teaching and Learning) https://sites.tufts.edu/teaching/2020/05/08/integrating-inclusive-and-sustainable-assessments-in-your-online-teaching-from-beginning-to-end/ (Teaching and Learning at Tufts University) https://teaching.uwo.ca/elearning/student_assessment/alt-assessment-ideas.html (Centre for Teaching and Learning – Western Ontario) Have a wonderful week. I’m going out to play with my puppies! Jeff
0 Comments
Building Community through Esports In today’s musing, I want to share what I have been learning about E-sports! Since the year 2000, E-sports has become a very popular form of entertainment. Not only do people train and compete in online competitions, many others have jumped in as fans. In fact, the most recent competitions for the Overwatch, Call of Duty, and League of Legends had viewership rivalling major sporting events like the Superbowl or the Stanley Cup Finals. The winners often take home multi-million dollar purses and superstar” gamers can pad their earnings by posting clips of their games on YouTube channels for their legions of followers. Still, it is something quite foreign to me. I grew up with community league sports and playing hockey in the alleyways, using garbage cans as goal posts, and reliving Bobby Orr’s spectacular game winning goal in the 1970 playoffs. The closest that I have come to Esports is when I have to tell my son to take the volume down a notch or two when he plays Call of Duty online with his friends and I can hear him warning the others about hidden threats. I think the neighbors also hear him telling others to “get down and fall back!” I’ve seen my neighbor suddenly dart behind a hedge at the force of his commands! Here at NorQuest College, Phil Switzer and Andrew Keenan (and others!) have been working to build a bit of an e-sports community. They see it as one way to engage our students, staff and faculty in friendly competition. Phil and Andrew started this endeavor before the onset of Covid and, as of late, they have invested a lot of time into making a go of it. It makes sense. In a time when a pandemic has forced many of us (faculty and students) to eschew physical community and take up our task online, we need to find new ways to have fun and build community. What Phil and Andrew are offering has the potential to do all of that. So, in an effort to find out more about the NorQuest E-sports initiative, I sat down (via Teams!) with Phil and Andrew and asked them a few questions:
What is Esports? Well, according to Phil, “Esports is happening when people play or watch electronic games with other people; Esports is the social side of gaming. Esports is about community, belonging, fun, challenge, and for some competition – for many it is just about having fun with people by playing a game.” This cleared up a misconception for me. I thought that Esports was all about disappearing into your bedroom to shout at your computer. It seemed kinda anti-social to me. I have so much to learn! Phil continued: “For NorQuest College we have Community Games Nights every week open to anyone. Soon we will also add Competitive Gaming for those who want challenges. We play games on our phones, computer, console, and we even watch some of our community members as they compete against each other. We have done everything from League of Legends, Pictionary, trivia games, and very soon, we will be doing NHL 20 here on campus November 20 for an Online Road Hockey Tournament. This will be a great way for many of our students to learn about Canada, hockey and technology.” Phil stressed that Esports is most definitely not anti-social! He stressed that Esports is all about community and belonging. Students and NorQuest employees get together to play, watch, and chat, in an atmosphere that is not loaded down with assignments and power imbalances. It is about NorQuesters getting together to have fun, meet friends, and learn new skills. Why are you excited about Esports for NorQuest? When I asked about the educational value of Esports, Andy said; “Esports provides opportunities for our students to lead. As we move towards micro credentials and recognizing student expertise, Esports gives learners opportunities to lead and to mentor their peers. At times, these students also mentor our NorQuest faculty! In fact, NorQuest Esports has already “flipped” the classroom dynamic in our student club; our student members share their best practices for community building – and faculty need to learn from the students!” I thought this was an interesting point and could see the potential for community and confidence building. Andy continued: “At first glance, Esports seems to be about video games, but really, it is about the cultures and practices that surround digital natives. These cultures and practices include new forms of communication, new online platforms, new types of community, and a primary emphasis on inclusion and diversity.” Phil echoed what Andrew had shared: “Games are core to learning digital skills. For faculty, gaming provides a way to meet our College Wide Learning Outcomes – developing teamwork, communication, problem solving, and analytical thought.” Phil encouraged the faculty to re-examine our course outlines to think of ways that we might incorporate games that will meet our course learning outcomes – games that speak to the outcomes but also help to build a positive learning community.” He continued, “In some of my courses we are playing games and have been since March. These games are fun, free, and take as little as 10 minutes to play with up to 50 people at once in a safe online space.” Andy continued, “Esports is about empowerment. We want our students to gain the digital literacy and competencies to be successful as future leaders. Esports provides a pathway to skill building and becoming comfortable in an ever-changing digital landscape. We also want to celebrate the knowledge and expertise of the students in our community who have valuable insights to share with us as an institution.” “Like Andy says, this is about real Career Skills and real careers,” said Phil. “Mount Royal University now has an Esports program, NAIT has added courses specific to Esports, and Durham College - whom we’ve been working with – now has a post-degree program in Esports. Soon more Colleges and Universities will be adding courses and entire programs in Esports Management; Esports Marketing, and more. Playing games to learn, have fun, and be challenged is only part of the story here; Esports is huge right now and projected to grow exponentially for the next few years!” What are your next steps?
It was a lot to absorb! Phil and Andrew were passionate about the initiative and eager for others to experience it in a way that they and many others had. When I asked about the next steps for this group, Andy and Phil explained that they just wanted to keep building momentum. At present, there is a solid cohort of regulars, which includes students, staff and faculty. They also have some gaming mentors from beyond NorQuest College; former professional players who would like to help build our program. Phil and Andy shared an ambitious plan that includes having NorQuest serve as a bit of a community hub and leader within the Alberta college community. However, at this point, they were careful to focus on immediate steps and the exciting opportunity presented by the NorQuest College Road Hockey event (which will be online). Keep your radar up for that one, as it promises to be quite the event! As well, Andy explained that, in the coming months “We also plan to create ways for instructors to easily incorporate games into their classroom, especially for faculty members who may not be interested in games initially. In fact, I’ve got a game I use with students to learn about how to ask probing questions and collect data. It is free and runs on a browser, called GeoGuessr. GeoGuessr uses Google maps and puts players in a random location in the world. Your job is to guess where you are. The game is both competitive and cooperative because you can have students work together to gather evidence and do research.” In the end, Phil explained, the next steps for Esports at Norquest were really up to me; it was about my next steps! Phil and Andy encouraged me (and you!) to join them on one of their Esports nights. As Phil shared: “We are open to everyone and anyone. Just email [email protected]. We already have over 20 NorQuesters (faculty, staff and students) who regularly come out to build community and connection.” At the conclusion of our little chat, I thanked Phil and Andy for their insights. I really appreciated what they had shared. It addressed one of the lingering concerns I have about our college. Since we have such diverse, practical and often short-term programming, it can be hard to build community and allegiance. Events like Inclusion Fusion help and so do faculty-student connections like the RBC mentors program, the Student’s Council, the Lighthouse, and the Indigenous Centre, but we do not have the sports teams, arts communities (and performances) or clubs that many other colleges have. Now, in the face of the disruption and disconnectedness brought on by the Covid pandemic, it is nice to hear of another way to foster community and connection. Besides, it sounds like fun! This week, the Esports group will meet on two nights, Tuesday @ 8pm and Wednesday @ 8pm. I plan to attend at least one of those nights. Will you be joining me? Will you invite your students? Looking at Assessment!
This week I wanted to talk about assessment. It is the most significant factor in encouraging and sustaining student success. Formative assessment (Assessment For and As Learning) helps to provide students and instructors with an opportunity to check on understanding, clarify learning targets, re-calibrate, and build for success. As many leading educators have pointed out, this kind of assessment needs to happen minute by minute, throughout lessons and activities; there needs to be a constant going back and forth of checking and rechecking. Summative Assessment (Assessment Of Learning) usually comes at the end of a cycle, and it helps students and instructors to measure success against clearly defined parameters. Summative assessment requires educators to establish routines and procedures that promote fairness, reliability, and validity. However, while few educators would debate the impact and role of quality assessment practices, there has been hot debate about what these practices are. A number of years ago I was involved in a district-wide assessment reform that called on K-12 teachers to re-examine their assessment practices. Questions were asked like:
That year we tackled some very prickly pears. There were parents who were very upset that their child’s progress was no longer indicated by percentile (“How can I compare my child to the rest of the class? What does “proficient” really mean? Is it a 63% or 75%? There’s a big difference!”), and teachers who bristled at the idea of no zeros and second chances (“How can I ensure that they learn their lesson about tardiness?”). Not every issue had an easy answer. Nonetheless, as a district, we learned a great deal about assessment. It was a great leap forward for all of us. The present circumstances, the transition to whole scale online learning prompted by the Covid-19 pandemic, has brought on a similar kind of college-wide assessment reform for NorQuest. This time the questions are a little different though:
Since NorQuest moved to exclusively online instruction (with some obvious exceptions), I could feel the tension mounting around just these questions (and many more). Programs that relied on 2-4 big, multiple-choice assessments to provide evidence of understanding and achievement were suddenly faced with the challenges of conducting these exams online. Other programs that required physical demonstration of situational competency, practical skills, or professional judgement were also left struggling. One recent change to how we assess at NorQuest College has been with respect to exam accommodations and to the disability intake process:
These changes are more fully explained in a couple of emails that were sent out earlier this month. If you missed the emails, have a search through your inbox, check with your chair or associate chair, or contact William Hamilton. In the next few weeks William Hamilton, Alan Jeans, Kerry Taillefer, Joan Wall and I will be meeting with departmental groups to help clarify what this means for your students and for you. With all of these assessment pressures and changes in mind, Norma Schneider met with the Deans, Chairs, and Associates during the Week of Welcome to discuss what we, as NorQuesters, see as the most important components and principles in effective online assessment. Some of the frequently mentioned terms included: authenticity, alignment, relevance, choice, reliability, rehearsal, “aha” moments, variation, growth opportunity, transparency, and ownership. Norma urged us to look past assessments that rely solely on rote and recall, and think of ways to assess that will challenge students to analyze, apply and construct based upon scenarios or problems. It reminded me of what one of my Education professors used to say to us, when I was taking my undergraduate degree many moons ago (almost 40 years!). Dr. Glenn Martin (U of A) asked us if we planned to use assessment as an affirmation to find out what students know and can do, or as a “gotcha” to find out what they missed or failed to master. All too often, in an effort to “separate the wheat from the chaff”, we build assessments that test for perfection and not for proficiency. Such a practice makes it easier to rank and sort the students, based on where they fit on the curve (normative-based). These kinds of assessments also favor those students who are very good at memorizing or at taking multiple-choice tests. Dr. Martin advocated for a range of assessment types, that might include multiple choice but also include short and long answer tests, portfolios, projects, forums, problem-based learning, role-plays and many other ways of finding out what your students know and can do. Till next week! Jeff What is SoTL?
One of my roles at the college is to encourage instructors to examine closely their teaching practice with an eye to what works and what might not be quite so effective. The thought is that every one of us, no matter how experienced and skillful we are, can get better at the practice of teaching. Instructors who are reflective practitioners plan their lessons thoughtfully, seek feedback from students and colleagues, review their lessons and sometimes watch them over again (handy to do in BBU!), and make timely and skillful adjustments to their ensuing lessons and units. Those who want to take reflective practice to the next level engage in something we call “the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning” (the NQ definition of SoTL is included at the end of this musing). By doing so, these educators move from reflection to research. Not only do they seek answers to questions they may have asked about their own teaching, they also look for learnings to be shared with colleagues and applied in wider contexts. SoTL is a relatively new wrinkle in post-secondary education, having been on the scene for only 30+ years or so. Before this time, the research focus for many instructors and professors seemed confined only to their area of teaching expertise; literature professors studied literature and health care instructors studied advances in the world of medicine and care. Teaching was just a vehicle for conveying what they learning in their studies and research; it didn’t merit study in itself. However, this changed in the 1990’s. Many post-secondary instructors started to realize that there the practice and pedagogy of post-secondary instruction was not something that could be taken for granted. Skillful use of teaching approaches, strategies and innovations could make learning more interactive, engaging and powerful. And so these post-secondary educators began to research not only what they taught, but how they taught. Since that time, SoTL has gained in popularity. There are now conferences and publications established so instructors from a wide array of academic, professional or vocational fields may share their questions and findings in working with students in post-secondary settings. One such conference is the STLHE conference (The Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education) and another is the Symposium on Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (sponsored by Mount Royal University and held annually in Banff). Both of these conferences attract SoTL researchers from around the world! At NorQuest College, we have had quite a number of SoTL projects conducted in the last couple of years. Instructors have asked:
The NorQuest Research Showcase last year featured a number of these inquiries and several are now being prepared for presentation and publication. Just this week Viola Manakore and I hope to launch one more SoTL project. Our inquiry will ask instructors, from NorQuest College and from other colleges and institutes across Alberta to respond to a survey and perhaps participate in informal interviews. Our objective is to explore the experiences of post-secondary educators and students as they have transitioned from face-to-face learning to alternative forms of instruction during COVID 19 pandemic. More specifically, we would like to know:
Obviously, Viola and I are not the only researchers looking at this issue. There were some surveys and questionnaires sent out early in the pandemic that captured some of the confusion and quick thinking of the time. That said, I think we are in a very advantageous position to follow-up on some of this research. Instructors have had five months to make adjustments, explore technologies and get feedback. Now is the time to capitalize on what they have learned and consolidate it, so that it might be shared. So, I hope that, when the invite to participate in the study comes to your email this week, you will choose to jump in and share your learnings! If you have any questions about SoTL or are thinking of perhaps starting on a project of your own, please contact me. I will be running workshops later in this term, but a preliminary conversation is usually the best way to get started! The NQ SoTL definition: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) involves the close examination of the relationship between teaching and learning at the at the post secondary level. Faculty members who engage in SoTL conduct focused inquiries into their teaching practice with an eye to improving the engagement and achievement of their students. SoTL is primarily concerned with investigating and improving the “how” rather than the “what” of post-secondary teaching practice. Such inquiry necessitates the identification of an innovation, problem, or process to study; a review of previous research and seminal literature; the skilful and deliberate implementation of innovative teaching practices and strategies; a detailed reporting of success and failure; thoughtful analysis and reflection; and the eventual dissemination of findings through presentations or publications. SoTL may include inquiry into teaching aspects such as course design and implementation, classroom or online facilitation, review of assessments or assignments, innovative learning formats or systems, and/or program evaluation. Ultimately, SoTL adds to the growing body of knowledge related to post-secondary teaching and learning by providing practical applications for promising educational theories and innovations. References:
One Physics Teacher’s Experiment in Teaching A number of years back, when I was in a role very similar to the one I have now, I had the pleasure of working with high school teachers as they integrated changes related to literacy, assessment, inquiry, and differentiated instruction in their coursework. One of the teachers, who taught high school physics in a large urban school, invited me to come and attend his classes to provide feedback. For the purposes of this piece, we will call him “Fred”. Fred had been teaching for 30+ years and he was finding it more and more difficult to deal with the “busy-ness” of teaching. He was considering retirement (he had reached the magic number), but Fred also knew that he loved teaching, and he loved working with teens; he was just getting tired. Many of Fred’s classes were in a combination classroom and lab. On lab days, students were expected to spend the first 20-25 minutes in their desks listening to Fred explain the day’s experiment. Fred was very prepared; he had PPT slides, a two-page handout and a raft of notes to work from. On lab days, the students would often trickle in, in dribs and drabs. The school had a number of athletic teams and interest groups, so students had difficulty getting to their classroom right on time. Such was the case for the two classes that I spent with Fred and his class. Students trickled in, got settled and then waited to be re-oriented to the lesson and to Fred’s expectations. “So this is what is getting to me Jeff,” Fred shared, “I feel like the first 25 minutes of class is nothing but false starts. I start explaining the experiment, then a couple more trickle in and I have to start over. Then, even when they are all here, some students are not really paying attention and they will ask the same question that I had just finished answering for several other students. Meanwhile, other students have already read the whole handout and are asking me questions that most of the class is just not ready for. By the time we move to the back of the classroom (to the lab part), I’m exhausted and feel like I’m going to lose my voice. And once we get started on the experiment, I find out just how many students still didn’t get it!” After a couple of visits, Fred and I sat down together and discussed ways forward. First, we took a close look at what was actually going on:
Next, we asked a key question: “Who is actually doing the work?” Fred had to confess that, in spite of all his good intentions, he was actually the one doing the work. He made the handouts, prepared the notes, and gave the explanations. The students just had to sit back and listen (or not). We decided to put the onus for learning back on to the students! Yes, we would provide them with scaffolding and support, but we were not going to spoon feed any longer. The next lab class, Fred made a point of meeting each student at the door. As they came in, he gave them the two-page handout, a highlighter and a one-page graphic organizer. In a hushed voice, he asked the students to come in quietly and to get down to reading ASAP. Further instructions were written on the board. On the board, Fred had written the following directives:
K - What do we know already? What are the givens for this experiment? What are the conditions? W - What do you want to know? What phenomena are were really investigating? H - How will we go about testing to see what happens under certain conditions? What are the critically important steps in our experiment? L - What did we learn from the experiment? How should that be represented? How can it be replicated? S - What is the significance of what we have discovered? How might it be applied to real world applications? It took only a class or two for the students to catch on to the new routine. Fred no longer had to greet them at the door; the students just came in, picked up the materials (handout, highlighter and graphic organizer) from a front desk, and settled in to work. There were significantly fewer false starts and repeated explanations. When I next met up with Fred, he seemed to have a bit of a spring to his step. “It’s been a life-saver, Jeff! I am so glad we decided to make those changes. The students who are keen can get going as soon as they are ready and those who struggle I can sidle up to and work with quietly as they work through the KWHLS. Wow!” The Need to Step Back and Seek Input
I’ve shared this anecdote, but not because of my part in it. Indeed, Fred was the one who went through the reflective process; he identified an issue, sought a second set of eyes, discussed some of the underlying issues, chose a course of action and then skillfully and persistently put this plan into place. I just asked a few timely questions and shared some strategies that might help (we discussed many more options than the one he chose). The process that Fred and I went through is called: “instructional coaching”. As one of my mentors explained to me years ago, “to coach” in situations like this is not really acting like some kind of athletic coach, trying to get the best out of his athletes. I would feel funny yelling encouragement and guidance during an instructor’s lesson - “Atta go! Wonderful motivational bridge, Now let’s get to the outcomes!” Instead, to coach, means to provide the conveyance (like the old horse drawn coaches) so that instructors can work from one place or teaching challenge (a muddy spot) toward an easier or more efficient path. This “coaching” is done by careful observation and thoughtful feedback and questioning and not through pointed advice or judgement. There really is a bit of an art to it. In the last few years, Joan Wall, Sarah Apedaile and I have all had the chance to provide a bit of coaching to countless “Freds” at NorQuest. It has been great! Instructors have asked us to visit their classrooms (both physical and online) to seek feedback on their practices and routines. I love this part of my job. I get to watch true professionals in action and I get to step into learning environments that are vibrant and intellectually stimulating! In one morning, I can learn how to put in an IV line, balance the books, apply for a job, and formulate an effective thesis statement. If you are interested in having a faculty developer like Joan, Sarah or myself, work with you, just send an email our way. However, you might wait a week or two before doing so though. At the moment, it is a very busy time as many faculty need support facing up to tech challenges in teaching online for the first time (and Sarah is on leave for the next few weeks). You might also line up coaching conversations with a teaching colleague, where you visit each other’s classes and provide feedback. Just remember though, this process is not about evaluation; it is about reflection and growth. Look for someone who will challenge you to see possibilities, not push you towards their own preconceived notion of best practice. |
AuthorJeff Kuntz Ph.D. ImagesExcept where indicated, images used in the blog posts are personal photos, images from NorQuest College or images from Pixabay. Pixabay is a vibrant community of creatives, sharing copyright free images, videos and music. https://pixabay.com/ Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|