There are many reasons why student feedback is not particularly helpful, but there are things we can do to make it better. Here are a few suggestions on how to extract more value from course evaluations:

We don’t learn a lot from student feedback when we don’t ask good questions. At the top of my list of bad questions I’d put the ever-popular “What did you like most/least about the course/instructor” kind of questions. I wish I could make those questions illegal. Since when did the goal of education become providing learners with what they like? I know teachers can’t remove these questions from institutionally mandated forms. We can object, though, and we can ask students better questions on our own. If teachers want to make changes that improve teaching and learning, we need to ask about the impact of a policy, practice, behavior, technique, assignment, or instructional approach on students’ efforts to learn.

We don’t learn as much as could when we ask after it’s too late to make a difference. For me that means the end of the course when students are busy and stressed. They’ve got more important things on their minds. And at many institutions they are asked to evaluate every course every semester, which is not what the research recommends. Then there’s the reality that the feedback they provide isn’t going to benefit them—the course is over. The feedback that helps teachers make good choices about what and how to change doesn’t emerge from those overall, global assessments of how the course compares with all other courses on the planet. It’s found in responses to smaller segments of instruction, or course events like assignments or group activities, and it’s solicited right after the fact while students clearly remember what happened and the teacher has time to implement alterations.

We compromise the learning potential of student feedback when we don’t teach the principles of constructive feedback. The benefits of doing so go in both directions. Teachers get feedback that is more helpful than hurtful and students start developing a skill they can use in virtually every profession. Students deliver more constructive feedback when they understand what teachers do and don’t have the power to change, and what is and isn’t relevant to learning. Most of the time we don’t decide when the class meets or who enrolls in it. Moreover, our selection of ties or the types of earrings we wear don’t merit commentary in feedback that addresses learning experiences. Constructive feedback doesn’t preclude students from identifying things about the course and instruction that compromised their efforts to learn. It’s about how those comments are delivered. The golden rule of feedback is that teachers and students should give each other feedback in the form they’d like to have feedback given unto them.

We don’t learn much from student feedback when they don’t take the process seriously. And the reason students don’t take the process seriously is because they don’t think we do. They complain about some teachers, assignments, and courses year after year and nothing changes. Teachers can convince students that their feedback does matter by soliciting it and then talking about it during the course. Responding to student suggestions does not obligate the teacher to do whatever students recommend. If a course activity or assignment is essential to achieving certain learning outcomes, then removing it would be irresponsible. Teachers can help students understand by explaining the educational rationale behind the decision to continue the activity or assignment, and then by exploring what could be done that might help them do better. If a teacher makes a change that students recommend, they often feel vested in making the change successful.

It’s true that students don’t always provide good, helpful feedback, but that doesn’t mean they can’t or won’t. It’s up to faculty to solicit and respond to their feedback in ways that make it a learning experience for both parties.

But there’s a big difference between watching a video and learning something from it. Videos are great for presenting visual information and emotional appeals, but not particularly effective at diving below the surface of non-visual theoretical or abstract topics or for driving critical thinking. What’s more, any video presented in class must compete for attention and memory with the five-plus hours the typical student spends outside of class watching television programs, movies, and other onscreen entertainment. (Nielsen, 2013)

To help increase the educational effectiveness of an online course video, consider applying one or more of the following active learning strategies.

1. Video as guided lesson. The goal here is to help ensure that students watch videos actively—in other words, giving it their full attention. You also want to help draw students’ attention to (and reinforce) the most important concepts being presented. Here’s how:

a. Pose a question at the beginning of each video to give students an idea before they watch of what to expect, what to look for, and what might be worth thinking about. Example:

Q. Why might prehistoric man have diverted precious time from survival-based activities to make art? Think about that as you watch the following video: The Caves of Lascaux (5:10)

b. Present videos in an outline-like structure using concise, descriptively labeled links that include running times as shown below. Doing so:

i. Puts information into context for students automatically. In the example below, students don’t have to be explicitly told that Orientalizing is one of three important styles of ancient Greek vase painting; the structured presentation of video clips implicitly conveys and reinforces this—and similar—contextual relationships.

ii. Sets expectations. Like a well-worded chapter heading, a descriptive video link such as “Middle and Near East” delivers students to the content already actively thinking about what they know (or don’t know) about the topic.

iii. Encourages video viewing (and reviewing). Nontraditional students must fit their studies around work and family, taking advantage of unexpected bits of downtime throughout the day; including video running times helps them do so.

c. Embed short graded or self-assessments either in the video itself, or at the end of each video. Including one or two multiple-choice questions or requests to post to a forum—either between scenes (using a post-production editing tool such as Camtasia or Captivate) or after the video—alerts students to the “take homes” they should be getting from the material. It also helps teachers assess, at point of contact, whether students understand the major concepts.

2. Video as springboard for in-depth discussion. This strategy encourages students to make a personal connection between video content and their own existing knowledge. It also encourages student-student collaboration, which is a critical component of any successful online course. To use video as a springboard for discussion:

a. Assign a video.

b. After viewing the video, have each student post the following to a discussion board:

i. A concept that was new to him/her.

ii. A concept that s/he found confusing (and why).

iii. A concept that, in the student’s opinion, relates either to the course text or to a previous class discussion (and how).

iv. A response to at least two classmates that attempts to define or explain the concept classmates found confusing (based on independent research if necessary).

3. Video as springboard for critical thinking. Ideally, students come away from a class not just having memorized material, but also having understood it well enough to discuss and apply it to novel scenarios. To apply this strategy:

a. Assign two or three videos.

b. Have students identify, compare, and contrast the concepts presented in each. How are the concepts similar? How are they different? Which are substantiated or refuted by the course text (or other course materials)?

c. Optionally, have students post their work to a discussion board and comment on their classmates’ comparisons.

4. Video as a way to strengthen online research skills while driving conceptual understanding. To apply this two-fold strategy:

a. Assign a video.

b. Have students locate online and present to the class a second video that (supports, defends, opposes, elaborates…) the original video. If students need scaffolding to complete this exercise, provide guidelines for searching the Web and vetting sources.

c. Use students’ “found” videos as the basis for class discussion. Ask students to comment, via discussion board, on how well the clips shared by their classmates met the selected criterion.

Reference:
The Nielsen Company, Free to Move Between Screens: The Cross-Platform Report, March 2013. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/reports/2013/the-nielsen-march-2013-cross-platform-report–free-to-move-betwe.html.

Emily A. Moore, M.Ed., is an instructional designer in the online learning office at Texas State Technical College – Harlingen Campus.

Is that all there is to it? Steven Reiss doesn’t think so, and he has done lots of research that supports his view. But first he goes after the intrinsic-extrinsic dualism, which he says fails on three counts: construct validity, measurement reliability, and experimental control. Starting with construct validity, Reiss writes, “The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is invalid … because motives cannot be divided into just two categories. … Human motives are too diverse to fall into just two categories.” (p. 152) He then explains the measurement problems and experimental control issues. The research that demonstrates an undermining effect (that extrinsic motivation diminishes intrinsic motivation) is almost entirely based on single-trial studies conducted in lab settings. “Consequently, this literature says little about real-world, long-term rewards such as grades and pay.” (p. 154) If the empirical arguments are of interest, they are more fully explained in the article.

Reiss proposes a multifaceted theory of motivation. In his research he identified 16 distinct universal reinforcements that he developed into an assessment tool called the Reiss Motivation Profile. “Everybody is motivated by the 16 universal reinforcements, but not in the same way. Individuals show reliable individual differences in how they prioritize these 16 reinforcements.” (pp. 154-155) These 16 reinforcements are listed in the article and they include the following motivations (among others): eating, the desire for food; curiosity, the desire for understanding; independence, the desire for self-reliance; social contact, the desire for peer companionship; and vengeance, the desire to confront those who offend.

To show the inadequacy of the intrinsic-extrinsic dualism, Reiss suggests giving students a list of motives like those on the profile and then asking students to rank their importance. “Doing this tends to show the extraordinary individuality of how people prioritize motives.” (p. 155) Some students rank money and status very high; others list the desire for social justice as much more motivating than money. Reiss asks whether “the information contained [on the various student lists] could possibly be captured by dualism, which only has two categories or kinds of motives. Dualism does not state what moves us; it does not show how we differ as individuals.” (p. 155)

Reiss says that researchers have moved beyond the dualistic study of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. They see motivation as multifaceted, and he challenges teachers to move forward in their thinking as well. Students in our classrooms do and don’t do things in response to a variety of motives. It’s more complicated than we tend to think, but this new understanding of motivation better explains how it works and can be harnessed in the interest of learning.

Reference: Reiss, S. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Teaching of Psychology, 39 (2), 152-156.

Reprinted from Motivation: Intrinsic, Extrinsic, or MoreThe Teaching Professor, 26.5 (2012): 3-4.

This was the case at LaGuardia Community College. “Once we started peeling back the layers, we found it was all about faculty needing more information, knowledge, confidence, and support about how to engage students. They weren’t against doing advisement, and I’m sure that’s the case in most institutions,” says Bernard Polnariev, executive associate to the dean of academic affairs at LaGuardia Community College.

More than course selection
Polnariev and his colleague Mitchell Levy, executive director of LaGuardia Community College’s Center for Counseling, Advising & Academic Support, have implemented a faculty development program—the Art of Advisement Faculty Development Workshop Series—that goes beyond the informational elements that comprise most advising preparation programs. This program, which won the NASPA 2011 Student Affairs Partnering with Academic Affairs (SAPAA) Promising Practices award, consists of three parts. In addition to the informational elements (course selection, institutional policies), this program includes conceptual (student development theory) and relational (building rapport) elements.

One of the challenges of implementing such a program is reframing the institution’s culture.

“Advisement must be seen as an institutional priority, therefore training, preparation, and support really must be built in to the institution. It can’t be a stand-alone one-hour workshop. It really has to be part of the culture. Advising is not just something you do. It’s something that you offer and continually assess, evaluate, and learn from. Rather than looking at advisement as a solitary function, we need to be aware that this is something that impacts the whole college. It will ultimately impact retention and graduation rates, which is what we’re all striving for. At the heart of what we’re talking about is tapping into the faculty’s desire to help students and making it comfortable for faculty to engage in this process,” Levy says.

Build on teaching skills
Part of getting faculty involved in advising entails relating what they do as teachers to the role of advisor. “There are a lot of parallels between teaching and advisement,” Polnariev says. “As we work with faculty, we illustrate that their roles as teachers and how they go about working with students are really extensions of developmental advising. The skills they need to be effective teachers are really quite similar to the skills needed for effective developmental advisement.”

Understanding different learning preferences, for example, is a skill that serves teaching and advising. “Being in a community college setting where there’s so much diversity, one has to be open to different approaches to reaching different students in the classroom or in advising,” Levy says.

Benefits of faculty participation
The benefits of faculty participation are twofold: institutions can increase their advising staff to accommodate a growing (and increasingly diverse) student body, and faculty offer content expertise that can be very helpful to students as they progress.

“With more and more students coming to college, we’re all doing more with less, and faculty are an untapped resource of additional [advising] staff. Beyond that, the faculty are experts in their fields. A business major really wants to be engaged with a business faculty member. We’re talking about developmental advisement, not just ‘Which course do I take?’ but ‘How do I prepare to major in that field?’ ‘How do I prepare for an internship?’ ‘How do I prepare to transfer to a bachelor’s degree in that major?’ We want the students to be engaged with those faculty who serve as connectors within their fields.

Understand the students’ perspective
An important part of preparing faculty for developmental advising is giving them the opportunity to explore their values and the values of their students. In a values-sorting activity, faculty are asked to identify their values and goals for education, and what they think the students’ primary reasons are for attending college. They then compare their thinking to what the students actually think. (To date, 2,000 students have participated in this activity.) Often, the students’ ideas about the value of a college education and the reasons for attending are quite different from those of faculty. “If there are disconnects in our values versus students’ values, what are the implications of those disconnects, and how might that be impeding our students’ success?” Levy asks.

Excerpted from Encouraging Faculty Participation in Academic Advising Academic Leader, 28.4 (2012): 3,6.

The Learning Question – If you want students to be more focused on learning, then you need to start asking them questions about their learning: “What are you learning …?” It’s a question to ask as you chat with individual students before class or see them on campus. “What have you been learning in biology this week?” I jokingly interject that “nothing” is not an acceptable response. It’s a question to ask after every class activity. “What did you learn for the test that you’ll still remember when I see you next semester?” and “What did you learn about test preparation that you need to remember?”

The Exam Review Session – Teachers don’t need to review the material; students do! So, plan a review session in which students are doing the reviewing. Have them work individually or in groups to answer the ultimate review session question: “What’s going to be on the exam?” Assign students to prepare the study guides on the reading material or task them with generating possible test questions that are then completed by others in the class. In other words, students should be working way harder than the teacher during the review session.

Before and After Class Previews and Reviews – Same point as above: teachers already know how to preview and review. It’s the students who need to practice and develop the skill. Here are a few ideas for facilitating that kind of learning: 1) Ask students to review notes with another person at the beginning or end of class and identify three important points. 2) Assign three students to tweet a summary of the day’s lesson. 3) Give students bonus points, brownie points, or a high five from the class if they offer a minute review of essential content from a class session last week and suggest one connection between that content and what was presented today.

Assignment Options – Take an assignment and redesign it so that it includes several (not too many) options¬; perhaps different topic choices or different format possibilities. Let students choose how they will complete the assignment but not without justifying their choice in terms of how it relates to them as learners. Or, let students determine the relative weight of two assignments with specified ranges. Quizzes may count 10, 15, or 20 percent of the amount of the final grade determined by quiz and exam scores. Maybe you could have participation count for a variable amount. When students make these choices, they should confront and explain the reason why. Why would you want quizzes to count more or less?

Setting the Assessment Criteria – “What makes you want to read and participate in an online discussion?” Responses to a prompt like that can be transformed into criteria that can be used to assess an online exchange (the whole exchange not just individual contributions to it). It may be that the teacher will need to add some missing components, but even using some of the student criteria changes the dynamic. Practice generating assessment criteria (say for essay answers, presentations in class, or contributions to group work) develops a new level of awareness that helps student prepare and participate in those activities.

In the August 8, 2012 post I identified five features that I believe make teaching learner-centered: It is teaching that: 1) engages students in the hard, messy work of learning; 2) includes explicit skill instruction; 3) encourages students to reflect on what and how they are learning; 4) motivates students by giving them some control over learning processes; and 5) encourages students and teachers to learn from and with each other.

These activities are first steps that move teaching and learning in these directions and are part of a longer list that appears in the recently released second edition of my Learner-Centered Teaching book (pp. 234-235) available from Jossey-Bass.

What are some strategies for developing the right balance between being friendly with students while still being their professor? They start with building respectful relationships. How the instructor asks and answers questions adds to the development of friendly yet respectful relationships. In her book Teaching Your First College Class, Carolyn Lieberg (2008) writes, “All of us feel cared about when people look at us when we speak and truly listen to our ideas or questions. Students also feel cared about if you show that you are accessible to them outside of class. … The basic message is that students want to be treated with respect.” (p. 11) Inside or outside of the classroom, our interpersonal communication should be built on respectful exchanges.

Sometimes actions that seem unimportant help to establish these respectful relationships. Professional attire is a good example. Even though professors don’t teach in academic regalia anymore, it is still appropriate to dress more like a professional and less like a student. Faculty who look like students can expect students to respond to them as if they are students. Professional language is also a must. It is another way that professors differentiate themselves from students, and in most professional contexts four-letter words are not appropriate.

When we leave the classroom, the norms change in small but significant ways. It is important to keep the right professional distance, whether meeting with students in your office or having them to your home. The age-old advice of keeping your office door open at all times when you are meeting with students is as relevant today as it always has been. If students are joining you in your home for a study session or end-of-semester gathering, make sure that you have another “adult” in the home (your spouse, a trusted friend, or another professor). It is not a good idea to have a student arrive early to help organize the event or to have one stay late to help clean up. The question of whether or not to serve alcohol depends on several factors, including the campus culture and the legal drinking age of the students. It is never a good idea to serve alcohol to undergraduates, even if they are of age, if they must drive home.

What about the distance between you and students electronically, whether it’s email or social media? Should the professor “friend” his or her students as a means of communication? Are Facebook and LinkedIn viable ways to reach students and further help them learn? How informal should emails and Twitter messages be? Rather than answer these questions, we pose them for your discussion. Creating a social media site specifically for class interaction is quite different from “friending” your students on a personal site. It is good to always remember that all electronic communications can go public at any time. Nothing is confidential.

How friendly should a professor be? Consider a parallel to the old Golden Rule. When interacting with students, ask yourself, “As a student, how would I feel if my professor made this request of me or responded to my question this way?” Those of us with children can ask the question another way: “How would I feel if my son or daughter’s college instructor did this?” The question can be asked more bluntly: “Could this interaction be defended before parents and administration?” And perhaps the toughest version of all: “If this interaction were quoted on the front page of the local paper, how would it appear?” With those questions guiding your decision making, and some old-fashioned common sense, you can have productive, engaging, and friendly relationships with your students.

Reprinted from Friendly but Not Their Friend The Teaching Professor, 26.5 (2012): 4-5.

In their framework outlining educational experiences for students, Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) identify and explain the critical elements of a Community of Inquiry that supports instruction and learning. The elements include: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. For online classes, many new online instructors tend to focus on the cognitive presence and teaching presence, and overlook the necessity of the social presence. They’ll build great online modules that help students enhance their understanding of course content but forget to attend to the critical social aspects that engage students and foster community building. While these aspects can happen naturally in face-to-face courses, they must be intentionally built into online classes.

Here are five ways you can build social presence in your online class:

1. Have your online students introduce themselves. This may sound simple but the first module of my online courses asks students to introduce themselves to their peers. I create a discussion board where students share short introductions with the group either through text or through a short multimedia production using Fotobabble, MyBrainShark or some other Web 2.0 tool. I usually try to connect the introductions to course content in some informal way to assess the students’ prior knowledge and experience with the material. More than anything, the introductions are designed to foster open communication amongst students outside of course content.
2. Introduce yourself to your students. When I ask my students to create short introductions of themselves, I offer my own introduction as an example. I also create a short orientation video where I provide an overview of the course and share a little about myself. Presented in a short video where students hear my voice, students can connect with me outside of the written text that I provide for most of the class material.
3. Create a “commons area” for off-topic discussions. In a face-to-face class, it’s easy to engage in off-topic discussions. Students walking into the classroom will argue about last night’s football game, discuss the latest movies, or talk about their favorite music. This type of engagement is extracurricular but it can help students build relationships that are advantageous inside the classroom. Without purposeful inclusion of risk-free environments for sharing, online students’ affective needs will not be met and they may not fully engage with course content or with their classmates. In my online classes, I create a discussion board labeled “Commons Area” or “Water Cooler” and offer some guidance to the purpose of the area. While I’ll often peek in to add a question or respond to a post, I generally give the students some free rein over this forum.
4. Use synchronous tools for office hours. Most course management systems offer chat rooms or synchronous online classrooms as tools for teaching and communication. I schedule online office hours where students can meet with me to discuss course content and ask questions. While not every student takes advantage of the office hours, publishing their availability communicates to students that I am committed to their success in the course.
5. Don’t be the center of every discussion. Many new online instructors try to respond to every post in a discussion board. This habit can actually limit student-to-student interaction and discussion. In a face-to-face class, few instructors would break up lively classroom discussions by evaluating every remark from students. In online classes, however, instructors will do exactly that. Instead of excessively participating in discussion boards, provide some thought-provoking questions and allow the students to discuss course content openly on their own. Offer guidance when necessary and communicate that you’re present in the discussion through carefully chosen posts. Give the students some space to interact with one another and build their understanding through collaborating with their classmates.

References:
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Dr. Oliver Dreon is the director of the Center for Academic Excellence at Millersville University. Follow him on Twitter @ollied.

Review sessions—Some faculty don’t have in-class review sessions because that means one less period for covering content. The question is whether students benefit more from being exposed to additional material or from having a chance to organize, summarize, distill, and integrate the content they must now learn for the exam. Should students do this summarizing and integrating on their own as they study? Perhaps. Will they learn to do it better if they their efforts are guided by an expert who understands how the content domain is organized? Probably.

Typically in the review session, the teacher goes over important or challenging content. Students are supposed to ask questions and they do, but generally they focus their questions on trying to ferret out what’s going to be on the exam. There are better alternatives. The teacher who already knows (and loves) the content doesn’t need to review it. Students need to review. The period should be structured so that students are doing the work, with the teacher providing guidance. They can be working individually or in groups, but they should be solving problems, answering old exam questions, writing possible test questions, or extrapolating key concepts from assigned readings. Groups could be given different topics, concepts, problem sets, etc., and tasked with preparing review materials/study guides for the rest of the class. They could bring these materials to the review session and present and/or distribute them.

In addition to revisiting the content and seeing more clearly how individual topics relate, review sessions can also be used to help students figure out what’s going to be on the test. That’s a question they shouldn’t need to be asking the teacher. The answer is a function of being about to determine what’s most important and how the content is going to be applied. And that’s a skill students need to develop.

Exams—Regular exams don’t promote deep learning because the questions don’t challenge students to think. Many students memorize well; they forget with the same efficiency.

Questions that challenge students to think are much harder to write, and for that reason you don’t find a lot of them in question banks that accompany textbooks. The problem is not with the multiple-choice format per se. SAT and ACT questions are multiple-choice and many of those are quite challenging. If exams are returned to students, then new questions must be generated for each new class. It is smarter to let students have access to their exams (when they’re returned and subsequently in the prof’s office), but not to let them keep their exams. That way, questions can be recycled and across the years a collection can be developed, revised, and reused.

Exam circumstances rarely change. Students work alone without access to resources and under surveillance so that they don’t cheat or they cheat less. This newsletter does, with some regularity, highlight different kinds of exam experiences—like having the students take the exam individually and then take the same exam with a group. Their grade may be some combination of their individual score and the group score. Or let students prepare a crib sheet (of a specified size) that they are allowed to use during the exam. Preparing a crib sheet forces students to make decisions about what’s going to be on the exam.

Debrief sessions—Typically teachers go over the most missed questions, but that approach may not be the best way to maximize the learning potential that is still present after the exam. Teachers don’t need to correct the answers—students do. Whether in groups or individually students can be given the chance to find the correct answers and fix their mistakes. Maybe that happens during the debrief session, or maybe students do the work at home, completing it before the next class session. Maybe their grade isn’t recorded until they’ve corrected their errors, and maybe it’s a few points higher if they get all their mistakes taken care of.

Debrief sessions can also be designed so that they address some of the decisions students have made about preparing for the exam. Class attendance makes a difference. You can say that, but you should show some evidence. Take the five highest exam scores and list the number of times that group of students missed class. Take the five lowest scores and list the number of class sessions that group missed. Let the facts speak for themselves. Many students aren’t taking enough notes in class. You can say that, or you can demonstrate it. Pick a question that many people missed. Identify the date that material was covered and have everybody look at their notes. Do they have what they need there to answer the question? Were they absent and got notes from somebody else? Do they understand those notes? Quick discussions of topics like these can be concluded with students writing themselves a memo addressing “things I learned taking this exam that I want to remember for the next one.” Collect those memos and return them shortly before the next exam.

Exams motivate students and learning results. They review their notes, read the text, and talk with each other. The question is how much and how well do they learn? How seriously they study determines part of the answer to that question. But it is also answered by the design of the exam experience including what happens before, during, and after the event. Exam experiences can be designed so that more of their potential to promote learning is realized.

Reprinted from The Teaching Professor, 26.4 (2012): 3.

The suggestions that follow will help you create effective PowerPoint presentations.

Know your audience. You must be fully aware of what the audience is expecting from your PowerPoint; also, be aware of your audience’s education level—the complexity of your text and visuals must match what the audience will understand.

Create an outline to help you develop your PowerPoint presentation. The outline gives your PowerPoint the structure it requires, allows you to develop a balanced array of visuals, and gives you an initial look at the time required for students to view your PowerPoint slides. Your PowerPoint should not be so long that the audience loses interest, and if you have a set amount of time, you need be sure your PowerPoint fits within that time.

Become familiar with all features of PowerPoint. PowerPoint is a powerful presentation tool with many features that allow you to jazz up your slides, import other slides, add audio and video, change background styles and colors, etc. Spend whatever time it takes to fully familiarize yourself with all that PowerPoint offers; you’ll be able to develop a more professional and engaging PowerPoint presentation—something your audience will appreciate.

Do not become dazzled with the “whistles and bells” of PowerPoint. It is easy to be seduced by the over-the-top features of PowerPoint, such as transition and animation. Yet too much use of these will distract from the primary purpose of your PowerPoint: getting important information to your audience in an easy-to-understand manner. Certainly, some of these fun tools can help make your PowerPoint more engaging and can spotlight especially salient items in your presentation. But be careful that your PowerPoint does not turn into a Disney cartoon, resulting in a presentation that is less than effective. Overall, keep the design simple and basic.

Limit each slide to a few bulleted points. Your audience needs to quickly understand what you are presenting. Many folks load up each slide with far too much text. This defeats the purpose of a PowerPoint presentation. Keep each slide to no more than four bulleted items, with each item a maximum of one line in length. If you need to add more information, you have two options: (1) have some notes (use your outline for this) and simply add the material—by voice—when appropriate; and (2) at the bottom of each blank slide there is a section called “Speaker’s Notes”—you can add in here what you want to say to your audience beyond what they see on a slide (only you can see the Speaker’s Notes).

Use graphics to highlight your information, not overtake it. A visual on a slide won’t take the place of your text—and it shouldn’t—but it can highlight a point you are making and help to engage the audience. Have a nice balance of visuals and colors, and spend some time searching for the spot-on, already-created visual. (There are many sources: online, your own, items you’ve scanned, etc.) You also can create your own graphs and/or charts and use screenshots of items.

Your voice can truly bring a PowerPoint to life. In an online PowerPoint presentation, the audience hears more of your voice than if you were in a room with them. Thus, each clearing of your throat, sip of water, “um” and “uh,” and licking of the lips can often be heard. Speak slowly; be sure to vary your tone (no one enjoys a monotone!); stay enthusiastic and excited about the topic; and use your voice to bring audience attention to important points, closing of a subject, introduction of the next slide, etc.

Always do a slideshow run of your PowerPoint to view it as an audience member. You’ll find one of the drop-down menu items on the top tool bar of PowerPoint is called “Slideshow.” Here you have various choices that allow you to view your PowerPoint as a slideshow. Be sure to do this so you will see what your audience will see and you can quickly pick up on items that might need to be corrected, such as typos, font size, size of or lack of visuals, too much text on a slide, length of time for the PowerPoint, etc. And for each slide, make a note (e.g., #14—correct spacing; #15—OK; etc.). Once completed, make the changes and then run the slideshow again.

Check spelling, grammar, spacing, font size and style, etc. It is crucial that all components of writing be perfect. Be sure that the font size and style are easy to read. Consider line spacing and visual placement.

Always do a trial run with at least one other person. While we will see items that need to be corrected or tweaked, rarely do we see them all. Have one person or more look at it to get their input. You’ll be surprised at how many helpful suggestions you will receive about things you had not considered or just didn’t see. Your audience will benefit from this extra input.

Errol Craig Sull has been teaching online courses for 17 years and has a national reputation in the subject, and in writing about and conducting workshops on distance learning. He is currently putting the finishing touches on two online-teaching books.

Excerpted from Teaching Online With Errol: An Online Educator Must: Creating the Perfect PowerPoint!Online Classroom, 12.4 (2012): 6.

Promote study groups – First, include a list of reasons why students should join study groups in the syllabus or on the course website. Maybe there’s a short podcast available in which you talk about the usefulness of study groups. Better yet, if you’ve got some students who studied together in a previous course, ask them to make some comments about their experiences. Second, talk regularly in class about study groups. You can repeat all the benefits, suggest activities that involve good group study strategies, or propose some things they could study together (like problems they could solve, questions they could discuss). You also can solicit feedback from study groups in class or mention content you discussed with a group during office hours.

Make study groups an option – Encourage students to organize their own groups, but offer to help with the process. Nudge them with reminders, such as “Send me an email if you’re interested in being part of a study group.” Have study groups “register” their members, and then report on meeting times and activities. Suggest study activities for the group (ideas like those offered in the next item). Invite the group to meet with you during office hours or to send questions electronically. Offer registered study groups that report regular meetings a bonus point incentive depending on the average of their individual test grades. Let all students know that joining a study group is an option throughout the course.

Demonstrate the value of a study group – Too often when students study together, it’s pretty much a waste of time. If they’re reviewing for a test, they talk about how it can’t possibly be that hard and thereby relieve themselves of the need to study. Or they “go over” their notes, reading what they’ve written but never with any discussion. Group studying is too often accompanied by eating, texting, and regular side conversations.

In order for students to get the most value from their study sessions, you’ll need to help them come up with a different set of strategies. You can do so by holding a review session and asking students to form potential study groups (it’s up to them if they want to meet as a group more often). Give the groups tasks like these: 1) For three minutes everybody reviews their notes and lists five things they think will be on the test and then for five minutes they share lists and create a group list of the items most often mentioned. During the exam debrief, students revisit their list of things they expected to see on the exam. Were those things on the exam? 2) Everybody takes three minutes and writes a question about some content they don’t understand or wish they understood better. The group devotes a specified amount of time to each question, looking for relevant content in their notes and the text. 3) The group has 20 minutes to make one crib sheet that everyone in that group can use during the exam.

Offer proof that study groups improve performance – Compare the scores, points, or grades of those working in study groups with those who aren’t. These are data which should be collected across several sections of the course.

Define study groups broadly – Students tend to think of study groups for exam preparation, but that isn’t the only kind of student collaboration that promotes learning. If there are regularly assigned readings for the course, students can get together to discuss the reading. Again you might let them do this first in class with a good set of prompts so they see how dialogue can enrich and deepen their understanding of the assigned material. Readings are easily discussed in virtual environments, which means the group doesn’t have to find a time when everybody can meet. If various writing assignments are required in the course, students can form peer editing groups. Rubrics, checklists, and prompts can help them get beyond superficial feedback (“you might need a comma here”) to the kind of helpful critique that improves the writing.

Readers, what strategies have you used to encourage effective study groups?

Be fully engaged and present
How often do we look up during office hours to see a troubled-looking student standing at the door? He needs help, but we are working against the clock to prepare the next lecture or reviewing materials to be discussed in an upcoming committee meeting. As I write, I’m seeing numerous student faces—some looking hurt, others angry, some seeming as though they just might implode. Our students experience strong emotions. These faces remind me that at times I have been abrupt, and at other times, I have been inviting.

Being fully engaged and present suggests that I stop what I am doing and give students my full attention. Glancing up from the computer while I continue to type or looking at the clock does not suggest that I am present. Being fully present means just that. For the next five or 30 minutes, I have nothing more pressing than the time I give to my student. Certainly, I may state that I have 10 minutes before my next appointment, but for those 10 minutes, my student’s voice is the only one sending messages to my brain. I sit with him, and I keep my thoughts on what he is saying. We may schedule another time for a deeper discussion, but the time I spend with him belongs to him alone.

Use silence to clear space
Let’s face it, we are teachers, and we like to talk. That’s how we make our living. We walk into our classes and begin class by opening our mouths. Our students benefit greatly from the knowledge we impart; it helps prepare them for their careers. However, important as our wisdom is, when students come to us with their misunderstandings, problems with assignment deadlines, or difficulties balancing family, work, and school, what they need from us, in addition to our presence, is our silence. I am not referring to the crossed-arms, closed-body postures that convey contempt and disdain. This silence is a quiet indicating that as teacher or advisor, I want to understand and will listen without interruption or assumption. I want my student to be heard without my butting in. The gift of silence is offered, and an invitation is given for the student’s voice to enter into the space created. By being quiet, I also become a thinking partner with my student as she begins to communicate her pressing concerns.

Refrain from giving advice
Being fully present and using silence to create space are both challenging; however, perhaps the most difficult behavior for teachers is allowing students to construct and choose their own solutions. We admonish our students to study, to read, to prepare, to work hard, to think critically, to be creative, and more. We are, after all, recognized experts. We know what it takes to learn and to succeed in life. As difficult as it may seem, we must let go of this proclivity to tell our students what they need to do. Most of the time, they probably know what they should do, but they need to be heard, not to hear us. When we engage with our presence and our silence, we can ask questions that invite students to think about the choices they make and the attention they pay to competing demands. By refraining from giving advice, we are suggesting that our students are fully capable of reaching conclusions that will lead them to their desired outcomes. And we know the advice they give themselves is probably more persuasive than the advice we offer.

Final thoughts
When we make ourselves fully present and attentive, use silence to create space, and encourage students to construct their own solutions, we are giving a gift that costs nothing but has great value. It is the gift that lets students know how much we care.

Dr. Patricia Kohler-Evans is an associate professor at University of Central Arkansas. Dr. Candice Dowd Barnes is an assistant professor at the University of Central Arkansas.

Reprinted from The Teaching Professor, 26.4 (2012): 5.

The basic assignment, also called the 3-2-1, has three requirements:

• Requirement 1: Students read what is assigned, then choose and describe the three most important aspects (concepts, issues, factual information, etc.) of the reading, justifying their choices.
• Requirement 2: Students identify two aspects of the reading they don’t understand, and briefly discuss why these confusing aspects interfered with their general understanding of the reading. Although students may identify more than two confusing elements, they must put them in priority order and limit themselves to the two most important ones. Students seldom understand everything in a reading and, knowing that they must complete this part of the assignment, will reflect on their level of understanding of all the reading’s content.
• Requirement 3: Students pose a question to the text’s author, the answer to which should go beyond the reading content and does not reflect the areas of confusion in requirement 2. The question reflects students’ curiosity about the topic and reveals what they think are the implications or applications of the reading content. This last requirement lets you know how well students understood the article’s intention.

The completed assignment is submitted on an electronic template before the class when the reading will be discussed. I grade and return the assignment electronically before the class, as well, although this is not critical if you find yourself short on time to complete the grading. With larger numbers of students, I review the assignments before class to identify the areas of difficulty and misunderstanding, and grade later. The grading process is minimal; three marks for part 1, two for part 2 and one for part 3, all based on a simple rubric, also provided to students.

Using my graduate course on teaching and learning as a ‘test bed’ for this assignment, I was amazed at the impact of this seemingly ‘little’ assignment on students’ engagement and empowerment. Their responses were thoughtful and reflected full engagement in the reading. In class, discussions were sophisticated and more in-depth than formerly. Students made meaningful comments and debated the most significant aspects of the readings, all with substantially less input from me. The benefit to teaching was that I could clearly identify areas where students were experiencing difficulty and those that they handled well. Requirement 3 gave me a sense of the connections they were making. I was able to be much more specific in the ways I helped students to fully understand the concepts. This process is similar to “just-in-time-teaching” (Novak, 2011).

After using the 3-2-1 several times in this course, we discussed its use as a tool for learning. Students were unanimous in their agreement that the three questions made them think deeply and critically about the readings. They reported greater confidence in their capability to discuss the reading and to achieve this they had to read the article for general understanding and then again to enable them to complete the report.

Following on that experience, I have used this assignment in other graduate and undergraduate courses. I have discovered I need to be judicious, particularly in first and second year courses, about the number of 3-2-1 reports assigned, as they are challenging. A 3-2-1 should only be assigned when the reading is difficult; otherwise, it may be perceived as ‘busy work’.

Since the first graduate class in which I used the 3-2-1, I have analyzed the mid- and end-of-term course feedback to the question, “What aspects of the course were of greatest benefit to your learning?” The purposeful, 3-2-1 reading report is the most frequently cited in all courses (mid-term =72% of all students, n= 549, end of term = 65% of students, n= 513). A typical response is revealing: I hate to admit it because they required quite a bit of effort, but the 3-2-1 reports were really helpful. Students appreciate their effectiveness, but don’t particularly enjoy doing them; therefore, it is important to assign a grade to the report that is consistent with the effort required and to ensure that the reading discussion draws on the content of their reports.

I encourage you to try this powerful but simple assignment as it has both an intellectual benefit for student learning and a practical benefit to the instructor. At the very least, it means never having to say I hope you are ready to discuss the reading for today.

An extended version of this assignment is available here »

References
Novak, G. M. (2011), Just-in-time teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011: 63–73. doi: 10.1002/tl.469.

Roberts, J. C. and. Roberts, K. S. (2008). Deep reading, cost/benefit, and the construction of meaning: Enhancing reading comprehension and deep learning in sociology Courses.” Teaching Sociology 36(2):125-4.

Author’s note: Until recently, I had been referencing the Purposeful Reading Assignment as one that John Bean of Seattle University had suggested on a visit to our campus. In a conversation with him, in preparation for this article, he told me that it didn’t come from him. Despite significant effort, I can’t find the original source of this assignment. If you can help me to find the originator of this writing assignment, I would be grateful so that I can acknowledge her or him.

Dr. Geraldine Van Gyn is a professor in the School of Exercise Science at the University of Victoria.

Understand critical thinking as a multidimensional construct – In their discussion of critical thinking in psychology, these authors propose that critical thinking includes skills, dispositions, and metacognition. Critical thinking skills in psychology include argument analysis and evaluation, methodological reason, statistical reasoning, causal reasoning, and skills for focusing and clarifying questions. Dispositions refer to “the willingness to engage in effortful thinking and the tendency to be open- and fair-minded in evaluating claims, yet remain skeptical of unsubstantiated claims.” (p. 6) Metacognition means being aware of one’s thinking and in control of it.

A recent article in The Teaching Professor highlighted the variation in definitions for critical thinking. These authors point out that critical thinking is either thought of generically or as being discipline-specific. They cite research that critical thinking is probably a combination of both. As a multidimensional construct, it contains some general reasoning skills and some skills that are specific to the discipline. The point is that if you want to assess learning outcomes associated with critical thinking, you cannot do that well without understanding how critical thinking is defined in your discipline.

Select important goals, objectives, and outcomes for assessment – What critical thinking skills and knowledge should students be able to demonstrate as a result of being in a course or program? Some faculty have learning goals so general that they are all but impossible to assess. They need further specification. If the assessment is to be scientific, then the goals, objectives, and outcomes must translated into specific hypotheses—ones that can be tested.

Align assessment with instructional focus – “Measures for assessing the impact of instruction must be sensitive to the changes instruction is intended to produce.” (p. 7) If the measures are sensitive, then classroom assessment can be used to look at the techniques being used, compare their effectiveness with other techniques, and conclude which are better.

Take an authentic task-oriented approach to assessment – Taking an authentic task-oriented approach means using a performance to assess how well students are completing a task. In psychology, tasks requiring critical thinking include evaluating the quality of information from the Internet, analyzing and evaluating research literature, using psychological theory to analyze and evaluate behavior, and writing research and case reports, among others. Many of those tasks can be used to evaluate critical thinking in a variety of fields.

Use the best and most appropriate measures – Because critical thinking has multiple dimensions, multiple measures should be used to assess it. The authors point out that standardized tests of critical thinking (the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test are the two examples referenced in this discussion) are “probably better measures of general CT skill.” (p. 9) In many cases, no standardized tests or measures assess the specific type of critical thinking or aspect of critical thinking being developed in a particular course. In situations like this, new instruments may need to be developed.

Conduct assessments that are sensitive to changes over time – “Simply testing seniors once in their capstone courses is not sufficient to infer changes over time because the levels of skill and knowledge of students entering the program are unknown.” (p. 9)

Assess frequently, embedding assessment and feedback into instruction – Students can be assessed too much, especially if the same instrument is being used. They become sensitized to those instruments. The authors recommend a formative approach that embeds assessment in instruction. In this case, the assessment provides the instructor useful feedback and helps students focus on their development of critical thinking. It offers them feedback that can be used to improve their critical thinking skills.

Interpret assessment results cautiously and apply the results appropriately – The quality of the data collected must be considered before decisions to change a course or a program are made. Not considering the quality of the data and not carefully interpreting the results can result in changes that do not improve learning outcomes.

Reference: Bensley, D. A. and Murtagh, M. P. (2012). Guidelines for a scientific approach to critical thinking assessment. Teaching of Psychology, 39 (1), 5-16.

Reprinted from Assessing Critical Thinking Skills, The Teaching Professor, 26.3 (2012): 4.

“We approach it from four conceptual areas, which are all inextricably linked— content, teaching methods, who we are as instructors, and who the students are,” says Stanley, vice president and associate provost for diversity and professor of higher education administration at Texas A&M University. “A lot of faculty members, particularly those who identify as white, don’t see how identity connects with their disciplines and how they teach and what they teach.

“For example, a lot of faculty in the sciences and engineering probably think that their content doesn’t lend itself very well to talking about these issues, but it does. In the real world, engineers rarely solve problems alone. They work with others to solve problems. To me, working with others is a diversity issue.”

Ouellett, associate director of the Center for Teaching & Faculty Development at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, adds that using multicultural course design can improve students’ critical thinking skills. “Some of the most recent research on groupthink says that a minority view is often tremendously helpful. Even if the minority view doesn’t prevail, it makes the people who hold the majority perspective think more deeply and harder about the view that they hold.”

Stanley and Ouellett contend that each academic program needs include multicultural learning as an integral learning goal. “One of the first places to start is to ask, What do I want my students to know as a result of taking this course in order to live, grow, and function in an increasingly diverse, global, and complex world?” Stanley says.

“These goals should not be tacked on at the end or be separate, stand-alone goals. They should link directly to the discipline and to your institution’s goals for the undergraduate experience,” Ouellett says.

Stanley adds: “I think we’d be hardpressed to find any institution that would say that it didn’t have as learning outcome goals for their graduates social and global competence, being able to think critically, being able to problem solve, and being able to look at issues from a multitude of perspectives. All these learning outcome goals are linked to diversity.”

Reprinted from Academic Leader, 28.4 (2012): 7.

We know in our heart of hearts this assignment (it could also be a classroom activity, a collection of readings, or almost any aspect of instruction) doesn’t work. Maybe we’re telling ourselves it’s not our fault. Students can’t write. They didn’t learn how to write in their composition courses. Other teachers aren’t making them write enough. They don’t want to learn to write. They hate to write.

To be sure, students aren’t blameless. Often they don’t expend much effort on written assignments. But blaming students shouldn’t become the default mode that keeps directing us away from those aspects of instruction that aren’t working.

Often teachers avoid facing what doesn’t work with one of my least favorite sayings, “It is what it is.” In other words, nothing in the world can be done about the problem beyond passively accepting it. Given the kind of students we teach or given what we’ve come to believe about ourselves as teachers, we muddle along and hope for the best. We shouldn’t be asked to face what can’t be fixed — or so it seems some have convinced themselves.

But we can face what isn’t working and I’d like to suggest how. First, there’s got to be a willingness to find out why it isn’t working and that question needs to be approached with an open mind. This means not looking for the reason while already suspecting you know what it is. It also means being willing to pursue the answer wherever it leads, even if that ends up being your front porch. Finding out why some aspect of instruction isn’t working is easier when others are involved. You may want to solicit feedback from students. You may benefit from input provided by colleagues—those who can offer wise pedagogical counsel. Finally, this task must be approached with a firm belief that the vast majority of things that aren’t working in our courses can be fixed. The “vast majority” doesn’t mean all and “fixed” means made better (generally significantly better), but not perfect.

Here’s a great example illustrating how this can work and why it helps to involve others. In the paper referenced below, Paul Van Auken, an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, starts out admitting to being disappointed with the quality of student work done in a semester long research project he assigned in an introductory sociology course. Students weren’t very engaged in the project and couldn’t seem to write a final paper that synthesized their learning in the course. He made one change that improved student engagement but not the quality of their papers. He decided to find out why—why weren’t students able to pull it all together in their final paper?

Several months after the course was over he asked a colleague to convene a focus group of students who received low C’s to low B’s in the course. His colleague facilitated and recorded a 90-minute discussion during which these students talked about their learning and experiences in the course. Much to Van Auken’s surprise, the recording revealed that students had way more understanding of the issues and concepts of the course than they conveyed in their papers and this was two months after the course had ended. A colleague wondered if maybe his assignment didn’t allow students to demonstrate their knowledge. Could he try giving students more options for sharing what they’d learned? He could and he did. Students still had to write a final paper but they also had to create a nonpaper artifact that demonstrated their learning. The results? A teacher satisfied and excited about student learning in the course.

What isn’t working must be faced and can be fixed!

Reference: Van Auken, P. (2013). Maybe it’s both of us: Engagement and learning. Teaching Sociology, 4 (2), 207-215. [There’s more about this excellent article in the May issue of the Teaching Professor newsletter.]

They are critical of much of the evidence being used to support both positive and negative characteristics associated with Millennial learners. “Over the last decade, as the literature on the Millennial student has proliferated, it has proven that opinions beget opinions. A scrutiny of the references of a majority of publications and presentations indicates that the ideas being espoused are fundamentally opinions based on observation and perception as well as on student personal satisfaction and preference surveys rather than on evidence-based research methodologies.” (pp. 215-216) They point out that many of the surveys documenting a set of Millennial student characteristics have been done at one or two institutions with populations not always representative of the larger student population. The Millennial cohort includes students from various races, religions, ethnicities, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

Among the Millennial student characteristics challenged by these authors is their need for the digital delivery of content. The authors cite multiple studies documenting “that a spectrum for both the desire and ability to use digital learning tools exists.” (p. 216) Based on their review of this literature, they conclude, “More careful evaluation of the purpose of technology in learning with regard to actual student needs, desires, and professional applications should be undertaken before additional time, money and resources are invested in more extensive technologies.” (p. 216)

Millennial students are thought to be multitaskers. They may be, but only a small percentage perform multiple tasks with no loss in efficiency. One study cited identifies a population of “supertaskers” who were able to multitask, but they were only a bit more than 2 percent of the population studied. The other 97 percent were less efficient at one or both of the tasks they attempted to perform simultaneously.

Some characteristics associated with Millennial learners are verified by empirical research. Critical thinking skills are a good example. “Millennials have grown up with astonishing exposure to unvetted Internet resources exemplified by Wikipedia and YouTube. The predilection for Millennial students is to make big gains quickly and with minimal effort, which has conditioned them to select the first or most easily available information source.” (p. 218) That has eroded their critical thinking skills. More worrisome is the fact that students don’t appear to be developing high levels of thinking skills in college. These authors reference a 2006 survey of 400 employers nationwide. Only 24 percent of that group felt that college students had “excellent” preparation for the workplace. Sixty-five percent said their preparation was adequate. Specifically on critical thinking and problem-solving skills, only 28 percent of the employers felt students had “excellent” preparation, and 63 percent said preparation on those skills was “adequate.”

The admonition to respond thoughtfully and critically to sweeping generalizations made about any generational cohort of students is appropriate. Generalizations about Millennial students can become stereotypes that reinforce erroneous assumptions about individuals and groups of them in courses. As these authors note, “Educators should encourage curricular change that will positively impact the learning process in a way that will be meaningful not just for a single generation but will have fundamental application for a broad spectrum of learners.” (p. 223)

Reference: DiLullo, C., McGee, P., and Kriebel, R. M. (2011). Demystifying the millennial student: A reassessment in measures of character and engagement in professional education. Anatomical Sciences Education, (July/August), 214-226.

Reprinted from Millennial Students: They Aren’t All the Same, The Teaching Professor, 26.3(2012): 8.

Higher education leaders can foster an online professional learning community to promote faculty engagement and teaching excellence in the following ways:

• Establish a faculty development team. An established group of experienced practitioners can serve as a point of contact for anything from classroom management strategies to dealing with difficult students. Having a core team of people to act as mentors and host professional development workshops can help make an online university seem less overwhelming and more like a community.
• Hold regular faculty meetings. Involving all faculty, whether full-time or adjunct, in regularly scheduled meetings is a great way to bring faculty up to speed on policies, procedures, and organizational changes, while simultaneously creating an environment where faculty can get to know one another, share experiences, discuss best practices, and address shared and individual challenges.
• Partner new faculty with experienced faculty. This mentoring partnership allows new faculty to become better acquainted with faculty expectations, gain insight into online classroom management strategies, and form a relationship with a more experienced colleague.
• Make peer review an annual event. The mentor-mentee relationship does not have to end after just one class. Annual peer review allows faculty to share ideas with one another, pass along best practices, ask questions about policy, and share concerns. It is also a great opportunity to remind faculty of any new expectations they should be adhering to as they work with their students. These connections between faculty and peer reviewers extend beyond the peer review period and many times result in long-lasting relationships.
• Be proactive. Reach out to colleagues and offer assistance before they need it. Frequent and ongoing communications to faculty regarding policies, initiatives, and frequently asked questions can help everyone feel connected to the institution while also ensuring information is disseminated in such a way that results in increased performance.
• Give faculty the opportunity to be students. Professional development workshops that are offered in the online environment allow faculty to remember what it is like to be a student. In addition to the learning that takes place, these opportunities create a community wherein faculty can make connections to others, establish a network of relationships, and engage with peers in an online environment. Many times these relationships extend beyond the online environment.

Establishing an online professional learning community allows all online faculty, whether adjunct or full-time, to connect and collaborate with one another. The creation of a faculty development team, at the heart of this professional learning community, allows online universities an effective way to orchestrate faculty development efforts. Leaders in higher education should strive to foster a sense of community among all faculty members. This professional learning community will build faculty retention, ensure standardized processes and policies are enforced across the institution, and promote excellence in teaching leading to student success.

References:
Doe, S., Barnes, N., Bowen, D., Gilkey, D., Smoak, G., Ryan, S., & … Palmquist, M. (2011). Discourse of the firetenders: Considering contingent faculty through the lens of activity theory. College English, 73(4), 428-449.

Dolan, V. (2011). The isolation of online adjunct faculty and its impact on their performance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 62-77.

DuFour, R. (2004, May). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.

Anne O’Bryan is an online adjunct instructor at Colorado State University-Global Campus. Todd Kane is the Faculty Training Manager and teaches business at Colorado State University Global Campus. Melanie Shaw serves as an adjunct faculty member at several universities, including Colorado State University Global Campus.

Interested in a better alternative, I initiated “the final hour,” an open office hour for any student interested in conversing about his/her graded portfolio. The procedure is straightforward. As with my previous practice, students have until Monday noon during final examination week to submit their portfolios. I’ve seen the original and revised pieces in the portfolios throughout the semester and during a “trial run” conference where I give them a ballpark grade of where the portfolio is presently situated. This enables me to read the final product quickly, usually finishing by Tuesday evening, after which I send out an e-mail with a grade report. In the e-mail header, I announce first: “Questions? Discussion? Complaints? FINAL OPEN OFFICE HOURS, Wednesday 10-12.” The e-mail note contains all the details and the final grade, although I typically don’t submit final grades to the registrar until after that conference time; I’m open to students’ input.

Final conference attendance varies, and so do the reasons why students decide to drop by. Some want to chat, just like they do with me before class starts. Some others want to see what I liked, delighted that their final grade is higher than they expected. Still others solicit empathy; I listen to them reason through their disappointment, which helps me to understand the decisions they made—or did not make—in revision. They tell me this time is comforting to them too. One student just wanted to tell me “how hard it was to even earn a D.” I find there are learning opportunities during this last conference as students and I make our way through their portfolios and I share my reactions to them.

The final conference also helps me. It makes me a more careful final grader because, whether a student attends the final office hour or not, I may have to face him or her and defend my decision. That influence is not debilitating; rather, it is mightily persuasive in keeping me centered on making my evaluation “honest.” As Peter Elbow notes in his book Everyone Can Write (p. 357), the high-stakes response is a “critical” one that “is more likely to misfire or do harm because of how it is received—even if it is sound…” The final office hour gives me an opportunity to listen and to see how that graded message is received—a rare opportunity to hear a student’s side after the final portfolio is graded. The student controls the final hour with questions and complaints, all of which I respond to. I discover, however, that I do far more listening than talking.

The final hour also provides a space for quick resolution. Without it, grade debate can linger on. One semester I had a student and his father debating whether to appeal the final portfolio grade, which for the student meant the final course grade; the e-mail discussions went back and forth between the freshman dean and the student’s parent, with me as the bystander, supplying information and commentary along the way only to the dean. It was a bizarre way to look at my own grading, defending it in the role of a third party. Since implementing the final hour, I’ve avoided such scenarios.

Although I’m responsible for the academic integrity of the course, I also understand that I need to keep communication open, even after students have finished the course. Therefore, I’m not averse to changing a grade as a result of the final conference. Yet, I never have and no student has asked me to do so. Instead, that final hour provides something different: an exchange and a shared understanding that can come only after a final piece of work is discussed. The worst that has ever come out of the final hour is to have students agree to disagree, parting without acrimony. The stack of unclaimed portfolios outside my office is significantly smaller now. That reason alone justifies the final hour opportunity.

Dr. Gary R. Hafer is an associate professor of English at Lycoming College.

Reprinted from The Teaching Professor, 26.3(2012): 1,3.

As I note in The Teaching Professor, this article is a great resource. It contains references to other studies documenting the use of texting and cell phones in college classes, and it features an excellent discussion of the physiological reasons why the human brain is not good at multitasking, despite the fact 47% of the students in this survey believe they can text and follow a lecture at the same time.

However, the real value of this research is that the findings and the authors raise tough questions about texting. Does it make sense to ban texting if students ignore the ban and teachers back away from enforcing it? Can a ban be enforced? How about in a large course, can it be enforced then? Should it be enforced? The researchers note that at one time most faculty objected when students brought food and drink into class and now that’s accepted in many classrooms. What are the costs of enforcing a “no texting” policy? Public altercations with students that erode the climate for learning in the classroom? But texting itself erodes the learning atmosphere of classroom, doesn’t it?

What about taking the “if-you-can’t-beat-them-join-them” approach? The researchers cite a number of references in which faculty describe ways and means of using texting to enhance the learning experience. I worry that texting for legitimate reasons serves to validate its use for any reason.

Does texting show a lack of respect? Perhaps, but are students doing it because they want to disrespect the teacher? Or are they texting simply because they do it everywhere else and don’t see the classroom as being any different. I regularly see faculty texting during my workshops. Am I being disrespected?

Here’s a student comment (cited in the article) that raises the toughest question of all: “For me, I only text when I am bored, so if the teacher sees that maybe they can change their teaching style.” (p. 36) The researchers write, “Given the research on multitasking and brain function, the real question is not whether texting in class lowers academic performance, but why does a class not produce enough cognitive load that texting would disrupt it?” (p. 36) In other words, why isn’t the content in our courses interesting and challenging enough that students realize if they text, they will miss something important?

No, I’m not naïve—too old for that. I know that a divine visitation could be occurring in class and some students would still be texting. Moreover, not everything we teach, not even the stuff that that students really need to know, titillates with excitement. Sometimes we have to pay attention when it’s boring. And most of the time our attention cannot be divided for learning to occur. Somehow students must confront the fact that they can’t be texting, listening to the teacher, and taking good notes. They’re going to do one well and the others poorly, just like the rest of us when we try to multitask. Late last year I tried to listen to a webinar on Medicare while cleaning my desk and writing notes for a blog post. I later had to spend hours trying to rectify the mistakes I made when I signed up for Medicare.

The questions about texting are tough because they don’t have easy answers. I don’t think there’s one simple policy that solves the problem and constructively resolves the issues. But I don’t think that excuses us from confronting the questions.

Reference: Clayson, D. E. and Haley, D. A. (2013). An introduction to multitasking and texting: Prevalence and impact on grades and GPA in marketing. Journal of Marketing Education, 35 (1), 26-40.

Research has shown that instant feedback as well as peer-to-peer engagement helps improve student comprehension. Learning Catalytics allows faculty to obtain real-time responses to open-ended or critical thinking questions, determine which areas require further explanation, and then automatically group students for further discussion and problem solving. The system supports numerical, algebraic, textual, and graphical responses. The comprehensive and advanced analytics also help faculty better understand student performance in real time while lecturing.

“A wide body of research has long supported peer instruction, student engagement, and active learning in the classroom,” said Paul Corey, Pearson Higher Education president of Science, Business, and Technology. “What attracted us to Learning Catalytics is its unique ability to make these proven learning techniques more scalable in and outside the classroom, to enrich them with more actionable data and innovative analytics, and, ultimately, to make them even more effective. The use of Learning Catalytics in the classroom also enables instructors to be more effective. Faculty benefit greatly from the graphical dashboard in the classroom and more detailed results afterwards; and equipped with these insights, they can dive more deeply into areas of common misconceptions or make adjustments in real-time.”

By actively engaging students with questions and receiving their immediate responses, faculty can see a graphical representation of the current state of learning in their classes. Faculty can then adjust their teaching method, in real-time, and provide more in-depth instruction on areas of common misunderstanding. Learning Catalytics also empowers faculty to author questions directly, or further develop questions written by other faculty whose questions they can rate, comment, and improve upon.

Learning Catalytics was co-founded by Eric Mazur, a thought leader in the flipped classroom movement and an esteemed Pearson author, Brian Lukoff, an education researcher and software engineer, and Gary King, a noted social scientist and statistician.

“Pearson’s global reach and their focus on truly understanding what leads to better results in learning is in perfect alignment with our goals for Learning Catalytics”, said Eric Mazur, Balkanski Professor of Physics and Applied Physics at Harvard University and Area Dean of Applied Physics. “We want faculty and students worldwide to benefit from our system.”

To learn more about Learning Catalytics, visit https://learningcatalytics.com/.

To learn more about Pearson, visit: http://www.pearsoned.com.

About Pearson
Pearson, the world’s leading learning company, has global reach and market-leading businesses in education, business information and consumer publishing (NYSE: PSO). Pearson helps people and institutions break through to improved outcomes by providing innovative print and digital education materials, including personalized learning products such as MyLab and Mastering, CourseConnect customizable online courseware, education services including custom publishing, content-independent platforms including the EQUELLA digital repository, and the Pearson LearningStudio online learning platform and OpenClass online learning environment.