Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1
Curricular Collaboration with Technology
  • Report on a three-year
  • inter-institutional program


  • Scott E. Siddall
  • Denison University
  • Granville, Ohio
2
First, some context
  • Who are we?
  • What is “The Program?”
    • Faculty development
    • Experiments in collaboration


  • http://enhanced-learning.org


  • This presentation:


  • http://siddall.info/talks/educause2001/


3
The Challenges
  • We share common goals
    • e.g., to enhance learning
  • But, we often devise solutions in isolation
    • At institutional level, at individual faculty level
    • Examples:
      • Institutions hire LCT language faculty
      • Instructors develop new curricular material for similar courses
4
The Challenges
  • Why does this happen?
    • Lack of information about each other
    • Lack of time, opportunity to become aware
  • Administrative vs. curricular collaboration
  • Unique issues of curricular collaboration
    • Autonomy of faculty members
    • Review based on individual work
    • Role of discipline-specific methods
  • Shared solutions aren’t just about efficiency
    • Enhanced learning
    • Hence the program’s name
5
The Program
  • http://enhanced-learning.org


  • Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
  • 1999-2002, $735,000
  • Denison University and Kenyon College
  • Now Five Colleges of Ohio, www.ohio5.org
    • Adds in Oberlin, Wooster, Ohio Wesleyan
6
The Program
  • “Exploring the Possibilities” workshops
  • “Colloquia on Technology in Learning”
  • Faculty grants


  • Not a linear process – faculty can engage at any point


  • Remote Collaboration Classrooms


7
The Program
  • Operational elements:
  • Faculty review committee
  • Steering Committee
    • Fiscal and credit implications were waived
  • Student liaison program
  • Assessment of courses, student perceptions
  • Shared access to Blackboard, ERes
8
Create Awareness
9
Newsletters
10
Web presence
11
The Experience
  • “Exploring the Possibilities” workshops
  • Focus on pedagogy - not training
  • Example session:
    • Sociologist and librarian discuss use of online library resources
    • Biologist demonstrates electronic reserves
    • Mathematician discusses innovative technology for teaching calculus
    • Economist reviews advanced uses of spreadsheets
    • Historian discusses pedagogical uses of e-mail and listservers
    • Biologist presents online syllabi
    • Historian reveals the benefits of student-authored web projects
12
The Experience
  • “Colloquia on Technology in Learning”
  • “Organic” experiences, led by faculty participants
  • A critical success factor
13
The Experience
  • More than 150 faculty members participated in some manner (47%)
  • 20% of colloquium participants are involved in funded projects
  • $240,000 supporting 22 faculty projects
  • About half of the projects met their stated goals
  • All project participants learned a great deal about colleagues, collaboration, technology
14
The Experience
  • Broad types of faculty collaborative projects


    • Classes shared between campuses
    • Shared development of curricular materials
    • Shared faculty expertise, co-training
15
Collaborative Projects
  • Classes shared between campuses
  • Clash of Cultures: Middle Eastern Studies
  • Gender and Family in South Asia
  • Greek Drama Today
16
Collaborative Projects
  • Shared development of curricular material
  • Access to examples in abstract algebra
  • Symbolic computing to enhance learning in probability and statistics
  • Shakespeare on Film
17
Collaborative Projects
  • Shared faculty expertise
  • Enhancing spatial analyses in the classroom (GIS)
  • Print making in a digital world
18
Collaborative Projects
  • Less commonly taught languages
  • Chinese Language and Literature
  • Beginning and Intermediate Japanese
  • Three semesters of Arabic
19
Benefits
  • Availability of specialized courses
  • More and improved curricular materials
  • Greater awareness leading to new opportunities
    • Sabbatical replacements
    • Guest lectures
    • Pooled enrollment for very small courses
  • Enhanced learning (self-assessed outcomes)
20
Costs
  • Time
    • Takes time to change a culture steeped in individual scholarship
  • Stipends, release time
    • Collaboration takes more resources than independent efforts
    • Designing and redesigning courses is expected; fund the added overhead
  • Support
    • Local training and consulting – staff and student
    • Mission-critical production support
  • Infrastructure
    • Inter-campus network capacity
    • Faculty desktop systems
    • Classroom systems
  • Facilitator


21
Factors for Success
  • Get faculty members talking to their disciplinary colleagues at other schools
  • Collaborative potential is proportional to the square of the number of faculty members from different campuses
  • Provide flexible funding
  • Define “technology” broadly
  • Provide local, technical support
  • Senior administrators need to communicate with each other and support the program
22
For more information….
  • This presentation:


  • http://siddall.info/talks/educause2001/


  • EDUCAUSE’s “Effective Practices and Solutions”


  • http://www.educause.edu/ep/


  • More about the program:


      • http://enhanced-learning.org


23
Back to home
  • Back to home