rit faculty learning community the faculty learning community rochester institute of technology...

RIT Faculty Learning Community

The Faculty Learning Community

Rochester Institute of Technology

2002-2003

Faculty Learning Community

Principles of a FLC

Cross-disciplinary

Year-long

Enhances teaching and learning


Goals

Collegiality Respect and trust Innovative teaching Scholarship

Scholarly teaching Contributions to scholarship of teaching

and learning


Activities

Regular meetings Lilly Conference on College Teaching Readings Projects Associates (faculty, student) Portfolios


FLC at RIT

Modeled after Miami of Ohio’s plan developed by Milt Cox

Project of the IETC, supported by the Provost’s Office

Facilitators: Vinnie Gupta, Susan Donovan Pilot 2001-2002 Second FLC 2002-2003 Applications available for 2003-2004


Participants

Sidney Barefoot (NTID)

Maurino Bautista (COS)

Jessica Bayliss (GCCIS)

Marcia Birken (COS) Grant Cos (CLA)

Dominique Lepoutre (NTID)

Christine Monikowski (NTID)

Jeffrey Porter (NTID) Maria Rubino

(CAST) Glenda Senior

(NTID)


Just Ask Them: An Inquiry Approach to Student-Teacher

Learning Partnerships

Sidney M. BarefootSpeech-Language Department, NTID

Faculty Associate – Dominique Lepoutre

Student Associate - Brennan Vining


The Course

Individual Speech-Language Therapy, an individualized non-credit course focusing on the improvement of spoken communication.

Learning goals are variable, based on student needs.


The Need forStudent-Teacher Partnering

Many limitations to teacher-generated assessment and instruction

Backgrounds highly parent/teacher- directed

Need to promote thinking conducive to life-long self-assessment, goal-setting and improvement


Inquiry by Interview

Question: what are key areas of inquiry that can guide an instructional partnering process?

Method: interview 4 students, each at a different stage of instruction. Videotape and transcribe.


Preliminary Results

Students highly engaged in interviews Found several key areas of inquiry Student data complemented and informed

other assessments Inquiry process itself appeared to foster

subsequent cooperative and self-directed learning


Future Plans

Continue analysis of current interviews Modify interview to focus on key areas Develop student inquiry of instructor Scholarship:

online tutorial for professionals in the field national presentations


Improved Acquisition of ASL through the Reduction of Anxiety in

Language Learning

Dominique LepoutreAmerican Sign Language and Interpreter Education, NTID

Faculty Associate: Sidney Barefoot


A Little History

Serendipity in the year 2000 “Where ever you go, there you are” by

Jon Kabat Zinn Personal reflections/ potential

applications Academic year 2000-01 and the

summer of 2001


The Project

The problem Participants’ concerns about language

learning The experiment


Methods and Strategies

Suspending judgment/letting go Meditation Journal writing “Contacting the language” Processing language learning

(metacognition)


Outcomes

Reduced stress Increased focus leading to increased

ability to correctly produce signs and grammatical features of ASL

Increased motivation for learning Understanding of own learning style


Outcomes

Increased awareness, focus and ability to self correct

Ability to monitor pace when signing Understanding of emotions that block

learning Development of kinesthetic awareness Decreased postural rigidity


Communication Apprehension in the Online Course

Grant Cos

Department of Communication, College of Liberal Arts


Objective

The objective of this study is to explore the construct of communication apprehension within the context of an online, virtual classroom. While the construct has been investigated across a number of different contexts, it has yet to be examined from this perspective. Through a preliminary, exploratory study, I hope to sketch out the dimensions of online communication apprehension


Project Overview

Northedge (2002) defined distance education. Mc Croskey (1977) defined communication

apprehension and significance of comm. app. in the classroom.

Flaherty, Pearce, and Rubin (1998) found that CMC apprehension was significantly different than interpersonal apprehension .

Clark and Jones (2001) compared traditional and online formats for a public speaking course at a community college, found no significant differences in communication apprehension or perception of speaking abilities.


Project Implementation

10 students from a graduate level, online course in Communication Law and Ethics were interviewed by telephone for this study.

An interview protocol was adopted from McCroskey’s PRCA-24, a self-report instrument used to measure communication apprehension. The researcher adapted questions from the instrument for the study.


Preliminary Results

This study found two themes emerge from the interview

– Positive theme of “involvement” from 8 of 10 interviewees. Online discussion requires participation, leaves time to reflect, better express self - all these contribute to reduced apprehension.

– Negative theme of “permanence” from 6 of 10 interviewees. Online discussion has certain permanence, not as easy to provide feedback, more open to criticism.


Future Plans

This study serves as a pilot for a broader study of communication apprehension in the online classroom.

Further study would include:– Expanding on this preliminary study with a

broader, more empirical measure of students’ online apprehension.

– Developing an instrument to specifically measure online apprehension.


Paired Programming in an Introductory Computer Science

Course

Jessica D. BaylissComputer Science Department, GCCIS

Thanks go to James Heliotis, the Intro. Course Seq. Committee individuals, and all the professors and

teaching assistants involved with the CS1 labs


The Project

Issue: Most computer programming in industry is

done with a group while most computer programming in classes is done individually

Question: Are there benefits to using paired

programming in an introductory programming course?


Paired Programming What it is:

Two individuals sit at one computer. One will control the mouse/keyboard One is in charge of on-line debugging and

continuous design review. The two switch roles around every 20 minutes.

Experiments have shown: With only a 15% increase in overall production time,

there is a significant decrease in bugs. [Williams & Upchurch 2001]

People are more satisfied when working as a pair.


Implementation

~30 sections of Computer Science 1 PAIRED condition: 1/3 did paired programming INDIVIDUAL condition: 1/3 did individual

programming MIXED condition: 1/3 did some paired labs and

some individual labs

Paired groups stayed in the same teams for 3 labs and swapped seats every 20 minutes

All groups assigned the same work


Preliminary Results Paired and mixed groups more likely to want to

work with others in CS2 (54% and 52% vs. individual groups at 29%)

Students:– Large numbers of students were neutral (40-50%)– Didn’t want to switch partners weekly (~76%) or every other

week (~67%)– Would do paired programming if choosing their own partner

(76%)– Highest preference for partner at same skill level (~80%)


Future Work

Correlation between grades and lab section type.

Correlation between those who dropped in CS2 and their CS1 lab section type.

What to do for people who are unable to pair How do those who participated in the fall feel

about paired programming now? Implementing changes based on the results.


Increasing Active Learning in Workshop Calculus

Marcia Birken

Department of Mathematics & Statistics, College of Science


Workshop Calculus

Workshop Calculus is in 2nd year at RIT Students work in small groups to solve more

in-depth problems Faculty have no prior experience as

workshop leaders Need to improve my performance as

workshop facilitator Need to assist students to become active

learners in group work


Goals/Objectives

Promote active learning Promote shared group work Overcome the “divide & conquer”

method of approaching group work Have students discuss mathematical

methods Learn to be a better workshop facilitator


Implementation

Rotate group members Assign a leader in each group who is

responsible for ensuring that all group members discuss each problem

Put some workshop problems (in simplified format) on hour exams.

Practice being a guide, rather than lecturer in workshops


Preliminary Results

Students reported that workshops in winter were a vast improvement over fall quarter

After first instance, students take seriously that workshop problems appear on tests

Students ask questions in class about workshop problems


Future Plans

Will be teaching workshop calculus next fall, providing another opportunity to try out techniques

Will offer colloquium to department faculty on successful workshop techniques


Using Teacher Designed Feedback Form and Student Generated Test Questions with Model Answers to Improve Learning in Differential

Equations

Maurino P. BautistaDepartment of Mathematics & Statistics


Goals/Objectives 1

To develop ability to review, evaluate and apply what they have learned

To develop ability to recognize the more important concepts or techniques in a subject

To develop a commitment to accurate work To develop the ability to ask meaningful

questions


Goals/Objectives 2

To obtain immediate feedback on instruction and be able to make timely adjustments to improve teaching

To encourage participation from students who may be too shy to say anything in class


Implementation

Three question feedback form administered almost daily during the first 3 weeks of the quarter with decreasing frequency later in the quarter

Week-long group activity to formulate exam questions with the instructor selecting up to 50% of the points in the next exam from these questions (with possible modifications)


SGTQ Participation

Yes No

Test 1 42.3% 57.7%

Test 2 25% 75%

Test 3 13.5% 86.5%


Test Averages

02-2 01-3 00-4 99-4

Test 1 68 74 65 60.3

Test 2 67 70 76 51.6

Test 3 60 57 64 58.1

N 66 56 64 58


Feedback Participation

No response 1

0 6

1 - 5 times 36

6 - 10 times 6

More than 11 times 2


Did it work for you?

YES 34

NO 17


Future Plans

Continue using both techniques with appropriate modification in all my classes

Design feedback forms that are more content specific to be given at appropriate times


Experimenting with myCourses & Cooperative Group Learning

in a Biology Laboratory

Glenda SeniorScience/Engineering Support Department,

NTID

Faculty Associate: Dr. Tom Frederick

Student Associate: Annemarie Ross


INTRODUCTION: Problem

Winter quarter e-lab manual is relatively unstructured

Students are unfamiliar with on-line learning Students do not integrate lecture and lab

exercises Student interaction is low


PROCEDURE

Developed an easily navigable myCourses website

Adapted Millis & Cottell’s cooperative learning method

Elicited and collected student feedback at intervals during course and with a final open evaluation


RESULTS

Results of student survey 1/30/03 Most useful myCourses sections: 100% TESTING section 100% OUTLINE - access lab manual 95% OUTLINE - lab objectives 100% OUTLINE - “what to study for next quiz” 95% FILES - “what to study for next quiz”


RESULTS (continued)

Results of student survey 1/30/03 asking about the value of group activities: 52% = it helps me with the lecture material [4 rating] 33% = I love it, it’s fun and helps me learn [5 rating]

Responses to whether activity should be kept, changed or dropped: 86% = Keep e.g. “If it works, don’t fix it” 5% = Change 9% = Drop


RESULTS (continued)

Elicited student feedback on my instructor evaluation, with the following probe: “Your lab instructor experimented with group work in the lab. Please comment on the value of this activity” (22 comments received)

68% positive comments e.g. “I enjoyed the group work, b/c it forced me to

put on paper & words that I knew in my head”


CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION

myCourses site post everything in OUTLINE section learn to use the grade book keep SYLLABUS section

Group work keep this activity (86%) because it helps with

lecture and/or helps students learn (85%) continue refining the cooperative group format


Assessment Techniques and

Critical Thinking

Maria Rubino

MMET-PS Department, CAST

Faculty Associate: Glenda Senior


Goals

1. To develop assessment tools : how the students are processing and

learning the material presented in class

2. To improve critical thinking: To help the student to become an “active

thinker”


Project Description

and Implementation

1. Students had to formulate questions regarding the material discussed in class

2. The best question was included in the exam

3. Implementation: The day before the exam each student brought

to class a question At the end of the class period the students were

organized in small groups (maximum 4).


Project Description

and Implementation cont…

3. Each group: discussed the questions and answers selected the best question.

4. Each group presented the question to the class.

5. Only one question was included in the exam.


Preliminary Results

1. The exercise had been adjusted throughout winter term

2. Student responds very positively to the exercise

3. An entire class was dedicated to consider the process on how to generate a question.

4. An interesting set of questions were obtained


Revisions

1. Develop a set of instructions on how to develop questions

2. Explain and train students in team work interaction


Outcomes

During the small group activity the students

had to explain the question and the answer to

the group as a consequence:

Provides a mean to assess how the students are learning.

a new way to present the material using the student language.

Help students to manage the fundamentals


Incorporating cooperative learning - a beginning

Christine Monikowski

Dept. of ASL and Interpreting Education, NTID

Faculty Associate: Rico Peterson, Chair – ASLIE

Student Associate: Desiree Leonard – student in BS program


Project Description

Incorporating more “cooperative learning” into the course, Discourse Analysis for Interpreters (first year, 2nd quarter)

Began as a time issue but the Lilly conference clarified things for me

Directed activities that help the students process information and also help the students KNOW what they should be doing


Goals/Objectives

determine “how much work” is appropriate for a 4 credit course

incorporate more “cooperative learning” activities into the course work


Implementation

time sheets “reflective learning” worksheets specific “new” activities were included:

homework, guidelines for reading, one-minute papers, outlines


Preliminary results

positive” responses from students highest grades ever for this course excellent papers!


Future plans

continue to incorporate cooperative learning activities in courses

national workshop for peers


Efforts toBreak a Vicious Cycle:

“Not Ready” Learners

“Overly Directing” Teacher

Jeff PorterNTID Learning Consortium


Project Description/Objectives

Graduate-level course (20 students) Tinkering with new strategies for fostering

more student responsibility for their own learning

Objectives: Increase student engagement with assigned

readings Increase student role in guiding class discussions Increase student self-assessment


Project Implementation

Strategy #1: Teacher-developed Study Questions for assigned chapters

Strategy #2: Teacher-developed Discussion Point for assigned chapters (Web-based Bulletin Board)

Strategy #3: Teacher-developed 10-question Self-Assessment Quiz for each assigned chapter (Web-based)


Project Results

Strategy #1: course became less lecture-based, more seminar-based; mid-term and final exams built around Study Questions (content emphasized = content assessed)

Strategy #2: out-of-class student exchanges re: personal understandings and real-life applications of key course concepts; teacher assessment tool

Strategy #3: student appreciation for tracking their own mastery; teacher assessment tool


Future Plans

Strategy #1: develop in-class tutoring/ discussion vehicle to group those students who understand a set of Study Questions with those who don’t

Strategy #2: improve Bulletin Board format to make it more user-friendly

Strategy #3: develop on-line tutoring regarding missed questions on Self-Assessment and Quizzes

rit faculty learning community the faculty learning community rochester institute of technology...

Documents