proceedings of the roosevelt university mini …...1 editorial preface the seventh roosevelt...

Proceedings of the Roosevelt University Mini-Conference on Teaching

Volume Seven2010

3

Table of Contents

Editorial Preface .................................................................................................................1 Steven A. Meyers

Using Universal Design to Teach Students at Different Learning Levels .......2-3 Jamie Dusold, Holly Passi, Kimberly Peters, and Christopher Balthazar

Differentiating Instruction at the College Level: Gathering the Life Story ..............................................................................................3-5 Margaret Mary Policastro

Facilitating the Academic Success of Traditional-Age, High-Risk Students ......................................................................................................5-6 Jeff Helgeson, Erika Huber, and Nancy Litke

Lessons Learned from an Ambitious Service-Learning Class ...........................6-8 Cami K. McBride, Carrie Miller, and Valerie Vorderstrasse

Kozol’s Kids as Adult Learners: Implementing ‘Wraparound’ Instructional Practices ................................................................................................8-11 Vince Cyboran

Online Learning: Achievement and Challenges for Students and Professors ..........................................................................................11-14 Mary Elin Barnish and Amelia M. Hicks

Higher Learning and Presenting Social Justice in the Classroom: Cultural World Views, Communication Dialectics, and Ethical Frameworks ......................................................................................... 14-16 Stanford C. Traywick

Integrating Civic Engagement into an Integral Calculus Course ...................17-18 Bárbara González-Arévalo and Melanie Pivarski

Creating a Socially Just Democracy through Interpretive Discussion ........ 18-20 Elizabeth Meadows

Proceedings of the Roosevelt University Mini-Conference on Teaching

Volume Seven2010

1

Editorial Preface

The seventh Roosevelt University Mini-Conference on Teaching (RUMCOT 7) was held at the Chicago Campus on April 27, 2010. Full-time and part-time faculty members, administrators, and staff from many departments at Roosevelt University attended RUMCOT, which focused on enhancing teaching. This year we focused in greater detail on the theme of incorporating social justice into teaching practices.

The event featured 15 interactive workshops, teaching roundtable discussions, panel presentations, showcase demonstrations, and exhibit displays. These proceedings provide a summary of many presentations from the conference.

For additional information about effective college teaching, you can explore related book and video holdings in the University libraries. These resources can be found by accessing the library’s home page at libguides.roosevelt.edu/facultyservices, and then clicking on the links marked “Resources for Effective College Teaching” and “Resources for Transformational Service Learning.” The Center for Teaching and Learning, located in Room 1046 inside the Auditorium Library, has even more resources for you to peruse. Ask a reference librarian for the key code to enter the center.

RUMCOT 7 and these proceedings are sponsored by the Center for Teaching and Learning and the Office of the Provost and Executive Vice President.

Steven A. Meyers Professor of Psychology Senior Fellow, Center for Teaching and Learning Roosevelt University (312) 341-6363 [email protected]

ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY MINI-CONFERENCE ON TEACHING 32

not emphasized. By using experiential learning strategies, lesson-planning can be made to focus on the student’s construction of knowledge whereby students participate and are engaged in the learning process. The four experiential learning strategies are learning by feeling or sensing (concrete experience), learning by watching (reflective observation), learning by thinking (abstract conceptualization) and learning by doing (active experimentation) (Kolb, 2005). Interestingly, the experiential learning strategies map on to several universal design principles, specifically equitability, flexibility and perceptibility.

The first adaptation incorporated the four experiential learning strategies into lesson planning for a Coping with Stress course, specifically teaching students about effective problem-solving techniques. Students came to class prepared by reading a basic chapter on effective problem solving techniques. They were given a very brief lecture on the main points of the readings. Students then completed an initial “minute paper” where they were asked to write in a short-paragraph what they learned thus far about effective problem-solving skills. The next portion of the lesson incorporated the four experiential learning styles. Students watched a video clip of a main character using poor problem-solving skills (learning by sensing and feeling). They then got into groups to discuss what the character did wrong (learning by watching). In those same groups, students then were asked to rework the main character’s actions using the appropriate problem-solving techniques discussed earlier in the class (learning by thinking). Students then were asked to individually apply effective problem-solving steps to a situation in which they commonly experience stress (learning by doing). Finally, students completed a second “minute-paper” on comprehension.

After the first “minute-paper,” 15 out of 32 students demonstrated a complete understanding of the concepts. However, after the second “minute-paper,” 26 out of 32 students demonstrated a complete understanding of the concepts. Moreover, the second “minute-papers” included more specific details on effective problem-solving skills. It was concluded that lesson planning using various experiential learning styles targets students at various learning levels by offering flexibility to target students with different learning styles and learning strengths. More students demonstrated comprehension in this way than with lecture only.

The second adaptation illustrated how universal design could be incorporated into a psychology research methods course. The course consisted of 37 students of different ethnic and racial backgrounds, different learning styles, various levels (i.e., first year students, sophomores, juniors and seniors), and various educational backgrounds and understanding of the field of psychology. Some of the students required academic accommodations, such as extended time to complete course material. Some of the other students were parents, first-generation college students and/or spoke English as a second language, which could present a challenge that might affect both student retention and student class performance (Tinto, 2004). The challenge the instructor encountered while teaching this course was developing a teaching strategy that

Using Universal Design to Teach Students at Different Learning LevelsJamie Dusold Holly Passi Kimberly Peters Christopher Balthazar Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, Roosevelt University

Universal design is a concept that was first applied to the field of architecture in the 1950s. For example, the most frequently used example of universal design in architecture is the street curb cut-out (Rose & Meyer, 2007). When curbs were cut low at the corners, it benefitted those with special needs, such as those in wheelchairs. However, it had the added benefit of making it easier for those with carts or baby carriages to use the sidewalks. Thus, the essence of universal design involves devising strategies to make a given construct more accessible to those with special needs and, in doing so, provide some benefit to the general population. Many have argued that this principle can be applied in an educational setting, whereby making curricula more accessible to students with special needs will also benefit average and above average students (Rose & Meyer, 2007). In fact, this principle has been effectively applied in special education and inclusion curricula. Others have attempted to apply universal design to postsecondary education, given the increasing cultural, cognitive, and linguistic diversity of students in college classrooms (Highbee, 2009; McGuire & Scott, 2006).

Increasing diversity in college classrooms means that the seemingly tried and true methods of education, which have mainly been gleaned from experience with those from the dominant culture, may not necessarily tap into the strengths of diverse students. Therefore, when students do not perform well, it may be because a lesson or curriculum is not designed to tap into the strengths of diverse learners. In fact, inflexible and invariable educational materials represent barriers to learning for many students, diverse students in particular. Some have argued that applying the principles of universal design in postsecondary education may facilitate learning and positive performance in diverse learners (Mino, 2004, Moriarty, 2007). In light of this, as newly minted undergraduate instructors, we attempted to utilize the principle of universal design into our psychology courses. What follows are descriptions of the principles and strategies used, as well as discussion of the outcome of implementing principles of universal design. More specifically, the strategies implemented were strongly informed by some of the principles of universal design, which state that any given lesson must be equitable, flexible, simple and intuitive, and perceptible.

Lecture is the most common mode of instruction in college classrooms (Moriarty, 2007). However, when using a lecture format, prior learning and world experience are

could facilitate the best result in learning the course material.

The two important experiential teaching strategies that were used were learning by doing and learning by thinking. Students were assigned the task of developing and conducting their own experimental or correlational research design study, while using archival data or their classmates as participants. They were encouraged and assisted in finding a topic of interest while considering ethics and limitations on the kind of information that could be requested of their participants (i.e., classmates). Throughout the course they were also asked to review and critique empirical studies and study results in an effort to understand the different inferences that could be made from experimental and correlational research studies.

The universal design principles for assessment of knowledge and skills are taken from the universal design standards for lesson planning. Principally, students should be given opportunities to demonstrate knowledge in ways related to their preferred learning style (Higbee, 2009). For example, assessment methods may include the oral expression of knowledge, group collaboration, written products or other creative expression. Universal design places particular emphasis on the communication of clear expectations. Instructors can level the playing field in their classroom by providing students with an equal opportunity to know what they are looking for, how they will be evaluated, and examples of how they can achieve an optimal result (Higbee). Expectations can be communicated to students in multiple ways, including written grading rubrics, sample assignments, and thorough, directive feedback. In addition, students should be given the opportunity to practice expressing knowledge in the manner they will be assessed during class time or via homework assignments in which they will receive feedback prior to the more formal assessment (Mino, 2004). For example, if an exam requires students to express knowledge about course topics in writing, practice of this skill should be a regular part of classroom activity. By providing adequate feedback on assessment materials, students can refine skills and become more comfortable with multiple styles of learning and communication.

In conclusion, using universal design strategies, as well as experiential teaching styles, can be used to guide both lesson planning and assessment in college classrooms. Such techniques assist instructors in targeting students with various learning strengths and learning styles. Students are given the chance to learn and demonstrate learning in various ways that engage them in the learning process and reflect their strengths.

ReferencesChickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39, 3-7.

Dolan, R., & Hall, T. (2001). Universal design for learning: Implications for large-scale assessment. IDA Perspectives, 27, 22-25.

Higbee, J. (2009). Implementing universal instructional design in postsecondary courses and curricula. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 6, 65-77.

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 193-212.

Mino, J. J. (2004). Planning for inclusion: Using universal instructional design to create a learner-centered community college classroom. Equity and Excellence in Education, 37, 154-160.

Moriarty, M. A. (2007). Inclusive pedagogy: Teaching methodologies to reach diverse learners in science instruction. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40, 252-265.

Pare, D., & Schwartz, D. (2008). Accessibility in post-secondary education: Application of UDL in college curriculum. U.S.-China Education Review, 5, 20-26.

Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2007). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Education Technology Research

Development, 55, 521-525.

Differentiating Instruction at the College Level: Gathering the Life StoryMargaret Mary Policastro Department of Specialized Studies, College of Education, Roosevelt University

Getting to know our students can have a tremendous impact on many aspects of the teaching and learning process. The following statement from the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University summarizes and captures the important teaching transitions that must take place in college classrooms:

“Unlike the days when one teaching style fit all students, in today’s context there is a pressure to acknowledge and accept students with perspectives other than our own, to diversify our syllabi, to be more aware of classroom dynamics, and to pay more attention to how our students are experiencing the learning process. Our collective ability to respond and be enriched by these challenges will determine the success of our institutions and students” (President and Fellows of Harvard College 2002-2010).

As retention becomes an increasingly important topic and issue in higher education, some possible ideas in pedagogy that might help keep and retain students are explored here. Differentiating our instruction combined with getting to know and care about our students can be a powerful formula for successful teaching and learning at the college level. Rethinking different avenues for the delivery of course content combined with instruction that fits the learner is both critical and essential to retention. According to Tinto (1993), students are more likely to persist and graduate in settings that provide academic, social and personal support and where students are actively involved in their learning. Thus, rethinking practices to include the life of our students can greatly enhance and enrich the learning experience. Developing these notions about differentiated instruction requires a shift in philosophy about the learning process, the course content and the delivery


(Tomlinson, 2003, 2008). This transformative pedagogy can revitalize learning and bring forth a zest for teaching. Therefore, this article is organized around the following:

• An overview and definition of “differentiated instruction”and alignment to the college classroom

• Gatheringstudentlifestoriesasameansto“differentiatinginstruction”

• Examplesofhowtogettoknowourstudentsasarouteto“differentiated instruction”

Differentiated Instruction Defined

Differentiated instruction is not a new concept or idea in teaching, rather it is thought of as an educational reform to reach the academic diversity and variance of students. With historical roots in gifted and talented education, differentiated instruction is a philosophy about teaching and learning that is most often considered in elementary, middle and secondary schools. However, many aspects of differentiated instruction can be applied at the college level. In fact, the best practice alignment with college students fits quite well as their life stories are evolving and developing in interesting ways. Tomlinson (2003) discusses differentiated instruction as a way of making sure that learning fits the learner; providing different avenues to acquiring content, to processing ideas and developing products so each student can learn. These are certainly critical and essential pieces to good teaching at any level, including college. A nonnegotiable aspect of differentiating instruction centers on respecting individuals. With this respect comes a desire to know a person more fully (Tomlinson, Brimijoin, & Navaez, 2008). As we get to know our students, a deeper development of differentiation begins to emerge. Thus, we can view the life story that students bring as the truest and purest of differentiated teaching. Students come to our classes with their birth to present day stories that are unique to them and intricately detailed. These stories represent who they are, their past experiences and where they are headed in the future. This information can shape the content, process and delivery of the course instruction. When the dimension of learning the life stories of the students is added, what evolves is a true and pure form of differentiated instruction. As we get to know students in this manner, we have a better lens to make sure the learning fits the learner. My experiences have taught me that the more time and effort put forth in getting to know my students will result in a better class overall. A bonus to this teaching method has been sustained favorable course and teacher evaluations.

Life Story Route: Differentiating Instruction

Inherent in the definition of differentiated instruction is the notion and idea of knowing the learner. Hipsky (2011) states that every student who walks into your classroom will have a story, individual ways of viewing the world, variations in how they learn, different home lives and skill sets. Getting to know my students each semester is an important goal for

me. Teaching through story has always allowed my instruction to weave bits and pieces of who my students are into each class session. Typically, I want to know as much as possible regarding their life, experiences, where they grew up, etc. In most cases, this process takes the entire semester to unfold as life stories evolve naturally through discussions and conversations. Students will make text-to-self connections and share these connections in class and through other means of class communication. One recent semester, I learned from a student that her mother had just become homeless and was living day by day out of her car in the suburbs. Another student had just lost his mother and was learning how to cope alone and was worried about home foreclosure. The information from these two different students provided details to me that allowed reflection and observations of the students. I made anecdotal notations during the semester about how prompt, even though they were both engaged and focused as active participating students in my class. I felt a special respect for them as they managed their daily challenges in a mature style and manner.

Most recently, I have jump-started this process of getting to know my students through an assignment on Blackboard; requesting information from students before the start of the semester. I wanted to find an exercise that would yield information before the semester begins and not take formal class session time. This works well as it does not take time away from other areas in the course and it provides a wonderful first day “ice breaker” to get to know students. About two weeks before the start of class I send an email and follow up with an announcement on Blackboard. I ask the students to consider writing a brief “life story” summary to bring to the first day of class and share with peers; encouraging artifacts and photos as well. Built into this is asking to students to identify how they learn best, styles of learning, etc. Although this felt like a risk when I first initiated the practice, the unanticipated outcomes and success forged me forward to continue and refine the assignment.

On the first day of class, this assignment brought forth an eager group of students who diligently created life stories with detail (photos, artifacts, etc.). Students arrived talking to each other about their assignment and sharing items before the class formally started. At the end of the first day of class, I felt like I knew my students better than any previous semester. Taking digital photos of each student and notes as they shared their stories, I was able to leave “knowing” much about my students and thinking of ways to differentiate the content and process to better meet their individual learning for the classes to come. Following the first class session when life stories are shared, I posted a forum on the discussion board about the experience. Students’ responses have been most favorable, and they report enjoying all aspects of the assignment.

In conclusion, when we can get to know our students, how they learn best, their interests, etc. each class session takes on a special meaning in the way we prepare, what we prepare to teach and how we teach it. In essence, the class shapes itself into a unique culture where lives are shared, new meanings are constructed and an exciting learning community is created.

ReferencesHipsky, S. (2011). Differentiated literacy and language arts strategies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

President and Fellows of Harvard College. (2002, 2010). Teaching in racially diverse college classrooms. Retrieved from http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/icb.topic.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tomlinson, C. A., Brimijoin, K., & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making revolutionary changes in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Eidson, C. C. (2003). Differentiated in practice: A resource guide for differentiating curriculum. Alexandria, VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Facilitating the Academic Success of Traditional-Age, High-Risk StudentsJeff Helgeson Erika Huber Nancy Litke Roosevelt University Academic Success Center

In the effort to facilitate the success and retention of traditional-age (18 to 24), high risk students, Roosevelt University has expanded its long-term commitment to academic support through new initiatives that augment programs which have been in place since 1976. Within the Academic Success Center, four programs (Disability Services, Learning and Support Services, Peer Mentoring, and Content/Skill Development Tutoring) currently provide assistance to both students and faculty, as an outgrowth of the University’s commitment to meet the unique needs of currently enrolled students.

Shared Awareness Between Faculty and Students?

In order to better support the classroom experience of both faculty and students, as well as to provide a means of exploring some of the common assumptions of faculty regarding what might be termed the “common knowledge” of traditional aged students, the Academic Success Center recently administered a survey to a small sampling of one adjunct faculty member and 40 currently enrolled students between the ages of 18 and 23. The faculty member responded to the survey with an accuracy rate of 96 percent correct; by comparison, traditional aged students achieved, on average, a score of 36.23 percent correct.

Conclusions drawn from this activity include the existence of a marked disparity between faculty expectations with respect to what may be characterized as “common knowledge” and the actual levels of awareness exhibited by “traditional” 18- to

24-year-old students who would have ranged in age between 9 and 13 at the time of the “historic” occurrence of the World Trade attacks in September of 2001. The acknowledgment of this difference in awareness is critical for the development of strategies to maximize the effectiveness of classroom instruction. In The Knowledge Deficit (2006), E. D. Hirsch, Jr. has pointed out that background knowledge is essential for comprehension. As in his previous publications, The Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them (1996) and Cultural Literacy (1988), the point that is made – and which seems to have been born out within the brief Academic Success Center survey – is that access to referent awareness cannot be assumed, and yet it is essential to understanding. In every instance, faculty should be aware of the existence of a general absence of “common knowledge” and, therefore, seek to consistently follow the advice of Plato as expressed within the dialogue between Socrates and Phaedrus: “the speaker should define his several notions and so make his meaning clear” (311). It is “elementary” that “core knowledge” cannot be taken for granted.

Further Considerations

Additional concerns regarding “college readiness” have been demonstrated by research conducted in relation to the Mentoring Program that was undertaken by the Academic Success Center during the fall term of 2009. Essentially, a wide range among entry levels of academic skill, a broad set of deficiencies in “study habits,” a general absence of consistently shared content knowledge, along with a well documented national reduction in attention/concentration span, and increased skimming of written material while using online sources have combined to create a circumstance within which consistently employed, structured instructional strategies have become increasingly important.

Active Solutions

Faculty can seek to foster classroom learning environments that are both well structured and accessible. Concrete feedback can be provided offering specific examples, applications and information that extend well beyond a mere critical thinking approach to instruction. This can contribute to both the acquisition of content knowledge and the cultivation of applied skills that range from standard usage in written English to the specific cognitive awareness of detailed knowledge, as well as general familiarities in terms of where and how to locate information when needed, even including new critical and postmodernist approaches to learning.

The general understanding derived from the overview of “college readiness” and the successful rates achieved through the Mentoring Program, in addition to a consistent pattern of successful retention/completion rates that have been documented as a result of the Tutoring Program (80 percent of those students who received services from Fall 2008 to Fall 2009) has been that achievement of structured contact and strong rapport clearly contributes to student success and retention.


The Environment and Learning Experience

Acknowledging the influence of instructors who “appear to be human and caring,” the receptive environment established within the Academic Success Center (ASC) has been guided by the principle that students seek out those who make them feel comfortable and avoid those who cause them to feel uncomfortable, or who provide unrewarding experience. It has also sought to recognize that the quality of communication is greatly influenced by prior expectations, as well as that the environment within which an interaction takes place will greatly influence its outcome. Taking these factors into account, the Academic Success Center has been physically arranged to create a comfortable/casual space (including a small conversation area with two chairs and a coffee table, as well as several paintings from the University’s art collection) within which students can study, receive small group and individualized instruction, page through a magazine or newspaper, and have computer access. Additionally, the ASC is designed to be a place where students can talk out their ideas, receive non-judgmental study skills advice, and obtain the type of extended-time remediation that is not possible within a traditional classroom setting, both from professional staff and content tutors (who include honors undergraduate students, graduate students, adjunct faculty and other specialized instructors), as well as from currently enrolled peer mentors.

The advantage of this type of approach is that the specific needs of particular students can systematically be met. Chronic concerns that cannot adequately be resolved within a group setting, such as specific mathematical functions, particular editing applications, and issues related to reading comprehension can be successfully addressed.

Classroom Practices

With respect to faculty applications of these principles, the classroom, similarly, is an environment that can be used to facilitate a systematic approach to comprehension. Such routine practices as beginning on time, using the first several minutes of a class session to return and collect assignments, conducting a student “recall” session regarding the previous session, and closing the door following the completion of that beginning regimen can be extremely helpful with respect to connecting the experience of one class to another, orienting students who may have missed a class, discouraging late arrivals, and eliminating external, hallway distractions.

Further suggestions for instructions include:

• Requiringnotestobetakenduringeachsession,likeminutes at a meeting guided by “agenda items,” the amplification of which can be developed through lecture/discussion, resulting in “generative note-taking” augmented by background information for references;

• Dividingtheclassexperienceintoaseriesofpurposeful,twenty minute activities (to accommodate contemporary student concentration spans);

• Providingassignmentsinwriting,withattentiontotheprocess of their completion; and

• Providinga“stylesheet”thatisspecifictothewriting

requirements/expectations for a given discipline/course stating specifically that writing should be clear, well organized and exhibit the use of the standard conventions of written English.

In the effort to make increased support available for the growing numbers of traditional-age students enrolled at Roosevelt University, the Academic Success Center plans to continue to strengthen its affiliations with both instructors and students by working closely with its faculty advising board and by actively seeking to establish and maintain interactive relationships with currently enrolled students. Finally, it is believed that, through providing a comfortably structured, non-judgmental, self-contained classroom environment, as well as with the faculty and student resources that can be made available by the staff of the Academic Success Center, the gap between expectations and reality, “between the idea and the reality ... between the conception and the creation,” between Sam Cooke’s “Don’t know much about ...” and Kurt Cobain’s “Here we are now, entertain us,” can and will be productively “over come.”

Lessons Learned from an Ambitious Service-Learning ClassCami K. McBride Carrie Miller Valerie Vorderstrasse Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, Roosevelt University

Psychology of Close Relationships (PSYC 384) was a service-learning class that attempted to serve multiple goals. Our overarching goals were: (1) addressing the problem of risky behavior in adolescents and undergraduates, (2) helping undergraduates understand the life experience of low income adolescents, and (3) providing undergraduates with a service experience that would encourage future service and volunteering. In this article, we describe our success with Goals 2 and 3. These were ambitious goals, and if we were to run the class again, we would use what we learned to increase our chances of reaching these goals, and to reduce the labor intensiveness of the course.

As an overview, Psychology 384 was funded by a McCormick Tribune Service-Learning Grant awarded to the first author. It was intended as an academic and experiential service-learning course, in which undergraduates learned relationship skills, then taught the same skills to at-risk adolescents as a service to a local community agency, the Boys and Girls Club of Chicago (BGCC). Both the course and running the groups would teach the undergraduates key relationship skills as well as instruct them in how to teach these skills to teens in groups. The groups were comprised of male and female teen participants currently involved in the BGCC.

So that others may learn from our successes and challenges,

we provide the following about the process of implementing the course. First, we describe our partnership with a willing community service organization. Next, we describe the design of an undergraduate psychology course that included a service-learning component. Further, we explain the logistical challenges we encountered along the way. Next, we provide a summary of themes that emerged in the journal reflections from the undergraduates. Last, we cover some of the lessons we learned from this long process.

Problem and Approach: Relationship Skills

There is increased interest in providing both adolescents and young adults with “pre-marital” or relationship skills education to address the challenges that occur in later, long-term relationships. One format for these programs occurs at the college level, with students receiving course credit. We were interested in addressing relationship skills with a community partner, who would find this content meaningful to its target audience.

Approaching a community partner interested in serving adolescents could take several forms. One could: (1) inquire what an agency’s most pressing service need was, (2) develop an idea in partnership with the agency, or (3) come to the agency with a specific idea that appeared consistent with the mission. We utilized the last strategy in which we approached the BGCC with a relationship skills intervention that we could offer to their participating adolescents. This partnership appeared beneficial for both groups in that the BGCC saw a need for such an intervention and appreciated that we would provide the staff (undergraduate students) and the materials needed to run the program.

However, partnering with an outside agency for a service-learning course is not without its challenges. Approval occurred at multiple levels over a lengthy period of time. Initially, the executive staff of the BGCC approved the idea, followed by the central office BGCC youth coordinator, followed by each club’s coordinator, followed by each club’s youth programs director, and ended with the “buy-in” from the adolescents themselves who came to the groups.

Design of the Course

The course was designed to increase students’ knowledge about marriage and intimate relationships, while also improving their abilities to navigate these relationships. Students did readings on close relationships and marriages as well as on group facilitation and adolescents. We utilized a pre-existing curriculum called “Love U2: Relationship Smarts Plus (LU2),” produced by The Dibble Institute (Pearson, 2007). As the service-learning component, the students provided a program based on the Love U2 curriculum. The program was offered for seven weeks and included identifying healthy relationships, values clarification, dating violence prevention and conflict resolution skills. Graduate students served as teaching assistants/coaches who helped the undergraduates with their service.

Execution of the Program: Logistical Challenges

The logistical challenges we encountered were the product of running groups in four different clubs, using a material-heavy curriculum and attempting to collect research data all at the same time. Because of high interest among undergraduates, we ran groups across four different clubs of the BGCC, which increased the complexity of the program dramatically. Also, the LU2 curriculum, while appropriate and evidence based, required the creation of many materials, including flash cards, game pieces, question prompts, Play-Doh, handouts, etc. Needing all these materials across all clubs complicated the program further. Lastly, we attempted to collect questionnaire data from the adolescents before and after the program. This required additional paperwork, time and coordination from the undergraduates and adolescents. Consider all of the above, with different groups starting on different days of the week, on different weeks during the semester, and with varying numbers of adolescents, and the complications multiply exponentially!

Journal Reflections

Despite these complications, we appeared to reach our goals of increased understanding and appreciation of service among the undergraduates. After each session at the BGCC, the undergraduates composed journal entries based on reflective questions assigned in class. The questions were:

1. What did the teens in the group teach YOU about relationships and how are your experiences as an adolescent the same or different, and why?

2. What has been most challenging so far about running the groups and what has been most rewarding so far about running the groups?

3. What biases or misconceptions have you had about teens and their relationships, and how have these biases or misperceptions been altered?

4. Write a journal entry addressing your reaction to leading a group with other facilitators. What are the advantages and what are the disadvantages of facilitating with others?

5. Write a journal entry describing what it has been like to work with your Boys & Girls Club. How has the experience changed your thoughts about working in the community? What have you learned about non-profit service agencies (like BGCC)?

6. Write a journal entry on how you might modify the Love U2 curriculum. What topics or activities might you add or delete? What do you think your group needs that the curriculum did not provide?

7. Write a journal entry regarding the MOST IMPORTANT things you learned during your service experience at the clubs. What would you want to share with students who might take PSYC 384 in the future?


We read all the journal entries that varied in number based on number of sessions facilitated at the BGCC and coded for themes. The themes that emerged were: basic content summaries of the lessons, misconceptions about teens that were changed, advantages and disadvantages of group co-facilitation, community service/volunteering, reactions to the LU2 curriculum, and how they, as undergraduates, changed from the experience.

Below we present some representative quotes from the undergraduates’ journals on several themes. For example, while recounting her experience with community service and volunteering, one junior said,

“I found that going home after working with these teens is extremely rewarding. I feel like I’m meeting people I would never meet with my lifestyle and it’s exciting to hear what the kids have to say. I even talk about it to my co-workers and I love the reaction they give me when I say I volunteer. It’s usually along the lines of, ‘I could never do something like that’ or they laugh at me because it is so out of my character. Especially with my crazy busy schedule, I feel like I would make time to do more volunteer work after this is over.”

There were both positive and negative reactions to the structured curriculum; the students liked some parts and pointed out flaws. A senior had both positive and negative things to report. She said,

“One of the weaknesses that I have noticed throughout the LU2 curriculum is that there are parts where they are trying to display too many facts and statistics at once. It’s kind of a waste to try to stuff so much information in one lesson because the teens have a hard time concentrating and retaining all the information. Some of the lessons become boring for the teens and their minds wander off.”

She also reported,

“I also noticed that kids were more prone to remembering the catchy phrases that the LU2 curriculum had employed ...This is something I think the LU2 program does well. They come up with easily worded names for the techniques and lessons.”

One prominent theme was about change from the experience. In recounting her experience, a non-traditional age student said,

“I think that I took on the stereotypical viewpoint about them [the adolescents]. I thought that they wouldn’t be engaged and that they wouldn’t care about what we the facilitators were speaking about. Luckily, today I get to admit that I was very wrong about them. My viewpoint couldn’t have been further from the truth. I found myself learning from the teens and some of their comments made me do some self reflecting.”

Lessons Learned

After our own reflection on this course, we have discovered a number of things that if we were to repeat, we would change to improve the process for everyone involved. We discovered that when finding a community partner, it was helpful to network and be flexible, but plan for various contingencies far in advance. In addition, it was crucial to have the students visit the site in advance of the actual service so they could familiarize themselves with the site and the administrators, and so the adolescents would recognize them when they returned for the sessions.

Some things we could not change along the way, but would improve if we were to do this again, would be to warn the students about the time commitment in advance (at registration) and to get help. It would have been much easier to have additional teaching assistants to help, or request a faculty course reduction for the semester, as the time commitment was much more than a regular course. Also, we learned the value of downsizing. Fewer undergraduates working with fewer adolescents would have significantly reduced the complexity of the course. We also found that a more flexible curriculum, or not rigid adherence to the existing one, would have been easier for all involved. Lastly, providing food for the adolescent groups and incentivizing them in other ways was invaluable.

Kozol’s Kids as Adult Learners: Implementing ‘Wraparound’ Instructional PracticesVince Cyboran Graduate Program in Training and Development, Evelyn T. Stone College of Professional Studies, Roosevelt University

Borrowing from both health and social services models, we, as faculty in practitioner programs can move beyond the explicit curriculum of our programs and incorporate “wraparound” services for our students. That is, we can emphasize and magnify the natural strengths and informal supports of our students. We can do so by implementing the three guiding principles of what I term a “Model of Inclusive Education for Professional Development (IEPD)”: competency, connections and caring. This article briefly describes these principles and covers explicit methods and techniques used to foster professional development in students, eschewing “skill and drill” and stimulating students’ self-efficacy and potential. Specifically, it addresses how to provide students with the foundational skills they need to succeed in school and beyond, and how to avoid predatory admissions in higher education.

Competency

Much has been written about fostering competency in professional education (Houle, 1980; Schön, 1987). Much has also been written about providing educational scaffolding for learners in those settings (Bonk, Lee, Kim, & Lin, 2009). Within the IEPD model, the fostering of competency is extended beyond past practices by addressing an additional focus — foundational skills — and a strong focus on learner self-assessment.

Foundational Skills

What to include under foundational skills will necessarily depend upon the profession or area being studied. For example, in the Training and Development Program, I offer the following suggestions for helping students improve their foundational skills.

Type of Foundational Skill Strategy/Technique

Writing Writing for success: Choose key areas on which to focus. Provide a few minutes of direct instruction at the start of each class session. I covered one topic per class; topics were chosen from the text The Elements of Technical Writing by Blake and Bly.

Reading Inspectional reading: Help students understand the structure of any texts in use and how to make the most of examples, charts, etc. provided in the text. Give specific exercises that ask students to demonstrate an understanding of the text organization and examples.1

Organization and Focus Course packs: During the first session, distribute packets that contain the syllabus, feedback sheets, templates for and examples of assignments.

Success paths: Create a graphic organizer of how the course works; that is, showing what work is done to prepare for class, what work is done in class, and what work is done following class. Discuss this during the first session.

Course web sites: Keep the digital versions of the syllabus, templates and so forth there. Also, create forums for students to ask questions and to continue conversations between class sessions.

1 Inspectional Reading: The concept of inspectional reading was introduced by Adler and Van Doren.


Professional Skills

I offer the following suggestions for helping students improve their professional skills and level of competency.

Type of Professional Skill or Competency Level Strategy/Technique

Creating Deliverables Templates: Provide professional-looking templates for students to use when completing their assignments.

Examples: Provide examples of all assignments. These examples will use the templates you have provided. Examples can be garnered from students in prior classes.

Self-assessment Immediate formative assessment: Each class, provide a feedback sheet that asks students to rate their understanding of the topic(s) covered. Students submit these at the end of the class, so the forms can also be used to plan the next class, and take attendance. I typically use a five-point Likert scale (5= fully, to 1 = Not at all).

Periodic formative assessment: Ask students to rate their understanding and achievement of the learning or performance objectives for the class. Consider using “Yes,” “No,” and “Needs work.” Ensure students that this self-assessment is not related to their grades.

Proficiency Alternative assignments: Create different sets of assignments that allow students to demonstrate proficiency in different ways. This should not be considered lowering the standards for certain students. All assignments must be tied to the stated learning and performance objectives.

Connections

Science has demonstrated that human learning entails the growth of neural connections (Gazzaniga, 2004). Within the IEPD model, connections go beyond standard problem solving and make use of research on imagination and creativity (Clark, 2009; Livingston, 2010). I offer the following suggestions for helping students make connections of a variety of sorts.

Type of Connection Techniques

Within a curriculum Use graphic organizers to show the relationship(s) among courses

Creativity Informal curatorial work: Have groups of students create exhibits about important topics. Students post their exhibits on the walls of the classroom. Follow this with a ‘gallery walk’ by the entire class.

Making thinking explicit: facts, predictions, inferences

Just-in-time journalism: Give students five minutes to write a headline and a supporting paragraph about a topic being studied.

Use artwork: display a work of art depicting a situation. Ask students to list two or three facts about the work. Then ask students to make an inference based on the facts depicted.

Avoiding concrete thinking Have students match components of different models about the same topic.

Professional competencies Explicitly list the mapping of courses/learning objectives to competencies from pertinent professional organizations.

Caring

Though historically associated with feminist pedagogy (Noddings, 1984) and sometimes dismissed because of this association, the research suggests that caring is an important ingredient in student success (Wassell, Hawrylak, & LaVan, 2010). Within the IEPD model, the all-too-murky concept of caring must be operationalized — just as any variable must

be in a research study — if it is indeed to be both explicit and consistent.

Numerous guidelines for the operationalization of caring can be found in the literature. Noblit, Rogers, and McCadden (1995) document qualities of caring teachers as:

• Beingcommittedtotheirstudents;acceptingresponsibilityfor student performance whether it involves success or failure;

• Constantlyimprovingtheirownskills;and

• Believingtheirrelationshipswithstudentsarethekeystoneof teaching.

Tronto (1993) emphasizes the importance of caring in professional work beyond education. She describes caring as possessing the following four qualities:

• Attentiveness:caringabout,thatis,noticingtheneedsofothers in the first place;

• Responsibility:takingcareof,andthroughthatassumingresponsibility to care;

• Competence:care-givingandtheactivityofcaringinvolvedin this;

• Responsiveness:care-receiving,whichinvolvesanawareness of one’s own vulnerabilities as well as an appreciation of the different positions of the caregiver and care receiver.

It is up to us to translate these qualities or principles into specific techniques. I will provide one example here that addresses Tronto’s quality of attentiveness: the use of cartoons for alleviating existing or potential anxiety of students. When a few students informally expressed concern about preparing a lesson plan, I created a two-person cartoon, using a cartoon generator (stripcreator.com). This cartoon is shown on a PowerPoint slide that is displayed prior to and during the start of class. I then speak to the cartoon. This practice opens a dialogue with students and helps to set them at ease about the class.

References

Adler, M., & Van Doren, C. (1972). How to read a book. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Blake, G., & Bly, R. (1993). The elements of technical writing. New York: Longman Publishers.

Bonk, C., Lee, M., Kim, N., & Lin, M. (2009). The tensions of transformation in three cross-institutional wikibook projects. Internet & Higher Education, 12(3/4), 126-135.

Clark, M. M. (2009). Beyond critical thinking. Pedagogy, 9, 325-330.

Gazzaniga, M. S. (Ed.). (2004). The cognitive neurosciences III. Boston: MIT Press.

Houle, C. (1980). Continuing learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Livingston, L. (2010). Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111, 59-62.

Noblit, G. W., Rogers, D. L., & McCadden, B. M. (1995). In the meantime: The possibilities of caring. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 680-685.

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tronto, J. (2003). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. London: Routledge.

Wassell, B., Hawrylak, M., & LaVan, S. (2010). Examining the structures that impact English language learners’ agency in urban high schools: Resources and roadblocks in the classroom. Education & Urban Society,

42, 599-619.

Online Learning: Achievement and Challenges for Students and ProfessorsMary Elin Barnish Illinois New Teacher Collaborative, University of Illinois at Urbana – Champaign

Amelia M. Hicks Department of Specialized Studies, College of Education, Roosevelt University

“I am getting my master’s degree online. I am getting all As because I can do the work. I just don’t feel like I am learning.” – A Kaplan University student’s reply when asked about her course work.

The above statement may provide the quintessential conundrum for online education, which is how to provide a high-quality education that produces scholastic growth and is convenient for the student. As universities and colleges provide more online or distance learning, successes and challenges associated with this instructional medium arise. Indeed, traditional classroom instruction does not necessarily translate easily or seamlessly into electronic modes. To address this issue, the authors present an introduction to the rapidly growing medium of online instruction.

Online Learning, Expanded Opportunities


Enrollment numbers show that online learning is increasing among students of all ages. “More than 2 million pre-K–12 students take some form of schooling online right now – whether attending a virtual school for all their classes or just taking one or more courses via the Internet” (Nagel, 2009). The Harvard Business School has speculated that half of all high school classes will be online by 2019 (Zucker, 2008). While these numbers are related to younger students, the current increase in college and university online classes suggests the likelihood that the proportion of college-age students may be even higher when compared to the information about primary, elementary and high school students. Further, the large number of pre-K–12 students enrolled in online instruction may lead to a greater need for teachers who are knowledgeable, skillful and confident when teaching online. Assuming that online learning will meet the above predictions, it is appropriate to consider the needs, preparation, changes and challenges this mode of education will require.

Teacher Criteria for Online Learning

The authors believe and the literature supports the need to consider online learning as both a separate entity and as another medium for learning. For example, Collins (2004) identifies factors important for high quality online education:

• Teachersarecertifiedandhighlyqualifiedtoteachthecourse that they are teaching.

• Teachersareproficientinteachinginanonlineenvironment.

• Onlineteachers,liketraditionalteachers,areevaluatedannually.

• Onlinecourseprovidersprovidequalificationdocumentstotheir client schools or districts.

• Appropriatemetricsforteacherresponsetimetostudentsare established.

• Feedbacktostudentsisprovidedthroughappropriatecommunication vehicles.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Learning

As online learning environments are considered, it is beneficial to discuss advantages and disadvantages of electronic classrooms. According to BizHelp24 (2005), convenience, cost and time are distinct advantages of the distance format. Anywhere students have computer access (home, work, library) will suffice. Since enrollees do not need to travel to class, the cost is less and time is saved. Further savings occur if texts and other learning materials are in electronic formats. Both students and instructors can participate on their own schedule, which may change from day to day as necessary. An extreme example of time advantage applies to the student living in another time zone or another country who can participate in course activities, discussions and projects.

While cost and time can be distinct advantages for the use of

electronic education, they may also cause problems. To make distance learning as cost effective as possible, institutions of higher learning may set large class size limits and teachers may spend a number of hours per day working on a single class. Broadwell and Washington (2009), online teachers and course designers at Roosevelt University, stated that students should plan their time for course work as they would for traditional classes: hours in class plus about four hours per week for homework. Broadwell and Washington suggest that both students and instructors be required to enroll in training on how to participate in online learning

The “human aspect” of learning can present another difficulty. “As online training is through your computer, there is no direct contact to training professionals or teachers” (BizHelp24). “In a virtual environment, the verbal cues aren’t there, and the visual cues aren’t there, so you need to use the technology and the tools and good communication strategies to engage your learner and diagnose what’s happening around learning” (Ash, 2009).

Price (2008) further discusses this lack of human contact inherent in online learning:

“In education, arguably one of the most human of professions, there are already places where we are preparing students in isolation, connected only by computers … I have profound misgivings about the loss of a human face in learning.”

The challenges noted above suggest that online learning might not be appropriate for every students or every instructor. “It is necessary to look for not only the match or mismatch of technology uses with learning principles, but also its match or mismatch with learners and their diverse needs” (McCombs & Vakili, 2005). Jeff Murphy, director of instruction for the Florida Virtual School, agrees: “Online teachers need to be comfortable with and passionate about technology” (Ash, 2009). Glowa (2009) elaborates on this view, noting that teachers must use different knowledge and skills as they teach online since “research shows that a teacher’s skill in face-to-face teaching does not necessarily transfer to an online classroom.”

Designing Online Courses

In many ways, online courses are designed similar to traditional, face-to-face courses. Content, goals, outcomes, instruction and assessments must be determined if a viable, effective curriculum is to be created. Gersten and Knerr (2005) ask online course designers and instructors to consider the following questions that not only help move the planning from traditional classroom instruction to online education, but also ask instructors to determine their own comfort, knowledge, skill and confidence in teaching online.

• HowdoIgenerallyrunaclass?WhatteachingmethodsdoI rely upon most?

• DoIfeelthatIneedtomaintaincontrolofthelearningenvironment? How comfortable would I feel giving that control to the learners and being an equal participant?

• Inthetraditionalclassroomsetting,doIempowerstudents to pursue knowledge on their own? Do I routinely incorporate collaborative exercises and assignments into my courses?

• Howdodiscussionsgenerallygoinmycourses?Aretheydominated by a few? Are my classes truly interactive?

• HowcomfortabledoIfeelwiththeconceptofpromotingself-knowledge in learners?

• HowcomfortableamIwhenstudentsdisagreewithmypoint of view? How would I feel if a student suggested that I read material they have discovered in their learning process?

• HowdoIdefinelearning?WhatdoIhopetoseeaslearningoutcomes from an online class?

Gersten and Knerr (2005) continue with their action plan for creating a viable online course by articulating the following steps: (1) Determine course goals; (2) Determine how students will learn (considering the categories of instructional design: inquisitory presentation, collaborative learning, expository presentation, generative learning, anchored instruction and problem-solving learning); (3) Determine breadth, depth and organization; (4) Determine the nature of course interactions; and (5) Determine how learning will be assessed.

The American Distance Education Consortium (2003) further notes that the following are characteristics of quality web-based teaching and learning:

1. Fosters meaning-making, discourse

2. Moves from knowledge transmissions to learner-controlled systems

3. Provides for reciprocal teaching

4. Is learner-centered

5. Encourages active participation, knowledge construction

6. Based on higher level thinking skills – analysis, synthesis and evaluation

7. Promotes active learning

8. Allows group collaboration and cooperative learning

9. Provides multiple levels of interaction

10. Focuses on real-world problem solving

Tools for Online Environments

As online courses are developed, the specific delivery system, instructional tools, teaching strategies and type of learning community formed must be determined. Kaplan (2002) identified two distinct types of learning communities: “E-learning communities are groups of people connected solely via technology … Blended learning communities integrate online learning and face-to-face meetings.”

Kaplan (2002) created a detailed consideration for “features of a web-based environment,” which led to the goal of providing an easy-to-use collaborative environment:

• Synchronoustools(audioconferencing,webconferencing,videoconferencing, chat, instant messaging, whiteboards)

• Asynchronous tools (discussion boards, calendar, links,group announcements, email, surveys, polls)

• Contentintegration(courseware,streamingmedia,narratedslideshows, and e-books) document management (resource library, version tracking and control, permission-based access)

Assessment

When examining online learning, assessment must be viewed in a number of ways and for a number of different purposes: assessment of the online course and/or online program; technology and online tools used for individual assessment purposes in online or traditional instruction sessions; and assessment of student performance within an online course.

A number of sources provide feasible guidelines for online learning. Examining electronic courses in a very general way, Roblyer and Ekhami (2000) developed a rubric for assessing interactive qualities of distance learning courses that includes four elements:

1. Social rapport-building activities created by the instructor

2. Instructional designs for learning created by the instructor

3. Levels of interactivity of technology resources

4. Impact of interactive qualities as reflected in learner response

When considering the use of technological tools for assessment of student achievement, Waters (2009) believes that e-portfolios will become more common not only for university students, but also for K-12 pupils.

Trotter (2008) asks instructors and course designers to look toward the future when devising data collection methods used for assessment purposes. “ ‘Online [education] adds a number of unique elements – in some cases, we need to build new instruments,’ said Timothy J. Magner, the director of the Education Department’s office of technology.” Certainly, traditional assessments such as tests, quizzes, reflections and self-critiques may be appropriate for online use. Projects, presentations and other performance-based assessments can also be used in online courses although the methods for submitting and sharing these assessments may require the use of electronic tools beyond those of the software used for course management. Regardless of the assessment of student progress that an online instructor may choose, the teacher must determine the role of both formative and summative assessments within the course, and decide how students may revise their work as they move through the course content and assignments.


Natriello (2005) foresees a more radical view of futuristic education: “We should squarely face the prospect of the radical, revolutionary changes ahead for education, realizing that educators will not escape the forces of developing technologies, globalization and process rationalization that are washing over all other aspects of life in the post-industrial era. Moreover, we should attempt to shape them to achieve our educational goals and values.”

Cullen and Harris (2009) warn of the depth with which online learning must be considered: “We posit that readiness for online learning has less to do with students’ knowledge of technology and digital dexterity and more to do with their knowledge of how to learn and their motivation to engage fully in the process. Therefore, we submit that the introduction of online experiences for students should be consciously engineered to best capitalize on their readiness for independent learning, and that the progression into the online learning environment be intentionally built into the undergraduate curriculum rather than simply offering students an open menu of face-to-face, hybrid, or fully online courses.”

Finally, Natriello (2005) poses a critical challenge: “Perhaps the most important question deriving from the development of distance learning is whether we can go this distance.”

ReferencesAmerican Distance Education Consortium (ADEC). (2003). Guiding principles for distance teaching learning. Retrieved from http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/distance-teaching principles.html.

Ash, K. (2009, Spring/Summer). Characteristics of ‘highly qualified’ online teachers. Education Weeks’s Digital Directions.

Broadwell, K., & Washington, L. (2009, December 3). Personal interview.

BizHelp24. (2005). Advantages and disadvantages of learning online. Retrieved from http://www.bizhelp24.com/you-and-work/advantages-disadvantages-of-learning-online.html.

Collins, S. R. (2004). e-learning frameworks for NCLB. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office Educational Technology.

Cullen, R., & Harris, M. (2009, September). Online learning: more than technical savvy. National Teaching and Learning Forum Newsletter, 18(5). Retrieved from http://www.ntlf.com/.

Gersten, K., & Knerr, D. (2005). RU online course development guidelines and resources. Chicago: Roosevelt University.

Glowa, E. (2009). Guidelines for professional development of online teachers. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board Educational Technology Cooperative. Retrieved from http://publications.sreb.org/2009/09T01_Guide_profdev_online_teach.pdf.

Kaplan, S. (2002). Building communities: Strategies for collaborative learning. Learning Circuits. Retrieved from http://www.astd.org/LC/2002/0802_kaplan.html.

McCombs, B. L., & Vakili, D. (2005, August 8). A learner-centered framework for e-learning. Teachers College Record, 107, 1582-1600.

Nagel, D. (2009). 10.5 million pre-K-12 students will attend classes online by 2014. The Journal. Retrieved from http://thejournal.com/articles/2009/10/28/10.5-million-prek-12-students-will-attend-classes-online-by-2014.aspx?sc_lang=en.

Natriello, G. (2005). Modest changes, revolutionary possibilities: Distance learning and the future of education. Teachers College Record, 107, 1885-1904.

North American Council for Online Learning. (2006). National standards for quality online teaching. Vienna, VA: NACOL.

Price, W. J. (2008). The impending death of face-to-face instruction. Education Week, 27(41), 24-25.

Roblyer, M. D., & Ekhami, L. (2000, June). How interactive are YOUR distance courses?: A rubric for assessing interaction in distance learning. Paper presented at DLA, Callaway, GA.

Trotter, A. (2008). Education department released guide for evaluating online learning, Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/07/16/43edonline_web.h27.html&destination=http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/07/16/43edonline_web.h27.html&levelld=2100.

Waters, J. K. (2009). E-portfolios come of age. T.H.E. Journal, 36(10), 24-29.

Watson, J. (2008). Blended learning: The convergence of online and face-to-face education. Promising practices in online learning. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning.

Zucker, A. (2008, October 13). The future of online high schools. Teachers College Record. ID Number: 15405.

Higher Learning and Presenting Social Justice in the Classroom: Cultural World Views, Communication Dialectics, and Ethical Frameworks Stanford C. Traywick Department of Communication, College of Arts and Sciences, Roosevelt University

At the beginning of the 21st Century, institutions of higher learning in the United States should recognize, analyze and address the fact that student body diversity affects the delivery of higher education in the classroom. We educators who are the “gatekeepers” to the educational preparedness of students must recognize that the move from homogeneity to diversity among the student body also presents another set of circumstances in the classroom. More often we must be able to reach out to people whose universe and outlook bring different perceptions and realities. An analysis of those universes comprised of different perceptions and realities points us to a world whose citizens do not all have the same opportunities or access to equal income, equal participation in the political system, housing, medical care or education. Importantly, our respective institutions recognize, analyze and address those societal inequities through our social responsibility to provide opportunity and access to higher education through the application of social justice.

Our social responsibility to society through the application of social justice demands that our actions and decisions reflect the interests of all stakeholders in our society. The stakeholders in our society are simply defined as “the advantaged” and the “disadvantaged.”

What is social justice? There are various definitions of social justice. For this discourse, the following is submitted as a definition of social justice:

Social justice is the belief that all within a society are entitled to the same rights and privileges socially, educationally and economically. There should be an agenda of affirmative action herein defined as a “positive movement forward” not race-based obfuscatory legal rhetoric generally applied as the definition of affirmative action. Social justice is recognizing and understanding acts of oppression and inequality, producing an agenda of affirmative action and taking action to overcome oppression and inequality.

A social justice agenda should be considered a universal requirement in developing and maintaining a society that will take action to overcome oppression and inequality. How do we address and integrate issues of social justice across curricula in the classroom? How do we teach social justice in the classroom?

We can address and integrate issues of social justice across curricula in the classroom through self-reflexivity, by gaining a basic working knowledge of cultural world views, through understanding and developing communication dialectics, and applying ethical principles.

It is imperative that educators develop self-reflexivity. Self reflexivity is the process of learning to understand oneself and one’s position in society (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Educators must define and recognize their strengths and weaknesses as it pertains to understanding, delivering and leading a social justice agenda. Our race, age, gender and socioeconomic background certainly factor into our presentation of social justice. Where do we as educators fit into society relative to social justice? Self-reflexivity will assist educators in recognizing if and when we may be tempted to take credit for our possible advantaged positions in society and deposit blame on the disadvantaged in society for their position in society. Besides assigning reasons for others’ behavior, we must also provide explanations for our own behavior (Lane, 2008). Self-reflexivity promotes the qualities of understanding and empathy necessary to fulfill our duties under social justice.

Educators should gain a basic knowledge of cultures and their worldviews. Culture and worldviews form the basis of how one is socialized to relate to people. Culture is the sum of the values, rituals, symbols, beliefs and thought processes that are learned, shared by a group of people, then transmitted from generation to generation (Cateora, Gilly, & Graham, 2009). A worldview describes how a culture perceives the world (individualistic vs. collective). We are all bound by cultural values as they represent a “set of deeply held beliefs” (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). A basic knowledge of culture can assist educators in embracing cultural approaches to social justice. Educators can then attempt to anticipate behavior through possible enculturated behavioral patterns, emphasize a type of cultural immersion approach, or learn to understand and value the historical contexts of another’s experience. Cultural knowledge makes the application of social justice more personal.

An understanding of communication dialectics, which influences how we engage the students, assists in our delivery of social justice concepts. Briefly, a dialectical approach recognizes how we are influenced by and can hold onto contradictory ideas at the same time. There are a number of communication dialectics to review, but this discourse will concern itself with three: Differences-Similarities dialectic, History Past/Present-Future Dialectic, and Privilege-Disadvantage dialectic.

The Differences-Similarities dialectic recognizes that people are simultaneously similar to and different from each other (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). This dialectic points one to identify differences in cultural values, language and nonverbal behavior (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Educators recognize that if we only identify differences, we will run the risk of falling into the “trap” of stereotyping and prejudice which obfuscates our ability to reason. Social justice requires educators’ willingness to reason and to understand people who may express the same concerns but in different contexts.

The History Past/Present-Future dialectic directs us to view simultaneously the past and the present in understanding communication (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Our divergent past and present experiences shape the views we have as they relate to society members’ present and future actions. This dialectic offers a brief but important opportunity to lead all to examine how different perceptions of the same threads of history delineate our attitudes with regard to recognizing the need for the call to enact social justice.

The Privilege-Disadvantage dialectic recognizes that people may be simultaneously privileged and disadvantaged, or privileged in some contexts, and disadvantaged in others (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). This dialectic leads educators to view their roles and places in society. For instance, some educators may have traveled a less difficult road through life and academia than the students they teach. Although the educator may be privileged because the path to education may have been less arduous, the educator is disadvantaged because he or she may not fully grasp the mind-set of students who may have faced more obstacles traveling the same path. Educators should recognize the importance of this dialectic when developing strategies to present social justice concepts.

Educators must understand and develop a working knowledge of basic ethical theories and delineate their applications to social justice. There are numerous theories or ethical frameworks that can be referenced. This discourse limits its references to Immanuel Kant’s “Categorical Imperative,” William David Ross’ “prima facie duties of beneficence, nonmaleficence and reparation,” and John Rawls’ “Liberty and Difference Principles.”

Kant’s “categorical imperative” finds motives to be of the highest importance, in that it expects persons to make the right decisions for the right reasons (Beauchamp, Bowie, & Arnold, 2009). At its core, the categorical imperative demands that one judge the rightness of an act by analyzing if one would accept the same decision and consequence actions being applied to oneself. The categorical imperative creates personal connections to members of a society.


William David Ross’ “prima facie” (“at first sight”) duties are duties that constitute moral obligations. Under a paradigm of social justice we are obligated to improve the happiness, virtue or intelligence of others (duty of beneficence), obligated not to create situations that may cause undue harm (duty of nonmaleficence), and to rectify those actions that have placed or kept others at a disadvantage (duty of reparation).

John Rawls advised society that we must put into place fair methods for choosing how to resolve an issue. The focus of Rawls’ theory, then, is on social justice, that is, on a conception of justice that is suited to a well-ordered society (Boatright, 2009). Rawls states that we should view our actions through a system of distributive justice that is defined as a liberty principle and a difference principle. Rawls explains it in much greater detail, but briefly, society must see that: (A) Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive and total system of basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all; and (B) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged and attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity (Boatright, 2009). Therefore, each within a society should be given an opportunity to experience the same equal shares of that society’s benefits and burdens.

How do we teach social justice in the classroom? We prepare ourselves through self-reflexivity; by gaining a basic, working knowledge of cultural worldviews; by developing and understanding communication dialectics and applying ethical principles. Some methods that this author has used or is using include the following:

1. “Who am I” heritage-based essays. After I have offered some of my own heritage background, the class is assigned the task of relating their “Roots” narrative for discussion in the next class. Self-reflexivity works for the students, also. It can be used in multicultural, languages, communication, English, history, global marketing and education classes.

2. Construct and deliver your own surveys or questionnaires with topics that relate to past, present or current social justice concepts/issues. This way one can gather data relating to attitudes and perceptions held by the classroom “village” on the chosen topic and begin a brief discussion the next class. This technique can be matched with statistics, political science, sociology, education and psychology classes.

3. In-class group discussion assignments. Again, deliver a topic germane to that day’s class assignment and have groups divide for point/counterpoint discussion.

4. In-class role playing/panel discussions. Provide the students with the time to lead the discussion and provide their own insights as to how they would enact social justice concepts for the named scenario.

5. Judicious use of movies/documentaries. Educators should attempt to obtain some visuals that delineate life other than mainstream from the co-culture’s

perspective. I suggest the following: television series (A Different World; view 1988-1993 seasons, I’ll Fly Away), films (White Man’s Burden, which fictitiously portrayed social role reversals of African Americans and whites; The Long Walk Home, which presented the Montgomery Bus Boycott through a personal narrative of white and African-American families affected by the events; My Family, Latino/Hispanic generational family narrative; Once Upon a Time When We Were Colored, southern African-American experience), and documentaries from PBS (Hawaiians, Chinese Americans and Puerto Ricans: Our American Story).

If educators can face the challenge of presenting social justice issues, we can deliver social justice in the classroom as a norm. We can commit to social justice through social responsibility by instilling in our students a calling to lifelong service to our community that can be passed down from generation to generation.

ReferencesBeauchamp, T. L., Bowie, N. E., & Arnold, D. G. (2009). Ethical theory and business (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Boatright, J. R. (2009). Ethics and the conduct of business (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Cateora, P. R., Gilly, M. C., & Graham, J. I. (2009). International marketing (14th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lane, S. D. (2008). Interpersonal communication. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in

contexts (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Integrating Civic Engagement into an Integral Calculus CourseBárbara González-Arévalo Melanie Pivarski Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Science, College of Arts and Sciences, Roosevelt University

Integral Calculus is a second semester calculus course (MATH 232) taken by all mathematics and actuarial science majors as well as by all biology, chemistry and computer science majors who are pursuing a BS degree. For the mathematics and actuarial science majors, this course is a transition to upper level mathematics courses. For the others, it is a terminal math course. Usually there are 8 to 25 students per section, and the students vary from freshman to senior level. As part of the course, all students are required to complete online homework problems in MyMathLab. The topics covered by this course are Riemann sums, the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, integration techniques, separable and linear differential equations, applications of integration, sequences and series.

Previously this course was a traditional four credit hour, content-driven, one semester calculus course. In Spring 2010, we offered a redesigned version incorporating a semester-long group project modeling the spread of HIV/AIDS. The project was adapted from Janke (1993).

Changes to the Course

In order to accommodate the project, we removed two sections on “Applications of Integration” that involved work, fluid force and center of mass. When dealing with separable differential equations, we focused on transmission of disease models rather than Newton’s Law of Heating and Cooling. We used Maple for all of the numerical integration and differential equation sections in order to give students more familiarity with the programming language. Although we followed the general structure of the calculus text, we reordered topics slightly in order to cover differential equations earlier in the semester.

We also incorporated weekly reflective journals where students wrote their thoughts and opinions on mathematics, HIV/AIDS, the relationship between mathematics and the outside world and their study habits. Overall, students’ grades were based on the following categories: weekly online homework and Maple labs (10 percent); participation (10 percent); weekly quizzes (10 percent); two midterm exams (25 percent); comprehensive final exam (20 percent); project (15 percent); and weekly reflective journals (10 percent).

In particular, the group projects had the following components: biological background (15 percent, due week 3); differential equation background (15 percent, due week 6); data collection (10 percent, due week 8); model building (20 percent, due week 12); poster and presentation (15 percent, due week 13); and final paper (25 percent, due end of semester).

By redesigning the course, we wanted students to improve their learning, interest and retention in integral calculus; gain critical thinking skills in interpreting integrals and derivatives in a real-world example; work with a team dedicated to solving real-world mathematical problems; and increase their sense of civic engagement and appreciation of the social relevance and general usefulness of mathematics through modeling the spread of HIV/AIDS.

I’ve gained so much from doing this project. What I loved about it was that it forced me to think critically. It wasn’t just plugging numbers into a model. It was: Does this model make sense? Does its epidemic curve make sense? Would this be a reliable method to predict future cases? I loved being able to apply concepts from the class to a different discipline. My favorite was Project 2. It gave the most solid understanding, like a little light bulb going on.

– Actuarial Science Major

Community Involvement

The students presented a poster of their work at the Roosevelt University Math and Science Research Symposium. They explained to their peers, faculty and community members the work they did to create the models, the insights they gained about how the biology and mathematics connected to each other and to the world, and why they made their modeling choices. They discussed how they used mathematics to gain understanding of a civic issue and how this impacted them personally.

There was an optional field trip to the Illinois State Mathematics Association of America meeting in April; eight (35 percent) of the students attended. The experience was inspiring to the students. Most expressed interest in going again next year, and some wanted to begin a research project to present at next year’s meeting.

I had a great experience at the ISMAA conference and I really do think that people (even those who are not math majors) should go and experience it. I learned so much about math and how it applies to everyday life, that I appreciate it even more. I know that this will help me and you in our future education/career.

– Biology Major

Lessons Learned

Our experience with this course in Spring 2010 showed that students benefited greatly from doing the projects. The main benefits from the project were: a greater appreciation for how mathematics is used in the world; an understanding of the basics of mathematical modeling and the issues involved; and an enthusiasm for communicating mathematics.

These preliminary results are anecdotal; there were a total of 23 students taking the course, so it is impossible to make statistical claims at this time.

Project Groups

Group creation and management were the greatest challenges. Each group consisted of 2 to 4 students. The optimal size was four students. We grouped the students so that each group consisted of at least one math or actuarial science major and at least one biology or chemistry major.

Typically, a small percentage of students drop after the first exam; this semester was no different. It was necessary to rearrange the groups to reflect the new class size; this caused stress among some of the affected students.

In future semesters, we plan to address this by creating new groups for each of the first two project parts. In the final groups, we would like to have students with different skill levels and different majors mixed into all of the groups. We plan on surveying the students after each of the two project parts in order to determine their commitment to working on the project. This will help us to avoid inter-student conflicts.


Information Gathering

The students attended a mandatory library information session at the start of the semester. There they learned how to use print and online resources to find reliable information about HIV/AIDS, epidemics and modeling.

During the project, students were required to collect approximately 20 years worth of data from a reputable source, typically the CDC website at www.cdc.gov. There were some issues with the data; methods for collecting and counting cases of HIV/AIDS varied over time. Student groups that used two different sources (even within the CDC website) found abrupt jumps between the two data sets. This helped students to understand modeling better; real-world data always has some inherent error. Our students were quite capable of commenting on various error sources.

Technology

During weeks 3 and 6, the students completed Maple labs on the topics of numerical integration and differential equations. These were held during regular class periods in order to familiarize students with how to import data, use functions and plot in Maple. Project Part 4 had students use Maple to fit their real-world data to a variety of polynomial, exponential and logistic models. This worked well for all, but the logistic fit. We fit the data to a logistic function in Mathlab and gave this result to the students. This led to a discussion on the limitations of technology.

Course Structure

We plan to adjust the grading breakdown in the future. Currently, the reflective journals are weighted too heavily; we plan on making the project worth 20 percent and the homework 15 percent. The score for the reflective journals will be included as a portion of the project grade.

Reference

Janke, S. (1993). Modeling the AIDS epidemic. In P. Straffin (Ed.), Applications of calculus (MAA Notes No. 29). Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.

Creating a Socially Just Democracy through Interpretive DiscussionElizabeth Meadows Department of Curricular Studies, College of Education, Roosevelt University

In John Dewey’s views, as expressed in Democracy and Education, and in my own views of a democracy characterized by social justice, learning to listen with respect and interest to views different from one’s own is essential. Several democratic practices are available through participation in interpretive discussion that can help people learn to live peacefully and productively together in college classrooms and beyond, in our diverse, United States society. Too often, interactions

between people of differing gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and political persuasion are marked by conflict, alienation and even hatred. We witness this in divisive political rhetoric, in acts of overt, racial discrimination on university campuses and elsewhere, and in the increasing number of hate crimes in recent years. The structure of interpretive discussions promotes the democratic principles of listening to others’ views about a text with the purpose of understanding these views more fully; expressing one’s views with the purposes of identifying and resolving a concern shared by most, if not all, participants; and working together to evaluate and improve upon the discussion process.

Why Is It Important to Value, Listen to, and Understand Ideas and Perspectives that Differ from One’s Own in a Democracy? What Does Dewey Say?

Two traits that “precisely … characterize the democratically constituted society” (Dewey, 1916, p. 87) according to Dewey seem to require that people listen to and understand perspectives and ideas that are both similar to and different from their own. These two traits are:

1. “… more numerous and more varied points of shared common interest … greater reliance upon the recognition of mutual interests as a factor in social control” (Dewey, 1916, p. 86).

2. “… not only freer interaction between social groups … but change in social habit — its continuous readjustment through meeting the new situations produced by varied intercourse” (Dewey, 1916, 87).

Dewey may mean that in order to co-create a democracy, people need to communicate with one another about their goals in ways that allow them to identify those they have in common and to increase the number and variety of their common goals. Because people are unique (Dewey, 1916), there will be differing ideas about which aims to pursue and how to go about them in any social group. Therefore, group members need to express their own ideas and viewpoints and listen to those of others in order to arrive at common goals and to work together to decide on how to achieve them. The latter may be what Dewey means by “greater reliance upon the recognition of mutual interests as a factor in social control” (Dewey, 1916, p. 86). This may mean that people need to communicate with one another and negotiate their differences in order to come up with plans and ways to work toward them. For example, in an interpretive discussion, when participants each share their differing, genuine questions about a text, they try to arrive at a common question to work together to resolve it.

By his second trait, Dewey may mean that people in a democracy, as members of social groups, such as families, political groups, social groups, religious groups, racial groups, etc., need to communicate openly with many different groups of people in ways that give rise to events and contexts that are new to them. Then, people need to adjust how they live their lives in response to these new events and contexts that they

encounter when they communicate with people who were previously unknown to them. For Dewey, these adjustments need to focus on the constant improvement of a democratic society because for him, a democracy is, “… a society which not only changes but which has the ideal of such changes as will improve it …” (Dewey, 1916, p. 81).

Five Democratic Practices that Educators Can Engage People in to Enact Dewey’s Two Traits of a Democracy

When Dewey writes, “… after a greater individualization … and a broader community of interest … have come into existence, it is a matter of deliberate effort to sustain and extend them” (Dewey, 1916, p. 87), he may mean that educators in a democracy need to help children, youth and adults learn how to sustain a democracy in terms of its two fundamental traits that require people to value, listen to and understand perspectives and ideas that are both similar to and different from their own as described above. The following practices may correspond with what Dewey would recommend that people learn how to do. Each practice is labeled with the trait it supports.

1. Communicate with one another in ways that help people realize their shared interests and multiply the goals that they hold in common. [Trait 1]

2. Communicate with one another and negotiate differences to accomplish common goals. This may be what Dewey means by “… individuals who participate in an interest so that each has to refer his own action to that of others and to consider the action of others to give point and direction to his own …” (Dewey, 1916, p. 87). [Trait 1]

3. Interrelate with members of many different groups of people. [Trait 2]

4. Learn how to adjust their ways of living and thinking in response to new situations that arise when they communicate with members of groups other than their own. [Trait 2]

5. Communicate together to constantly reflect upon and work to improve the quality of life of all people in a group and society (Dewey’s definition of democracy).

People Engage in These Five Democratic Practices in Interpretive Discussions

Interpretive discussion is a form of teaching and learning whereby teachers and students can engage in the above five democratic practices and thereby, learn how to value, listen to and understand ideas and perspectives that differ from their own. Haroutunian-Gordon (1991, 2009) has written about teaching through interpretive discussions, the ways in which they work, and how people learn through them. Here, I briefly describe what an interpretive discussion is and how it involves participants in each democratic practice.

1. Students and teachers bring their own genuine questions about the meaning of a text to an interpretive discussion and work together to identify a shared concern. Examples of texts are written works, films, mathematical problems, data sets, works of art, etc. that hold enough ambiguity to support questioning. [Practice 1]

2. The teacher and/or participants begin the discussion by expressing their questions and working together to arrive at a shared concern. In this process, participants share and listen to their differing questions about, and interpretations of, the text in order to come to and resolve a question of shared concern to the group. [Practice 2]

3. Participants in interpretive discussions can be K-12 students, pre-service teachers and/or other students in university settings. Therefore, they relate with one another as members of different families, political groups, social groups, religious groups, racial groups, etc., and convene in a new group to discuss and derive meaning from a text. [Practice 3]

4. Participants in interpretive discussions are encouraged by the process to consider others’ ideas and perspectives and to reconsider and develop their ways of thinking in response to these ideas and perspectives that are new to them. [Practice 4]

5. Participants are encouraged to reflect on their discussion processes as a group to constantly improve them. [Practice 5] The teacher offers but does not limit participants to criteria such as these: Did the teacher and participants help one another come to and make progress toward resolving a question shared by the group? [Practice 4]; Clarify their own ideas? [Practice 1]; Understand one another’s ideas? [Practice 2]; Encourage discussion from everyone? [Practices 2, 3 and 4]; Did participants change their ideas about this shared question through the process of the discussion? [Practice 4].

Through evaluating the discussion process as a group, participants may come to appreciate working with others to improve situations for themselves and others. They may then bring their learning about how to do this to work with others to improve social processes and problems, such as providing excellent education for all, addressing homelessness and redressing other forms of injustice.

Conclusion

Teachers can help students sustain a democracy by learning to value, listen to and understand ideas and perspectives that differ from their own through interpretive discussions. When educators invite students to develop their own genuine questions about a text and then help them engage with others in a process of identifying a shared concern and working together to resolve this shared concern, all are engaged in democratic practices that can be utilized both within and

ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY MINI-CONFERENCE ON TEACHING20

outside of classrooms to sustain a democratic society and to improve it.

ReferencesDewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education, New York: Macmillan Company.

Haroutunian-Gordon, S. (1991). Turning the soul: Teaching through conversation in the high school. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Haroutunian-Gordon, S. (2009). Learning to teach through discussion:

The art of turning the soul. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

BLCA070701

proceedings of the roosevelt university mini …...1 editorial preface the seventh roosevelt...

Documents