Sunday, November 28, 2010

Teaching with Technology

Guest blogger: Maribel Charle Poza

Teaching with Technology

When one looks around Lincoln University these days, there is little doubt that, as far as technology is concerned, we are in a new era. As new buildings rise and others are renovated, we find our classrooms equipped with the best and the newest that instructional technology has to offer. Our old blackboards were replaced by smart boards. We went from maybe having a television monitor in the classroom to having unlimited access to a computer connected to the Internet. At the language laboratory, we moved from cassette tapes to digital files and from CDs to streaming audio from the Internet. Next semester, the university will migrate our online content from obsolete WebCT to new and exciting Desire 2 Learn.

This technological transformation offers a world of possibilities, but also comes with great challenges. Many find themselves wondering if the benefits compensate for the expensive and time consuming nature of teaching with technology. The learning curve can be steep for some, while for others it is hard to find useful ways to incorporate the new tools into their current teaching. Finally, appropriate use of the technology by students can become an issue, especially in those classrooms that double up as computer labs.

It is my hope that the answers to the two questions that I pose in this posting and the comments from the faculty will help those who find themselves at a loss when it comes to integrating technology. The premise of this posting is that while I acknowledge the challenges that come with technology, I believe that it is after all only a tool and that it is the user who determines if it enhances or hinders the teaching and learning process.

Why should I use technology in my teaching?

There are many possible answers to this question. Some would say that if technology is available and a great investment has been made, then it must be used. Others may say that technology is present in the student culture and that we should capitalize on that fact to motivate our learners. A few may point to the fact that there is a great deal of pressure in academia to use technology, as shown in the majority of position announcements in our profession.

These are all valid answers, but they miss the real value of technology integration: We must use technology to provide better learning opportunities to our students. In other words, technology must always be at the service of good teaching, either enhancing our current practices, or allowing us to teach our students in new ways. Therefore, before we decide whether to use a specific tool we must always ask ourselves this question, will this technology improve the teaching and learning process or is it just innovative but non-essential?

How are you using technology?

These are a few examples of how I have used technology at the service of my teaching. I use the communicative approach to language teaching, so my main goal is to provide additional opportunities for my students to communicate in Spanish:
Course Management Software (WebCT): I have integrated this technology to create computer-mediated communication opportunities to my students through the use of tools such as chat rooms and bulletin boards. I have also used WebCT to expose students to authentic input in Spanish through the integration of audio and video files in the language with myself and teaching assistants as actors.

Language Laboratory Technology: Elementary and intermediate Spanish courses include weekly laboratory sessions where students are exposed to different varieties of the language in different formats. Students listen to different varieties of the language, they view educational and authentic videos, and they record themselves speaking in Spanish.

Smart Boards: The addition of this tool to our classrooms has helped me to provide high-quality visual aids to improve student comprehension of the Spanish language. It has also served to increase student motivation and knowledge by becoming a window to the culture of Spanish-speaking countries.

These are by no means the only ways that I could have used the tools available and I am constantly seeking new methodologically-sound means to enhance my teaching through the use of technology. However, I know that most of us on campus are making excellent use of the technologies that we have available. It would be very helpful for all of us to share our ideas in this blog for others to read and maybe adapt to their classes. Please write your comments to this posting and add your ideas on how to make the best use of technology and how to overcome some of the challenges.

Monday, November 22, 2010

LU Faculty’s Interests and Concerns Parallel Those across the Nation

Guest Blogger: Jim DeBoy

In perusing the last few months of Academe, I was rather surprised by the “hot topics” in higher education, in that those selected for publication were virtually identical to the issues and concerns that have flummoxed us these past three or four months. While the articles themselves may not lead us to the promised land where all students maximize their abilities and talents, the authors do confirm that our difficulties/challenges are shared by most of our counterparts on other campuses. Maybe commiseration is beneficial.

This report will be an attempt to identify some of those issues that faculty (Lincoln and others) deem important and, perhaps more to the point, expend a great deal of time and effort. There is no attempt here to supply answers to the questions raised; I will opt for the Socratic instructional technique and construct additional questions to ones raised by Academe contributors. There are 23 questions in all and, like most important issues in life, there will undoubtedly be more than one reasonable response. Happy problem solving!

1. College Rankings
a. Is a college’s “quality” almost fully determined by its selectivity in admissions?

b. Is not selectivity closely related to first-year students’ SAT scores?

c. Are not college ranking formulae heavily weighted by SAT scores?

d. Are not “high-scoring” SAT students likely from “high-earning” parents?

e. Should not colleges be evaluated for what they actually do for students once they arrive on campus?

f. Should not value-added impact supersede admissions criterion as a factor in rankings?

g.Why do US News & World Report rankings criteria differ for HBCUs (polling of HBCU presidents and provosts)?

h. Want LU to jump in those rankings? Hire 20 more fulltime faculty members, thereby decreasing both faculty-student ratio and number of classes that exceed 50 enrollees


2. Teaching
a. Are colleges truly committed to effective teaching?

b. Do publications and obtaining external funding warrant more consideration for tenure/promotion than teaching?

c. Does knowledge of one’s field make one knowledgeable how to teach it well?

d. Is not teaching effectiveness comprised of the ability to master and articulate the content and control classroom dynamics?

e. Should not new faculty be mentored in educational assessment, classroom management, curriculum development, and student advising?

f. When do students learn best? (Hint: personal investment, active engagement,prompt, helpful feedback, and cooperative learning with peers and faculty)

g. Does assessment of teaching effectiveness (for promotion/tenure purposes) consist only of student end-of-semester course evaluations and chair’s observations?

3. Assessment of Student Learning

a. Is the ultimate assessment goal of “corporate-model” higher education to identify and administer one high-stakes test for all students? And then use those results to reward or punish faculty?

b. Will decisions about promotion and tenure be judged solely by learning outcomes (at least the teaching effectiveness component)?

c. Should not faculty/administrators be more concerned what students did not know/could not do when they first entered college ? (the so-called “value-added” effect )

d. If assessment of student learning is here to stay, how can we increase faculty interest and expertise in the assessment process?

e. Are all faculty presently capable and willing of making informed judgments about curriculum and academic standards? (These duties do fall under the auspices of faculty)

f. Has the government begun replacing both institutional and faculty judgment in academic matters?

g. What happens if/when government succeeds in controlling regional accreditors, e.g., Middle States?

h. Are learning goals in the liberal arts diametrically opposed to the culture of assessment (as some have proposed)?

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Using Technology to Address Student Differences

Guest Blogger: Frank Worts

The university, faculty and students have invested much time and resources into technology as tools for better learning. After review of the Facility Planning Website, I have identified four areas that might lead to further faculty discussion and better differentiated learning for students.

Tomlinson (1995) describes differentiated instruction (DI) as “a flexible approach to teaching in which the teacher plans and carries out varied approaches to the content, the process, and/or the product in anticipation of and in response to student differences in readiness, interests, and learning need” (p. 10).

As I reviewed the material on the , four important issues caught my attention which might provide a framework for using technology to address student differences.

One is the importance of identifying the educational philosophy and methods of learning and teaching of a given department and instructors, before undertaking the discussion of technology. A technology plan can’t be planned in a vacuum;it needs the context for a proper vision to be defined (Brown & Lippincott, 2003).

Second, more and more learning is taking place outside of the physical classroom, especially in higher education. Thus, the meaning of “Classroom” must be defined not so much as a physical space but more of a learning continuum of physical to virtual space. It has to be something that is movable within the bounds of a traditional classroom space, but that seamlessly evolves to other spaces and virtual spaces where individuals continue the learning process. Thus information that is developed should be easily transported from any segment on this continuum.

Third, learning is more and more perceived of as an active, social, collaborative constructive process that requires learning tools that are portable and that encourage debate and discussion, incorporating real life data as well as theory into the learning process in synchronous and non-synchronous media.

Four, the level and number of actors with a say in the process make the planning process more important, and necessitate a broad grassroots continuous process with feedback based on data collected from real educational activities within the educational process. This last point fits nicely into the University’s focus on evaluation. As the NLII White Paper (2004) indicates, administration, faculty, students, facilities management, planning department, information technology, library, teaching and learning support, community, business leaders, and politicians should all be a part of the technology planning process.

______________

Brown, M. B., & Lippincott, J. K. (2003). Learning spaces; More than meets the eye. Educause Quarterly, 1, 14-16.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Monday, November 8, 2010

A Luddite Defense of the Book

Guest Blogger: Steve McCullough

In the history department, we believe one of our missions is to prepare our majors for either law school or graduate school. While I cannot speak of what it takes to succeed in law school, as someone who earned his doctorate in 2007, I feel I am qualified to speak how we can help our students thrive in graduate school. And for me, the answer is more reading.

One of the shocks many first year graduate school students face is the amount of reading they are expected to do on a weekly basis. In history, learning historiography, the essential literature, is just as important as research skills. By the time a grad student reaches his/her comprehensive exam, they are expected to have read or have knowledge on an estimated 300 books.

So can we help out graduates excel in their further studies? I am firmly convinced that one way is to have a reading load of at least three books, excluding textbooks, in almost all history undergraduate classes. While weekly reading of primary source materials is a key ingredient of helping students place historical events into context, we also need to challenge them by assigning monograph length works that examine important topics or people.

When I took my first history class as a freshman at New Mexico State University in 1988, among the books I was assigned was Hunter Thompson’s Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, 1972. At the time the names of George McGovern and Richard Nixon only brought vague recollections of political discussions in my house long ago. Thompson made me realize that the 1972 was one of the most exciting in recent history, even though at the end, he admitted McGovern supporters deluded themselves in thinking he was electable. I realized then that I wanted to spend my life exploring the past.

I realize how in today’s world reading books seems passé, perhaps even obsolete. Students are reading less and less in K-12 as teaching to the standardized tests has gripped schools. Students come into college able to take multiple choice tests, but have little or no experience in reading monograph length works. To me, the lack of historical knowledge is something easily fixable by taking classes. The hard part is teaching critical thinking, including the ability to read a book and offer informed analysis.

To that end, in each of my classes, students are expected to read three books and then write a critical thinking paper based on books of topics I want my students to learn greater knowledge of then I could offer in lecture. For my U.S. History to 1865 class, I used Gordon Wood’s The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin to illustrate how the American colonists in the 18th century went from considering themselves loyal British subjects to creating a new national identity as Americans. I next assigned Peter Kolchin’s American Slavery: 1619-1877 to more fully explore not only how slavery changed from colonial to the antebellum period, but to also discover the world the slaves made. Finally, I used James McPherson’s For Cause and Comrade: Why Men Fought in the Civil War to offer a glimpse into the world of Civil War soldiers. For most classes I assign at least one book on war because of how removed we are as a society from war with the end of the draft in the 1970s and the creation of a volunteer armed forces. I often fear that students only understanding of war comes from popular video games such as Medal of Honor or Call of Duty.

As I end this blog post, I realize I use only anecdotal evidence to make my case. I can offer no research or evidence to support my argument other then personal experiences. But I firmly believe that to help out students succeed in the next stage of their education when they leave Lincoln University, we must prepare them for the rigors of graduate and law schools. And even if our graduates chose not to pursue further degrees, it is vital that we help create not only well informed citizens, but well read ones as well.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Integrating Undergraduate Research into the Curriculum at Lincoln University: Advantages and Challenges

Guest Blogger: Derrick Swinton

The discussion regarding integrating research into the curriculum at Lincoln University has intensified. Several factors have contributed to this discussion with the most important being the completion of the new science building, the establishment of the Centers of Excellence, mandates and resolutions by the Board of Trustees (resolution whereby LU graduates should be prepared for acceptance into a top 50 graduate or professional school, the charge for LU to be amongst the top 10 HBCUs), the overall financial stability of the university, and more importantly the retention and persistence to graduation of LU students majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The topic is very relevant and should take precedence on the agendas of those discussing LU’s future.

It must be noted that although Lincoln University has primarily been an undergraduate teaching institution, faculty at LU have historically engaged in research activities, as is evidence by faculty publications, research quality equipment owned by the Science Departments, and the fact that LU, in its prime, has produced many of the nation's African American medical doctors, scientists, and mathematicians. The list of LU alumni who have impacted the scientific and medical fields is numerous and includes such alumni as Hildrus A. Poindexter, the first African American to receive both an M.D. (Harvard University, 1929) and a Ph.D. (Bacteriology, Columbia University, 1932); Nathan Francis Mossell (1856-1946), the first African-American to earn a medical degree from the University of Pennsylvania and Member of the Niagara Movement, and others. The aforementioned achievements were unprecedented during the beginning of the 20th century and remain one of LU’s proud achievements. Provided such achievements, it is difficult to envision that at some point in time LU science faculty weren’t actively engaged in research and research integrated into the curriculum. There are other factors that contributed to the success of these students at that time; nevertheless, it is important to note and recognize the significance of research and its impact on the training of our students. With that being said, the dialogue regarding this matter should continue and take priority, concurrently, with other matters.

The Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health, and other agencies, noted the importance of undergraduate research (UR) and have adopted programs to support and stimulate UR activities, especially at primarily undergraduate teaching institutions. In fact LU is the recipient of various grants to support and stimulate UR. Nonetheless, challenges remain at LU in making the transition from primarily an undergraduate teaching institution to an institution with an active and effective undergraduate research program. Additionally challenges remain in integrating research into the curriculum. A few of challenges are listed.

1. Administrative Structure.
a. Despite support and efforts by the administration to address the topic, LU does not have a centralized office or position fully dedicated to advancing undergraduate research.
b. The administration has not been fully committed to undergraduate research or made it a priority.
c. The administration and faculty may not be familiar with the impact of undergraduate research on retention and persistence to graduation of minority STEM students.

2. Faculty Engagement
a. For various reasons some faculty aren’t interested in conducting research.
b. Some professors do not have the training, experience, and aptitude to conduct research.

3. CBA
a. The CBA is limited in scope and does not encourage scholarship, post tenure.
b. An incentive to conduct research is lacking.
c. Faculty receive an across the board salary despite performance reviews and pledge to support the LU community at-large, thus encouraging mediocrity, and placing the workload and burden on a few faculty.

4. Students
a. Students aren’t familiar with the expectations related to their career choices.
b. Students aren’t exposed to and are aware of the impact of undergraduate research on their understanding of classroom concepts.
c. Limited on-campus opportunities exist for students interested in conducting research.

Note, the commentary is not intended to be derogatory or an affront to anyone or any group, but is intended to encourage the LU community to continue its efforts to remain competitive and address the issues (retention, graduation rate, student preparedness, degree prestige) important to all of its constituencies: students, administrators, faculty, alumni, and the community at-large. In order to accomplish any initiatives undertaken by the administration and faculty, the issue of undergraduate research should be discussed because it impacts academic competitiveness, student achievement, and LU financial stability/sustainability. To begin the discussion, a few questions are presented and references provided for review.
1. What are some of the existing impediments to LU making the transition?

2. Can LU remain academically competitive and financially stable without some level of research activities?

3. Should LU consider offering a M.S. degree in the Natural Sciences?

4. Should there be differentiated pay scales for faculty who write and receive grants?

5. Should there be a thesis requirement for graduation?



References:
Jones, M.T., Barlow, A. E. L., Villarejo, M. (2010). Importance of Undergraduate Research for Minority Persistence and Achievement in Biology. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(1), 82-115

Gandara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J. (1999). Priming the pump: Strategies for increasing the achievement of underrepresented minority undergraduates. New York: College Board.

Grandy, J. (1998). Persistence in science of high-ability minority students: results of a longitudinal study. The Journal of Higher Education, 69, 589–620.

Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., Seymour E. (2007) Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students' cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education, 91(1), 36-74.

Nagda, B.A., Gregerman, S.R., Jonides,J., Hippel, William von, Lerner, J.S. (1998). Undergraduate Student-Faculty Research Partnerships Affect Student Retention. The Review of Higher Education 22(1), 55-72

Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., McCullough, J. (2007). The pipeline - Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316(5824), 548-549.