Do you speak SoTL?

I'm writing this in the air over Savannah, on my way back from a great SoTL conference.  For those who don't know, SoTL stands for "Scholarship of Teaching and Learning" (the title of this blog is the motto on  the conference t-shirts) and is a great organization to explore. 

After two days of 9 - 5 conference sessions I have amassed lots to think about and hopefully share with you in future blogs.  While all that new info is being digested, though, I will just share a list one of the speakers presented to answer the question, "Why SoTL?"

1. SoTL fosters student learning:  Teachers who ask "What works?" are more likely to be using activities that do. 
2. SoTL bridges the gap between teaching and research: It's a false dichotomy to separate teaching and research.
3. SoTL benefits SoTL-active faculty, helps them fight classroom inertia and invites them to change and improve their teaching:  It helps teachers grow, change, be more interested, stop being complacent.
4. SoTL benefits other students and faculty:  Teachers can share the findings across disciplines, breaking down some of the silos.
5. SoTL benefits the institution:  It helps to generate visible analyses of student learning--assessment at course and program level, models of practice for local colleagues, high-quality evidence for internal/external assessment and accessible examples of quality education for prospective students.
6. SoTL is a model of faculty development:  It provides a space for dialogue about practices that contribute to advancing knowledge
7. SoTL increases faculty credentials for professional rewards such as tenure and promotion.
8. SoTL lets us follow our passion:  It helps us learn from our students and learn who our students are, what it is that we are doing, and how we can do it even better.

SoTL starts with a question: Is there any teaching/learning-related question that has been nagging at you that you might begin to explore, either individually or collaboratively?

What Makes a Group Project Work?

Most of us involve our students in group projects at some point, knowing that such projects promote active learning, student motivation, and enhanced retention.  The Galileo Educational Network has developed a comprehensive rubric teachers can use to evaluate group projects.  The rubric contains specific descriptors for each of the following eight general components:

• Authenticity
• Academic Rigor
• Assessment
• Beyond the School
• Use of Digital Technologies
• Active Exploration
• Connecting with Experts
• Elaborated Communication

As I read through the article describing this rubric, I was struck by how useful these eight categories can be for evaluating any class project, individual or group, reminding us of the how and the who and the why and the where questions we should be asking as we design learning activities.

Do you have a favorite group project that incorporates all eight components?  What does it look like? Or would you argue that not all of the eight are necessary?  What’s your assessment of this project assessment tool?

Who Will Survive?

At a recent conference on assessment at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, keynote speaker Linda Suskie addressed the question, “Which colleges and universities will survive and thrive?” Her vote went to universities that

• Have a pervasive, sustained culture of quality.  (Note:  she explained that doesn’t mean being the most selective college; a college might be known for providing the best learning environment for underprepared students, for instance);

• Focus on what is most important to them;

• Focus on having great teaching and learning;

• Fight complacency (talk about innovation and risk taking, honor efforts to improve even if the efforts don’t succeed first time around);

• Break down silos, giving funding priority to collaborative projects;

• Build a culture of evidence;

• Keep assessment useful, simple, and pervasive;

• Set rigorous, justifiable standards for success;

• Tell meaningful stories of the university’s success;

• Keep their promises.

It seems to me that Lincoln measures up well against many of these criteria.  I wonder, though, to what extent we are really focusing on what’s most important to us. 
  
To focus on what’s most important, we need to agree on what’s most important.  Have we done that?  Does our mission statement do it?  Do we have an academic master plan that operationalizes it? Do faculty and staff all agree on what Lincoln could/should be? 

All of the other points follow relatively smoothly if we have that overall focus in mind, clearly defined and universally agreed upon.  Do we? If so, what do you think that focus is?  If not, what do we need to do to find it?