Hello everyone and welcome back to the Winter semester! For my kickoff column of the semester, I’d like to start by telling you about some of the Winter events occurring at the OTL. We started the semester in January with our annual Semester-Start Up. A four-day series of workshops for faculty designed around various teaching and learning themes. This year, we had a wonderful turnout. Our success would not have been possible without the help of some of your colleagues and fellow faculty members, Michael Barbour, Abby Butler, Linda Hulbert, and Mark VanBerkum. They all generously offered their time to present workshops on topics near and dear to their hearts. So, I’d like to extend a warm thanks to the four of them for spending the week with us!

For the rest of the semester, in addition to our regular workshop calendar, we have many other events planned. The Digital Humanities Collaboratory (DHC), hosted by our faculty fellow, Julie Thompson Klein, has an exciting series of monthly presentations geared towards integrating digital resources into teaching. On January 30, Jeff Pruchnic from English, along with three of his graduate students, engaged faculty in a lively discussion about their use of wikis in Wikidelica: Open-Author Technologies and Just-In-Time Pedagogies. February 27, Julie and Anne-Marie Armstrong, Instructional Designer for the OTL, will be further discussing digital humanities in their presentation, Digital Humanities: Mapping the Field. More events are planned for later in the semester. To check the schedule, feel free to consult the Digital Humanities Collaboratory page on our website.

In addition to the DHC events, we will also be featuring other faculty speakers. On February 18, William Crossland from Anatomy (a 2008 President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching recipient) will discuss how he has adapted his teaching for what he calls the “wired” generation. We’ve got other faculty who are planning to give presentations as well and will announce those events as more information becomes available.

And finally, the response to the OTL Book Club was overwhelming positive so we’ve scheduled another book for discussion. This semester, we will be reading Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled – And More Miserable Than Ever Before, by Jean Twenge. Twenge takes a closer look at many of the students we’re seeing in our classes today and documents the self-focus of what she calls “Generation Me”. Through her book, she examines data which illustrate how different young adults are today and presents stories which bring these individuals to life for the reader. Join us on April 1 from 12:00 – 1:30 as we discuss the implications of this book and attempt to better understand the “Generation Me” students in our own classrooms. All participants will receive a copy of Twenge’s book and lunch at the discussion. Registration is limited to 10 people, so register early on Pipeline and contact me to arrange to pick up a copy of the book.

That’s just a sample of the things going on at the OTL. In addition to our events, the OTL staff is always available on a one-on-one basis to assist and collaborate with you on any instructional project or need. Do not hesitate to contact us at otl@wayne.edu or 313.577.1980. We look forward to seeing you this semester!

Kristi Verbeke, MEd
Associate Director, Office for Teaching & Learning
af5315@wayne.edu
(313) 577-6448

The study highlighted in our newsletter this issue examined the nature of mentoring in a doctoral program at the University of Hawaii. As the authors note, mentoring has been associated with many positive outcomes for both mentors and mentees and has the potential to contribute to positive institutional outcomes. Using focus groups and follow-up discussions, this particular study looked at differences between protégés, peer mentors, and faculty mentors in terms of how they defined the mentoring relationship, their experiences with mentoring, and the outcomes of those mentoring experiences.

Definitions

The three groups had similar ideas about the definition of mentoring; however their definitions became more broad and sophisticated from with each level (protégé to peer mentor to faculty mentor). All three agreed that many different types of individuals could serve as a mentor (advisor, peer, professor), that mentors should serve as a guide for mentees, and that the relationship should be reciprocal. However, while protégés tended to define mentors solely as a guide in their professional development, peer and faculty mentors expanded this definition, emphasizing the development of a relationship which benefits both parties. Additionally, faculty mentors also stressed developing future needs of their protégés.

Experiences
After analyzing stories about the mentoring experience, the researchers identified six themes across all three groups. First, all participants emphasized the importance of a quality relationship between mentor and mentee. Second, mentors were motivating, providing support and encouragement to their mentees. Third, mentors helped their mentees transition from student to professional. The authors coined this “socialization into the profession.” Fourth, mentors offered instruction and ensured their mentees gained essential knowledge and skills. Fifth, mentors made available opportunities and connections for mentees that they otherwise would not have had on their own. And sixth, mentors bestowed guidance and advice beyond the typical advising role.

Outcomes
Finally, the authors asked participants to identify outcomes which they attributed to the mentoring relationship. These fell into two categories: procedural and learning. Examples of procedural outcomes cited included program admission, degree requirement completion, and degree completion. Learning outcomes such as knowledge of subject matter, professional activities (teaching, conference presentations), and publishing were also identified by mentees as resulting from the mentoring relationship.

Conclusion
This study suggests that both mentors and mentees find value in a mentoring relationship and feel it helps further the development of doctoral students. While informal mentoring often happens at the graduate level, departments might find it beneficial to explore the establishment of formal mentor programs between doctoral students and faculty.

References
Noonan, M. J., Ballinger, R., & Black, R. (2007). Peer and faculty mentoring in doctoral education: Definitions, experiences, and expectations. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(3), 251-262.

Kristi Verbeke, MEd
Associate Director, Office for Teaching & Learning
af5315@wayne.edu
(313) 577-6448

Blackboard can be a great tool, but its limited formatting options sometimes results in all courses looking the same. How can you set your Blackboard course site apart from others? Add some color, eliminate clutter, and provide information at your students’ fingertips! Simple changes in your Blackboard course will not only make it more appealing and user-friendly, but will also save instructional time and decrease the number of administrative-type questions from students. In this article, we’d like to show you examples of how other faculty have personalized their courses in Blackboard. Our colleague, Chen-Yuan Lee (Corey), recently shared some of his course designs and demonstrated new ways to incorporate graphics without learning HTML or any other programming skills.

Everyone has different preferences, but take a look at some parts of Corey’s course. Though the basic Blackboard structure is retained, the colors are coordinated and the navigation buttons have been customized. Graphics have been added to bring attention to important notices.

Next, the modules from Corey’s course are organized and available from the “Module” button in the course menu.

If you like this look, here are instructions for adding simple graphics to your Blackboard information boxes:

Step 1: Using the control panel, go to Content Areas and add an item to the appropriate area:

Step 2: Choose the Table tool from the tool bar in the Text box for the new item. Enter number of rows and columns, width in pixels. If you do not want a border to show, choose 0 for Border Thickness. For this example we wanted one row with two columns. The entire width of table is 575 pixels and the border is not visible. A typical web page is approximately 640 pixels (8.5 inches) wide and 75 pixels is about 4 inches.

Border Thickness will vary, 0 = no border, 1= single line, etc. Cell Padding lets you put in some space between the border and the text or image.

Step 3: Insert graphic using toolbar,

Resize image using the “Insert Image” screen. Small iconic images are usually 50-100 pixels in width and height. You can still adjust the images on the edit screen. Add Text to same row, but to second column.

Step 4: Hit Submit and review your item.

To see what the students will see, access your item as a student would—by clicking on the area from the main page (the first page you see when you enter your course before accessing the Control Panel).

Following are simple instructions for customizing your navigation. This allows you to change the name, add, or delete areas in the course:

This is a quick overview of the possibilities for customizing your course. If you’d like more detailed instructions or hands-on assistance, the OTL staff is always happy to help. Simply call 313.577.1980 or email us at otl@wayne.edu to set up an appointment.

Anne-Marie Armstrong, PhD
Instructional Designer, Office for Teaching & Learning
dv3709@wayne.edu

In our last newsletter, we introduced a new topic for the 2008-2009 academic year – interdisciplinary studies (IDS) and integrative learning. The last issue focused on IDS, and this issue begins a parallel conversation about integrative learning. “Integrative learning” is the broader of the two concepts. It is an umbrella term for structures, strategies, and activities that bridge numerous divides, such as high school and college, general education and the major, introductory and advanced levels, theory and practice, experiences inside and outside the classroom, and disciplines and interdisciplinary fields. Both approaches advance the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) by fostering connection-making. In their classic formation of SoTL, Ernest Boyer and Eugene Rice defined four forms of scholarship: discovery, integration, teaching, and application. “Integration” is synonymous with synthesizing and reintegrating knowledge, revealing new patterns of meaning and new relations between parts and wholes. 

Since the late 1990s, calls for more integrative learning experiences have accelerated across higher education. In mapping the terrain of the movement, Mary Taylor Huber and Pat Hutchings call the capacity to make connections now “essential to the conduct of personal, professional, and civic life.” Integrative learning is not a new idea, though. The earliest modern uses of the term appeared in books on principles of psychology by Herbert Spencer (1855) and William James (1896) and in Alexis Bertrand’s theory of integrated instruction (1898). In the 1800s, integration was also linked with the Herbartian movement’s doctrine of correlation, which supplemented the doctrine of concentration by recognizing “natural relations” among subjects. The meaning of the term expanded in the twentieth century. Integrating disciplines and developing the “whole” person were primary values in the general education movement that arose in the opening decades of the century, and an important distinction also emerged. At a 1948 workshop sponsored by the Foundation for Integrative Education, participants further distinguished content integration — bridging separate subject areas — from process integration – promoting the interplay of an individual and an environment. They also distinguished integration as synthesizing accepted postulates from integrative building of new conceptual modes capable of producing a holistic experience (Ciccorico, 60-61; Taylor, 130l).

The emphasis on process means that integrative learning today does not occur at a single point or in a single form. In a Statement on Integrative Learning adopted in March 2004, the Association of American Colleges and Universities and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching emphasized that integration occurs “across courses, over time, and between campus and community life” (Huber & Hutchings, 13). Likewise, it occurs in different formats: in first-year experiences, learning communities, senior capstone seminars, student portfolios, and service-learning. The pedagogy varies in turn. The most prominent approaches include collaborative and experiential learning, living/learning communities, multicultural learning, inquiry-and discovery-based, and performance-based teaching. Strategies may also be combined. A course in a living/learning community, for example, might draw on several disciplines (interdisciplinary study), field experiences (service learning), cultures (multicultural learning), and perspectives (feminist theory and pedagogy). The essential commonality is drawing from multiple perspectives on a complex phenomenon for insights that can be integrated into a richer, more comprehensive understanding (Newell, 196-98). 

The philosophy of integrative learning is informed by constructivist epistemology. When students are engaged in making meaning, application of knowledge takes precedence over mastery of facts alone. Students are immersed in acts of question posing, problem posing and solving, decision making, higher-order critical thinking, and reflexivity. The characteristics of an integrative thinker appear across contexts in a set of common abilities:

• asking meaningful questions about complex issues and problems

• locating multiple sources of knowledge, information, and perspectives

• comparing and contrasting them to reveal patterns and connections 

• acknowledging and negotiating their contradictions

• creating an integrative framework and a more holistic understanding.

• understanding issues and positions contextually.

 
The relational skills that students gain also foster the ability to adapt knowledge in unexpected and changing contexts. The questions they will have and the problems they must solve as workers, parents, and citizens are not “in the book.” They will require integrative interdisciplinary thinking. 

Over the remainder of the semester, we will explore the dynamics of both interdisciplinary and integrative approaches in a variety of disciplines and fields. If you have examples to share in this column, please contact Julie Thompson Klein at ad5820@wayne.edu. 

References 

Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

Ciccorico, E.W.  (1970). “Integration” in the curriculum. Main Currents in Modern Thought, 27 (Nov-Dec): 60-62.

Huber, M. T. and Hutchings, P. (2004). Integrative learning. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Newell, W.H. (2001). Powerful pedagogies. Reinventing ourselves: interdisciplinary education, collaborative learning, and experimentation in higher education, ed. B.L. Smith and J. McCann, 196-211. Bolton, Massachusetts: Anker.

Taylor, A. (1969). Integrative principles and the educational process. Main Currents in Modern Thought, 25 (May/June): 126-33.

Julie Thompson Klein, PhD
Faculty Fellow, Office for Teaching & Learning
julietklein@wayne.edu

Many of you likely noticed a change to Blackboard last semester or over the summer if you were teaching. WSU recently upgraded to a newer version, and for those of you unable to attend our “What’s New” workshop, highlighting the major changes, we wrote an article detailing the new features. The major change in the Blackboard 8.0 upgrade is primarily with changes from Gradebook, which is now called the Grade Center. Additional improvements and updates, however, extend the usefulness of this course management system beyond just grading. New technology such as self and peer assessments and Blackboard Scholar® facilitate learning. Other improvements in the Content system make sharing and collaboration much easier, while additions such as Safe Assign and a Browser check enhance instruction and communication without complicating it. Below is a short synopsis of the newest upgrades in Bb 8.0.

The New Blackboard Grade Center

No longer referred to as the Gradebook, the new Grade Center includes new interfacing, fewer clicks, and greater flexibility. Improvements in the Grade Center design make navigating easier. Instructors have the ability to freeze specified columns in place while scrolling through others for more convenient viewing. Modifying, hiding or removing a column can be accomplished with a single click. Instructors can also create and save distinctive views of student grades, allowing them to filter student grades based on a set criteria, using Smart Views.

New grading options also mean flexibility. Instructors can over-ride a score or exempt any score, and eliminate high/low scores from calculations. Clicking on Grade Details from the drop down menu for each individual score allows instructors to view a student assessment and then easily access any other student assessment in a single click. Other big improvements include the ability to email students directly from the Grade Center and to build custom reports that include assignment and grade information that can be sent immediately to a single student, student groups, or the entire class.

Self and Peer Assessments

Using technology similar to the Assignment function, instructors can now require students to evaluate their own and peer submissions. In doing so, students gain new perspectives on important course material and engage critical thinking skills in order to accurately assess papers. Instructors create a self-peer assignment inside any Content Area from the drop-down menu on the right. Here they determine the number of students that will assess each student paper, deadlines for uploading assignments and assessing randomly assigned students, and criteria that students will use to support their assessment. During the assessment period, students reward points based on instructor criteria, which is viewable at the time of assessment. Once the assessment period expires, students can view points awarded and any comments posted by the assessor(s).

Blackboard Scholar

Integrated within the Blackboard system is a basic license for Scholar, a social bookmarking system that facilitates the transfer and sharing of relevant information. By entering Scholar through Blackboard, the instructor can easily access important information on the internet and automatically upload it to a Blackboard course as it becomes available. Using a tagging system created by the user, individuals are able to locate public information according to institution, author, topic or some other unique criteria identified by the user. Instructors can then view pertinent information, bookmark these locations to save it in a personal bookmark directory and upload it easily to content areas within Blackboard for student viewing. Additionally, instructors can create search parameters that scan the web for material matching set criteria and link these sites automatically to a content area right in Blackboard. This gives students and instructors easy access to the most up-to-date information on chosen topics as they become available on the internet. Blackboard Scholar uses the same drop-down menu in a Content Area to create Scholar links that is used to create other items, such as Self and Peer Assessments and Safe Assign assignments.

Safe Assign

Several years ago and after much consideration, the Committee for Academic Integrity recommended that WSU purchase a license for Safe Assignment, plagiarism detection software. The decision to purchase the license was based on performance and critical options available only through Safe Assignment. Today, a new version of the software, called Safe Assign, is now available free through Blackboard. Although some features have been compromised, Safe Assign is still powerful software that, when used in conjunction with other strategies, is a proven deterrent to plagiarism.

Using the drop-down menu in any Content Area (see picture above), instructors can create an assignment whereby all submitted student manuscripts for that assignment are automatically uploaded to Safe Assign for plagiarism detection. Instructors who suspect individual manuscripts are plagiarized can also submit individual manuscripts for detection. Once papers are submitted, Safe Assign generates a report that identifies suspected sources, the percentage of the document or any suspected passage that is matched to outside resources, and then links to any suspected source available. Using Safe Assign as a teaching and learning tool is also possible if students are allowed to submit drafts prior to final submission. This gives students an opportunity to correct citing, quoting and referencing errors prior to grading and possible sanctions.

Content Management System

New features in the Content Management system allows for greater collaboration between and among faculty on projects that span departments and disciplines.

In the past, sharing information was easiest with those already enrolled in your course. With improvements in the Content Management system, faculty can use the Collaboration page to create, initiate and manage collaborative projects using multi-state workflows. Each member can then read, edit or add to the current project, making input across disciplines, time, and space much more convenient. Improvements in e-portfolio now allow users to create personal portfolios, collect artifacts relevant to teaching within the e-portfolio environment, and view portfolios submitted and shared by others in a single click. Users can also subscribe to directories so they are notified when new material is added to the directory.

Browser Check

The browser check, conveniently located as you enter Blackboard under the My Blackboard tab, allows students and faculty to determine if their computer has the software necessary to run all components of Blackboard loaded on the current computer. Upon clicking on Test your Browser, current computer components, along with required and optional components are listed with green checks next to those components already installed and red X’s next to components that are not currently installed. Instructors can search the internet or contact the OTL if there are concerns relative to the downloading and installing necessary software.

Hopefully, this article inspires you to look into the newest features in this major upgrade to Blackboard 8.0 to enhance your teaching and learning practices. Please check the OTL website to view our workshop calendar and sign up for instruction that suits your needs. If you are unable to meet during the regularly scheduled workshops, please do not hesitate to contact the OTL at otl@wayne.edu or 577.1980 to set up a personal consultation on upgrades mentioned here or on other technological and pedagogical issues. And be on the lookout for another Blackboard upgrade coming in May. The OTL will be offering training for faculty on the new features.

Annette Feravich, Ph.D. ABD
Instructional Consultant, Office for Teaching & Learning
aferavich@wayne.edu
(313) 577-0250

Many of our readers are now familiar with RSS news readers and the valuable role they can play in organizing and tracking multiple sources of information. If you aren’t clear on how they work, have no fear. You can get up to speed quickly by watching the online video “RSS in Plain English.”

Most people use news readers to follow favorite blogs or topical news, but there are lots of other kinds of content that can be tracked using RSS (Really Simple Syndication), the “secret sauce” that makes news readers work. For example, perhaps you have half a dozen academic journals that you try to keep current with in your discipline or special interest area. Many journals now produce an RSS feed that enables you to go to one place, your own news reader, and see the titles (always) and abstracts (sometimes…) for newly published articles.

The trick to making this work is knowing where to go to find the RSS feeds for the journals you care about. Fortunately, our colleagues at the University of Saskatchewan Library have developed a very extensive list of academic journal news feeds provided by different publishers. Get started by visiting Publishers/Sources Providing RSS Feeds for Electronic Journals and then choose a publisher to browse. My personal favorite collection is IngentaConnect, which provides more than 4,500 individual journal feeds that can be tracked. Wayne State happens to be an IngentaConnect subscriber, so WSU students and faculty have access to most of these journals if you see an article that looks promising and you want to see the full text version.

Once you’ve found a journal title that you want to follow recent publications in, you copy the link attached to the little orange RSS “chicklet” for that journal, and use that weblink as the journal subscription address in your RSS newsreader. For instance, say I’m interested in tracking the Negotiation Journal. The link provided by IngentaConnect for this journal’s recent contents is http://api.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/nego/latest?format=rss
I copy this link and then go over to Bloglines.com, my current newsreader of choice (there are many free readers available), log into my account and choose “Add Subscription” from the menu. I paste in the Negotiation Journal link and presto, from now on, every time I review my Bloglines news items, I’ll see a listing for the latest articles from this journal with the newest items on top and a link to more information.

If this approach appeals to you, WSU Librarian Michael Sensiba has developed a useful WSU-specific Subject Guide on Content Alert services. The guide includes listings of content collections WSU has access to that provide RSS feeds, as well as information on other alert tools such as email announcements and saved searches. You can find this online at
http://www.lib.wayne.edu/resources/subject_guides/guide.php?id=214

Be in the know. Use RSS!

Bill Warters, PhD

Faculty Fellow, Office for Teaching & Learning

w.warters@wayne.edu

(313) 577-6109

Nominated for consideration by students and peers, WSU faculty and graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) are eligible and encouraged to compete for various annual teaching-related awards, including the President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching, Distinguished Graduate Faculty Award, Outstanding Graduate Mentor Award, and the Garrett T. Heberlein Excellence in Teaching Award for Graduate Students. For the 2007-2008 academic calendar, there were thirteen winners, representing several WSU Schools, Colleges, and Departments, including the School of Medicine, College of Education, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and the Institute of Gerontology. In an effort to highlight these individuals, they were asked to respond to a short survey generated by the OTL regarding their awards, hobbies, teaching philosophies, and teaching tips; the following is a summary of their responses.

The Wayne State University Board of Governors recognized these faculty and GTAs on April 22, 2008 at the Academic Recognition Ceremony, where they received plaques that they now display proudly in their offices. Garrett T. Heberlein Excellence in Teaching Award for Graduate Students winner, Lynne Kennette, said, “It serves as a constant reminder of the hard work I have accomplished and motivates me to continue my efforts.” Outstanding Graduate Mentor Award winner, Jeffrey Loeb, noted, “I am extremely proud of this award as it came about as a result of letters written by my current and former students. The award is hanging prominently in my office within the Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics for all to see.”

In addition to plaques, the winners also received monetary stipends. President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching winner, Associate Professor, Lisabeth Hock, spent her stipend on books, while Kennette, a Psychology Graduate Teaching Assistant, applied her funds toward a plane ticket so that she could travel to a conference in October. Associate Professor, Marianne Fahlman, from Kinesiology, Health and Sport Studies said, “I bought a piece of art work by Goddard; gave some ‘fun money’ to my secretaries (I can’t do my job without them) and gave the rest to the Adrian Dominican Sister for the good work they do.”

In addition to their love of teaching, this year’s award winners have many other things in common, including how they spend their free time. Associate Professor of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Loeb, enjoys music, running, skiing, sailing, and spending time with his family. Kennette takes pleasure in walking, cooking, and camping, while Hock likes gardening, camping, hiking, reading, travel, yoga. Professor of Anatomy and Cell Biology, William Crossland, is interested in spending time with his family, “fitness, photography, recycling and other green concerns.” And Fahlman spends her time traveling and trying new things, “usually some insane thrill seeking activity. I went sky diving in Australia and Bungee jumping in New Zealand. I walked on the lava flows in Hawaii and the glaciers in Alaska (where I also zip lined). I am also a baseball fanatic. If I am not thrill seeking, then I try to catch a game in whatever city I am visiting. I have seen baseball games in 26 out of 30 cities.”

When asked to summarize his teaching philosophy, Loeb notes, “While it is critical that students know the basic facts, it is even more important for them to know how to question those ‘facts’ and move forward. I try to encourage this through example and encourage students to constantly question.” Crossland’s overall philosophy is to “efficiently provide contemporary scientific information to medical students in a respectful, considerate and responsive way. I also consider the differences in abilities and learning styles of students and use digital technology to address these differences to foster learning and communication.” Fahlman, who teaches future high school teachers, understands that “one needs a certain amount of knowledge in the health sciences, knowledge is not the key to teaching health; behavior change is. The top three killers in this country have been the top three killers for over 30 years, and all of them are lifestyle-based.” Hock asserts “I am not dogmatic when it comes to teaching methodologies; I try to make sure that how I teach is informed by a balance of theory and praxis.” And Kennette adds, “I spend a lot of time ensuring that their learning environment is the best it can be by arriving early to class and staying late if necessary, providing detailed feedback on assignments quickly and responding to emails in a timely manner.”

In addition to these wise words, the award winners also offer teaching tips. Hock recommends respecting your “students by setting high standards for them. Support your students by being available to them and giving them the learning tools they need to achieve those standards.” Fahlman agrees, and encourages educators to “listen to the students. They will do anything for your class if they feel as if they are heard.”  To loosen things up a bit and capture the student’s interest Crossland suggests teachers “greet each class with a smile and a sincere, ‘Good day’ to all. Start off or finish up your class with a joke or cartoon.”

For a complete list of award recipients, visit the OTL website.

Kimberly Conely, M.A.
Instructional Consultant, Office for Teaching & Learning
ai6513@wayne.edu

Teaching courses online has created a paradigm shift from structured learning of content to resource-based learning, whereby instructors guide students in acquiring strategies to manage information efficiently and effectively.  The authors of this book focus on current research and proven strategies that help ensure successful online learning and teaching.

Effective online learning and teaching means that students have more control and responsibility over their own learning.  Because online learning is not as simple as moving your in-class materials to a Blackboard course, attention to goals and objectives, planning, and appraisal is essential.  Using the ten steps to success listed in the book, instructors monitor their goals and determine action items that help ensure desired learning outcomes.  Additionally, suggestions for online sessions and student activities help with delivery of course material.  Emphasis is on enriching the student learning experience by using technology and effective communication strategies, while addressing obvious disadvantage of delivering course material without the benefit of face face-to-face communication.

These authors acknowledge that online teaching requires specific skill sets, such as knowledge of technology, online-based activities, and a variety of methods for interacting with students.  Suggestions for collaboration, creating online communities, and transforming ordinary teaching materials for online use, make this book essential for any instructor interested in moving their course online.

Reference:
Bach, S., Haynes, P., and Smith, J. L. (2006). Online learning and teaching in higher education. Berkshire: McGraw Hill.

Annette Feravich, MA
Instructional Consultant, Office for Teaching & Learning
aferavich@wayne.edu
(313) 577-0250

It’s hard to believe that it’s November already, with leaves changing colors and dropping from the trees. Where does the time go?? For this column, I’d like to tell you about some of the happenings at the OTL. To begin with, we’ve hired a new Web Content Administrator, Corey Lee. Corey comes to us from the University of Findlay with a wide range of skills and experiences (for a full introduction to Corey, please read the accompanying article in this newsletter). His first task will be to redesign the OTL website. Corey has already shown us a few prototypes and we’re very excited at what we’re seeing, so keep an eye out for our new “look” in the near future!

Additionally, our faculty fellow, Julie Thompson Klein, is leading a faculty learning community called the Digital Humanities Collaboratory. This Collaboratory, which is co-sponsored by the OTL and The Humanities Center, consists of a group of WSU faculty interested in examining technology and its effects on teaching and research in the disciplines and fields of arts and humanities, media and communication studies, and information science. Their first event, New Paradigms for Teaching and Learning in Museums, was held Friday, September 19 at the Detroit Institute of Arts. Faculty received a tour of the newly renovated DIA, with an emphasis on technology and tools which have been designed to engage museum-goers with the various artifacts in the museum. The Collaboratory’s second event, InterDIGITALdisciplinarity: Why It’s Right for Everyone, was held on October 31 and featured Dr. Karen McDevitt, from the Communication Department, and a group of her graduate students. Dr. McDevitt and her student explained their experiences with incorporating technology into their courses. The next event, An Evolutionary Approach to Teaching Language and Culture with Technology, will be held Friday, November 14 in the Foreign Language Technology Center (385 Manoogian). A panel consisting of members from the Classical and Modern Languages and Literatures Department and Foreign Language Technology Center (FLTC) will talk about how their use of instructional technology has reshaped their teaching of foreign language and culture over the past few years, as well as how the use of technology is likely to impact the future of the teaching of language and culture.

In addition to the Collaboratory events, we’ve got many others planned for this year, including presentations from various faculty on their teaching best practices, as well as events geared toward helping new faculty transition into their roles at WSU. We’re also organizing a book club, which will meet once a semester to discuss a teaching-related book, furnished by the OTL. Last year, the group had a wonderful discussion on My Freshman Year: What a Professor Learned by Becoming a Student. This year, we’ll be looking at Racing Odysseus: A College President Becomes a Freshman Again. I know I’m always disappointed when other conflicts interfere with my ability to attend my local library’s book club, so I thought, why not start my own?? We’re planning to meet and discuss this first book during the lunch hour on Thursday, December 4. A free copy of the book as well as lunch will be provided for all who attend. Participation is limited to 10, so register early and contact me to pick up your book!

As you can see, in addition to our workshop calendar and our on-the-road visits to many departments, we’ve got a lot going on at the OTL! Another project planned for this year is a faculty needs assessment so we can tailor our services in ways that better suit you. I hope you’ll all participate and provide us with feedback when that project gets rolling. Until then, you are always welcome (and invited) to contact us with any suggestions or requests!

Until next time,

Kristi

Kristi Verbeke, MEd
Associate Director, Office for Teaching & Learning
af5315@wayne.edu
(313) 577-6448

Assessment is an important part of education because it helps determine if learning goals are met; however, faculty often struggle with the best method for assessing students. During his presentation at the WSU 2008 Student Academic Success Summit, Assistant Professor Larry Lemke discussed his own creative approach to testing—having students take exams both individually and collectively. This suggestion sparked great interest in attendees and as it turns out, this issue’s feature study highlights the benefits of using such an approach.

A group of professors from SUNY – Brockport compared the results of solitary, cooperative, and competitive testing in an introductory psychology course. Randomly assigned students completed 16 multiple choice questions in all three settings and rated their confidence in their scores and their degree of liking for the assessment approach. Students in the solitary setting worked alone, while students in the cooperative and competitive settings first completed the assessment alone and then in groups. In addition to the group dynamic, the competitive setting pitted the various student groups against one another, allowing teams to earn points for correct answers.

Data analysis revealed that students in teams generally outscored those working alone and much like Professor Lemke’s findings, students in the group settings often improved on their original individual score as a result of the group discussion. Likewise, those working in both group settings (cooperative and competitive) were more confident in their answers and tended to like their assessment condition better than those assessed alone.

This article makes an interesting case for group assessment. Students seem to perform better and prefer working with others. It may be the case that working collaboratively on an assessment allows students to learn from one other and better understand what is being asked of them on the exam.

References

Desrochers, M. N., Fink, H. C., Thomas, A., Kimmerling, J., and Tung, W (2007). Student assessment: A comparison of solitary, cooperative, and competitive testing. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(3), 289-296. Retrieved

Kristi Verbeke, MEd
Associate Director, Office for Teaching & Learning
af5315@wayne.edu
(313) 577-6448