August 2 0 0 3 Vo l . 2 N o . 2
Reflecting the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning at the
University of Saskatchewan
In This Issue....
Teaching & Learning:
Research and
Scholarship
NOW WE ARE THREE
By Eileen Herteis, TLC Programme Director
When we were one, we had just begun . . .
Promoting StudentCentered Learning
Environments
Reflections from Award
Winning Teachers
What’s on the TLC
Website
Teaching... Through the
Looking Glass
Reflections on Scholarly
Teaching
Developing Students’
Critical Thinking Skills
Coming Events
The Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre officially opened on August 28,
2000, amidst much celebration and high expectations. Our priorities included
• Facilitating the exchange of information about effective teaching practices to
benefit student learning
• Promoting, recognizing, and rewarding good teaching
• Assisting the next generation of teachers
• Supporting teachers in their judicious use of instructional technology
Now we are three . . . . .
During the past three years, our focus has remained the same: To encourage,
nurture, and support teachers and the scholarship of teaching and learning at the
University of Saskatchewan.
We continue to grow. Our many workshop series, Fall Institute, peer consultation,
and special events have been augmented by enriched programmes for graduate
student teachers, a teaching portfolio web site that receives over 3,000 hits every
month, mentorship for new faculty, a new-look newsletter, and the TLC web site
that is the envy of teaching and learning centres across Canada.
This issue of Bridges spotlights some of the TLC’s recent initiatives, including
Teaching & Learning—Research & Scholarship, our May, 2003, symposium on
teaching with technology, and Dr. Craig Nelson’s outstanding workshops. It also
revisits some important topics: graduate peer consultation and the scholarship of
teaching and learning. And we remind you of the splendid array of teaching and
learning resources on our TLC web site (www.usask.ca/tlc).
Whether or not you have “just begun” at the University of Saskatchewan, we are
looking forward to seeing you at our sessions in the coming year. Check our list
of fall workshops, browse our web site, or visit us at Room 37 in the Murray
Building.
The Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre
37 Murray Building • 966-2231
August 2003
Vol. 2 No. 2
The Gwenna Moss Teaching
& Learning Centre
University of Saskatchewan
Room 37 Murray Building
3 Campus Drive
Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A4
Phone (306) 966-2231
Fax (306) 966-2242
e-mail : corinne.f@usask.ca
Web site : www.usask.ca/tlc
Bridges is distributed to every
teacher at the University of
Saskatchewan and to all the
Instructional Development Offices
in Canada, and some beyond.
It is freely available on the world
wide web through the TLC web
site. Your contributions to
Bridges will reach a wide local,
national, and international
audience. Please consider
submitting an article or opinion
piece to Bridges.
Contact any one of the following
people; we’d be delighted to hear
from you!
TEACHING & LEARNING—
RESEARCH & SCHOLARSHIP
How has the province’s Technology Enhanced Learning initiative (TEL) influenced
teaching and research? How are teachers integrating technology into their
teaching and scholarship? Once integrated, how is it rewarded in promotion,
tenure, and merit decisions? Where does technology fit into the Teacher-Scholar
model? Is online publication given the credit it deserves?
In May 2003, a 3-day Symposium at the University of Saskatchewan, funded by
TEL, examined these questions and many more.
The Symposium’s Keynote Presenters were Dr. Dawn Howard Rose, Waterloo,
who spoke about Integrating Online Learning Research Into University Research
Culture, and Dr. Arshad Ahmad, whose presentation “Reflections On Promoting
Student-Centered Learning Environments” is condensed below. Ron Marken
closed the Symposium by summing up its dominant themes and recurring
discussions. Ron’s summation will appear in a future issue of Bridges.
Twenty-six other sessions were presented at the Symposium, and the participants
included faculty, staff and students from the Universities of Saskatchewan, Regina,
and Alberta, representatives from SaskLearning and from Colleges across
Saskatchewan. Symposium Proceedings have been published online, and you
can access them at the TLC web site at www.usask.ca/tlc.
Ron Marken
TLC Director
Phone (306) 966-5532
ron.marken@usask.ca
Arshad Ahmad
Concordia University
Eileen Herteis
TLC Programme Director & Bridges
Editor
Phone (306) 966-2238
Fax (306) 966-2242
eileen.herteis@usask.ca
Christine Anderson Obach
Programme Coordinator
Phone (306) 966-1950
christine.anderson@usask.ca
Ron Marken
TLC, University of Saskatchewan
Corinne Fasthuber
Assistant
Phone (306) 966-2231
corinne.f@usask.ca
Joel Deshaye
Instructional Technology Consultant
(306) 966-2245
joel.deshaye@usask.ca
Dawn Howard Rose
University of Waterloo
COHERE
ISSN 1703-1222
2
PROMOTING STUDENT-CENTRED LEARNING
ENVIRONMENTS
Dr. Arshad Ahmad, Concordia University
Excerpted from the Keynote Presentation
Teaching & Learning—Research & Scholarship Symposium, May 12, 2003
Today, the word technology seems to be glued to our screens rather than to the
people around us. Technology-induced
generally associated with devices.
However, the word originates from the
Greek form techne, which is associated
with art, craft, or skill and was closely
related with episteme (systematic or
Technology has a way
scientific knowledge), emphasizing
of creeping into our
technology not only as an artifact, but
lives
so that we become
also as a process or means of
accomplices in serving
accomplishing a goal.
Irrespective of any one definition, the
main point about technology might be
that it serves a purpose: to extend
human capability. That is what tools are
intended for. That is what improved
processes should accomplish. If this is
true, that technology should extend
human capability, then it makes little
sense to compete with it. This is why
questions about machines replacing
humans are framed on a false premise.
technology instead of it
serving us.
isolation is not something we have just
discovered, but its effects seem to be
more far-reaching and pervasive than
ever before.
Once we adopt a technology and
integrate it into what we do, it becomes
ubiquitous. Technologies are not just
devices but also ways of doing
something. Technologies should help
There is nothing wrong with
technological devices per se, be it more make our work easier and over time
they have. And since technologies are
computers, or networks, or anything
else that we build. The caveat is that the couched within our practices, well, a lot
purpose of these technologies should be of issues arise.
to deal with tasks that are better
We know that technology does not
performed by machines. Educators
have any magical, transformative
should be given the freedom to
properties per se. In fact, many faculty I
concentrate on the things that are best
know are tired of the hype about the
done by human beings. Somebody
once said that the best classroom in the power of computers in education. Many
are realizing quickly that simply
world is at the feet of an elder.
parking course materials online or
Take it a step further. Technology has a sending students to computer labs does
not do much in terms of student
way of creeping into our lives so that
learning.
we become accomplices in serving
technology instead of it serving us.
And as an aside, many are reeling
Without requisite checks and balances, financially from the great expectations
technology can also divide and isolate. of the “dot.com” era and with the
irrational exuberance associated with
Our profession values independence
anything high tech.
and not isolation. During the past
decade too many of us are watching
and listening to machines rather than to
each other. Far too many of us are
3
Technology and the
Scholarship of Teaching &
Learning
Faculty lament how overworked they
are with respect to their research,
teaching and service obligations.
Many question the rewards that do not
seem to be commensurate with the
investment in time or the support
required once substantive technology is
incorporated. This point about a lack
of meaningful incentives is important.
Incentives have to do not only with
stipends or time release for
development or promotion and prizes,
but for many, the real incentives should
be framed in terms of the Scholarship of
Teaching and improved student
learning.
We need to revisit the Scholarship of
Teaching, which I am delighted to see is
the focus of this conference. We need to
further examine and regard other forms
of scholarship besides discovery,
including the scholarship of integration,
the scholarship of application, and the
scholarship of teaching. And I will
argue that if we are to transform
educational practice with technology,
we need to understand the scholarship
of creating learning environments. All of
these activities are essential in how we
can help our students and how we can
better serve our communities.
The inherent complexity of
understanding how our students learn
provides many opportunities to work on
the scholarship of teaching.
What are students telling
us about their learning?
The work of Richard Light, specifically
one study called “Students Speak Their
Minds”, helped confirm what students
are telling us with respect to their
educational experience. He interviewed
more than sixteen hundred
undergraduate students at Harvard
University. The findings might surprise
you:
We spend most of our time in the
classroom; the students repeatedly point
out that the most important learning
occurred in situations and events
outside the classroom.
Many are
realizing quickly
that simply
parking course
materials online
or sending
students to
computer labs
does not do much
in terms of
student learning.
We tend to assume that students want to
work at their own pace; the students tell
us that they want courses with a lot of
structure with many short tests. In
addition, students were not opposed to Closing Thoughts
I think current educational technology is
tests but to final exams that offered no
still by and large pretty unfriendly, and
opportunities for feedback.
unstable. This is not a view against
technology. It is a view of where we are
The important question I have tried to
vis-à-vis technology.
raise is whether we are prepared to
look at our pedagogy and do we have
the will to improve learning
environments? If new technologies
prompt us to revisit these issues, well,
that’s a great start.
I see signs of enormous potential with
the liberating aspects of technology.
Access and equity can be addressed if
we keep those objectives front and
centre in designing new courses. But I
also see danger signals of technologyinduced isolation. Some of us are
unwittingly beginning to serve
technology when we know that it must
serve us.
We need variety: variety of learnercentred software and variety of modules
that support diverse learners with
diverse learning styles. Standardized
technology and templates for several
courses homogenize education and do
not bode well for quality. The
underlying motivation for realizing cost
efficiencies remains unproven and in
fact many are reporting that costs
increase with standardization.
We have to demand that the technology
integration projects pay for the software
just as students have to pay for the
textbook – that is, software does not
come free with the textbook. Unless
there is real money in educational
software and especially in supporting
software that gets obsolete by the time
the semester is over, we will be stuck
with standardization.
I think we have learned that once we
embrace a particular technology, our
habits at work begin to change. We
need to find a fine balance between
online and offline teaching and
learning activities.
STLHE Green Guides
STLHE Green Guides are a series of short, practical manuals for university teachers.
Affordable at only $10 each and written by respected Canadian scholars of
teaching and learning, the Guides combine research and theory with examples to
present useful, original solutions to common teaching issues.
Four Green Guides have been published:
Teaching Large Classes, by Allan J. Gedalof, University of Western Ontario
Active Learning, by Beverly J. Cameron, University of Manitoba
Teaching the Art of Inquiry, by Bob Hudspith & Herb Jenkins, McMaster University
Feedback, by Sergio Piccinnin, University of Ottawa
For complete details of each Guide and to order, visit the Dalhousie University Bookstore web site
http://www.bookstore.dal.ca/
You may also borrow Green Guides from the TLC.
4
UNABRIDGED: REFLECTIONS FROM
AWARD-WINNING TEACHERS
We are delighted to introduce a new
regular feature in Bridges: personal
interviews with the university’s awardwinning teachers. Our first is Dr. Sheila
Rutledge Harding, who received Master
Teacher Award at Spring Convocation.
Here she is—Unabridged.
Why did you become a teacher?
Frederick Buechner said, “The place
where God calls you to is the place
where your deep gladness and the
world’s deep hunger meet.” (Wishful
Thinking: A Theological ABC, New
York, Harper and Row, 1973, p 95.)
Most medical students are hungry to
learn the art of medicine. It is my deep
gladness to participate in that learning.
I backed into teaching through
medicine. I realized that one of the
best ways to improve patient care
would be to help student doctors learn
their art well. If I hadn’t become I
teacher, I would still be a doctor - I
really like that I’m able to be both!
And, as I learn to be a better teacher, it
makes me a more effective doctor.
Tell us about one of the best teaching
experiences you’ve had.
A patient received really good care
from a senior medical student medically sound, efficient, sensitive,
compassionate, reassuring. A visitor
observed the interaction and told the
student, “You remind me of a friend
who is a physician, too.” The student
asked, “Who’s that?” “Sheila
Harding,” he replied. “Who do you
suppose I learned this from?” the
student asked. Sometimes, it all unfolds
as it should.
Do you have a teaching role model?
Many! I’ll pick two. The first was my
dad. He taught with the integrity of
consistent example. He taught
passionately because of his passion for
his subjects - medicine, music, literature,
humanity. He taught effectively
because, to quote Parker J. Palmer, he
had the ability to see others “clearly
and see them whole, and respond to
them wisely in the moment...” (The
Courage to Teach, San Francisco,
Jossey-Bass, 1998, p 2.) The other is
Miss Minnie Quinch, a character of
author Wendell Berry’s imagination.
Miss Minnie “prepared herself to teach
by learning many cunning methods that
she never afterward used. For Miss
Minnie loved children and she loved
books, and she taught merely by
introducing the one to the other.” Miss
Minnie reminds me to keep it simple.
(A Consent, in Watch With Me, New
York, Pantheon Books, 1994, p 6.)
Persuade me to take—or not to drop—
your class.
For five years, I’ve coordinated the
introductory course in Professional Skills
in the undergraduate MD program. In
that course, first year medical students
get to play with Lego. (You have to be
there.) They also get to leave the
classroom, put on white coats and
stethoscopes, and begin to learn the
physician role by interacting with “real”
patients. For three hours every week,
they’re in direct contact with the most
important teachers of medicine they’ll
ever have - their patients. If you’re not
persuaded, you may want to reconsider
your vocational choices.
5
What’s your favourite place to eat on
campus?
The Faculty Club. It has good food and
a pleasant atmosphere. I only go there
when I’m not “on call” and I have a
little margin in my day, so I associate it
with being a little more relaxed than
usual.
Finally, what’s your favourite movie?
Monsters, Inc. It’s the only movie I’ve
considered buying for myself. I laugh
out loud just thinking about it. It’s
creative, clever, sweet, and very funny.
I use it to unwind when life has been
particularly “large.”
Mentorship: An
Opportunity to
Connect
Mentors are senior, tenured faculty
who provide informal, but not casual,
support and guidance to new
colleagues through a variety of
means: regular meetings, discussion
and feedback. They are listeners, role
models, leaders, sounding boards,
advisors and resources.
New tenure-track faculty are invited
to participate in the TLC’s Mentorship
Programme. The introductory meeting
for new faculty and mentors will take
place early in September—watch
your mailbox for an invitation and
more details, or visit the TLC web site
at www.usask.ca/tlc
For more information, contact Eileen
at 966-2238
(Eileen.Herteis@usask.ca).
Teaching . . .Through the Looking Glass
For information
about the TLC’s
special programmes
for graduate
students, visit our
web site
www.usask.ca/tlc
and click on
“For Grad Students”.
Welcome
Norma and Lynda
We are delighted to welcome
two graduate students as new
TLC colleagues: Norma Buydens
and Lynda Airriess.
Norma Buydens, a Master’s
candidate in the College of Law,
is the new graduate peer
consultant. Norma will be
working closely with Tereigh
Ewart Bauer and Kim West to
develop and present
programmes for TAs and
graduate students.
Starting in October, Lynda
Airriess, a Master’s student in the
History department, will be
working on special four-month
project. She will investigate the
departmental teaching roles and
development opportunities for
graduate students across
campus.
Tereigh Ewart Bauer, Graduate Peer Consultant
You are standing in a line-up at the
grocery store, reflecting on your long
day of teaching. The cashier disrupts
your daydreaming, telling you as gently
as possible that a peanut butter and
jam-smeared chunk of toast is glued to
your collar. Aghast, you realize that it
has been there since your rushed
breakfast at 7:17 am. If only you had
looked in a mirror!
All day long, you’ve been tugging at
the cuffs of your new shirt sleeves.
Since you were unable to look in a
mirror before leaving, you’ve been
terribly self-conscious that the sleeves
look slightly too short. Your selfconsciousness fidgeting has distracted
you (and your students) all day. If you
had been able to look in a mirror, you
would have realized that the shirt looks
polished and well-tailored, and you
would have taught with confidence and
without distraction.
Any graduate student
who visits the Centre
seeking impartial and
supportive teaching
feedback is directed to a
graduate peer
consultant. Graduate
students may seek
feedback for a variety of
reasons: confirmation
that they are doing
something well;
uncertainty about, for
example, their ability to
ask effective questions;
or to acquire feedback
ability to ask effective questions; or to
acquire feedback on something new
they are trying in class.
The consultant’s job is to mirror to the
graduate students the teaching elements
they have identified as being important;
My role as one of two graduate peer
this reflection sometimes aids the grad
consultants with The Gwenna Moss
student teacher to find ways to improve,
Teaching & Learning Centre is that of
and almost always reveals teaching
the sentient mirror. I reflect to graduate strengths of which the graduate student
students how they are teaching in
teacher was not aware. The graduate
tutorials, labs, and classrooms.
peer consultant might also suggest print,
media, or human resources of use to the
Any graduate student who visits the
grad student teacher, or offer
Centre seeking impartial and supportive suggestions, encouragement, and
teaching feedback is directed to a
affirmation of teaching well done. The
graduate peer consultant. Together they process is voluntary (not remedial). The
discuss key teaching elements the
resulting report is the property of the
consultant will focus on during the class. grad student teacher, and all aspects of
The consultant then visits the grad
the consultation are kept confidential.
student teacher’s classroom or lab,
making observations that become part
As you prepare for your tutorial or
of the peer consultant’s report to the
laboratory teaching this fall, consider
teacher. The teacher may also request
‘looking into’ the graduate peer
that the consultant videotape the class,
consultation programme. Enter your
administer a student questionnaire, or
class each day, feeling confident in
employ another tool to gather
your teaching reflection.
information.
Graduate students may seek feedback
for a variety of reasons: confirmation
that they are doing something well;
uncertainty about, for example, their
6
Call us at the Teaching & Learning
Centre at 966-2249.
WHAT’S ON THE TLC WEBSITE
By Joel Deshaye
Last summer, The Teaching & Learning
Centre approved a new mission
statement and 5-year plan. As we
continue to promote good teaching
and improved learning through our
workshops and programmes, we have
redesigned and updated our web site
to deliver more content about teaching
to more people and to promote the
visibility and public awareness of the
Centre.
standardized printing. This ever-popular
journal and newsletter has grown from
its days as Pointer to one of the mostvisited destinations on our website. Look
here for recent scholarship,
commentary, and for alternate views on
teaching and learning. See
www.usask.ca/tlc/bridges_journal.
Another perennial favorite is the
Teaching & Learning Guide for
The new TLC web site (www.usask.ca/
tlc) is faster, cleaner, and more
accessible than ever - and the content
has been put front and centre.
Some of the most popular content on
our site is in the Teaching Portfolios
section, which attracts teachers from
around the world. People search for
information about the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning and instructions
on the various aspects of building a
portfolio: assembling the evidence of
achievements, writing the statement of
responsibilities and philosophy,
including the curriculum vitae, and
organizing all these elements. Now
that portfolios are being considered in
tenure and promotion decisions at
many universities, people are returning
to this site for practical information that
could help their careers (and their
students). See www.usask.ca/tlc/
teaching_portfolios.
Meanwhile, our Resources section
continues to grow, showcasing our
Teaching & Learning Guide, our
Handbook for Grad Student Teachers,
our Bridges journal, and our slide
presentations. Much like our library of
in-house books and pamphlets, our
online resources are worth browsing.
See www.usask.ca/tlc/resources.html.
A key resource that was the flagship of
the new design is Bridges, which can
be read in full either on screen in
HTML or in Adobe PDF for
HTML for viewing in your Internet
browser. See www.usask.ca/tlc/
slide_presentations.
Besides the generous donations of
slides from colleagues and scholars, we
also have privileged access to several
online journals besides our own: the
National Teaching & Learning Forum,
the Journal On Excellence In College
Teaching, inventio, Academic
Leadership, and The Successful
Professor. The University Library has
generously provided proxy server
access to these sites for readers who
would like to use remote, non-campus
computers to reach them.
And beyond all these resources, we
have an archive of past resources and
features, plenty of links, and information
on all our programmes and workshops.
It’s all at www.usask.ca/tlc.
university instructors of all kinds.
Faculty, teaching assistants, lab
demonstrators, and librarians will find
plenty of tips for improving teaching
and student learning in this 90-page
guide adapted for the Web. See
www.usask.ca/tlc/teaching_guide.
In concert with the Teaching & Learning
Guide, the Handbook for Graduate
Student Teachers helps new instructors
meet the challenges of teaching for the
first time. Like the Guide, the Handbook
contains many of the important campus
telephone numbers and contact
information. See www.usask.ca/tlc/
gs_handbook.
For people interested in the technical
aspects of our site, the new design is
based on cascading style sheets and
XHTML (extensible hyper text markup
language) to provide faster downloads
and better access to content. This
means that pages are organized to
accommodate the visually impaired and
to fluidly adjust to different monitor
sizes and resolutions. The disadvantage
is that users of antique browsers, such
as Netscape Navigator 4.7, will only
get the content and not the correct
layout. The content, at least, can be
read by any Internet device (including
the old browsers), thanks to the style
sheets and to the text-only Betsie script
developed by the British Broadcasting
Corporation and modified for our
campus by Earl Fogel.
If you have any comments, concerns, or
Our collection of slide presentations has tips about our web site, please contact
me at joel.deshaye@usask.ca or 966grown, too. We have asked many
2245.
presenters from conferences and
workshops to let us use their slides on
our site. We have saved the slides as
7
SOME REFLECTIONS ON SCHOLARLY TEACHING
Eileen Herteis
TLC Programme Director
Last fall, I wrote an article for Bridges
focusing on the Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning (Herteis, 2002). With the
start of another academic year and
another annual round of submissions to
college and university review
committees, it seems prudent to revisit
that topic.
In 1990, Ernest Boyer, former President
of the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, wrote
Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of
the Professoriate, arguing that we must
give “scholarship a richer, more vital
meaning” and that it is unreasonable to
limit the term scholarship to published
research because it excludes so much of
the other significant work faculty do.
Indeed, he says, scholarship has four
overlapping and interdependent parts
(xii):
The Scholarship of Discovery or
Inquiry
The pursuit of knowledge; it is central to
academic life, encompassing research
and investigation in all disciplines.
The Scholarship of Integration
Connects knowledge and discovery into
larger patterns and contexts, transcends
disciplinary boundaries. Integration
includes, for example, cross-disciplinary
activities and the connection of
technology with teaching or research.
The Scholarship of Application or
Engagement
Closely related to the concept of
service; involves the rigorous
application of one’s academic expertise
to problems that affect individuals,
institutions, and society.
The Scholarship of Teaching (and
Learning)
Involves planning, assessing, and
modifying one’s teaching and applying
to it the same exacting standards of
evaluation as those used in research.
Boyer’s work has resonated with
“Scholarly teaching
is intentional,
studied, prepared,
monitored,
reviewed, shared,
revisited, revised,
and revived.”
countless scholars who are eager to
raise the profile and value of teaching
on their campuses. It is also reflected
internationally in university mission
statements (including our own), the
movement towards certification in
university teaching, and the evergrowing interest in teaching portfolios
as a way to document teaching
scholarship.
Activities of scholarly
teachers
What is scholarly teaching? What
activities do scholarly teachers engage
in? How can scholarly teaching be
identified, critiqued, and valued?
According to Boyer, the scholarship of
teaching means “transforming and
extending” knowledge, not merely
transmitting it (24).
Scholarly teaching is more than simply
incorporating one’s research into
teaching (although that can be part of
it). Scholarly teachers consciously
reflect on their teaching, asking
themselves questions such as these,
which David Baume (1996) suggests:
session on Changing Perceptions of the
Scholarship of Teaching & Learning. In
my presentation, I suggested that the
first steps in scholarly teaching are often
the result of a particular issue that has
arisen in the classroom; for example,
teaching a large class for the first time,
introducing a new teaching strategy, or
dealing with a problem or difficulty.
In response to that teaching issue or
topic, scholarly teachers read the
pedagogical literature, likely starting
with their own disciplines, and then
branching out into the broader
literature. They may attend instructional
development sessions on that topic,too.
After trying out some of the solutions or
ideas they’ve discovered in their
research, they will test whether they
have been successful by doing some
formative evaluation with their students,
adjusting their approach, asking a peer
to come into their class to review their
changes, and so on.
For many of these teachers, the process
ends there with improved teaching and
better student learning outcomes. Other
teachers go farther, however, and share
the results of their research and
classroom practice with their colleagues
in more formal ways. They give a
presentation to their teaching
committees, send a description of their
activities to a listserv or post it on a
web site, present a session in their
department or college, give a
conference presentation, or write a
paper for publication.
As part of my STLHE conference
session, I asked participants to list the
kinds of activities in which a scholarly
“What am I doing? Why? Is it working? teacher engages.
How do I know? What theories,
Continuous self-evaluation and the quest
principles and values underpin or
to improve were common themes
spring from my practice?”
amongst their responses, summarized
here:
th
At the 24 annual conference of the
Society for Teaching & Learning in
Higher Education (STLHE), I presented a
8
Scholarly teachers
• Create a teaching portfolio as a
scholarly document
• Are always willing to make changes
in their practice
• Participate in programme review and
in instructional development
opportunities
• Share both successes and
disappointments so others will learn
from them
• Continuously evaluate their own
teaching to check student outcomes
• Are open and responsive to feedback
from peers and students
One participant gave the following rich
definition:
“Scholarly teaching is intentional,
studied, prepared, monitored,
reviewed, shared, revisited, revised,
and revived.”
Rewarding scholarly
teaching
I also asked the participants in my
session how they would like to see
scholarly teaching nurtured and
rewarded in their own institutions and
beyond.
They agreed that despite the wealth of
material that describes and defines
scholarly teaching and the Scholarship
of Teaching and Learning, universities
do not adequately reward this
scholarship. Still needed are clear
institutional definitions with corollary
actions to explain what scholarly
teaching is and is not. Solutions to this
dilemma were broad–ranging, from
creating sabbatical leaves that focus on
teaching to ensuring that awardwinning and scholarly teachers are
members of review committees.
Many participants saw a more political
solution: for example, lobbying for
change in the wording of collective
agreements and standards. Several
recommended involving the institution’s
Teaching & Learning Centre when new
guidelines for promotion and tenure
were being drawn up, so that the
language of scholarship is accurately
included.
As long as we are trying to change an
ingrained culture—that research is the
only valuable scholarship—with an
“attitude”—that teaching is scholarly
work—we face many obstacles, said
another. We must convince peers to
engage in scholarly teaching, in action
research in the classroom, and in
hands-on research in their teaching.
We must encourage them to present,
write about, and publish on the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Some suggested renaming teaching
excellence awards “scholarly teaching”
awards. For others, a semantic shift like
this is not enough; we who care about
the scholarship of teaching and
learning need to act as role models to
educate and support our peers, new
faculty, and TAs to create a “bottom up”
movement of change.
Scholarly teaching is
constantly evolving
International Journal for Academic
Development. 1(1).
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship
reconsidered: Priorities of the
professoriate. The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching: Princeton University Press.
Glassick, C.E., Huber, M.T., & Maerof,
G.I. (1997). Scholarship assessed:
Evaluation of the professoriate. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Herteis, E. M. (June, 2003). Changing
perceptions of the scholarship of
teaching and learning. 24th Annual
Conference of the Society for Teaching
& Learning in Higher Education.
University of British Columbia.
Herteis, E. M. (2002). The scholarship
of teaching and learning. Teaching &
Learning Bridges. 1 (2). University of
Saskatchewan.
While, as we have seen, the terms
Herteis, E. M. Teaching portfolio web
“scholarly teaching” and the
site. http://www.usask.ca/tlc/
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
teaching_portfolios/index.html
have been used for over a dozen years,
the fruits of that scholarship are still
often undervalued, dismissed, or
ignored. Can it simply be that counting
Reappointed:
publications in refereed journals is
On July 31,
easier than measuring the outcomes of
2003 Dr.
teaching? Surely not.
Ken Coates,
Acting
Scholarly teaching is teaching that is
Provost and
constantly evolving and improving.
ViceScholarly teachers establish clear goals
President
for the course, focusing on what
Academic
students will learn rather on the content
announced
they will “cover.” They prepare
that Dr. Ron
adequately, and they research and use
Marken
would
be
reappointed
as
a variety of appropriate methods. They
Director
of
The
Gwenna
Moss
reflect on their own practice and invite
Teaching & Learning Centre. As
critique on their teaching from students
mentioned in Dr. Coates
and peers alike. Their teaching results
announcement “It was clear from
in significant student learning.
the feedback received by members
of the University community that
That’s scholarly teaching. Practice it
Professor Marken is doing a fine
yourself. Recognize it when you see it
job in this role and that the Centre
in others. Reward it when you can.
and its staff are making an
important contribution to teaching
References
and learning on our campus.”
Baume, D. (1996). Editorial. The
9
PRESIDENT’S SERVICE AWARD
WINNER, SPRING 2003
EILEEN HERTEIS,
PROGRAMME DIRECTOR, TLC
Eileen Herteis brings an infectious passion for good teaching to the University of
Saskatchewan. Colleagues of the Programme Director for The Gwenna Moss Teaching &
Learning Centre say when this is combined with her other qualities - good humour, excellent
presentation skills, boundless helpfulness, and a warmth in dealings with faculty, staff and
students - it all adds up to a truly outstanding contribution to the U of S.
At Convocation this spring, they honoured her with the U of S President’s Service Award.
Her nominator and co-workers say Eileen“puts life and sparkle into all her University
endeavours. She has made the University a better place in which to work and learn.”
As the TLC’s Programme Director, she organizes and presents instructional development
workshops for faculty, sessional lecturers and graduate students, writes articles on teaching
and learning, pulls together resource materials for the Centre and for its website, coordinates the Peer Consultation programme, and consults on teaching porfolios.
Colleagues applaud her excellence at all these activities, and note how she has inspired
them to think more deeply about their teaching and work to improve it: “Eileen is the
supporter, the encourager, the initiator and problem-solver...” “Always upbeat, (she) looks
past faults in the rest of us to see our possibilities, and helps us get there.” “Eileen Herteis
excels in every way.”
Eileen was born in Dalry, a small town in southern Scotland, and earned an undergraduate
degree in English and Latin from the University of Glasgow. In 1977 she won a
scholarship to study at McGill University in Montreal and there she earned a Master of Arts
degree in English Literature. She also married a mining engineer, leading to a number of
future relocations. At Kirkland Lake, in northern Ontario, Eileen found herself in demand to
teach at local schools and at Northern College. “Teaching went from being the last thing I
wanted to do, to the only thing.”
She moved to Saskatoon in 1981 and taught at Saskatoon Business College, English as a
Second Language for the U of S Extension Division, and as a sessional in the English
Department and the College of Education. In 1988 she moved to Nova Scotia and taught
at four universities - St. Mary’s, Mount Saint Vincent, Technical University of Nova Scotia,
and Dalhousie. She set up Dalhousie’s first Orientation to Teaching program and worked
for six years as programme co-ordinator at its Instructional Development Office.
In 1997 Eileen, husband Brian and daughter Anne returned to Saskatoon - and she
rejoined the U of S staff, first working with Angie Wong in Prior Learning Assessment and
Recognition (PLAR), then with Gwenna Moss in Instructional Development, and then with
the new Teaching & Learning Centre when it opened in the summer of 2000.
Eileen loves the generosity of people at the U of S and the feeling that individuals matter.
She gains satisfaction from finding ways to help good teaching gain recognition. And
while she takes pride in organizing the high-profile conferences and workshops, “my true
joy is in the small things, the one-on-one conversations with teachers, the chance to listen,
be an ally, or boost morale. That’s how I can make a difference.”
From On Campus News, May 16, 2003.
CONGRATULATIONS EILEEN!
10
“Creating E-Learning
Communities: Ideas and
Technologies”
Dr. Brent Wilson,
University of Colorado at
Denver
11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.,
Friday, November 7
Studio B, Education Building
Does students’ experience with
technology affect the way they
access learning? Will it change
the way students relate to each
other? Does technology change
our approach to teaching?
Dr. Brent Wilson will discuss how
technologies affect teaching,
learning, and work
performance—both positively
and negatively.
Brent Wilson is a professor in
information and learning
technologies at the University of
Colorado at Denver. He teaches
courses in instructional design,
cognition and instruction, and
adoption and use of
technologies in education. A list
of his numerous publications can
be accessed through his home
page at http://
carbon.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/
While in Saskatchewan, Dr.
Wilson will also be conducting
an “Instructional Design Summit”
for instructional designers in
institutions throughout the
province.
For more information, call
Margareth Peterson (966-5570)
or Deirdre Bonnycastle (9661803). To register, contact
Registration Office, Extension
Division (966-5539).
Supported by TEL Funding.
Developing Students’ Critical Thinking
Skills: Less Can Be More
On May 1st, Dr. Craig Nelson presented two half-day
workshops at the University of Saskatchewan. These
outstanding sessions, supported by TEL funding,
concentrated on Fostering Students’ Critical Thinking and
Key Lessons From the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning. Dr. Nelson, a Carnegie Scholar and Professor
of Biology at Indiana University, has won several national
teaching awards and contributes regularly to scholarly
teaching journals, especially the National Teaching &
Learning Forum. A special link on the TLC home page will
direct you to a list of Craig’s recent articles in the Forum;
they are well worth reading.
During his sessions, Craig Nelson said that while most
faculty want to foster their students’ critical thinking skills,
many still fear that teaching critical thinking will mean that
they teach less content. If we define teaching by what the
teacher presents or covers, “then time spent on anything
except lecturing on content is, by definition, a reduction in
coverage.”
However, covering as much content as possible is “a
seriously flawed approach,” according to Craig Nelson;
sometimes we have to cover less so that our students can
learn more. The pedagogical literature tells us that
students learn more when we incorporate active learning
into our classes; of course, that means reducing some of
the content to allow time for these activities. Similarly, if
we want to encourage critical thinking, we have to give up
some class time to allow our students to think—so again,
we have to reduce the amount of content we cover.
SYLVIA WALLACE
SESSIONAL
LECTURER AWARD
The Sylvia Wallace Sessional Lecturer
Award recognizes the important
and essential contribution of sessional
lecturers to the University of
Saskatchewan’s teaching community. The
nomination deadline is November
15 of each year. Visit the Teaching &
Learning Centre for a nomination form and
instructions on how to nominate
someone or get the form online at
www.usask.ca/tlc.
Excerpts from past winners’ teaching
philosophies:
Wendy Schissel
“The best teachers, it seems to me, are those who
know that education happens in the exchanges that
occur amongst learners, themselves included,
teachers who facilitate the exchange of ideas and
enthusiasm through their own desire and excitement
for life-long learning.”
Too much emphasis on the content may also encourage
students to assume that there are always correct, factual
answers to questions, that there is no ambiguity or
uncertainty in the discipline. But without ambiguity or
uncertainty, critical thinking cannot flourish. Moreover,
students in content-driven classes tend to develop an
attitude like Sergeant Joe Friday from TV’s “Dragnet”: they
want “just the facts, ma’am” and want to hang on to them
only long enough to pass the exam. Craig calls this
bulimic learning—students memorize the material,
regurgitate it on the exam, and forget it so quickly and
irrevocably that there is no “mental nourishment.”
Marcus Rayner
“Now I can approach the responsibility of teaching
at a university with the assurance that I can bring
something practical to what is, in effect, an
intellectual pursuit. I can impart to the students what I
know to be the beauty of the language and the texts
that I select and teach, but I can also allow some of
my own experience of the world to add validity to
what I teach, and how I do so.”
Jack Coggins
“Plato in The Republic uses the cave as a metaphor
for a mind darkened by its own narrow perceptions,
prejudices and ignorance. The light at the end of the
tunnel is the individual’s intellectual formation that
turns away from darkness into a light of ideal forms.
This is enlightenment of both self-knowledge and a
deeper wisdom - what educators call lifelong
learning.”
Two of Craig’s articles, given as handouts during the
workshops, are available from our web site http://
www.usask.ca/tlc/resources.html#other :
“On the Persistence of Unicorns: The Trade-Off between
Content and Critical Thinking Revisited” [PDF].
“Student Diversity Requires Different Approaches to
College Teaching, in Math and Science” [PDF].
11
Announcing the first annual
Fall Teaching Days
Academic
Integrity Week
September, 2003
Critical Thinking Skills
How Am I Teaching?
sponsored by the University
Secretary’s Office, The Gwenna
Moss Teaching &Learning Centre,
and the USSU
October, 2003
The Teaching Voice
On-line Writing Labs
Designing for Diversity
September 29 October 3
November, 2003
Student Assessment
Keynote Speaker
Dr. Nancy Oliveri,
University of Toronto
speaking on Research Ethics
Full program information and on-line
registration is available at
www.usask.ca/tlc
There will be workshops and panel
discussions on
Student/Supervisor Relationships
Writing A+ Essays Using the Internet
What Happens When You Cheat
USSU Advocacy Office
Legal Issues for Students
Intellectual Property
Professionalism
Check our website also for more
information on Grad Student
Development Days and the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Certificate programme for Graduate
Student Teachers.
For more information on any of
these programmes please call
966-2231.
Watch for posters and check the
website www.usask.ca/honesty
or www.usask.ca/tlc
BEST PRACTICES IN GRADUATE SUPERVISION
September 26 - 27
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
Sponsored by the Research
Committee of Council and VicePresident (Research), the event is
provided free of charge to participants. For further information, check
The Gwenna Moss Teaching &
Learning Centre website:
www.usask.ca/tlc/or contact Rob or
Corinne at the TLC at 966-2231.
The College of Graduate Studies and The
Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre
present the second annual ‘Best Practices in
Graduate Supervision Conference’. This
year’s conference will focus on the issues of
intellectual property and knowledge transfer,
and will include presentations by Drs. Peter
Stoicheff and Kamiel Gabriel, Distinguished
Graduate Supervisor Award Winners.
12