SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
SLC VISION: Rooted in our communities, we will be a globally recognized college delivering innovative learning opportunities and
preparing career-ready graduates to be leaders in their fields.
SLC MISSION: We are dedicated to student success, academic excellence, and leadership in our communities.
Program: The ‘SLC New Full Time Faculty Development Program’ is a two year program for new hires developed to enhance teaching
competencies, create a professional sense of community and build a teaching and learning network. The program will model and instill a culture
of innovation in the classroom congruent with the SLC vision of delivering innovative learning opportunities.
Goals of the Program:
 To ensure that new faculty members are educated in the fundamental teaching competencies
 To model and instill a culture of innovation in the classroom congruent with the SLC vision of delivering innovative learning opportunities
 To provide opportunities, resources and structures that support and enhance innovative learning opportunities
 To create a sense of community with new teachers and build a collaborative teaching and learning culture within the College
SLC Faculty Competencies:
1. Create engaging learning environments with a student-centered focus
2. Design effective instruction employing varied teaching strategies
3. Construct authentic learning assessment and evaluation
4. Build inclusive learning communities
5. Use technology to enhance learning
6. Commit to continuous professional learning and reflective practice
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Framework:
YEAR ONE
Amount of
Date & Location
Time
Evidence of Completion
Faculty
Competency
Faculty Coach
3 hours
Early August or as
arranged
Faculty Coach to sign off
4
 School Orientation
-Orientation to School practices and
resources
-Overview of specific School’s Policies and
Procedures
Associate
Dean/
Campus Dean
2 hours
Date: August
Room:
Time:
Associate Dean to sign off
4
 Program Orientation
-Orientation to full-time faculty program
member role and responsibilities
-Ebb & flow of semesters
Coordinator/
Mentor
2 hours
Date: August
Room:
Time:
Program Coordinator to
sign off
4
 Teacher/Educator Orientation
-Introduce faculty member to ‘Professional
Identity’ and importance of ‘Full Time
Faculty Development Program’
-Introduction to the CCTL, Teaching &
Learning requirements and resources
Faculty Coach
2 hours
Date: August
Room:
Time:
Faculty Coach to sign off
4/ 6
Human Resources related content
 Mandatory Legislation Training
-Workplace Violence Prevention
Human
Resources
4 hours
Date: August
Room:
Time:
Manager of Training &
Development verify
completion
6
Action
Orientation Progression
 College Orientation
-Survival Guide Hub- College administrative
requirement’s e.g. Xerox, phones etc.
-Overview of SLC Academic Policies and
Procedures
Supervisor
2|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
-Accessible Customer Service Standard
-AODA Training
-WHMIS Training
-Completion of Health and Safety Checklist
with Supervisor
Blackboard
 Introduction to Blackboard
-Minimum usage requirements
E-Learning
Specialist
3 hours
Date: August
Room:
Time:
E-Learning Specialist to
sign off
3/ 5
Focus on Learning – Part 1
 Eastern Region Colleges’ New Faculty
Development Program
ERC FOL Team
5 days
Date: August
FOL completion
certificate in file
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/
6
Teaching Methodologies & Student
Engagement
(see below for full description)
Faculty Coach
Module Instructor to sign
off on
1/ 2/ 3
Location: St.
Lawrence College
Kingston Campus
15 weeks
30 hours
SWF: 2
hours per
week
Fall Semester
Friday’s
2:30-4:30pm for
10 weeks
Reflection papers/
module work 2
hours x 5 weeks
Faculty Self Evaluation & Planning
(Quality Assurance Program)
Associate
Dean/
Campus Dean
1 hour
Fall Semester
Associate Dean/ Campus
Dean
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5
3|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Curriculum Design and Development
Curriculum
Developer
4 half days
Winter Semester
Module Instructor to
sign off on
2/ 3
1 hour
Winter Semester
Associate Dean/ Campus
Dean
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5
4 weeks
8 hours
SWF: 1
hour per
week
Spring Semester
Friday’s
2:30-4:30pm
Module Instructor to
sign off on
(3.5hours x
4=14)
SWF 1hr per
week
Faculty Self Evaluation & Planning
(Quality Assurance Program)
UDL, Assessment and Evaluation
(see below for full description)
Action
Focus on Learning – Part 2
 Eastern Region Colleges’ New Faculty
Development Program
Associate
Dean/
Campus Dean
Faculty Coach
Supervisor
ERC FOL Team
YEAR TWO
Amount
Date & Location
of Time
3 days
Date: May
Evidence of Completion
FOL completion
certificate in file
3
Faculty
Competency
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6
Location: St.
Lawrence College
Kingston Campus
4|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Teaching Squares
 Program where colleagues visit each
other’s classrooms, reflect upon what
has been observed, discuss the visits
with colleagues, and potentially
implement new strategies or practices
in his/her own teaching based upon
participation in the Teaching Squares
Program.
(see below for full description)
Faculty Self Evaluation & Planning
(Quality Assurance Program)
Enhancing Learning with Technology
 Teaching with technology strategies
and skills
(see below for full description)
Faculty Self Evaluation & Planning
(Quality Assurance Program)
SLC Learning Connections
 Develop ‘Teaching Portfolio’ and
content related to continuing to build
faculty skills and abilities
-Where to from here?
-How do you see yourself continuing
to develop professionally as a teacher?
-Create a professional identity as a
teacher
 Celebration of completion of New
Faculty Development Program
Faculty Coach
10 hours
Fall Semester
Flexible schedule
Faculty Coach to sign
off on
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6
Associate
Dean/
Campus Dean
E- Learning
Specialist &
Program
Manager,
Hybrid &
Online Course
Design
Associate
Dean/
Campus Dean
CCTL Team
1 hour
Fall Semester
Associate Dean/
Campus Dean
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5
2 days
Winter Semester
1 day in January
1 day follow-up in
March
(3.5hours x
4=14)
SWF 01hr
per week
E-Learning Specialist or
Program Manager,
Hybrid & Online Course
Design to sign off
1/ 5
1 hour
Winter Semester
Associate Dean/
Campus Dean
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5
1-2 days
May/June
Faculty Coach to verify
and sign off on
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6
5|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Action
Supervisor
YEAR THREE
Amount
Date & Location
of Time
30min
TBD
Dean
Faculty
Competency
4/6
TBD
Faculty Coach
4/ 6
15 hours
(1 per
week)
Sept-April
Faculty Coach to verify
and sign off on
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6
6 - 8 hours
minimum
During 2nd academic
year
September - June
Faculty Coach to verify
and sign off on
1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6
Succession Planning Session
Dean
Staying Current in Industry
Faculty
Coach/ Dean
30min
Faculty Mentor
Faculty members who have been through
the two year program now become
mentors for new faculty hires
Faculty Coach
Pick from one of the following three
options:
Faculty Cyber Connections Module
CCTL Assistant
Evidence of Completion
Professional development workshops,
seminars, or activities offered through the
CCTL
External conferences, workshops,
seminars related to teaching and learning
Module Delivery Considerations for Instructor
6|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Tri-Campus- Sessions throughout the module must be taught face to face on each campus throughout the module. An equitable distribution
based on the number of new hires on each campus.
Modules must include a variety of delivery options e.g. Hybrid sessions, WebEx Delivery, V-Tel, experiential etc.
7|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Appendix 1- Module Descriptions
1. Teaching Methodologies, Student Engagement & Classroom Management
It is important that teachers learn to use a variety of teaching methodologies in order to cater for the range of learning needs and requirements
that are present within most class environments. Within this section a variety of teaching methodologies will be explored and their various
advantages and disadvantages outlined.
Student engagement in learning and teaching refers to students’ active participation in the academic environment resulting in an enhanced
learning experience. This may be through involvement with their individual studies, and/or the structures and processes that underpin learning
and teaching.
Student engagement in learning and teaching is important for the following reasons:






Active participation encourages our students to take more responsibility for, and have ownership of, their learning, thus enhancing their
academic experience;
Student engagement in learning and teaching recognizes the different goals, approaches and motivations of each individual student as
well as the collective student voice;
Active engagement of our students is the main channel through which we are able to get feedback from our students, helping us to
develop and improve all aspects of university life;
Partnership and collaboration between our students and staff creates mutually beneficial learning communities;
Student engagement in learning and teaching underpins deep, transformational learning;
Student engagement in learning and teaching enables the attainment of skills, thus enhancing the employability of our students.
Classroom management will also be addressed throughout the module. Professors play various roles in a typical classroom, but one of the most
important is that of classroom manager. Effective teaching and learning cannot take place in a poorly managed classroom. Classroom
management case studies and scenarios will be discussed and strategies will be developed.
2. Teaching Squares
Teaching Squares involves a self-reflective process about teaching gained through observation of one’s peers. It is not peer evaluation but selfevaluation in a safe, mutually supportive environment. It is not a program restricted to new teachers, but is more successful if it includes those a
wide range of teaching experience. In this way, those new to the field can learn from the more experienced or innovative.
8|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Teaching squares foster conversations about teaching, disseminates innovative teaching practices, creates an understanding of a colleague’s
work; builds connections across different disciplines; and recognizes and reinforces good teaching practice.
The basis of the program is simple. Four instructors from different disciplines (the square) visit each other’s classes to observe teaching methods,
attitudes, classroom materials, and classroom management. After the instructors have observed each other’s classes, they get together to
reflect on the positive aspects they have learned and how they might improve their own classes. This is followed by a gathering of all Teaching
Square participants who share their experiences and add to the learning. The time required over the semester is about seven hours.
The program is simple and is being adopted at colleges and universities across North America. Instructors have found it to be so helpful that
most sign on to participate in Teaching Squares more than once.
3. UDL, Assessment and Evaluation
The Value of UDL in Assessment- Embedded, flexible, ongoing assessments have the potential to resolve many of the problems with
standardized, paper-and-pencil tests, particularly as tools for guiding teaching. It is true that standardized tests can yield valuable information,
especially if one is evaluating trends and information about groups, but as accurate assessments of individual students' skills, knowledge, and
learning, these assessment tools are severely flawed.
The obvious value of embedded, flexible UDL assessment is its ability to adjust to individual differences and focus the questions on exactly what
teachers are trying to find out. With flexibility in presentation, expression, supports, and engagement, we can reduce the common errors
introduced by single-mode fixed assessments. Further, that same flexibility allows teachers to align assessment more closely with teaching goals
and methods and thus, to assess students more accurately.
For example, if you are assessing the ability to create a coherent narrative, you can offer a wide assortment of media for that composition
including recorded speech, images, video, animation, or dance. If you are assessing the ability to write a coherent narrative (i.e., create one in
text), you can scaffold spelling, reading, and text entry (either through voice recognition or word processing) and provide additional media, like
images and sounds, to scaffold motivation and enhance the narrative. If you are assessing mastery of writing mechanics, you wouldn't scaffold
these skills, but you might offer motivational supports such as the use of sound or images, and you might provide prompts to help students selfmonitor and build editing skills. The interactive capacity of new technologies allows teachers to provide dynamic assessments that assess the
ongoing processes of learning more organically. By tracking the supports a student uses, the kinds of strategies that he or she follows, the kinds
of strategies that seem to be missing, and the aspects of the task environment that can bias the outcome, we can gain valuable insights about
students as learners.
9|Page
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Assessments in our digital age should be dynamic and universally designed. When we provide a full range of customizations and adaptations as a
part of assessments, we are able to more accurately evaluate both student performance and the processes that underlie that performance. The
enhanced accuracy comes from the capacity to evaluate performance over time, under varying conditions, including conditions where the
student's performance is constrained by barriers inherent in specific modes of representation, expression, or engagement, and conditions where
appropriate adaptations and supports are available to overcome those barriers.
Most important, new technologies allow for two-way interactive assessments. With these technologies available in our classrooms, we will be
able to create learning environments that not only teach, but also "learn" to teach more effectively. By distributing the intelligence between
student and environment, the curriculum will be able to track student successes and weaknesses and monitor the effectiveness or
ineffectiveness of its own methods. The result will be a curriculum that becomes smarter, not more outdated, over time.
(CAST- Teaching Every Student)
Based on the principles and rationale outlined above each participant will have the opportunity to collabourate with colleagues to design tests
and evaluations keeping in mind the practicalities and logistics of coping with the ‘marking monster’ throughout the semester.
4. Enhancing Learning with Technology
It is now recognized that we have before us an amazing and powerful tool for developing student thinking and learning 1. It is commonly thought
that new technologies make a big difference in education2. Many proponents of e-learning believe that everyone must be equipped with basic
knowledge of technology, as well as use it as a vehicle for reaching educational goals3.
E-learning includes numerous types of media that deliver text, audio, images, animation, and streaming video, and includes technology
applications and processes such as audio or video tape, satellite TV, CD-ROM, and computer-based learning, as well as local intranet/extranet
and web-based learning.
1
2

3
Enhanced Learning with Technology (www.enhancedlearning.ca)
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-2, Issue-1, December 2012
Muhaimin, I (2013) · Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
10 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
E-learning can occur in or out of the classroom. It can be self-paced, asynchronous learning or may be instructor-led, synchronous learning. Elearning is suited to distance learning and flexible learning, but it can also be used in conjunction with face-to-face teaching, in which case the
term blended learning is commonly used4.
This course will explore the objectives of e-learning and its methodologies. E-learning tools will be explored and evaluated in order to integrate
the best technology with effective educational principles.
Whether you are a novice or a seasoned pro, the rate of change in technology means you’ll probably find some new ideas here.
5. Instructional Planning
In this four part online module, we will discuss principles for designing instruction and for engaging students in learning. Participants will explore
the connections between teaching practice and some key learning theories and models, experience and consider a variety of instructional
strategies, and share examples of effective instructional planning.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this course, you will be able to:




4
Consider learners and learning needs as you plan your instruction.
Use principles of learning to inform instructional planning.
Explore strategies for the various components of an instructional plan.
Plan a lesson based on instructional frameworks.
Tavangarian D., Leypold M., Nölting K., Röser M.,(2004). Is e-learning the Solution for Individual Learning? Journal of e-learning, 2004.
11 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Appendix 2- Literature Review
The following is a brief review of the literature on faculty development, conceptions of teaching, and the impact of faculty development.
Reviews of Faculty Development
Workshops and seminars were the most common instructional development intervention (short, "one-shot" workshops were most common),
they were also the least evaluated and the least likely to "produce lasting changes in teaching behaviour or lasting impact on students”
(Levinson-Rose & Menges, 1981, p. 419).
Short training courses tend to have only limited impact on actual teaching practice (Prebble et al. 2004).
In a selection of 36 studies Stes et al found evidence that instructional development interventions that were extended over time had more
positive behavioral outcomes than one-time events (Stes et al. 2010).
Conceptions of Teaching
“… lecturers who considered teaching to be a process of transmitting knowledge were more likely to use content-centred approaches to
teaching, while those who conceived teaching as a facilitative process tended to use learner-centred approaches (Kember and Kwan, 2000).
Student-centred teachers have been found to use a wider repertoire of teaching methods than teachers who adopt a teacher-centred approach
to teaching (Coffey & Gibbs, 2002).
Learning facilitation orientation (learner-centred) encouraged more meaningful learning among students (Kember and Gow 1994).
Teachers who focus on their students and their students' learning tend to have students who focus on meaning and understanding in their
studies, while university teachers who focus on themselves and what they are doing tend to have students who focus on reproduction” (Prosser
and Trigwell 1999).
According to Kember and Kwan (2000), fundamental changes in the quality of teaching and learning are unlikely to occur without changes in
teachers' conceptions of teaching. As such, it has been argued that faculty development efforts should be focused on changing faculty
conceptions of teaching in order to emphasize the facilitation of student learning (Kember & Gow, 1994; Trigwell & Prosser, 1996). This
approach requires a move away from traditional faculty development approaches that simply highlight various teaching strategies to more
sophisticated approaches that challenge conceptions of teaching and help faculty become more aware of wider variations in teaching and
learning styles (Åkerlind, 2007; Trigwell & Prosser, 1996).
12 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
The Impact of Faculty Development on Faculty’s Conceptions of Teaching
Those who had participated in faculty development programs were more likely to adopt a learner-centred teaching practice (Gibbs and Coffey
2004).
The Impact of Faculty Development on Student Learning
When faculty adopt a student-focused teaching approach following participation in a faculty development program, their students adopt deep
learning approaches to their studies (Hanbury et al. 2008).
(Full literature review completed by Ruth Rodgers and Jordanne Christie at Durham College in their work on: The Effects of a Required Faculty
Development Program on Novice Faculty Self-Efficacy and Teaching Approach Prepared by Ruth Rodgers and Jordanne Christie, Durham College,
and Maureen Wideman, The University of Ontario Institute of Technology
For the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario and Durham College)
13 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Appendix 3- Implementation & Communication Plan
Development:
CCTL Associate Director and Faculty Coach to develop draft document by January, 2014
Consultation:
a. Send draft to CCTL Team for review and request feedback (December, 2013)
b. Consult with Terri McDade Dean Faculty of Arts (January, 2014)
c. Contact Associate Deans to request they review document and provide feedback (January, 2014)
Present to Dean’s Council (February/March)
Once approval has been obtained:
Communicate with Associate Deans, Campus Deans and with Human Resources to develop policy and procedure for incorporating ‘New Full
Time Faculty Development Program’ into Letters of Offer.
Appendix 4- Table Outlining Spread of Faculty Competencies Represented in Framework:
1. Create engaging learning environments with a student-centered
focus
11
2. Design effective instruction employing varied teaching strategies
11
3. Construct authentic learning assessment and evaluation
4. Build inclusive learning communities
13
13
5. Use technology to enhance learning
11
6. Commit to continuous professional learning
11
14 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Appendix 5- Total Number of Hours
Year One
College Orientation
School Orientation
Program Orientation
Tear/Educator Oreintation
HR Related content
Blackboard
FOL 1
Teaching Methodologies & Student Engagement
Performance Evaluation for Probationary Faculty in Fall
Curriculum Design & Development
Performance Evaluation for Probationary Faculty in Winter
UDL, Assessment & Evaluation
Year Two
FOL 2
Teaching Squares
Performance Evaluation for Probationary Faculty in Fall
Enhancing Learning with Technology
Performance Evaluation for Probationary Faculty in Winter
SLC Learning Connections
Year Three
Faculty Mentor
Option
3
2
2
2
4
3
30
30
1
12
1
8
18
10
1
10
1
8
15
8
Total Hours 169
Appendix 6- PLAR
Faculty members with previous full-time college teaching experience and/or an undergraduate or graduate degree in education may elect to
seek exemption from modules by submitting a portfolio for assessment by the CCTL team for review and decision. However, it is strongly
15 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
recommended that all new faculty irrespective of experience, participate in the program. Participation will enhance their personal and
professional experience and create a sense of community and build a collaborative teaching and learning culture within the College.
16 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Appendix 7- References
Åkerlind, G. S. (2007). Constraints on academics’ potential for developing as a teacher. Studies in Higher Education, 32(1), 21-37.
Coffey, M., & Gibbs, G. (2002). Measuring teachers' repertoire of teaching methods. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 383390.
Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach
to learning of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87-100.
Hanbury, A., Prosser, M., & Rickinson, M. (2008). The differential impact of UK accredited teaching development programmes on academics’
approaches to teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 33(4), 469-483.
Kember, D., & Gow, L. (1994). Orientations to teaching and their effect on the quality of student learning. Journal of Higher Education, 65(1), 5874.
Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers' approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science,
28(5), 469-490.
Levinson-Rose, J., & Menges, R. J. (1981). Improving college teaching: A critical review of research. Review of Educational Research, 51(3), 403434.
Prebble, T., Hargraves, H., Leach, L., Naidoo, K., Suddaby, G., & Zepke, N. (2004). Impact of student support services and academic development
programmes on student outcomes in undergraduate tertiary study: A synthesis of the research. Report to the Ministry of Education,
Massey University College of Education.
Rodgerson, R., Christie, J. (2014). The Effects of a Required Faculty Development Program on Novice Faculty Self-Efficacy and Teaching Approach
Prepared by Ruth Rodgers and Jordanne Christie, Durham College, and Maureen Wideman, The University of Ontario Institute of
Technology. For the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario and Durham College
Stes, A., Coertjens, L., & Van Petegem, P. (2010). Instructional development for teachers in higher education: impact on teaching approach.
Higher Education, 60(2), 187-204.
17 | P a g e
SLC NEW FULL-TIME FACULTY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1996). Changing approaches to teaching: A relational perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 275-284.
Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning.
Higher Education, 37(1), 57-70.
18 | P a g e