Category: Educational and Curriculum Development

Trusting your inner wisdom in team coaching to navigate conflict and strengthen psychological safety

What is team coaching?

Team coaching involves partnering with and walking alongside teams to help them learn together, relate together, reflect together, achieve together, and grow together.  Team coaching supports teams in leveraging their collective talents and gifts to achieve goals, strengthen performance, enhance team health, and transform themselves, their team and their organization(s).  Traylor et al. (2020) summarize that team coaching focuses on learning and development, goals and performance, team self-awareness and team health/functioning over a sustained time. Team coaching is systemic and intentional, focusing on individual, interpersonal and team relationships; team priorities and tasks; internal and external partner connections; and, wider systemic/societal contexts (Lines and Leary-Joyce, 2024; Peters and Carr, 2013a). Team coaching positively impacts team performance, interaction, communication, affect (e.g., trust, respect, psychological safety), as well as ongoing team and individual learning and growth (Salihovic, 2021; Peters and Carr, 2013b). 

What does team coaching look like?

Team coaching is nuanced and complex.  Important approaches to team coaching include:

  • using a combination of team coaching and individual coaching with team members and team leads, 
  • iteratively gathering insights from the team, organizational partners, and external partners, 
  • creating and maintaining conditions for psychological safety (Edmundson, 1999; 2018) and growth,
  • challenging and stretching performance for individual team members and the team as a whole, 
  • providing expertise, mentorship, facilitation, and guidance where helpful, 
  • building conditions for sustained team health and change, 
  • evaluating and communicating the impact of team coaching interventions, and 
  • paying attention to our own growth, restoration and self-care (Graves, 2021).

According to Peters and Carr (2013a) the structure of team coaching includes six core components:

  1. Assessment (team coaching readiness, engagement of team members, stakeholders and context),
  2. Coaching for Team Design (team purpose, structure and talent),
  3. Team Launch (team charter, direction, vision, goals, working agreements),
  4. Individual Coaching (leader, team members),
  5. Ongoing Team Coaching (coach, team lead, team members, peer coaching), and
  6. Capturing Learning, Success and Impact (results and outputs, team and social processes, individual learning, partner perspectives).

The importance of psychological safety in team coaching

Psychological safety is core to team processes, especially when teams are navigating conflict.  Gallo (2023) describes psychological safety as “a shared belief held by members of a team that it’s OK to take risks, to express their ideas and concerns, to speak up with questions, and to admit mistakes — all without fear of negative consequences.”  Based on work by Amy Edmondson (e.g. Edmondson, 1999; Edmondson, 2018), Gallo emphasizes that psychological safety creates more motivated and engaged teams, leads to better decision-making, and fosters a culture of continuous improvement. In short, psychological safety leads to better team communication, performance, creativity, resilience, and learning.  

What’s core to ensuring psychological safety? 

Bresman and Edmondson (2022) highlight three key approaches leaders or coaches can take to create psychological safety: 

  1. Framing: Frame team meetings and conversations as important opportunities for collaborative information sharing and intentionally invite team members to share different perspectives. Ensure you provide space and time to hear from all team members. Frame differences as valuable from the start.

I anticipate that we will all bring different perspectives to this conversation. Our diverse viewpoints will help us more fully understand each other and the issue at hand.  These different perspectives enrich our discussion and help us arrive at a better outcome.

  1. Inquiry: This is what coaches do best!  Ask open questions that inspire deep dialogue. Great leaders and coaches ask questions that are curious, learning-focused, and have no correct or pre-determined answer.  Don’t know what to ask?  Keep it simple.

What do you think? 

What else might we consider?

How do you feel about this? 

What matters most?

How should we move forward?

  1. Bridging Boundaries: I love this one. Bresman and Edmondson (2022) recommend that strength-based questions around hopes, skills and expertise, and challenges can help build psychological safety.  These questions help team members see where they can bridge their expertise and boundaries. They provide a foundation for moving forward and stealthily inspire vulnerability.

What do you want to accomplish?

What do you bring to the table?

What are you up against?  What are you worried about? What concerns you?

Digging deep to inspire team transformation

Team coaching is more than what you do or how you structure an experience with a team. Team coaching is coaching, and coaching is about transformation.  It’s about digging below the surface.  

Expert team coaches work to create psychologically safe spaces for open and honest conversations. They help teams lean into and resolve conflicts and disagreements.  They learn to read the space by noticing shifts in energy, somatic responses and communication patterns to uncover what matters most.  They are calm, affirming, and curious. They name shifts in team dynamics and are “prepared to drop the plan and respond to what is emerging in the team” (Lines and Leary-Joyce, 2024, p. 109).

This is the messy, magical, and essential part of team coaching that inspires new awareness and insight and results in sustained learning and transformation. It forms the heart of team coaching.  This type of learning happens when teams uncover and challenge their assumptions, beliefs and frames of reference (Mezirow, 1997).  Make no mistake, this is tough work. For coaches, this means leaning into team dynamics, team conflict, team tensions, team energy, team safety, team interaction, and the unspoken undercurrents of team processes.

Digging below the surface takes practice and courage.  It often starts with listening to our inner wisdom. As coaches, our emotional responses and inner sensory reactions are powerful indicators that something is happening with the team that we need to pay attention to.  Tuning into our inner wisdom is a coaching superpower, and mindfulness practices can help us develop this superpower. 

Using the RAIN mindfulness practice to harness our inner wisdom and transform teams

I first learned about the RAIN mindfulness practice through Dr. Tara Brach’s work. I often use the RAIN (Brach, 2021) practice to navigate and live through the inevitable and common human experiences associated with stress, anxiety, anger, fear, frustration, grief, sadness, and burnout. RAIN stands for Recognize, Allow, Investigate, and Nuture.

Let’s break down how to leverage the RAIN practice to navigate tension and conflict in team coaching.

Imagine you are coaching a team, and you suddenly feel tension arising. 

Drawing upon the work of Lines and Leary-Joyce’s (2024) approach to conflict and Brach’s (2021) RAIN framework, here is an example of how RAIN can help.  Take note of how RAIN is used as an internal strategy for the team coach and as a coaching framework for the team throughout this example.

Recognize

Recognize what is happening and note what is emerging within you. Tap into your inner wisdom. Your feeling body is filled with wisdom. It has much to offer and teach your thinking mind. Pause and reflect on questions such as:

What thoughts, behaviours, and feelings am I experiencing? 

What emotions are surfacing for me?  

Where are these emotions living in my body? 

What sensations am I experiencing? 

What are these sensations wanting from me? 

How could these feelings be an indicator of what others are feeling?

To help the team recognize and name what they are experiencing, identify what you are experiencing and invite them into the process.

I am feeling some tension arising.  Do any of you feel that way, too?

Allow

Allow the experience, emotions, and sensations to be there, just as they are.  There is no need to suppress, fix, judge or avoid these arisings. Remember that these reactions are there to support and help you. They are alerting you to pause and pay attention to something important. They are there to support your and the team’s success and learning.

You may acknowledge your sensations silently in a way that is meaningful to you.  

I see you anxiety. I feel you as my jaw and hands clench.

To help the group uncover and allow their experiences, explore questions such as, 

What are you noticing or experiencing as a team? 

What emotions or sensations are you noticing arise within you?

Allowing is about creating space for folks to name, acknowledge and sit with their discomfort. Your role as team coach is to create a safe, open discussion where team members can identify what they are experiencing without judgment. It is the beginning of helping the team identify patterns of conflict and their impact on team dynamics and performance.  

It may be helpful for team members to use statements starting with,  

I feel…

I am…

I notice…

Create space for all voices to be heard.  Encourage team members to name and sit with their discomfort, rather than judge, blame or rush to solutions. Validate and encourage different perspectives and encourage team members to do the same. Remember, this inner work is tough and may be new to many team members. Some team members may benefit from accessing an emotions or feelings wheel. I still use an emotions wheel regularly, as in the moment, it’s tough to identify what’s happening within us!

Your calm and reassuring presence is essential.  Consider taking grounding breaths throughout the process.  Affirming statements can help folks ease into the conversation. 

It’s natural for strong emotions to arise during conflict.

Different people may experience this situation differently. 

Investigate

Investigate with curiosity, interest and care. Investigation starts with you. You may silently reflect on questions such as,

What information are my emotional sensations providing me about my experiences as a team coach?

What information are these arising providing me about the team structure, dynamics and processes and the broader system they function within?

What patterns in the team’s dynamics and interactions am I noticing?

To dig deeper into an exploration of tension and conflict with the team, you may explore questions such as,

What patterns are you noticing?

What is this situation offering or teaching the team? What opportunities is it revealing?

How might the team structure be contributing to this situation?

What broader organizational dynamics or external contexts may be contributing to this situation?

What are your roles, contributions and responsibilities related to this situation? 

What strengths could emerge from working through this?

What do you need from the team in this moment? 

What does the team need from you?

Again, your calming and curious presence is essential. Notice your and the team’s tone, posture and somatic responses and intentionally work to ease tension throughout the discussion. Take pauses and breaks if necessary.

Nurture

Nurture psychological safety and demonstrate compassion and self-compassion. Demonstrate compassion and encourage self-compassion by openly acknowledging, appreciating and affirming courageous and vulnerable contributions. 

Self-compassion (Neff, 2023) involves giving ourselves support and compassion, just as we would a friend, especially when we are experiencing discomfort, suffering and pain.  It includes demonstrating self-kindness, acknowledging the common humanity of our experiences, and practicing mindfulness. It is about reducing the separation we feel from one another. 

Working through conflict and disagreement is tough work.  Self-compassion can be demonstrated throughout the RAIN cycle. For example, you may silently acknowledge, 

Working through conflict is an important component of my role as coach. It’s tough work.

The gentle movement of placing one of your hands on top of the other can help demonstrate self-compassion and care.  

Encourage self-compassion and compassion by the team by normalizing and emphasizing the importance of team conflict.

Thank you for working through this process. Conflict and disagreement are critical to fostering team health.

Working through moments of tension, conflict and disagreement provide incredible opportunities for team learning, innovation, and growth.

It takes courage, expertise and vulnerability to lean into team tensions. You’ve strengthened the way you interact as a team and surfaced new and different perspectives.

Nurture psychological safety through shared framing, inquiry and bridging boundaries (Bresman and Edmundson, 2022). Check-in and facilitate a debrief to synthesize what the team learned and how they will move forward.  Ensure you allow for time to hear from all team members.

The act of psychological safety is a demonstration of compassion and self-compassion as the team is provided with time to normalize and mindfully reflect upon the learning and growth they have accomplished. 

Consider questions such as,

What strengths emerged from working through this?

What did you learn about navigating team conflict and ensuring psychological safety as you worked through this? As individuals? As a team? 

How will you carry forward what you learned as a team?

What might you add to your team agreements based on this experience?

How will you reflect upon and celebrate the work and growth you have experienced today?

Conclusion

Listening to and leaning into our inner wisdom is one of the most important practices we can develop as team coaches. Like any practice, it takes practice!  RAIN provides an accessible framework for helping us leverage our and the team’s inner wisdom to navigate tension, disagreement and conflict, and to strengthen psychological safety.

RAIN has completely reframed conflict and tension for me. It’s helped me see this discomfort as an essential part of team health, learning and growth.  Most importantly, it’s given me a grounded approach to strengthen my capacity to help team members and teams become more curious, human-centred and resilient. 

Call to action

I encourage you to find one component of the RAIN practice that resonates with you and to try it in a team coaching experience. The RAIN practice can apply to your individual leadership and coaching practices too. You may start by recognizing the emotions and sensations that arise within you during a team discussion, or by engaging in a conversation of what the team experiences during a moment of energy, passion and joy. RAIN can also illuminate joyful team experiences. You may start by sharing and discussing this post with a coaching colleague or a leadership team you are working with. There is no one or right way to bring the RAIN practice to life.  Do what feels most meaningful and important to you!

References

Brach, T. (2021) Blog: The RAIN of self-compassion. https://www.tarabrach.com/selfcompassion1/

Bresman, H. and Edmondson, A. (2022) Research: to excel, diverse teams need psychological safety. https://hbr.org/2022/03/research-to-excel-diverse-teams-need-psychological-safety

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. John Wiley & Sons.

Gallo, A. (2023) What is psychological safety? https://hbr.org/2023/02/what-is-psychological-safety

Graves, G. (2021). What do the experiences of team coaches tell us about the essential elements of team coaching? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 15. https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/file/fe000ae4-258d-4fed-8fcb-8d2d484295e1/1/IJEBCM_S15_16.pdf


Lines, H. and Leary-Joyce, J. 2024. Systemic Team Coaching 2nd Edition. AoEC Press.

Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New directions for adult and continuing education, 1997(74), 5-12. https://www.ecolas.eu/eng/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Mezirow-Transformative-Learning.pdf

Neff, K. D. (2023). Self-compassion: Theory, method, research, and intervention. Annual review of psychology, 74(1), 193-218. 

Peters, J., & Carr, C. (2013a). High Performance Team Coaching: A Comprehensive System for Leaders and Coaches. Friesen Press.

Peters, J., & Carr, C. (2013b). Team effectiveness and team coaching literature review. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 6(2), 116-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17521882.2013.798669

Salihovic, K. (2021). Team coaching in the workplace. A literature review on team coaching and solving performance deficiency in the workplace, University of Gothenburg, School of Business, Economics and Law. 

Traylor, A. M., Stahr, E., & Salas, E. (2020). Team coaching: Three questions and a look ahead: A systematic literature review. International Coaching Psychology Review, 15(2), 54-68. https://www.siopsa.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ICPR-Vol-15.-No.-2-Autumn-2020.pdf#page=56

What does it mean to be an educational developer?

I’ve been connecting with several teaching and learning leaders across Canada, exploring the shifts and transformations we have been experiencing in higher education following the pandemic. I’ve experienced something during these conversations that has taken me by surprise. I’ve caught myself wondering:

What does it mean to be an educational developer? What do we do and what are our core ways of being? What guides how we approach our work? How has this shifted over the last few years?

As a leader in educational development and and higher education, you may think that this should be top of mind. It’s always helpful to pause and reflect upon what you do and what most strongly guides your practice.

Thankfully, I’m not the first person to consider this. Authors like Debra Dawson (Dawson et al., 2010), Lynn Taylor (Taylor & Rege Colet, 2010), Graham Gibbs (Gibbs, 2013), and Kathryn Sutherland (Sutherland, 2018) have put some great thinking into the work of educational development. Building upon the work of Gibbs (2013), a group of colleagues and I (Kenny et al., 2017) described many activities that educational developers engage in such as: working to strengthen teaching and learning practices with individuals, groups of educators, and faculties/departments, partnering with educators, departments and faculties to influence academic course and curriculum development, improving learning environments and spaces, influencing institutional processes, structures and policies related to teaching and learning, supporting quality assurance processes, and engaging in program evaluation, scholarship and research.

We emphasized that educational development takes place across multiple organizational levels: with individuals; departments, faculties, committees and working groups; across the institution; and even across the sector of higher education (Simmons 2016, Taylor & Rege Colet, 2010). Kathryn Sutherland (2018) encourages us to think even more broadly about academic development to consider the whole of the academic role, the whole of the institution, and the whole of the person.

Much of the above work focuses on what educational developers do. In 2013 Julie Timmermans (Timmermans, 2013) described threshold concepts in the careers of educational developers. She emphasized ways of knowing and being such as: respecting existing expertise, building capacity, starting where people are at, getting out of the way, thinking and acting strategically across mutliple organizational levels, influencing knowledge sharing and flow, seeing patterns and opportunities, collaborating and building relationships, communicating effectively, engaging in reflection, adapting a scholarly approach, and adapting to context.

But what does this actually look like in practice?

A group of educational developers at UCalgary came together to reflect on how we approach our practices. We called these our academic core beliefs. In 2023, we expanded upon these beliefs to describe guiding principles for our educational development practices at the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning (TI). I’ve presented this work below:

Collective Capacity: We foster integrated, ethical, and equitable networks of practice and leadership to build connections that strengthen our collective capacity to improve post-secondary teaching and learning. We provide context, resources, and expertise to help others enhance their learning, share knowledge, build communities, and influence change in teaching and learning. We believe that teaching and learning expertise and different ways of knowing are distributed across the academic community, and that relationships and a relational approach are paramount to our work. We learn from others and within diverse intercultural contexts founded on integrity which create opportunities for meaningful dialogue and action. 

Collaborative Relationships: We believe it is essential to foster significant conversations and networks through both formal and informal processes. We support the development of collegial relationships and collaborations within the TI and across academic communities. We believe that context and culture matter, and that diverse ways of being, knowing, and doing exist. We respect, celebrate, and draw upon the knowledge, experience, and perspectives of the diverse roles, backgrounds, and cultures of colleagues.

Learning focused:  We are all learners; therefore, we emphasize approaches that lead to meaningful and enriching learning experiences for all.  We model and disseminate strategies that empower educators and students to actively engage in learning. We acknowledge that learning is an iterative and contextual process that can be supported by critical reflection, research-informed principles, and diverse ways of knowing, being, and doing,

Scholarly and cultural relevance: We believe it is important to critically examine knowledge and assumptions through inquiry, scholarly practice, practice-based research, and culturally relevant approaches. We commit to making decisions based on the best available information that incorporates multiple ways of knowing. We engage with the scholarship of teaching and learning and actively support and disseminate it to strengthen educational development. 

Leadership: We believe that shared, collaborative leadership approaches are key to meaningful decision-making, transformation, and change in postsecondary education.  We provide expertise, support, and resources to empower others to lead.  We bring our scholarly experience and wisdom of practice to identify gaps and lead initiatives to influence change in teaching and learning. We model leadership approaches that are grounded in building trust and relationships across the academic community.

Critical Reflection: We believe that critical reflection is essential to fostering growth, enhancement and innovation in teaching and learning, as well as professional practice. We commit to being intentional about our individual and collective educational development approaches by engaging in critical self-reflection, examining our own positionality and assumptions, and modelling reflective practice. 

A call to action

If you are an educational developer in higher education, I encourage you to open a conversation with your team.

What are the principles that guide your work in higher education? What practices bring these principles to life? How might these principles or approaches be shifting?

Concluding thoughts and thanks

I am proud of the work our team continues to put into meaningful considering not only what we do as academics in the TI (i.e., what we do?), but how we approach our work (i.e., who we be?). Special thanks to colleagues Alysia Wright, Carol Berenson, Cheryl Jeffs, Frances Kalu, Fouzia Usman, Jaclyn Carter, Kara Loy, Kim Grant, Patti Dyjur, Robin Mueller, and Sreyasi Biswas, who thoughtfully informed and contributed to the development of these core beliefs and principles over time. Apologies if I missed anyone – let me know if I did and I will add you!

Coming back to these principles has helped ground what I believe to be most important about educational development approaches and practices in higher education.

References

Dawson, D., Britnell, J., & Hitchcock, A. (2010). Developing competency models of faculty developers. In L. Nilson & J. Miller (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development(Vol. 28, pp. 3-24). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.

Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development 18(1), 4-14.

Kenny, N., Popovic, C., McSweeney, J., Knorr, K., Hoessler, C., Hall, S., Fujita, N., & El Khoury, E. (2017). Drawing on the principles of SoTL to illuminate a path forward for the scholarship of educational development. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), n2.

Sutherland, K. A. (2018). Holistic academic development: Is it time to think more broadly about the academic development project?. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(4), 261-273.

Simmons, N. (2016). Synthesizing SoTL institutional initiatives toward national impact. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 146, 95-102

Taylor K. L., & Rege Colet N. (2010). Making the shift from faculty development to educational development: A conceptual framework grounded in practice. In A. Saroyan & M. Frenay (Eds.), Building teaching capacities in higher education: A comprehensive international model (pp. 139-167). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Timmermans, J. A. (2014). Identifying threshold concepts in the careers of educational developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 19(4), 305-317.

From learning-centred to human-centred education

When I started my work in educational development and teaching and learning in the early 2000s, we talked a lot about the need to shift our focus from teaching to student learning in higher education. Fundamentally, this meant embracing a mindset more focused on what and how students learned rather than the content we taught, or how we would transmit knowledge. Through a learning-centred approach, students were seen as the starting point of the curriculum, learning experiences focused on meaningful student engagement and collaboration, learning skills such as metacognition, problem-solving, critical reflection, evaluating evidence, and developing arguments were seen as essential to developing subject matter expertise, and instructors and students were recognized as part of a learning community, sharing the work and process of learning (Paris and Combs, 2006; Weimer, 2013).

I feel a shift in higher education that is now moving us from a learning-centred approach to a human-centred approach to higher education.

I am only starting to conceptualize what this might mean. One of the key principles of human-centred design is that it considers “human perspectives” in all steps of the process, thereby creating outcomes that are meaningful to all involved (Burns, 2018; Leason et al., 2022).  Human-centred design recognizes those within the system as whole beings who are multi-faceted, and places the needs and well-being of humans at the centre of design processes (Leason et al., 2022). Advocates suggest that human-centred design approaches help embrace ambiguity and complexity, create community, recognize the importance of local context, and support innovation and well-being (Bazzano et al., 2017). 

What could this mean for higher education? 

I’ve adapted some of Gill and Thomson’s (2017) work on human-centred education to describe a few core principles for a human-centred approach to higher education (HCHE) below:

  1. Human Flourishing: HCHE focuses on the well-being and flourishing of all within the system, respecting the needs of faculty, staff, students and the community itself.
  2. Holistic Development: HCHE focuses on the development of whole beings and communities. This includes looking beyond academic or performance metrics and goals, toward indicators of emotional, physical, social, psychological, and spiritual well-being and development.
  3. Lived-Experience: HCHE recognizes and affirms the lived experiences and expertise of those within the community, as intrinsically important and valuable. HCHE meaningfully includes the lived experiences of students, staff and faculty in planning, design, and decision-making processes.
  4. Learning in and as a Community: HCHE recognizes that staff, students and faculty contribute to the planning, creation, and nurturing of teaching and learning communities.
  5. Learning Beyond Knowledge and Skills: HCHE conceptualizes learning beyond acquiring and demonstrating knowledge and skills (aka learning as doing) to focus on learning as a lifelong process, and a way of being, caring and meaningfulness (aka learning as being). 
  6. Care, Compassion, and Respect: HCHE creates and nurtures a relational culture of care, compassion and respect. In the wise words of Dr. Michael Hart, this principle recognizes the importance of “relationships before tasks” in our academic spaces, workplaces and communities. It emphasizes caring and respectful relationships across all levels of the academic community.
  7. Iterative Learning, Reflection, and Growth: HCHE develops sustainable processes and systems for meaningful feedback, learning, improvement, and growth to improve teaching and learning. This includes the many systems and processes that support teaching and learning across multiple organizational levels. Feedback for learning goes beyond data collection to include critical reflection and meaning-making for individuals, teams, classes, programs, communities, units, and the institution.

What did I miss?  What would you add or change to these principles to make them better?

How could these principles be used?

These principles could be used to inform how we approach course and curriculum design, how we develop academic processes and policies related to teaching and learning, and as a foundation for meaningful reflection, conversation and dialogue.

For example:

  • An individual faculty member could apply these principles to redesign a course in partnership with students.
  • Student councils and working groups could use these principles to develop priorities for advocacy and action.
  • These principles could inform the work of teaching and learning working groups or committees.
  • Faculties or departments could use these principles to open a conversation about curriculum renewal, or faculty, staff and student wellbeing.
  • Institutions could adapt these principles to inform strategic planning for teaching and learning.

Concluding thoughts

One of the gifts that the pandemic taught me is the importance of human well-being and flourishing, and the humanity of our work. Perhaps human-centred approaches will help us reimagine how we approach higher education, whether it be the courses we create, the workplaces we are part of, or the communities we contribute to. Human-centred principles could help us hold tightly to what matters most.

I welcome any thoughts and insights on what these principles could mean for higher education, and how you would strengthen them!

References:

Bazzano, A. N., Martin, J., Hicks, E., Faughnan, M., & Murphy, L. (2017). Human-centred design in global health: a scoping review of applications and contexts. PloS one, 12(11), e0186744.

Burns, C. (2018). Human-centred design. In eHealth Research, Theory and Development (pp. 207-227). Routledge.

Gill, S., & Thomson, G. (2017). Human-centred education: A practical handbook and guide. Routledge.

Leason, I., Longridge, N., Mathur, M. R., & Nickpour, F. (2022). An opportunity for inclusive and human-centred design. British Dental Journal, 233(8), 607-612.

Paris, C., & Combs, B. (2006). Lived meanings: what teachers mean when they say they are learner‐centered. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 12(5), 571-592.

Weimer, M. (2013).  Learner Centred Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Second Edition. CA: San Francisco.  Jossey-Bass. 

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) into the future 

I was asked to share some insights on the future of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) by Mindi Summers and Fabian Neuhaus as part of their work as educational leaders in residence at the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning. They asked me to reflect on my hopes for SoTL at UCalgary into the future. What would I most like to see?

Here is what I shared.

I hold a broad conceptualization of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL).  To me, SoTL extends beyond the classroom.  It includes authentic and meaningful inquiry related to teaching and learning in a postsecondary context, and the many systems, practices, and processes that support teaching and learning across multiple organizational levels.  You’ll note that I have not limited this definition to student learning. This expanded conceptualization recognizes that all students, staff, faculty, and academic leaders are learning within this system.  

The other realization that I have come to after two decades of work in higher education is that the impacts of SoTL extend much beyond scholarly outputs, such as peer reviewed publications and presentations. Research conducted on the impact of UCalgary’s Teaching and Learning grants program (Jamniczky et al., forthcoming) speaks to the many meaningful impacts of SoTL including: working with students as partners in research and scholarship, expanding partnerships and supporting community-building with colleagues across disciplines, increased critical reflection on teaching and student learning, academic growth and improvements in teaching and research practices, as well as meaningful scholarly dissemination at the local, national, and international levels. 

We know that SoTL is good for higher education. Full stop. It engages students in meaningful inquiry. It improves teaching and research practices. It inspires transdisciplinary partnerships and collaborations. It strengthens critical reflection on teaching and learning. It results in knowledge sharing and local, national, and international dissemination about teaching and learning.

Does SoTL include securing grants, engaging in inquiry, and disseminating scholarly outputs at conferences and in peer reviewed publications? Absolutely. It also includes engaging intentionally in critical reflection, asking meaningful questions in and beyond the classroom based on our local experiences and curiosities, gathering, and generating information related to these experiences and curiosities in ways that are most authentic to our experiences, and sharing our insights and pondering with colleagues through small, but significant conversations (Roxå & Mårtensson, 2009) in our local context.  

What are my aspirations for SoTL at and beyond UCalgary over the next 10 years?   

  1. All staff, faculty, students, and academic leaders recognize and speak to the value of engagement in SoTL across multiple organizational levels.
  2. We focus less on the outputs and more on the processes, impacts, and learnings from SoTL.
  3. We strengthen a sense of belonging in SoTL.
  4. We expand and connect SoTL communities and networks across units and disciplines. 

SoTL is one of many key influencers impacting change in teaching and learning cultures. Other influencers include: 1) High-impact professional learning for individuals and groups, 2) Local-level leadership and academic microcultures, and 3) Learning spaces, pedagogies, and technologies (Kenny, 2021). As we look to continue to strengthen teaching and learning in higher education across multiple organizational levels, we must continue to broaden our conceptualization of SoTL, strive to ensure a culture of belonging in SoTL communities and identities, and recognize and value the influence and impact of SoTL in order to understand and strengthen teaching and learning and the many practices, processes, systems, and structures that influence teaching and learning in higher education. 

A Call to Conversation

If you are in higher education and involved in SoTL, I’d love to hear your thoughts on SoTL and where you think it is headed into the future.

Better yet, grab a colleague or two and engage in a conversation on some of the following questions:

  • Where and how have you seen SoTL emerge in your local teaching and learning context?
  • What has been the influence of SoTL, on you, your colleagues, your department/faculty, institution, and/or discipline?
  • How would you like to see SoTL grow into the future?
  • What shift, changes or new perspectives would you most like to see?
  • What supports would need to be in place to further grow SoTL?

References

Jamniczky, H.A., Mukherjee, M., Stewart,R., Mardjetko, A., Pira, R., Kenny, N.A. (Forthcoming) Insights and Opportunities: Evaluating a University Teaching and Learning Grants Program.  Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Accepted for publication February, 2024. 

Kenny, N. 2021. A framework for influencing change in teaching and learning cultures, communities and practices. Accessed at: /2021/08/13/a-framework-for-influencing-change-in-teaching-and-learning-cultures-communities-and-practices/                                               

Roxå, T., & Mårtensson, K. (2009). Significant conversations and significant networks–exploring the backstage of the teaching arena. Studies in Higher Education, 34(5), 547-559. 

Metacognition – a strategy for success in university teaching & learning


By: Natasha Kenny and Patti Dyjur

Following teaching and learning disruptions during the pandemic, we heard a lot about the struggles students were facing as they returned to the classroom. For example, Nappierala et al. (2022) summarized that undergraduate students faced a “skills gap” in time management, organization, independent learning, engagement and communication.  Students were struggling less about the content of what they were learning, and more about the strategies they were using to support how they learned.

Herein lies what may be the most powerful strategy to support student learning and success in university courses – metacognition. 

What is metacognition?

Metacognition is our awareness of and ability to reflect upon, control and improve how we learn (Stanton et al., 2021; Rivas et al., 2022). It involves: 1) learning more about how we think and learn; 2) identifying and developing strategies to regulate and improve how we learn; and, 3) planning to and actively transferring these new and improved learning strategies into other areas of our lives (Stanton et al., 2021; Fleur et al., 2021; Rivas et al., 2022).  Metacognition not only helps to improve students’ learning and performance, but it helps them become better learners in the long run. What’s even better?  Metacognition is a skill that can be learned, practiced, and strengthened over time (ideally over a lifetime!).

Teaching and learning interventions that provide opportunities for students to engage in self-reflection on their learning processes and behaviours, plan what strategies work best for them, and select new learning strategies to support their success into the future may best benefit them and their academic achievement (Fleur et al., 2021).  Teaching and learning activities that support metacognition often don’t take much time, but they do involve on-going effort and practice.

Teaching and learning strategies to support metacognition

Here are a few of our favorite metacognitive activities.

Exam Debrief

Have students explore the following reflective prompts and dialogue with a thought partner after an exam (Tanner, 2012):

  • What strategies did I use, and how much time did I study for this exam?
  • What questions did I answer correctly? How do these demonstrate my strengths? What questions did I not answer correctly? 
  • How do my answers compare with the correct solutions?  What confusions do I still need to clarify?  What course material do I need to review and practice?
  • What exam preparation strategies worked well that I should remember to do next time? What exam preparation strategies did not work well that I should change next time? 

Diagnostic Learning Logs

Ask students to keep a log throughout the course and make brief notes on each class. You may want to save five minutes at the end of each class for students to answer the following questions:

  • What concepts that were introduced in today’s session are clear to me?  
  • What concepts do I need to better understand?
  • What are my next steps to promote my success in the course?

Occasionally, you might want to have a class discussion to identify tricky concepts. You can also collaboratively generate strategies to better understand them, such as reading supplemental resources and reaching out to a teaching assistant (University of Tennessee Chattanooga, 2016).

Modeling

Use metacognitive techniques in your teaching to model them to students. These strategies can get you started:

  • Think aloud: Demonstrate specific steps or techniques while describing them explicitly. When implementing a strategy, describe what you have selected and why, what the benefits are as well as potential drawbacks. Learners can ask questions to further clarify any confusion (Ellis et al., 2014).
  • Diagramming: Present information in graphs, charts, timelines, and other representations as appropriate. For topics that are not easily represented in graphical form, create a mind map while describing the connections. As a follow up, ask students to create their own mind map on another topic and discuss it (including what they’ve learned through the process) with an elbow partner once they have completed it (Ellis et al., 2014).

A call to action

Our call to action for all university instructors is to intentionally integrate one additional metacognitive activity into your course.  It may be through a formal course assignment or as part of an informal course activity.  Trust that the benefits for student learning will likely ripple far beyond your course! Our stretch goal – take the time to stop and reflect with a colleague: What did you notice about this activity? What worked? What didn’t go as planned? What would you change going forward? Get meta about going meta in the classroom!

Curious about other activities and ideas? Tanner (2012) shares many additional metacognitive activities and prompts.

Have additional metacognitive activities and ideas that you’d like to share? We’d love to hear more about them in the comments section below!

References

Ellis, A. K., Denton, D. W., & Bond, J. B. (2014). An analysis of research on metacognitive teaching strategies. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5th World Conference on Educational Sciences, 116, 4015-4024.

Fleur, D.S., Bredeweg, B. & van den Bos, W. Metacognition: ideas and insights from neuro- and educational sciences. npj Sci. Learn. 6, 13 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00089-5

Napierala, J., Pilla, N., Pichette, J., & Colyar, J. (2022) Ontario Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experiences of Ontario First-year Postsecondary Students in 2020–21. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario. https://heqco.ca/pub/ontario-learning-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-experiences-of-ontario-first-year-postsecondary-students-in-2020-21/

Rivas, S. F., Saiz, C., & Ossa, C. (2022). Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 913219.

Stanton, J. D., Sebesta, A. J., & Dunlosky, J. (2021). Fostering metacognition to support student learning and performance. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(2), fe3.

Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113-120.

University of Tennessee Chattanooga. (2016). Classroom assessment strategies. Retrieved from http://www.utc.edu/walker-center-teaching-learning/teaching-resources/classroom-assessment-strategies.php#self-awareness  

Four key elements to building a supportive teaching culture in higher education

I love a good read on how best to influence teaching and learning cultures in higher education.  This recent article had me thinking critically about our work in higher education – Myllykoski-Laine et al. (2023).

It reminded me of four key elements critical to building a supportive teaching culture in higher education:

  1. Value and Recognition: teaching and the development of teaching expertise and communities needs to be valued, recognized, and appreciated across multiple organizational levels.  Many formal and informal processes and structures provide value and recognition for teaching including spaces, environments, resources, workload assignments, awards, grants, resources, policy, vision, professional learning, and leadership.
  2. Collaborative Relationships & Collegiality: teaching and the development of teaching expertise should be recognized as a shared responsibility, across the academic community. A collegial “sharing culture” based on respect and trust are fundamental to creating communities of shared responsibility and understanding for teaching in higher education. Fostering this sharing culture extends beyond the responsibilities of teachers themselves.
  3. Intentional Interaction & Knowledge Sharing: opportunities for formal and informal interaction and knowledge sharing about teaching should be fostered, including opportunities for co-teaching, peer support and learning, dialogue, critical reflection, and the sharing of experiences, ideas and knowledge.  The development of teaching and learning communities, networks and conversations must be fostered across all levels of the academic community.
  4. Pedagogical Influencers (aka Pedagogical Change Agents): Pedagogical influencers are individuals who actively support the development of teaching in community and positively influence change. Pedagogical influencers often hold informal roles and inspire concrete actions in their local teaching and learning communities. Pedagogical influencers require support, resources, recognition, and meaningful opportunities to impact change.

The authors acknowledge the inherent complexities and interrelationship of these different factors in influencing teaching values, attitudes, norms, principles, practices and structures across postsecondary institutions. They suggest, “…the development of a more supportive pedagogical culture requires intentional endeavors to influence abstract and possibly invisible cultural elements in the community” (p. 951).   

Four elements to building a supportive teaching culture in higher education

I leave you with some further questions for reflection and dialogue.

  • What are you already doing in each of these areas to intentionally build a supportive teaching and learning culture?
  • What’s missing from this list? What would you add, change, refresh, revise?
  • Where are your strengths and points of pride?
  • What is one area where you would like to further learn, grow, and improve (as an individual, faculty/department, or institution)?
  • What is one action (or forward movement) you would like to take to provide an even more supportive teaching and learning culture in your context?

Reference:

Myllykoski-Laine, S., Postareff, L., Murtonen, M., and Vilppu, H. (2023) Building a framework of a supportive pedagogical culture for teaching and pedagogical development in higher education. Higher Education, 85, 937–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00873-1

What’s changed? Research informed principles for teaching in higher education

As we embark on a new academic year, I’ve been thinking a lot about what it means to be an effective educator in higher education. I have to admit that I struggle with the word effective recognizing that teaching and learning are complex and nuanced. Developing teaching expertise is a consistent practice that is supported through engaging in ongoing and intentional reflection over time (Hendry & Dean, 2002; Kreber, 2002). For me, the concept of effectiveness puts a somewhat artificial label of judgment on a practice that shifts, develops and changes over time. What is certain is that growing one’s teaching practice is an iterative journey of practice, reflection, and forward movement.

A while back, I drafted a set of research-informed principles for teaching in higher education, drawing upon the works of authors such as: Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education, Ramsden’s (2003) thirteen principles for effective university teaching; Weimer’s (2013) five key changes to practice for learner-centred teaching, Lizzio et al.’s (2002) conceptual model for an effective academic environment; and Tigelaar et al.’s (2004) framework for teaching competencies in higher education.  Over the summer, I read Devlin and Samarawickrema’s (2022) thoughtful commentary on teaching in a “post-COVID” higher education. I’ve incorporated some of their work into the below “revised” principles.

What is presented below is meant to inspire further reflection and dialogue. These are not intended to be a prescriptive or straightforward list of strategies for teaching in higher education. Although the following principles are concisely presented – each is contextual and certainly more complex to put into practice! I imagine these principles as a starting point for curiosity-based discovery.

Research informed principles for teaching in higher education

Co-creates a Respectful and Inclusive Learning Environment: works with students and the instructional team to collaboratively create commitments to foster a learning community of respect, care, inclusion, and belonging; shows interest in student’s opinions and concerns; seeks to understand student’s diverse backgrounds, talents, needs, prior knowledge, and approaches to learning; affirms diverse ways of knowing; encourages interaction between instructor(s) and students; exhibits respect for students, colleagues, and the profession, field, and/or discipline.

Actively Engages Learners: ensures learning materials are current and relevant; explains material clearly, with relevant examples; provides opportunities for students to connect learning to future work, life, and academic experiences; uses a variety of methods and modalities that encourage active and deep approaches to learning, interaction, and engagement; connects meaningfully to community and industry (as appropriate); adapts to evolving learning contexts, technologies, and transformations in society and the field, profession and/or discipline.

Communicates Clear Expectations: makes clear the intended learning goals/outcomes and standards for performance; provides organization, structure and direction for where the course is going and how this may connect to future learning context (inside and outside of the classroom).

Encourages Student Independence: provides opportunities for students to develop and draw upon their personal interests; offers choice in learning processes and modes of learning and assessment; provides timely and developmental feedback on learning; encourages self-directed learning, autonomy, and metacognition (aka learning about one’s own approaches to thinking and learning) to promote ongoing self-assessment of learning. 

Creates and Contributes to a Teaching and Learning Community: uses teaching methods and learning strategies that encourage reciprocity, relationality, mutual learning, as well as thoughtful, respectful and collaborative engagement and dialogue between all members of the course learning community; seeks feedback, input, and works with students as partners in learning; actively adjusts teaching approaches based on student feedback and input; collaborates with and supports teaching colleagues; actively contributes to curriculum conversations and activities across the program.

Uses Meaningful and Authentic Assessment Methods: clearly aligns assessment methods with intended course outcomes and desired learning goals; designs assessments that are meaningful and relevant to the field, profession, and/or discipline; designs assessment strategies to support students learning and to promote academic integrity; provides clear criteria for evaluation; emphasizes deep learning that can be applied over time; designs learning activities to practice and receive formative feedback on what is assessed; provides opportunities for students to intentionally monitor, evaluate, and adjust their learning progress; iteratively scaffolds assessments and feedback to ensure progressive learning. 

Commits to Continuous Improvement: gathers feedback on teaching and learning approaches from multiple perspectives (e.g., self, peers, students, scholarship); practices ongoing self-reflection; draws conclusions and takes action from reflection to strengthen teaching; consults and/or engages in the scholarship of teaching and learning; engages in meaningful conversations with colleagues about teaching and learning; identifies clear goals for strengthening teaching and learning practices; adapts, innovates and responds to change and new pedagogical approaches.

Which of these principles resonate most with you? Which principle most challenges you?

How do (or might) you put these principles into practice?

Based on your own context, wisdom of practice or experience, what would you add to or revise in these principles?

As you reflect on these principles, what is one of your “superpowers” or strengths as an educator?

What is one thing you may shift in your teaching and learning practices based on these principles?

How might you use these principles to inspire further conversation or dialogue with a colleague or in your local context (e.g., in a coffee conversation or with your department, faculty, or institutional community)?

References

Chickering, Arthur W, & Gamson, Zelda F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7. 

Devlin, M. & Samarawickrema, G. (2022) A commentary on the criteria of effective teaching in post-COVID higher education, Higher Education Research & Development, 41:1, 21-32, DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2021.2002828

Hendry,G.D.&Dean,S.J.2002. Accountability, evaluation and teaching expertise in higher education.International Journal of Academic Development,7(1),75-82.

Kreber,C.(2002).Teaching excellence,teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education,27(1),5-23.

Lizzio, Alf, Wilson, Keithia, & Simons, Roland. (2002). University Students’ Perceptions of the Learning Environment and Academic Outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 27-52. 

Tigelaar, D.E.H, Dolmans, D.H.J.M, Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P, and Van Der Vleuten, C.P.M. (2004) The development and validation of a framework for teaching competencies in higher education. Higher Education, 48, 253-268.

Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.

Weimer, Maryellen. (2013). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice: John Wiley & Sons.

Leading through Compassion, Connection, and Hope

The last three years have presented extraordinarily complex challenges in higher education, as we navigated pivots and experienced ongoing disruptions in our teaching and learning spaces, environments, and communities. We became more aware of the systemic inequities that exist across our organizations. We’ve questioned and leaned into the opportunities and challenges our organizational infrastructure presents (e.g., our technologies, spaces, governance, decision-making, and planning). We’ve also worked to navigate challenges with our individual and collective well-being, anxiety, burnout and exhaustion. Throughout the pandemic, I heard strong leaders described by words such as: systems-level thinkers, networked, self-aware, mindful, equitable, inclusive, empathetic, compassionate, courageous, hopeful, and relational.

Perhaps we’ve experienced some foundational shifts in leadership practices, which will continue to carry us forward in higher education? I’ve conceptualized these shifts as three foundational leadership practices: 1) a leadership of compassion; 2) a leadership of connection; and 3) a leadership of hope.

A leadership of compassion

Throughout the pandemic we experienced challenges that were difficult to comprehend. We felt the anxiety, isolation, and overwhelming complexities of uncertainty. Building upon Worline and Dutton (2017), Waddington (2021) describes compassion as noticing and making meaning of suffering, feeling empathy for those experiencing suffering, and taking action to alleviate suffering. Throughout the pandemic, leaders across higher education demonstrated compassion by reaching out to their teams, checking in with their colleagues to see how they were doing, demonstrating empathy and vulnerability in the face of ongoing uncertainty, providing reassurance, embracing dialogue, listening deeply to those around them, and demonstrating support through relational action (e.g., Lawton-Misra and Pretorius, 2021). They asked about other’s feelings and well-being, and took action to alleviate barriers and reduce suffering where they could have influence. They suffered themselves. They made mistakes and experienced failure. They learned and unlearned. Their emotions fluctuated, and often, were relentlessly raw and challenging. It became harder to respond, rather than react in the face of ongoing challenge and uncertainty. They demonstrated resilience and vulnerability by sharing their experiences, connecting with peers, normalizing help-seeking, and cultivating a deeper sense of self-awareness, self-compassion, and mindfulness.

What does a leadership of compassion look like moving forward?

Hougaard et al. (2021) share practical strategies for demonstrating wise compassion through self-compassion, intention, transparency, and mindfulness. The Conscious Leadership Group’s Above the Line/Below the Line Framework is a fantastic tool for fostering ongoing self-awareness and reflection. Dr. Kristin Neff’s work on developing self-compassion through self-kindness, a recognition of common humanity and mindfulness is transformative.

A leadership of connection

There were no simple answers to the challenges we faced during the pandemic. Decision-making was forced by situations beyond our control and the need for action was accelerated at relentlessly unsustainable rates. There were no right answers. The disruptions were constant. The impacts of the pandemic were complex and disproportionately affected equity-deserving groups (Abdrasheva et al., 2022; Bassa, 2022; Jehi et al., 2021). Throughout the pandemic, many leaders embraced the power of shared leadership, relationships, and collaborative decision-making. They brought together informal and formal networks to surface and grapple with challenges, and to share knowledge across once-siloed institutional, faculty, departmental and unit-level boundaries. They identified and connected core networks of problem-solvers, instilled confidence, fostered trust, built relationships, facilitated consensus, listened deeply, and leveraged the strengths of local-level leaders, influencers, and change-catalysts (Bleich and Bowles, 2021; Bassa, 2022; Mehrotra, 2021). They looked across multiple organizational levels to influence systems-level awareness and change. They created peer, cross-institutional, national, and international networks of knowledge and resource sharing, breaking through past barriers of competition and scarcity. They leaned into the realities of the systemic and structural inequities that became increasingly visible across our university structures.

The work of fostering connection and developing relationships takes time and intentional effort. Research suggests that one of the most important factors associated with student confidence in their learning during the pandemic was their sense of connection with their peers and their professors (Guppy et al., 2022). This finding speaks volumes to the importance of developing and sustaining meaningful relationships bounded by belonging and connection across higher education.

How can we continue to foster connection moving forward?

We can continue to bring networks together to grapple with important teaching and learning issues. A few topics that continue to surface: student assessment, academic integrity, artificial intelligence, experiential and work-integrated learning, learning spaces and technologies, equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility, truth, reconciliation and Indigenous engagement, the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), mental health and well-being, student learning skills, engagement and metacognition, sustainability and climate change, blended and online learning, learning pathways, stackable and personalized learning, and micro-credentialing. We can listen deeply to one another – with an intention to understand and heal, rather than to respond, judge, debate, criticize, or problem solve. We can trust and provide resources and support to pedagogical catalysts, influencers and local educational leaders who care deeply about teaching and make an effort to develop local teaching and learning networks and communities (Myllykoski-Laine et al., 2022). We can create accessible spaces, events, and initiatives for open knowledge sharing about teaching and learning, within our academic units, institutions, nationally and globally. A fantastic exemplar is Dr. Maha Bali’s and colleagues’ work on Equity Unbound – an open, and freely available resource that is filled with strategies to inspire online community-building, through the principles of equity and care.

A leadership of hope

It was easy to feel overwhelmed and consumed during the pandemic. The challenges we faced felt enormous, and it was often difficult to see where and how we could have influence. We learned the importance of establishing a leadership of hope. It was a hope that acknowledged that what we were living through was challenging and hard. We were experiencing a world that had become increasingly uncertain, volatile, and unpredictable.

Despite the challenges and inequities which surround us, critical hope requires us to come together in community to connect in meaningful ways, to envision a better and more inclusive future, and to take incremental action to create positive change (Riddell, 2020). Critical hope is a “…hope that is neither naïve nor idealistic;” it is both critical and emotional, and it works to dismantle injustice and despair in our systems and structures (Grain & Lund, 2016, p.51). It accepts that through connection and collective action, we can help to reduce suffering and move towards healing.

During the pandemic, leaders sustained a sense of critical hope by naming and leaning into the systemic inequities that continued to emerge, by acknowledging the ongoing uncertainty and suffering that occurred, by creating a sense of purpose and meaning in the face of uncertainty, by demonstrating a continuous perseverance to take action, by maintaining honest communication, by accepting and moving beyond mistakes, by establishing open feedback channels, and by creating an organizational culture of continuous learning and growth (Beilstein et al., 2021; Bassa, 2022). Leaning into uncertainty, systemic inequities, failure and ongoing learning took courage. It was an intensely vulnerable time for leaders – many of whom drew focussed attention to the power of emotion and humanity to help us through it all.

How do we continue to move forward through a leadership of hope?

McGowan and Felten (2021) highlight that deep inequities persist in higher education. They present a wonderful equation for continued reflection that I believe provides a foundation for leading through hope (p. 474):

Agency

 ‘I can change in meaningful ways despite the systems and structures constraining me’

+

Pathways

 ‘I see specific and purposeful steps I can take’

 =

Hope

When feeling overwhelmed, this framework provides me pause to stop and ask:

1) What is one meaningful change that I can contribute to despite the systems and structures that constrain me?

2) What are some specific and purposeful steps I can take to move towards that change?

3) Who/what are the support networks I can draw upon for support and accountability?

There is always something I can do to help move towards the positive changes we most aspire to in higher education.

I am curious how these three shifts in leadership (i.e., a leadership of compassion; a leadership of connection; a leadership of hope) resonate with you? What would you change or add? What shifts have you observed? What can we learn moving forward?

References

Abdrasheva, D. Escribens, M., Sazalieva, E., do Nascimento, D. V., & Yerovi, C. (2022). Resuming or reforming? Tracking the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education after two years of disruption. UNESCO. https://www.iesalc.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/IESALC_COVID-19_Report_ENG.pdf  

Beilstein et al. (2021) Leadership in a time of crisis: Lessons learned from a pandemic. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology 35 (2021) 405e414

Bassa, B. (2022). Leading Into a New Higher Education as It Emerges in the Present Moment. In International Perspectives on Leadership in Higher Education (Vol. 15, pp. 271-290). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Bleich, M. R., & Bowles, J. (2021). A model for holistic leadership in post-pandemic recovery. Nurse Leader, 19(5), 479-482.

Guppy, N., Matzat, U., Agapito, J., Archibald, A., De Jaeger, A., Heap, T., … & Bartolic, S. (2023). Student confidence in learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: what helped and what hindered?. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(4), 845-859.

Grain, K. M., & Lund, D. E. (2017). The social justice turn: Cultivating’critical hope’in an age of despair. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 23(1).

Jehi, T., Khan, R., Dos Santos, H., & Majzoub, N. (2022). Effect of COVID-19 outbreak on anxiety among students of higher education; A review of literature. Current Psychology, 1-15.

Lawton-Misra, N., & Pretorius, T. (2021). Leading with heart: academic leadership during the COVID-19 crisis. South African Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 205-214.

McGowan, S., & Felten, P. (2021). On the necessity of hope in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 26(4), 473-476.

Mehrotra, G. R. (2021). Centering a pedagogy of care in the pandemic. Qualitative Social Work, 20(1-2), 537-543.

Myllykoski-Laine, S., Postareff, L., Murtonen, M., & Vilppu, H. (2022). Building a framework of a supportive pedagogical culture for teaching and pedagogical development in higher education. Higher Education, 1-19.

Riddell, J. (2020) Combatting toxic positivity with critical hope. University Affairs. https://www.universityaffairs.ca/opinion/adventures-in-academe/combatting-toxic-positivity-with-critical-hope/

Worline, M. C. & Dutton, J. E. (2017). Awakening compassion at work: The quiet power that elevates people and organizations. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler

Waddington, K. (2021). Introduction: Why compassion? why now?. In Towards the Compassionate University (pp. 5-22). Routledge.

Five practical strategies for fostering learning and wellbeing in student assessment

Recently, we’ve heard that students and course instructors are reporting feeling overwhelmed. Assessment is often at the centre of these conversations. Jones et al. (2021) acknowledge that assessment practices impact both educator’s and student’s perceptions of their wellbeing. They highlight some common tensions related to challenge, format, weighting, flexibility, and group work. I anticipate more research to surface on assessment practices for wellbeing in higher education, as we continue to learn and heal from our experiences during the global pandemic.

Over the past year, I’ve noticed a handful of strategies that continue to surface as potential ways to promote wellbeing in student assessment. Many of these strategies align with and build upon research from Ross (2021) on assessment practices using a lens of ethics-of-care. I’ve summarized five approaches to promote wellbeing in student assessment below:

  1. Wherever possible, focus on implementing practices that align with principles for Universal Design for Learning into student assessment practices (CAST, n.d.). UDL principles support multiple means of engagement, multiple means of action and expression, and multiple means of representation (Coffman & Draper; 2022; La et al., 2018). Strategies may include intentionally connecting assessments with student interests, supporting self-assessment/reflection, and providing flexibility, choice and a variety of forms of assessment throughout the semester (CAST, n.d.; La et al., 2018).
  2. Provide some flexibility to adjust submission timelines throughout the semester. One example is to provide late banks where students have a set amount of time (e.g., 48-72 hours) to use and distribute without penalty when they are struggling to meet assignment deadlines throughout the semester (Schroeder et al., 2019).
  3. Let students bring a page of self-generated notes or a flashcard into an exam. This strategy may help reduce stress and anxiety, and promote metacognition as students strategically consider what they already know and where their growing edges are in terms of the course material (Settlage & Wollscheid, 2019).
  4. Wherever possible, streamline and make transparent grading processes. For example, work with students as partners to co-develop the assignment grading criteria (Meer and Chapman, 2014), and have them submit a self-assessment of their work based on these criteria (Yan & Carless, 2022). What are they most proud of? What came most easily to them in completing this assignment? Where did they struggle most? What would they most like to improve upon? What 1-2 areas do they most want to receive feedback on? Use this self-assessment to help streamline where and how you provide feedback when grading.
  5. For in-class presentations, have students present to small groups, rather than to the entire class. Many students experience fear when presenting publicly – practice, preparation and support can help to alleviate some of this fear (Grieve et al., 2021). Providing opportunities for students to practice and present their work to small groups of peers may help reduce anxiety, streamline the use of class time, and foster peer learning and development. For these presentations, consider focussing the grading process on student’s reflections of the growth and development of their presentation skills, and on communication skills such as active listening, and providing/responding to peer feedback. You may even consider doing this multiple times throughout the semester so that students have more than one opportunity to practice their presentation, communication, and feedback skills.

By no means is this an exhaustive list. There are many creative ways to implement assessment practices that further foster wellbeing for students and educators. I’d love to hear your ideas, as I predict this will be a growing topic of discussion in higher education over the coming years.

References

CAST (n.d.) UDL ON CAMPUS · Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education: UDL and Assessment. http://udloncampus.cast.org/page/assessment_udl

Coffman, S., & Draper, C. (2022). Universal design for learning in higher education: A concept analysis. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 17(1), 36-41.

Daniel M. Settlage & Jim R. Wollscheid (2019). An analysis of the effect of student prepared notecards on exam performance. College Teaching, 67:1, 15-22, DOI: 10.1080/87567555.2018.1514485

Grieve, R., Woodley, J., Hunt, S. E., & McKay, A. (2021). Student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education: a qualitative survey. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(9), 1281-1293.

Jones, E., Priestley, M., Brewster, L., Wilbraham, S. J., Hughes, G., & Spanner, L. (2021). Student wellbeing and assessment in higher education: the balancing act. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 438-450.

La, H., Dyjur, P., & Bair, H. (2018). Universal design for learning in higher education. Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning. Calgary: University of Calgary. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/resources/universal-design-learning-higher-education

Meer, N., & Chapman, A. (2015). Co-creation of marking criteria: students as partners in the assessment process. Business and management education in HE, 1-15. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.11120/bmhe.2014.00008

Settlage, D. M., & Wollscheid, J. R. (2019). An analysis of the effect of student prepared notecards on exam performance. College Teaching, 67(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1514485

Schroeder, M., Makarenko, E., & Warren, K. (2019). Introducing a late bank in online graduate courses: the response of students. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2019.2.8200

Ross, R. (2021) Reflecting on Well-Being and Assessment Practices Using an Ethics-of-Care Lens. Summer Wellness Series Workshop, University of Calgary. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/series/summer-wellness

Yan Z. & Carless, D. (2022) Self-assessment is about more than self: the enabling role of feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(7), 1116-1128, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2021.2001431

Guiding Principles for Student Assessment in Higher Education

As institutions rapidly transformed the delivery of student learning, the pandemic drew attention to the importance of student assessment in higher education.  Postsecondary institutions continue to grapple with the opportunities and challenges that assessment practices present across multiple organizational levels, whether in individual courses, across academic programs, or as it relates to institutional structures, policies, and processes.

Gibbs (2006) affirmed that assessment is key to student learning, often driving what, when and how students learn. Boud (2000) challenged us to rethink all components of assessment to create more sustainable and meaningful assessment practices to support student learning. More recently, authors such as Jones et al. (2021) have highlighted that wellbeing must be a key consideration for assessment practices in higher education. Technological developments such as artificial intelligence (AI) have become more prevalent in supporting practices related to assessment design and delivery, e-proctoring, grading and feedback, and learning analytics – while also presenting numerous ethical dilemmas and risks (Zawacki-Richter, et al., 2019; Eaton and Turner, 2020). Attention has also been focussed on how assessment practices can further support (or hinder) equity, diversity, inclusion, accessibility, and social justice in higher education (Tai et al., 2023).

There is no doubt that student assessment in higher education is complex and important.  When addressing complexity, I tend towards using principles as a guide. Building upon the excellent work of Boud (2000), Gibbs and Simpson (2005), Gibbs (2006), Jones et al. (2021), Lindstrom et al. (2017) and recent work done at McGill University (2022), I’ve curated the following principles as a starting point for conversation and decision-making related to student assessment in higher education:

  1. Meaningful assessment practices shift the focus of assessment from evaluating, ranking, or judging student performance to ensuring assessment is an integral and intentional component of student learning experiences.
  2. Assessment practices should foster on-going learning and growth. Assessment tasks should be structured and scaffolded progressively, to ensure the development of expertise and confidence overtime, with appropriate challenge, feedback, and practice. Assessment should recognize and validate multiple disciplinary, scholarly, and culturally-relevant approaches and ways of knowing.
  3. Assessment practices should be equitable, fair, accessible, and inclusive. A variety of assessment methods should be utilized and provide some level of flexibility and choice to maximize student engagement, foster accessibility, and encourage student involvement in the assessment process. Assessment practices should draw upon the principles and practices of universal design for learning.  Grading practices should be based on transparent standards and criteria, rather than norms, ranks, or distributions.
  4. Assessment practices should be developmental and provide opportunities for feedback, self-regulated learning, and metacognition. There should be a balance between summative and formative assessment processes, with multiple opportunities for students to reflect on, receive, respond to, and use feedback on their learning.  Feedback opportunities should be encouraged from multiple perspectives (e.g., self-reflection, peers, course instructors, and/or teaching assistants).
  5. Assessment practices should foster academic integrity. Assessment design should uphold the values of integrity and be relevant to learning goals. Expectations related to assessments, and the policies and procedures related to academic integrity should be clearly communicated.
  6. Assessment should be recognized as a core element in the planning and design of course and program learning experiences. Assessment practices should be transparent, providing students with clear expectations on their assessments, and how they align with the teaching and learning goals, and approaches for the course/program/discipline. Institutional and unit-level supports should be available to ensure course instructors and teaching assistants have opportunities to develop expertise in developing and supporting scholarly, relevant, and meaningful assessment practices.
  7. Assessment practices should be sustainable and align with a commitment to supporting well-being for students, faculty, and staff. Expectations related to assessment practices should be transparent and clearly communicated to students. The design and scheduling of assessment tasks should consider a reasonable time to complete the assessment, be appropriate to the credit-weighting, recognize the cumulative distribution of assessment tasks throughout the semester, and support sustainable workloads for students, course instructors and teaching assistants.

What’s missing from these principles ?  What would you change or add? How could you imagine using and building upon these principles within your own local context?

References

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22, 2, 151-167

Eaton, S. E., & Turner, K. L. (2020). Exploring academic integrity and mental health during COVID-19: Rapid review. Journal of Contemporary Education Theory & Research (JCETR), 4(2), 35-41.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and teaching in higher education, (1), 3-31.

Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 43-56). Routledge.

Jones, E., Priestley, M., Brewster, L., Wilbraham, S. J., Hughes, G., & Spanner, L. (2021). Student wellbeing and assessment in higher education: the balancing act. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 438-450.

Lindstrom, G., Taylor, L., Weleschuk, A. (2017) Guiding Principles for Assessment of Student Learning. Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning Guide Series. Calgary, AB: Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary, June 2017. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/Guiding_Principles_for_Assessment_of_Student_Learning_FINAL.pdf

McGill University (Office of the Provost and Vice-Principal Academic)  (2022) Policy on Assessment of Student Learning (pp. 3-11) in 512th REPORT OF THE ACADEMIC POLICY COMMITTEE TO SENATE on the APC meetings held on April 14th and May 2nd, 2022 McGill University. https://www.mcgill.ca/senate/files/senate/03_d21-58_512th_apc_report_0.pdf

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Jorre de St. Jorre, T. (2023) Promoting equity and social justice through assessment for inclusion. In pp 9-18. Ajjawi et al. (Eds). Assessment for Inclusion in Higher Eduation: Promoting Equity and Social Justice in Assessment. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/oa-edit/10.4324/9781003293101/assessment-inclusion-higher-education-rola-ajjawi-joanna-tai-david-boud-trina-jorre-de-st-jorre

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators?. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-27.