Tag: Learning

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.

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.

Supporting wellbeing for students and educators

By: Natasha Kenny (Senior Director, Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning)

and

Patti Dyjur (Educational Development Consultant, Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning)

It’s been a tough couple of years for students and educators (Brazeau et al., 2020; Morgan and Simmons, 2021).  Over the past few weeks, we’ve increasingly heard from our academic community that students and educators are struggling.  There is an acknowledgement that we have not taken the time to intentionally reflect upon and heal from what we have experienced from the global pandemic.  Our individual and collective wellbeing has and continues to suffer and students are experiencing a “skills gap” in their approaches to time management, organization, independence and commitment, and communication (Napierala et al., 2022). Without a doubt, we need more conversation and shared leadership to address our experiences moving forward (Abdrasheva et al., 2022; Garcia-Morales et al., 2021).

We’ve been thinking a lot about how to address some of the challenges students and educators are currently facing in their courses.  Acknowledging that this work is complex and will have to be addressed across multiple organizational levels, we were drawn back to some of our earlier work on how the PERMA flourishing framework (Seligman, 2012) might be used to help? For example, Morgan and Simmons (2021) have used this framework to develop a wellbeing program in universities in the UK.

In a previous post we shared how the PERMA framework could be used to support student and educator wellbeing in the classroom. We share an adaptation of that post here:

Seligman’s (2012) PERMA model: Positive Emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment

Positive Emotions: feeling joy, hope and contentment; reducing stressors; promoting positive coping and resilience

For instructors: schedule daily, weekly and monthly time to replenish and recharge; get up from the keyboard and take a microbreak; implement gratitude practices; ask for help from a trusted colleague or ask if you can help them; practice self-compassion; keep a ‘happy day’ email folder to store and revisit thank you messages and notes of appreciation from colleagues and students. 

For students: Implement incremental learning tasks; create low-stakes assignments; incorporate student voice in and flexibility in setting deadlines (we love the concept of late banks); incorporate class time to check-in with students; incorporate mindfulness/contemplative pedagogies; promote a positive learning environment for all by establishing community and presence and cultivating equity, diversity and inclusion; connect with students through strategies such as learning their names and checking in with them to see how things are going.

Engagement: feeling attached, involved and an ability to concentrate on activities; creating meaningful opportunities to draw upon strengths and interests

For instructors: talk to your colleagues/department head about your strengths and interests; bring your strengths and interests into the classroom; engage in your workspace where students and colleagues can see and connect with you (e.g., studio, office, lab); leverage zoom or other virtual spaces to connect one-one with students, colleagues, and small groups; rest, recharge and detach from work during vacation time (we know this one is tough!). 

For students: provide choice in course activities and assignments; help students identify their strengths and interests through self-assessment activities and classroom discussion; encourage learning activities that relate to and encourage students to share their interests (e.g., discovering and sharing relevant readings and resources); bring relevant connections and “real-world” examples into the course to help students make meaning; incorporate collaborative activities in online courses such as jigsaws or world cafes; include online discussions to promote engagement; incorporate principles of Universal Design for Learning; incorporate variety in teaching and learning activities.

Relationships: feeling connected, supported, and cared about; promoting opportunities for collaboration and interaction within and amongst teams  

For instructors: connect with a community of practice or learning community related to something that interests you; invite people for coffee; recognize your colleagues (e.g., write a letter of support or send a brief email of acknowledgement); ask for feedback from a trusted colleague; seek and/or offer peer mentorship; invite students to lead class discussions; intentionally connect with a colleague or community off-campus for fresh ideas and connections.

For students: Facilitate peer and active learning, problem-solving and discussion activities; encourage students to get up and move – change seats and connect with a “new neighbour”; encourage learners to talk to elbow partners (students next to them); encourage study groups and/or collaborative note-taking; set up informal study groups; foster an inclusive learning environment; build in supports to facilitate positive team dynamics if assigning group work.

Meaning: feeling valued and connected to something greater than self; connecting to purpose; promoting reflection

For instructors: seek opportunities to mentor and provide positive feedback to colleagues; participate in a teaching square/triangle; prepare and/or revise a philosophy statement that speaks to your core values and purpose as a teacher – share this with students and/or a colleague; reflect on your teaching goals and impact (where are you making a difference? where would you like to further make a difference?)

For students: Model reflection (sharing what you learned from your mistakes); promote co-op programs and experiential learning opportunities; provide context around how student learning in the course is connected to students’ academic, personal and professional development; have students set their own goals for learning; collect and respond to mid-semester student feedback  – stop, start, continue; encourage metacognitive activities (e.g. exam wrappers); relate course concepts and topics to current events; have students create their own materials such as graphic organizers/ notes, concept maps, and summary notes. 

Accomplishment: progressing towards goals; feeling capable and a sense of accomplishment; providing autonomy; celebrate success

For instructors: Keep notes of your successes (e.g. after class, at end of the week); celebrate small wins and achievements along the way (e.g. have coffee with a colleague; keep a stack of sticky notes to document what’s working on the corner of your desk; acknowledge that accomplishments come in many shapes and forms; share goals with a mentor/supportive colleague; connect with colleagues you trust to help each other with accountability and perspective; provide space to share key teaching successes and learnings at department meetings.

For students: Share positive and balanced feedback; encourage students to recognize their successes in a final course reflection; allow students to select from a series of questions to respond to in their assignments; design open-ended projects to give students choice in a topic that interests them; allow students to demonstrate their learning and reflect on it with online portfolios.  


We continue to wonder:

How could these approaches and this framework be used to further support educator and student wellbeing as we continue to learn and heal from our teaching and learning experiences during the pandemic?

Overall, how might we design courses to promote a sense of wellness, for both students and instructors? 

How might we more broadly foster well being through our assessment practices across higher education?

References:

Abdrasheva, D., Escribens, M., Sabzalieva, E., Vieira do Nascimento, D., & Yerovi, C. (2022). Resuming or reforming? Tracking the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education after two years of disruption. Instituto Internacional de la UNESCO para la Educación Superior en América Latina y el Caribe. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381749

Brazeau, G. A., Frenzel, J. E., & Prescott, W. A. (2020). Facilitating wellbeing in a turbulent time. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 84(6). https://www.ajpe.org/content/84/6/ajpe8154.short

García-Morales, V. J., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Martín-Rojas, R. (2021). The transformation of higher education after the COVID disruption: Emerging challenges in an online learning scenario. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 616059. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616059/full

Morgan, B., & Simmons, L. (2021, May). A ‘PERMA’response to the pandemic: an online positive education programme to promote wellbeing in university students. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 6, p. 642632). Frontiers Media SA. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.642632/full

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/

Seligman, M. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Atria books.

Department Chairs and Leadership During the Global Pandemic

The global pandemic has been difficult for many in higher education.  

“The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the key assumptions and beliefs that serve as the foundation of higher education” (Brazeau, 2020, p.688).

Recognizing that the pandemic has impacted people very differently, Dr. Klodiana Kolomitro and I highlighted a few of the challenges the pandemic has created at a session earlier this year with the educational development community in Canada (Kolomitro and Kenny, 2021). We summarized that the pandemic has:

1) increased workload for students, administrators, educators and teaching and learning centres;

2) disproportionately impacted equity-deserving groups including Indigenous and racialized peoples, women, persons with disabilities and 2SLGBTQI+ communities;

3) increased feelings of uncertainty and emotional exhaustion;

4) caused physical, social and self-isolation and loneliness; and,

5) resulted in overall poorer mental health, wellbeing and quality of life (Aristonvnik et al., 2020; Brazeau et al., 2020; Naffi et al., 2020; Xiong et al., 2020).

Although hopeful for healing as we approach the 2021/22 academic year, the uncertainty of the fall semester continues to exacerbate many of these same issues.

The Department Chair and the Pandemic

In a recent article published in Innovative Higher Education, Gigliotti (2021) explored the impact of the pandemic on department chairs. This article highlights the critical role that department chairs hold at institutions, described as, “…agents of influence in leading the reinvention of policies, practices and patterns of behavior at the departmental level and throughout their academic discipline” (p. 430). Christensen-Hughes and Mighty (2010) further emphasized the role that these local leaders can play in either helping or hindering the decisions, cultures, behaviors, norms and practices we most aspire to see.

It won’t come as any surprise that Gigliotti (2021) found that the COVID19 global pandemic intensified leadership challenges, added complexity, and contributed to continuous emerging issues for department chairs. 

“The findings of this study underscore the important work of academic leadership, particularly the role of department chairs, in triaging immediate concerns, advocating on behalf of one’s colleagues and students, providing frequent and timely updates to facilitate an institution’s crisis response, ensuring the safety and well-being of others, and helping to restore hope when others experience a breakdown in collective sensemaking” (p.442).

Throughout this study, chairs acknowledged challenges related to pivoting to remote teaching, navigating remote meetings, and exploring methods to ensure some degree of research continuity throughout their department. They struggled with maintaining consistent and clear communication channels with senior administration, maintaining meaningful relationships and connections with colleagues, acknowledging and coping with emerging mental health issues experienced by themselves and departmental colleagues, balancing personal and professional commitments, ensuring the health and safety of students and staff, planning under constant uncertainty, ongoing budget constraints, and concerns related to ongoing pressures for renewal and reinvention.

The authors highlight the crucial role of relationships, connection and communication as departments negotiated and responded to the COVID19 pandemic:

“What we learn from the insights of the responding department chairs is a desire to connect with others— connections that are made more challenging in light of the global pandemic—and to care for others in navigating the uncertainty of the current moment. By shaping and interpreting how others react and respond to a crisis of widespread magnitude, leadership is made possible; and by recognizing both the personal and professional worries, fears, and goals of one’s faculty, staff, and student colleagues, department chairs can provide bridges of trust and goodwill.” (p. 442)

Leadership Approaches for Healing and Rebuilding Teaching and Learning

In their article, Gigliotti (2021) called explicitly for more opportunities to support departmental chairs, including providing additional support for their development as academic leaders. As we embark on healing and rebuilding our teaching and learning practices into the future, the following leadership approaches adapted from Gibbs and Knapper (2008) may provide a helpful guide and starting point for reflection for academic chairs:

  1. Establish credibility and trust: foster open communication; listen carefully and solicit ideas actively from the departmental community, especially from individuals and groups that have historically been marginalized; identify, seek and advocate for additional institutional support and resources for change; establish a network of mentors and colleagues to support on-going reflection, growth and development.
  2. Identify and address departmental strengths and challenges: actively identify departmental strengths and challenges; represent the department honestly; leverage strengths; lean into and address challenges; speak up to actions and behaviours that are harmful; focus on building and moving forward through incremental change.
  3. Articulate a clear vision and rationale for change: learn about what others internal and external to the institution are doing; seek guidance from evidence-based and culturally relevant practices; collaboratively identify and articulate a clear narrative for the future; gather evidence and feedback on change initiatives; admit mistakes, apologize and change direction as necessary.
  4. Distribute leadership: build and support a collaborative team of departmental leaders; create leadership pathways for those in formal and informal roles; surround yourself by a team that helps you address your leadership blind spots and areas for growth; ask for help; thank and give credit to others for their influence and impact.
  5. Build communities of dialogue and practice: foster debate, discussion and reflection around issues that matter; use multiple forms of engagement to involve the entire departmental community; actively create opportunities to make teaching and learning practices public.
  6. Visibly reward and recognize teaching and learning: provide leadership pathways for strong and committed educators; evaluate contributions to teaching and learning using multiple methods, lenses, and perspectives; actively identify and support individuals to be recognized for their contributions to teaching beyond the department.
  7. Involve students as partners in change: actively seek student input; involve students meaningfully in initiatives, innovations, and decision-making processes; intentionally provide space for and amplify student voices; create leadership pathways for students.

There are likely other leadership approaches you would recommend for departmental chairs as we embark on an ever-evolving and somewhat uncertain pathway for teaching and learning in higher education.

What do you think are key considerations, challenges, and recommended leadership approaches for department chairs as we begin to approach teaching and learning during the 2021/22 academic year?

References:

Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič, N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective. Sustainability, 12(20), 8438.

Brazeau, G. A., Frenzel, J. E., & Prescott, W. A. (2020). Facilitating wellbeing in a turbulent time. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(6).

Christensen Hughes, J., & Mighty, J. (2010). A call to action: Barriers to pedagogical innovation and how to overcome them. In J. Christensen Hughes & J. Mighty (Eds).Taking stock: Research on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (pp. 261-277). Queens School of Policy Studies.

Gibbs, G., Knapper, C., & Piccinin, S. (2008). Disciplinary and contextually appropriate approaches to leadership of teaching in research‐intensive academic departments in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 416-436.

Gigliotti, R. A. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on academic department chairs: Heightened complexity, accentuated liminality, and competing perceptions of reinvention. Innovative Higher Education, 1-16.

Kolomitro, K. and Kenny, N. (2021). Caring for our community: when will well-being be a priority.  Keynote Presentation.  Educational Developers Caucus of Canada Online Conference. https://edc.stlhe.ca/conference-2021/keynote/

Naffi et al. (2020) Disruption in and by Centres for Teaching and Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Leading the Future of Higher Ed. White Paper ISBN: 978-2-9818996-5-1

Xiong, J., Lipsitz, O., Nasri, F., Lui, L. M., Gill, H., Phan, L., … & McIntyre, R. S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general population: A systematic review. Journal of affective disorders.