Sunday, June 24, 2001
Facilitator: George Byrnes
Recorder: Judy Clarke
Topic 1: Faculty Issues
In the morning session, five faculty barriers and assets were identified. A review of these provided a basis for our discussion.
· Blaming (passing the buck)
· Shame (associated with status/respect at both institutional and personal levels)
· Consumer model (seeing student as a customer can lead to competition for students; it is better to see faculty as partners with students.)
· faculty are eager learners
· faculty appreciate support (course remissions, etc.)
· faculty have pride in their profession, their discipline, and their students
· faculty work well in a nurturing atmosphere (e.g., evaluation of outcomes dealt with in a positive rewarding way)
· A more positive consumer model is needed that sets up learning modes for students to engage with other students and with the learning materials.
· Faculty workload issues play a role. We need to
· Faculty need to see themselves differently within the framework of the new architecture; seeing ourselves as continuing learners in our disciplines is one way to express this idea.
· The industrial model of education continues to be a problem:
Topic 2: Strategies
· Institute a culture that supports learning
· There may be over-identification with expected roles
· Technology issues:
Topic 3: Facilitators of Learning
· We recognize barriers in that
· We need to communicate the big picture collegewide to help encourage a community of learning.
· Outcomes assessment needs to be rewarded, not punished.
· Good role models are needed:
Topic 4: Changing Roles
· We need to feel secure in our relationships but the impact of this issue on the role of adjuncts is not clear.
· We need to build on what we have done well and on people's strengths as we buy into new educational strategies.
· We need to apply principles of teamship to the classroom.
· We need an understanding of learning sequences, i.e., the time it takes to learn needs to be built in.
· We need to recognize faculty contributions and perhaps expand the role of administrators to include teaching so faculty and administrators share a common experience.
This was a joint session as the student services group joined the faculty group. This joint session came about after several issues/themes were identified at the Sunday session:
· We need partnerships to coexist.
· Student services/development needs to refocus around learning.
· The paradigm is changing as we move towards becoming learning centered.
· Counselors have information on the affective domain, so we should work together to help craft the successful student.
There is powerful learning when faculty and counselors work together or forge links. The participants shared diverse examples of joint projects:
· Class visits. Counselors visit program classes, speech classes for study skills instruction, career information
· Team teaching of foundations courses, communications/peer tutoring courses; modularized or full semester
· Online instruction/registration includes career workshops, employment information; students who learn online have the same need for connections to a counselor as do traditional students
· Communication/collaboration. Joint meetings regarding communications issues, student timetables, issue of faculty rights; Council for Innovation of Student learning (wrote 10 principles of learning)
· Joint sponsorship of conferences, guest speakers
· Crisis intervention. Working together on crisis interventions, conflict resolution helps faculty learn these skills
· Staff training by counselors on sexual and prejudice/discrimination, harassment issues; Faculty learn about these issues as well as how to link students in jeopardy regarding financial, child care issues
· Disability services. Faculty, student services, support staff need to be involved in delivering these services
· Volunteer activities. Counselors mentor student athletes, and then are seen as people who can help with issues
Conclusion: We have a shared responsibility for student learning;
therefore, we need a strategy so we can work together more effectively.
· Change work positions frequently (e.g., every 2 or 3 years) so we can learn about diverse issues and so that each person responsibility for a piece of student learning
· LOTS - Learning Outcome Teams: teams develop learning outcomes and determine how they will be applied to other areas of the college e.g. registration
· All college employees are held accountable to the same core abilities outcomes.
· Workload issues: need to find the required time by re-focusing roles, becoming strategic (i.e. doing only part of the role, sharing the power, the workload)
· An adaptable model: What does the box look like when we share the responsibility for learning? People need to work with their strengths. Perhaps cross-functional teams are good for faculty as well as for students
· Role changes: need to step out of our traditional roles which may mean sharing control
· Communication: need regular (once a month) joint meetings to share concerns and to provide direction
· Cross functional teams: for learning outcomes, tracking, hiring
· Look at government structures: Are they also centered on learning?