Going Global: Will Higher Education in America Ever Catch Up? Should It? by rebecca mills

This will be the first in a series of discussions I will post as I work to educate myself about the future of higher education and the push for it to become more global. My desire is to invite others to join me as I consider where I, as a Christian educator in America, stand on the issue of global education. I have much to learn and welcome any input you might have that will help me in my journey of discovery and evaluation. I am not an expert, so these segments will simply present questions that I am thinking through and provide information that might be helpful to the discussion.

In part one, I want to introduce the current leaders in global education in Europe and Africa and ask whether or not America should follow the trends they are setting. In this segment I rely on information from two articles in particular: Hans Pechar’s article in the Canadian Journal of Higher Education titled, “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education (2007) and Pam Watson’s Regional Themes and Global Means in Supra-national Higher Education Policy (2009). A complete list of works will be available at the end of each segment.

The Background Story:

After a visit with Natascha van Huttum-Janssen, an educational researcher at the University of Minho in Portugal who spoke at Cedarville last week, I became more curious about what it means for education to go global. We had opportunities to speak formally and informally. In both settings I heard her talk about the need for students to have fully immersed cross-cultural experiences. She spoke of her own children’s ability to speak three languages. She emphasized the importance of getting involved in the larger conversation about education that is happening around the world. In her presentation and some recommended readings, she mentions the Bologna Process, a macro-policy for higher education in Europe. Shamefully, I was not familiar with it, although it was, quite possibly, one of the most crucial developments in higher education in my lifetime. I decided it was time to enter the discussion about education going global. I started by learning about the Bologna Process.

The Bologna Process evolved over ten years ago as a result of goals established by the European Union and the initiative of the Sorbonne Declaration. Both desired “coherence and compatibility” among the universities in Europe. European educational leaders believed a unified process would both enhance student learning and make European universities more sought after internationally (Pechar, pg. 111). Hans Pechar, from the University of Klagenfurt, efficiently summarizes the goals of the Bologna Process in his article, “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education:

The objectives of the Bologna Process include the creation of a common framework of internationally understandable and comparable degrees, undergraduate and graduate levels of study in all countries, a European approach to quality assurance, and a European Credit Transfer System (ECTS). The overarching aim is to create a coherent and transparent European Higher Education Area with compatible and high quality systems that will make European higher education more attractive to the rest of the world.

In short, this means that most of the countries in Europe are setting common standards that are higher than ever, making higher education more accessible to students, and providing students and their universities with cultural exchanges that make them politically and economically more marketable. In fact the IAU, International Association of Universities, conducted a survey in 2006 showing that Europe “was identified as the most favoured region for future internationalization activities by all six world regions.” (H. Pechar, p. 121). Asia Pacific was ranked second and North America third. Although it has not been named as one of the leaders, Africa also has caught the collaborative vision with their Arusha Convention and African Union’s Harmonisation Policy (Watson, pg. 420).

What do you think? Is America keeping up? Should we?

Next Segment: Do American core values such as individualism, self-reliance, and competition keep us from joining Europe and Africa in their cooperative organizations or creating similar ones?

Suggested Reading:
(2008, Fall2008). Bologna Plus: The Liberal Education Advantage. Liberal Education, pp. 2-3. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=35690578&site=ehost-live&scope=site

(2008). NEWS AND INFORMATION. Liberal Education, 94(2), 5. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=32143475&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Doh, P. (2008). Global Integration Policies Versus Institutional Dynamics of Higher Education. European Education, 40(1), 78-96. doi:10.2753/EUE1056-4934400106.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=34511531&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hartmann, E. (2008). Bologna goes global: a new imperialism in the making?. Globalisation, Societies & Education, 6(3), 207-220. doi:10.1080/14767720802343308.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=34716553&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Pechar, H. (2007). “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 37(3), 109-125. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=31833519&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Schneider, C. (2007, Winter2007). It’s Not Just the Economy…. Liberal Education, pp. 2-3. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24424519&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Watson, P. (2009). Regional themes and global means in supra-national higher education policy. Higher Education, 58(3), 419-438. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9203-3.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=43540624&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Zgaga, P. (2003). The External Dimension of the Bologna Process: Higher Education in South East Europe and the European Higher Education Area in a Global World Reforming the Universities of South East Europe in|sq| View of the Bologna Process. Higher Education in Europe, 28(3), 251. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=10917378&site=ehost-live&scope=site

On Becoming a Culturally Responsive Teacher-Help from Geneva Gay and Others by Rebecca Mills

This fall I and a number of Cedarville University faculty and students attended a lecture at Wittenberg University titled “Improving Minority Student Achievement through Culturally Responsive Teaching” by Dr. Geneva Gay. Dr. Gay is a well-respected author and education specialist from the University of Washington’s Center for Multicultural Education. Gay teaches in the education department at Washington. Her reputation as an instructor is excellent, but she is best known for her multicultural education publications in the fields of curriculum design, instructional techniques, and professional development.
The following is a summary of what I learned at the lecture and what I gained from some follow-up reading about being a culturally responsive teacher. You will find the resources I read embedded within this post. This blog post is not meant to be a research project, but simply a record of my own learning and reflection after the lecture.
Things We Need To Know:
• There are gaps in the academic system- Some students come to college from school systems that are not academically strong. Poor rural or inner-city schools often lack resources. They do not have money to purchase the latest textbooks or the most innovative educational technology. In some cases they cannot offer teachers competitive salaries. However, the issue is not always money. Many teachers choose not to work in these districts because they often face challenges, like behavior issues, that inhibit deep and broad learning. We must remember that our students from these districts may be very bright, but often come to college never having been academically challenged or given the opportunity to use technology. They demonstrate great potential, but their educational scope is limited when compared to students from suburban schools. A good article describing the achievement gap: Article 1 A good article on how some universities are reaching out to close the gap: Article 2
• First generation college students must learn culture as well as content – First generation college students (FGCS) struggle within the academic culture because of differences in communication, values, time management, and general support. They have the added challenge of learning an unfamiliar culture as well as the content of their classes. A student’s cultural background is strongly influenced by the level of education available, valued, and achieved by most members of his or her community. Some college students grow up in communities where formal education is not valued and higher education has simply not been an option. FGCS often experience the greatest “disconnect” in the areas of language/communication. They are not familiar with the formal register spoken in academic settings. Values, priorities, and support are also different for the FGCS. Their families neither value education nor have the ability to advise them on how to be successful in school. However, their family members do tend to have opinions about college, seeing it as a means to a better career and more money. This puts family pressure on a student to get through the hoops, but typically without encouragement to embrace the culture of long-life learning. The pressure to provide financially for a family sometimes compounds the student’s problems when the student feels compelled to hold a job while going to school. This is a disadvantage because he or she will often prioritize work over studies.
A literature review of the topic: Article 3
Article 4

• Symbols and icons do not mean the same thing to everyone- As professors we must be careful, thoughtful, and self-aware. We often conduct our pedagogical business without taking time to reflect on our own biases. We all have them, and that is not wrong. But it is wrong to approach a class of students with insensitivity to their interpretation of our words, actions, and illustrations. Inclusive and culturally sensitive professors analyze the images they use in Power Point and the stories they tell with careful consideration. We must educate ourselves on what images and phrases have negative connotations for members of our class.
Things We Need To Do:
• Translate – We must never assume our students speak our language or register. We need to explain intentionally how we approach teaching and learning. This equips students with proper gauges and filters for better comprehension. We must give clear examples and use rubrics when giving assignments. This helps students understand what we expect and creates concrete action items from our verbal instructions.
• Think stretch forward rather than step forward. – We professors cannot assume we will succeed in getting a student from a unique population to buy into what we are asking them to do right away. Most humans resist change of any kind, especially when what is being asked of them is unfamiliar. When students see our course assignments and activities as hoops rather than learning opportunities, motivation drops even more. Therefore, we cannot expect a big leap of faith. Rather, we must encourage students to trust us. We must go out of our way to understand and sympathize with our students while we encourage them to try something new or to approach things in a different way. The best way to do this is to start early by asking students what they are trepidatious about, help them set reasonable small goals, and use forms of assessment that encourage continuous improvement. Professors who truly integrate in the classroom present opportunities for growth and nurture the learning process. Nurturing means helping the student start with his own place of reference and leading him toward the benchmark. Our challenge is to keep the standards and objectives rigorous, but be open to new ways of getting there.
• Start with strengths, (yours and theirs), and teach toward the weaknesses – Good classroom practices involve student assessment, and effective classroom assessment starts with getting to know one’s students. What do they know and what do they need to know? When a professor asks these questions he or she will discover the strengths of the students. Starting with students’ strengths will provide the best foundation for academic achievement. As teachers, we must also reflect on our own particular strengths and maximize them early in the teacher/student relationship. We will build confidence and trust within our classrooms when we begin a course using activities, content and assignments that maximize the greatest numbers of strengths of the group. We can tackle the more challenging things after students gain foundational skills and knowledge. For example, start with a chapter or section the students are interested in or have the most knowledge about. We don’t have to start with Chapter 1. Besides, as Tom Angelo reminds us, a good professor presents ideas and concepts, not chapters of books.
(See the following resources in which Angelo offers some great tips on motivating students, great teaching strategies for diverse groups, and assessment techniques that establish prior knowledge in quick, non-threatening ways.)
Article 5

• Understand that there is a hidden curriculum and communicate cross-culturally – As a professor in a small Christian liberal arts university, I need to recognize that the traditions we uphold have deep roots, but may not be universal. Like many American universities, Cedarville tends to favor the linear mode of communication in which information is handed to listeners in a logical, step-by-step fashion. This style of communication and teaching is culturally European, stemming from early thinkers such as Aristotle. The typical American university course is taught linearly by a white middle-class Euro-American. The content is presented, often quite literally, in outline form and supported by clear and reasonable evidence. The problem is that our students include many from other cultural backgrounds or different learning styles who communicate in a more global, circular way. In some cultures, story-telling and parables are used to get a concept across. Professors communicate most effectively in the classroom when they understand the cultural differences within their audience. We must remember that teaching is not an informative speech; it can be a performance. We can act and give examples or scenarios to teach concepts. We can role play and provide stories that illustrate a point to communicate to a diverse audience. Geneva Gay recommends the following when using illustrations: First, use examples and stories from our own culture, then, include some from other cultures as well. These articles provide more insight on the topic: Article 6
Article 7
Article 8
• Use good, team-based learning practices –Professors may not have time to work with culturally diverse students as much as they would like. However, professors can provide the support a student needs by creating small groups. Students who work in groups have the support of their peers. Being connected and supported in small learning communities often makes up for the lack of one-on-one time with a professor. Culturally diverse students have opportunities to share their perspectives more openly in small groups. And peers often tutor one another when they have common interests in the outcome of required work.
A Thing We Need To Consider
As a Christian university, Cedarville has a wonderful opportunity to join the newly emerging counter-cultural movement that recognizes the connection between spirituality and multicultural education. The new generation is crying out for the academy to recognize that humans are spiritual creatures. This fact could be the very point of connection that allows us to be truly diverse. As Christians we are called to recognize the image of God in every student and develop that image in them so they might become what God created them to be. This assumes we are doing all we can to nurture the spirit of every individual in a way that is meaningful to them. We cannot do this if we do not employ inclusive teaching techniques or multicultural education.
An interesting article reminding us that this generation is crying out for multicultural and spiritual connectedness: Article 9
More from Geneva Gay:
Article 10
Article 11
Article 12
Article 13
Article 14
Expressively Black: The Cultural Basis of Ethnic Identity (Praeger, 1987)
Essence of Learning: Multicultural Education (Kappa Delta Pi, 1994)
Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Practice, & Research (Teachers College Press, 2000)
Editor of Becoming Multicultural Educators: Personal Journey Toward Professional Agency (Jossey-Bass, 2003).

Lisa McMinn-An Introduction by Susan Warner

Some say a Christian sociologist is an oxymoron – after all, we do claim Karl Marx as one of our founding fathers. However, I found a small group of Christian sociologists in an organization called Association of Christians Teaching Sociology (ACTS). It was there that I met some of the most interesting and committed Christians in the academic world. My first meeting with ACTS was the summer of 2000 at Wheaton College. Lisa McMinn was one of the faculty at Wheaton, teaching sociology, and also the treasurer of ACTS. Her graciousness to me during that first meeting was an indication of the authentic character that makes Lisa so special. Over the following years, I incorporated the two books written by Lisa, Sexuality and Holy Longing: Embracing Intimacy in a Broken World and Growing Strong Daughters into some of the sociology courses I taught. Her down-to-earth approach to family relationships revealed a wisdom that added richly to my classes. As her latest book hit the presses, I greatly anticipated another addition to my class reading list. However, as I started reading her book, I was amazed at the pointed application her writing had to my own personal life. After ten years as a full-time faculty, her words came at exactly the right point in my life. I resonated with her as she applied the sociological imagination through a biblical lens. Sociologists often see the world from a different perspective – we not only turn over every rock, we also examine the soil attached to the bottom of the rock! Lisa’s introspective gaze into the life of harried academics struck a deep cord inside me. As our faculty group of readers gathered in the fall of 2008 to choose a book to read, I suggested we read The Contented Soul. I had begun reading it and recognized that Lisa had a message that most of us needed to hear. It was a great privilege to spend the next 14 weeks working through this book one chapter at a time with my fellow colleagues. Each week brought new insights for each of us. Lisa’s writings made us each feel as if she was sitting in the midst of us and sharing her heart. Now we have the opportunity to have the author with us in person. I am so looking forward to Lisa visiting us here at Cedarville and filling in some of the questions we addressed as we read through her book. I believe that everyone who reads The Contented Soul will recognize that Lisa has put her finger on the pulse of many of us and saw the need we have in our lives to slow down and simplify. I encourage each of you to come meet my friend, read her words of wisdom, and be challenged to savor the life given to us by God.

Rubrics Clues, Not Rubik’s Cube

One day I googled "rubrics +video". My objective was to find some well-crafted, clever yet compelling, evidence that rubrics are valuable tools for university professors. I also hoped to gather some relatively simple "how to’s" for designing and using them at the college level. I had already provided faculty members with research articles on the subject, but wanted to find more than formal academic studies, which can be long and tedious to extrapolate from at times. I wanted something motivating and practical to share with the faculty I serve. After narrowing the search a few times I found there was really nothing out there that met my needs. What I did find, amusingly, was many "how to" pieces for solving "rubrics cubes". It is funny what radically different things can be so quickly associated by a simple misspelling. There were about 484,000 "how to" videos or short pieces for solving Rubik’s cube, but almost nothing worth noting for educational rubrics. Curious, I watched a few videos of individuals, young and old, solving the multi-colored and multi-sided plastic cube puzzle with amazing speed and accuracy. Entertained but virtually empty handed, I changed my approach and made a note to myself that I should shoot an amazing rubric video someday soon.

When I returned to more serious research, I did find a very valuable resource for practical "how to" information about rubrics in a traditional book not a clever video. It was written by authors Dannelle D. Stevens and Antonia J. Levi and was entitled Introduction to Rubrics-An Assessment Tool to Save Grading Time, Convey Effective Feedback and Promote Student Learning. I agree with Adrielle Mitchell who writes,

I was thrilled to come across this book, as there are so few texts out there that address the use of rubrics in the college classroom. Stevens and Levi have done a laudable job of conveying the rationale for using such a grading tool in higher education, and have provided, generously, many outstanding examples. What I find most compelling is that it is so much more than an introduction: Stevens and Levi provide an effective blueprint for the creation of one’s own customized rubrics.

(Introduction to Rubrics. Stylus Publishing LLC. 2005. 2 Feb. 2002.)

This short read is well worth the relatively inexpensive cost of $17.95. It is one of the first, and one of the only, simple but good books on using rubrics in college courses. In just under 130 pages Stevens and Levi are able to provide a rationale for using rubrics, a guide to creating rubrics, several examples and variations of rubrics, and many ways to use them at the college level. The authors have been praised by university professors from all disciplines, as well as directors of teaching and learning centers all over the United States. These professionals report that their rubrics now produce the success that both the university and the student desire. Many love the student-centered approach and the ability to track and document student mastery of subjects. On the Stylus Publishing web page promoting Introduction to Rubrics Amy Driscoll from CSU is quoted as saying, "When departments or groups of faculty use rubrics as described in this book, they will indeed achieve the ‘academic currency’ sought today in higher education."

I would like to do more here than promote a book. I would like to provide some clues for designing an effective rubric. Actually, the approach is not that different from learning to solve the Rubik’s cube. Learning a new skill, no matter what it is, involves taking relatively similar steps. I recognized this truth at a recent end-of-the-semester coffee break where professors proved their mastery of the infamous cube. As one of those professors tried to teach me the steps to solve the puzzle, I was reminded of the fact that learning to do something new is hard and requires following a plan, mastering small steps and building on them. William Arthur Ward summarizes it well when he says, "Four steps to achievement: Plan purposefully. Prepare prayerfully. Proceed positively. Pursue persistently."

Steps for Developing a New Skill: In General-Specifically Related to Rubrics

1. Recognize the problems:

• A need for order and consistency – Students vary in ability, interest, and approach to assignments. Benchmarks are not clear and grading feels somewhat random and inconsistent.
• Incomplete results – The quality of work does not meet expectations and students are inconsistent in their thoroughness. They rarely have all the components complete.
• Takes too long – Professors write the same comments over and over again on student work. There are too many possible combinations of degrees of "rightness" on several components of an assignment to confidently assign a numeric or letter grade

2. Plan and Prepare for Success:

1. Reflect on the past
   • Ask yourself what you have done in the past? What worked, what didn’t, and why?
   • Meet with a mentor or colleague and ask what types of assignments have worked for them and ask to look at their rubrics if they have them.
   • Determine the most important aspects of this course. Ask "What does someone in this field do?" and "What would demonstrate mastery of each aspect?"
2. Reflect on Instructional Design
   • What resources will the students need?
   • What are my objectives and assignments going to be?
3. Reflect on each assignment: Activity Design
   • What are the best ways to get the students to engage in deep learning or reach high-level thinking?
   • What are the skills that the student will need to accomplish to prove mastery?
   • What terms and concepts will the student need to master?
4. Reflect on tasks
   • What are the tasks that accomplish the activity?
   • What are the smaller steps or tasks that build on one another to accomplish the big task
   • What is your highest expectation of mastery?
   • What would indicate failure of mastery?

3. Proceed by Implementing New Techniques

Find a format or layout to meet your needs and divide into four major areas:

• Record objective with the parameters for the desired outcome of the assignment
• Record divisions of major categories or dimensions and assign weighted percentages.
• Record subsequent tasks with descriptions as the building blocks to categorical tasks or dimension completion.
• Describe and assign the grading scale or levels of achievement.

4. Pursue Best Practices

A Review of “The Essential Elements of Team-Based Learning” by Larry K Michaelsen and Michael Sweet- by Rebecca Mills

Michaelsen and Sweet have released a new book entitled Team-Based Learning: Small Group Learning’s Next Big Step. Much of Michaelsen’s work since the 70’s has been focused on developing effective practices for group work in higher education. In 2004 he and his colleagues launched a practical and inexpensive book called Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups in College Teaching. The book caught the attention of those who previously thought that “team-based learning (TBL)” was like many cooperative learning strategies that were trendy but ineffective. Professors found TBL to be quite unique for the following reasons: Professors create the groups purposefully. Students prepare well and are assessed both individually and as a team. Teams compete with other teams. And assignments are problem-based. Professors embraced the concepts and instructions in the book. Consequently, they reported having an increase in both student achievement and job satisfaction. To read a few success stories visit the following sites:

1. Start with a Story
2. UNESCO – Team-based Learning Catalogue
3. Scaling Up: Designing a Technology-Enabled Team-based Learning Classroom

“It takes a lot of courage to release the familiar and seemingly secure, to embrace the new. But there is no real security in what is no longer meaningful. There is more security in the adventurous and exciting, for in movement there is life, and in change there is power.”

- Alan Cohen

It is often difficult to change, especially when the work required to get from A to B seems overwhelming. However, reaching high standards and working hard to succeed is extremely satisfying, especially when the results are good. So while I cannot promise Cedarville faculty that incorporating team-based learning into their classes will be easy initially, I can promise that professors and students will experience good results and great satisfaction. This is because it is based in good pedagogy, especially for the 21st century student: *Students are given content within the context of a problem. Students receive timely feedback. Students’ various learning styles are valued. Students engage in social and cooperative activity. New Directions For Teaching and Learning, no. 116, Winter 2008. Wiley Interscience ( www. interscience.wiley.com ) Wiley Periodicals, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/tl.330

Remember, the Center for Teaching and Learning will be here to guide and support you in the transition. *And for more information about the 21st Century Student visit our site next month for a review of Marc Prensky’s “Digital Natives”.

Below are the team-based learning steps toward group work success.

Professor Creates 4-7 Instructional Units for Each Course. This process is repeated for each Unit.
(Assessments and projects can be cumulative or noncumulative.)

• Preparation: Professor provides student with content that is to be read, reorganized or studied for comprehension
• Readiness Assurance:
  • Student studies content
  • Professor administers an individual assessment over the content
  • Professor administers a team assessment over the content
  • Professor provides immediate feedback on the team assessment and individual feedback within 24 hours.
  • Team writes written appeals to professors if there is a disagreement about the correct answer
  • Professor provides support and instruction for misunderstood content
• Application Activities:
  • Professor introduces assignments and projects
  • Students work outside of class on simple problems and tasks, research, plan and prepare
  • Teams works in class on simple tasks and projects; professor facilitates and provides guidance and redirection
  • Teams work outside of class on complex assignments and projects
  • Teams work in class on complex assignments and projects; professor facilitates and corrects
  • Team works outside of class reviewing and correcting
• Assessment

*For more information on the technology support that can help you incorporate TBL into your curriculum or for more information on creating meaningful assignments and assessments, please visit us at The Center for Teaching and Learning ctl.cedarville.edu/resources/ or make an appointment by calling 766-7849.

Comments on Student Evaluations: Suggestions for Cedarville Faculty

What is the purpose of student evaluations? The goal of student evaluations has always been to collect constructive feedback that allows professors to meet the educational needs of their students better. As a department, the Center for Teaching and Learning at Cedarville University hopes that the IDEA forms given to faculty and the consequent evaluations will help improve faculty pedagogy and overall courses. We desire to help make everything done in the classroom informative, enriching, and relevant to today’s Christian scholar. That being said, student evaluations are at times a quandary for faculty members. They are often inconsistent, confusing, frustrating and discouraging for both students and professors. Many studies have been done on various aspects of the topic, but few take a broad look at all the issues. Few propose overarching solutions to the dilemma. Consequently, there are few tips and guidelines available for those who desire to improve their scores. I would like to take a few minutes to address the topic informally and provide answers to some of the questions that arise related to student evaluations:
Why are student evaluations a subject of controversy? In the early 1900’s universities professors administered some of the first student evaluations. They were simple, student-outcome driven, and often one-on one. Administrators were not involved, and evaluations in no way influenced professional advancement. Professors who used them desired to improve their pedagogy for the sake of student learning. At this time, educators thought of the university as an institution having its own entity, separate from other entities such as business, government, etc. Later, with the increased influence of corporations on the culture, the business mindset of efficiency changed the philosophy of education. It became more pragmatic. Students were seen as consumers, and professors were given “performance reviews”. Student evaluations were, at times, the sole consideration in the process. Students and teachers perceived a shift in power. This may be one reason that professors began to react to student evaluations in negative self-serving ways. Professors, in some cases, started inflating grades, lowering standards, and striving for student affection in order to receive higher evaluation scores. On the flip side, other professors determinedly fought to continue to maintain the rigor of their class in spite of poor evaluations from students. The difference between poor pedagogy and rigor became unclear. Not understanding the difference can produce arrogant, stubborn or dismissive attitudes toward even constructive student feedback. I believe that modernism’s thrust toward materialism and its philosophical influences created an evaluation disconnect. What once was a benevolent gauge within a community of people who desired to work together toward a common goal is seen today as an instrument that is threatening, dehumanizing and promoting behaviors of self-interest.
Are student evaluations a valid way to assess the art and science of teaching in higher education? When it comes to the validity of student evaluations today, many educational researchers may not attribute the disconnectedness to a philosophical evolution, but many do agree on the following challenges: Neither students or professors take student evaluations very seriously. Students believe that their input is ignored and not valued. Unfortunately, this is often the case. Students admit to marking down the middle, marking all high or low depending on their grade or relationship with the professor, or making a blind stab or creative pattern with the bubbles on the questionnaire. Knowing this, professors do not trust the results. In addition, they do not believe that a student has the training to assess good pedagogy. And because most universities still use student evaluations for the purpose of determining advancement, professors do not believe that this assessment always paints a fair and accurate portrait of their strengths and contributions. Students are inconsistent in their claims and they may even misinterpret what the survey questions are asking. Professors begin to wonder if answers given were a genuine comment on the course, or mere amusement for a nineteen year-old slacker. During tenure reviews, many professors feel that it is up to them to provide a defense against claims that might be disingenuous and inaccurate. These concerns are just as valid as the students’ concerns. It is not surprising that only twenty-five percent of professors ever make any significant adjustments to their curriculum, methods or level of interaction with students based on student evaluations. Warnes, et al. (2008) summarizes the major downhill snowball that these challenges create:

If students do not see any action as a result of their feedback, they may become skeptical and unwilling to participate. Students are averse to completing feedback where they see no personal benefit. They may not provide accurate feedback and actions taken by staff will not be meaningful.

Not only are there significant perception hurdles, there are legitimate concerns about the statistical validity of student evaluations. Many want to know if the tests are reliable and stable. Are they valid in terms what they measure, how they are administered, how they are affected by things such as type of course, time of day or year, sensitivity to gender and diversity issues, etc? Researchers, Anthony Onwuegbuzie and his colleagues (2007), performed a multi-stage, mixed-method validity meta-study on student evaluations. They concluded that as it currently stands, student evaluations are not statistically valid in the areas of content and construct. They show more potential in terms of effective teaching methods and actual student learning. Where good teaching methods were applied and/or students did well on common assessments, student evaluations were remarkably consistent regardless of course, professor, or demographic. That being said, because Onwuegbuzie, et al. looked at so many areas at once, new ideas about the role of students were presented. His discussion of them in combination with an article by Rovaio, et al., (2007) reminded me of some things that, I believe, could guide us to make the best use of the student evaluations on our campus. How we present and handle student evaluations, like anything else, must be informed by our Christian philosophy of education. Our philosophy of education determines what our beliefs are in terms of who the student is and what role she plays in the education process. It influences our teaching methods and our curriculum. To take a common evaluation and apply it to all students, on all campuses, once every semester may be how it is done, but perhaps it is not prudent. A wise professor once encouraged me to compare how things are with how they should be. It is possible that we have failed to ask ourselves what we believe ought to be when it comes to student evaluations? As a Christian educator, I believe, that we must.

What are some student evaluation best practices within a Christian community?

• Be informed and prepare yourself: Attend a faculty advance session lead by Dr. Andy Runyan entitled, Filling Out the IDEA Form. At this session Dr. Runyan will provide valuable tips on how to use the evaluation process to truly help you improve your pedagogy.
• Take time at the beginning of the semester and prepare your students to perform evaluations.
o Give relevant reasons for objectives in terms of growth and achievement.
o Discuss occupational demands and current world needs in terms of stewardship for the furthering of the gospel and edification of the body of Christ.
o As brothers or sisters in Christ, model and overtly speak to your students about proper respect and true accountability to one another.
o Set clear parameters and expectations for them in this process. Students must understand that they are part of a professional and spiritual endeavor (Rovaio, et aI., 2007).
o Assure students that their feedback is desired often, that the feedback will be considered and adjustments will be made as needed. This expresses the value that you recognize the students as insightful image-bearers of God with unique potentials, created to redeem and reconcile the world through the power of Jesus Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit, to the glory of God.
• Evaluate 2-3 times: Give many opportunities throughout the semester to receive feedback. Consider developing and using your own evaluation instrument with some help from Dr. Susan Warner, our Director of Assessment.
• Be an advocate: Help students initially set reasonable, personal achievement goals that are based on the course objectives and the students’ expectations for the class. Have them determine how they will succeed based on individual strengths while recognizing limitations and challenges.
• Take the criticism as constructive: Trust the students’ intentions and learn to make positive changes. If you need help, please contact the Center for Teaching and Learning. We would love to encourage and support your efforts.
The ideas presented here were a result of reading several peices. For articles consulted please visit the CTL Resource Center website where you will find a complete list and more helpful tips or resources that will strengthen your pedagogy and your confidence. http://ctl.cedarville.edu/resources/

Changing your classroon “colors”? Try TEAL.

I received an interesting article late last week from Dr. Scott Dixon entitled, “At M.I.T., Large Lectures Are Going the Way of the Blackboard” (check it out at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&em). It seems that schools like M.I.T., Harvard, University of Maryland and others are ditching the large lecture classroom for smaller, more interactive classes that employ a Technology Enhanced Active Learning strategy (TEAL). Of course, the idea of technology enhanced active learning is not a new idea at Cedarville. In fact, this is a core strategy for the Center for Teaching and Learning that many of our faculty have already embraced. What is new, however, is the purposeful reduction of large section classes into more personal, collaborative, active smaller sections. The best current example on campus that I can think of is our hybrid version of Introduction to Humanities. For two semesters now, we have run over 700 students through a redesigned Humanities course that includes engaging online content, interactive group sessions, and rigorous, relevant projects. So far, the feedback on the course has been largely positive (we plan on writing up a more complete review of the course shortly). The success of Hybrid Humanities sparks a question – can we do similar things to other large section courses on campus? The answer is simple: we can if a professor is willing to try. So, if you are interested in changing your classroom “colors” in your large section course, come see us in the Center. TEAL may just be your color.

Your comments welcome: Portrait of a Cedarville Student

It’s been more than a year since I’ve “blogged” – with email and Facebook and LinkedIn taking up so much time, it’s difficult to add one more communication medium to the list. It is nice to be back communicating with my teaching colleagues at Cedarville about topics related to educational technology and teaching effectiveness. This post will be slightly different. As you know, a group of Cedarville faculty and administrators have been working on revising the university’s core objective statements. These statements are posted below for your review. Look them over and post your comments to them on this blog. We are very interested in your feedbackas we attempt to cultivate a culture of assessment at Cedarville University.

Cedarville University Mission Statement
Cedarville University is a Christ-centered learning community equipping students for lifelong leadership and service through an education marked by excellence and grounded in biblical truth.
In order to achieve this mission we must act as stewards of the principles upon which this university is founded. These principles include providing an educational experience where students will grow spiritually, cultivate their minds through study, communicate effectively, commit to community, excel academically and professionally, and engage their culture for Christ. Graduates acquire these skills in order to fulfill the creation mandate, tell the Gospel story, and glorify God. Based on our mission to be a Christ-centered community, we will develop intercultural competency. The following items expand on the founding principles of the mission statement and represent a portrait of a Cedarville graduate.

Portrait of a Cedarville Graduate

1. Grow Spiritually

A Cedarville graduate adopts a vision of being human that finds its substance, sustenance, direction, and delight in the person and purposes of the triune God revealed in the Scriptures. Such a life values God supremely so that His person and purposes definitively shape any notions of the good, the true, and the beautiful. With particular reference to the academic environment, this God-centered vision would drive and constrain the acquisition and use of knowledge and skills, elicit and shape creative expression, and set the trajectory for life in relation to others and the wider world. This is a view that ultimately sees life as a stewardship, a call to develop and harness one’s potential for fulfilling God’s purposes and bringing Him the attention and honor He deserves. This is a life that finds fullness when it is most satisfied in God. Valuing God and His purpose and being set apart by Him shapes any definition of success, of meaning, of purpose, of hope.

2. Cultivate the Mind

A Cedarville graduate grows in knowledge of the Bible, its content, theology and worldview, and in knowledge of the natural sciences and mathematics, human nature and action, human society, culture, language, literature, the arts and technology. The pursuit of this knowledge is situated within the framework of a world designed, created, and sustained by God. Cultivating the mind requires the ability to utilize sound critical and analytical reasoning. Graduates are able to think inductively, quantitatively, qualitatively and creatively. Cedarville graduates exhibit such thinking skills as conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating.

3. Communicate Effectively

A Cedarville graduate communicates effectively by creating messages that are presented in forms such as speaking, writing, art, music, drama, and mathematics. The graduate exhibits communication patterns that honor Christ and build community. The manner of communication will be truthful, clear, kind, concise, appealing, and appropriate, recognizing that our symbolic communication reflects the image of God. Graduates communicate in a manner that makes their ideas accessible interculturally and intergenerationaly by describing, narrating, analyzing, and persuading. The Cedarville graduate listens in deference to others and confirms their importance as unique image bearers of God through empathic and active listening.

4. Commit to Community

Cedarville graduates understand that being created as image bearers of God means being purposefully placed into community contexts with other people. The graduate actively pursues God-given roles in the community as the primary means for developing as a person and also as the place for practicing virtuous living for God’s glory. While the levels of involvement and intimacy vary widely based on the nature of particular groups, the situations being faced, and the particular roles assumed at a particular time, graduates are equipped to understand the roles they should play in various groups (family, neighborhood, classroom, church, staff, professional associations, etc.), accept responsibility for their God-given roles and act responsibly and appropriately in each community of which they are a part.

5. Excel Academically and Professionally

Cedarville graduates understand that excelling at their chosen degree program or profession is a positive reflection on themselves and their God and promotes opportunities for them to exert an authoritative and godly influence on their academic and professional communities. Graduates are characterized by the virtues of integrity, honesty, humility, initiative, industry and loyalty; academic and professional competence, to include an ability not only to master foundational content, but having potential advance knowledge in their fields; creativity and innovation; inquisitiveness that manifests itself in a continual enthusiasm for their discipline and activity in independent learning; and sound decision making, i.e., being solid practitioners of their skills.

6. Engage for Christ

Cedarville graduates actively engage with their culture on contemporary issues, modeling the character of Christ and impacting the world for righteousness and good. Graduates reflect Christ through obeying His commands as they live in an increasingly diverse global world. This is demonstrated in the graduates’ love for God and their neighbors. Graduates model this love by engaging the culture for Christ and becoming agents of spiritual, moral, and cultural change.