The document summarizes a faculty development webinar on integrating ePortfolios. It describes how the webinar will include case studies from various colleges on their faculty development practices. Participants are encouraged to ask questions through the chat function. The webinar will be recorded and made available online afterward. The agenda outlines presentations on faculty development programs at different schools, as well as opportunities for questions and discussion. Participants are asked to consider patterns across institutions and how they can apply lessons to their own campus.

2. If the above setting is correct and you still don’t hear the music, Go to Meeting Manage My Settings Audio Setup WizardWebinar Page Overview On the left side of your screen you will see the list of participants. You can experiment with selecting different icons; using the green check-mark to show agreement, or raising your hand. During today’s Webinar, WE ARE going to ask participants to speak up. During the discussion, raise your hand to indicate that you want to speak. Once the moderator grants you permission, you will see a little ‘microphone’ next to your name. That means, you are ‘ON AIR’. In addition, we strongly encourage your participation in the Webinar by using the Chat window also. Type your Questions, Feedback or Comments related to the presentation at any time in the Chat window. Chat options: to everyone or to individual participants. Attention: This Webinar will be recorded and made available for download on our C2L Blog site shortly afterward. Technical support prior to and during the Webinar is available. We can assist you over the phone. Call: 718-482-5419.

3. Connect to Learning, Jam #2Faculty Development Practices National Webinar Monday April 18, 2011

4. Agenda Welcome & Announcements Case Study 1 & 2 (Salt Lake CC & Manhattanville College) Q/A -- Chat Case Study 3: (N’West Connecticut) Cross-Campus Review: Helen Chen Q/A -- Voice and chat Jam #3: May 31- June 9 Campus plans for next year

6. Agenda Welcome & Announcements Case Study 1 & 2 (Salt Lake CC & Manhattanville College) Q/A -- Chat Case Study 3: (N’West Connecticut) Cross-Campus Review: Helen Chen Q/A -- Voice and chat Jam #3: May 31- June 9 Campus plans for next year

7. Questions to Keep in Mind What cross-campus patterns do we see? Are there approaches that seem to be particularly prevalent? Effective? What insights can we draw, moving beyond single case studies? What are we all missing? What kinds of new practices could be valuable? How might you apply what you’ve learned from this study to improving faculty development practice on your own campus?

8. NextPresentationbySalt Lake CommunityCollege

9. Faculty Development Practices in SPS & Rutgers Spring 2011

10. What did you find most interesting or impressive about this practice? What did you really like & learn about it this practice? What questions does it raise? SPS plan for a series of three linked faculty development sessions in July, one of which will happen asynchronously online. By the end of the three sessions, participating faculty will create assignments that will be integrated into their Fall courses. We like that this faculty development exercise is both grounded in the literature on reflection and focused on producing real results that faculty can use immediately. SPS’ faculty development sessions raise the question of whether three meetings are enough to produce positive results. Will the faculty be encouraged to share their successes and failures after they have tried out their assignments in the Fall?

11. Is there evidence that this practice was effective? Explain. What suggestions might you make, in terms of future evidence gathering? Does it demonstrate any of the Angelo principles we’ve discussed? Does it suggest other principles? SPS’ faculty development series is to be implemented this summer, so no evidence has been collected yet. They plan on surveying the participants at the end of the third session—which is good—but we would also suggest a focus-group debrief of these faculty at the end of the Fall term. SPS’faculty development project demonstrates building trust through the cohort meetings and building a common language through their grounding in the literature on reflection.

12. How is SPS’ approach similar or different to SLCC’s FDP? What could you borrow or adapt to use at SLCC? Offer suggestions or ideas for further strengthening your C2L partner’s practice? SPS faculty development sessions are similar to SLCC’s four-session series. One suggestion is for SPS to add another session at the end of the Fall term for this cohort of faculty to get together and compare their experiences.

13. What did you find most interesting or impressive about this practice? What did you really like & learn about it this practice? What questions does it raise? Rutgers plan to have three learning communities “formulate their programming and syllabi around environmental themes.” This practice impresses us because of the communities that it wants to “merge” into one larger learning community: sciences; social justice; women and creativity. Rutgers’ learning communities within a larger learning community initiative made me wonder what assignments, projects, etc. might students produce? Will the larger community (students) work on assignments/projects together or report to each other on them? Why these learning communities? Why environmental themes?

14. Is there evidence that this practice was effective? Explain. What suggestions might you make, in terms of future evidence gathering? Does it demonstrate any of the Angelo principles we’ve discussed? Does it suggest other principles? Rutgers’ environmental focus initiative among learning communities is still in development which means that there is no concrete evidence that this practice will be effective – although the potential for it to work is great! Rutgers’ design for their initiative demonstrates 1-6 of Angelo’s principles. 1-6 are all centered on building trust and making connections. Rutgers cannot make the initiative come to fruition without building trust within the learning communities and having the communities work together on developing curriculum that connects multiple disciplines together.

15. How is SPS’ approach similar or different to SLCC’s FDP? What could you borrow or adapt to use at SLCC? Offer suggestions or ideas for further strengthening your C2L partner’s practice? Rutgers’ approach to integrative teaching and learning proposes to produce the following: “create a model of integrative teaching;” develop curriculum using multi-modal strategies; increase student engagement in integrative learning; foster rich collaboration among faculty and students. We want to achieve these same goals at SLCC. We cannot have meaningful ePortfolio work if we don’t develop and model these kinds of teaching and learning methods.

16. NextPresentationbyManhattanvilleCollege

17. Evaluation of Faculty Development Practice at Johnson and Wales University Alison Carson Jim Frank Gillian Greenhill Hannum MANHATTANVILLE COLLEGE

18. Johnson and Wales University Faculty Development Practice “Critical Reflection: A Practitioner’s Approach to Enhancing the Student Learning Experience” Cross-disciplinary faculty development Emphasizes pedagogical learning Introduces the DEAL model of critical reflection (Ash & Clayton, 2004, 2010)

19. DEAL (Ash & Clayton) D = Describe the experience objectively (who, what, when, why, where) E = Examine the experience using reflective prompts by category of learning goal (personal growth, civic learning, academic enhancement) AL = Articulate Learning (what was learned, how was it learned, why did it matter, what should be done in light of what was learned?)

20. Thinking analytically… A sense of urgency Build a shared language Acknowledge implicit mental models Think and act systematically Practice what we preach Social construction of knowledge Embed the discussion of assessment within the session

21. Effectiveness of Practice Development of trust and a learning community through discussion Leads to openness to evaluate implicit mental models Time will tell

22. Questions in anticipation of application: J&W: “With the integration of a deeper and more intentional reflection component in the Johnson & Wales Internship programs and internship projects/assignments…” I would be very interested to hear more about this. Was this done through faculty committee? Administration? J&W: “We believe that the training workshop offered an outlet for faculty interested in pursuing reflection more intentionally” How do we move beyond those faculty who are already interested? What role do incentives play in encouraging faculty participation in professional development at J&W?

23. Questions beyond J&W’s practice Building trust: How to do this beyond sharing successful strategies? Angelo views “academic departments as the most promising units of instructional reform and heads of departments as the natural leaders in transforming departmental cultures.” How might we harness this potential in our ePortfolio plans?

24. Q & A Please type in your questions for the presenters and the featured schools in the chat window.

25. NextPresentationbyNorthwest Connecticut CommunityCollege

26. C2L Faculty Development Northwestern Connecticut Community College highlights Pace University And Norwalk Community College

27. #1 What did you find most interesting or impressive about this practice? What did you really like about it? What did you learn by reading about this practice? Collaborative Practices: We were drawn to both of these practices because they work with cohorts of faculty across disciplines. We feel this approach provides a unique opportunity to foster collaborative learning and mentorship among faculty. Pace – The Teaching Circles consist of three meetings throughout a semester with a group of 10 faculty who are committed to using ePortfolio in an upcoming semester. The goals for the 3 sessions are to: introduce you to all the capacities of the eP, exchange ideas about pedagogical issues surrounding it; explore best practices, and plan for using it in the following semester—for a specific course and for designated assignments. Norwalk – In the ePortfolioIntroductory Workshop we work with 10-15 new faculty per semester. Our main goal for these workshops is to stir faculty enthusiasm for ePortfolio, get them to understand how to use them in their classes, why they should be using them and the best pedagogy to use in implementing it with their students.

28. #2 What questions does it raise? What would you want to know more about? Frontloading: Both Pace and Norwalk do the majority of their faculty development workshops before faculty actually integrate ePortfolio into their courses. Does this provide a key opportunity to build shared trust, motivation, and language in advance? Could this create disconnect between theoretical applications and actual practice?

29. #3 Did you see evidence in the posting that demonstrated that the practice was effective? If so, what evidence was most persuasive? Why? Faculty responsiveness: Both Pace and Norwalk surveyed faculty in some format and were able to use what they learned to continue to improve their faculty development process going forward. In both cases, faculty found the workshops worthwhile, and that bodes well for sustainability and future buy-in.

30. #4 Think analytically: Assuming this practice is effective, what factors in its design might make it so? Does it demonstrate any of the Angelo principles we’ve discussed? Does it suggest other principles? Angelo: Builds shared trust, motivation, and language. Frontloading development allows faculty to “begin with the end in mind” and thus plan systematically. These practices model the kind of collaborative learning and reflective thinking that we hope to build with our students. Integrative Learning: Because of the cross-disciplinary nature of the workshops, these faculty development models seem uniquely designed to give birth to integrative learning through faculty collaboration with a common tool, ePortfolio.

31. #5 Think about your own faculty development practices: How is this approach similar or different? What could you borrow or adapt to use on your own campus? “Don’t borrow, steal!” – Robert Frost As we planned our faculty development model at NCCC, we were already familiar with Pace’s Teaching Circles, and we share the tradition of cooperative Center for Teaching activities with Norwalk. So, we knew we wanted to create a collaborative faculty development program across disciplines and programs. This also supports our holistic approach to student portfolio construction. One key difference is that we plan to work with each cohort of 10 faculty for a year while they actively implement ePortfolio into their classes in two consecutive semesters.

32. NextPresentationbyHelen Chen

33. OBSERVATIONS ON C2L JAM #2: FACULTY DEVELOPMENT FOR INTEGRATIVE EPORTFOLIOS CONNECT TO LEARNING APRIL 18, 2011

34. Forum Discussion – 4/7-4/9 Leslie Lieman (Lehman) – themes from the reading Adoption vs. transformation Local (class, program, department) vs. institutional Bottom up vs. top down Short-term vs. long-term Improve faculty teaching vs. improve student understanding/learning

35. Additional Themes Trust – willingness to take risks within a community that is supportive AND critical Redesign vs. just “adding on” – a more holistic view of the “system” Ownership – From being support-driven to faculty-driven (Nancy W., Stony Brook) Faculty’s role as a “change agent” on multiple levels

36. Digital Stories of Students

37. Digital Stories of Faculty

38. Opportunities for Synthesis and Collaboration Lillian Rafeldt (Three Rivers CC): multiple sessions for faculty development Lehman (6 sessions ), Manhattanville (4), Pace (3), Johnson & Wales (2 w/online component), TRCC (1 plus mentoring), Tunxis (4) Additional support structures outside of workshops: Individual consulting (IUPUI), mentorship (Hunter), Ambassadors (Queensborough), ePortfoilio Student Team (Virginia Tech), student mentors (Rutgers)

39. Questions to continue to explore… How can we, in our faculty development practices, prioritize and foreground the focus on student learning?“ What practices did you see where that is the focus? What else could we be doing in this regard?“ What kinds of reflective prompts and activities are most effective for faculty? (e.g., SFSU’s Guiding Questions, U Delaware’s structured interview protocol) What is the evidence of success and how do we measure and collect this evidence? Your thoughts, questions? What’s next?

40. Additional Questions What cross-campus patterns do we see? Are there approaches that seem to be particularly prevalent? Effective? What insights can we draw, moving beyond single case studies? What are we all missing? What kinds of new practices could be valuable? How might you apply what you’ve learned from this study to improving faculty development practice on your own campus?

41. Thank you The recordings of the session will be available on the connections blog later this week.