49% of college instructors nationwide are classified as adjunct faculty.

Adjunct faculty are seen as peripheral to higher education, but play a vital role in student education. Community colleges are leading the way in developing programs and professional development opportunities for adjuncts.

At North Shore Community College in Massachusetts, the college developed a one-year adjunct faculty professional development model to foster diverse thinking and collaboration around teaching skills and expertise. Laurel S. Messina and Dawn Spangler, both of North Shore, explained the program and the extensive research project that demonstrated its value as an annual program over six years.

Full-time or adjunct faculty facilitate collaborative workshops. In addition, an adjunct coordinator receives a stipend for overseeing the workshops. These workshops are held twice per semester on Saturdays and come with a nominal stipend to attend and learn. Adjunct faculty resources are also available online and through the university’s center for teaching and learning.

Adjunct faculty are more likely to seek professional development in teaching than their tenured, tenure-track, and full-time counterparts. Universities can harness this energy and experience by providing opportunities for involvement, training, and development of the talent in our adjunct faculty members.

Results of the study demonstrate that adjunct faculty would prefer the following formats:

• Faculty collaboration with colleagues
• Cohort-based learning
• Sharing experiences and Best Practices
• Faculty as Adult-Learners Approach
• Demonstrations of Best Practices in Teaching and Learning

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

One of the key trends impacting colleges and universities today is the need for multiple pathways to participation in an institution.

At the City University of Seattle, faculty and administrators tackled this issue head on. At AAC&U’s conference on general education, Elizabeth Fountain, David Griffin, and Melissa Mecham described their university’s approach to a multiple pathways model.

At the university, the large number of professional courses are taught by adjuncts, leaving the general education as the foundational cohesive curriculum offered by the school. Recognizing this issue, the university focused on general education as a distinctive experience.

The program was based heavily upon the excellent work of others: (1) Knowledge Management Research, (2) the Lumina Foundation’s Degree Qualifications Profile, and (3) AAC&U’s VALUE Project Rubrics for General Education.

Creating multiple pathways to learning suggests practices for general education in relation to the person and type of student:

For new students (adult and traditional): college readiness and completion of lower level general education.
For transfer students: student readiness and integration into general education based on university-wide outcomes.

Multiple points of entry allow students entering at all levels to integrate into the mission of the institution. Transfer and adult students should not be able to “opt-out” of the general education or the signature experiences of the university simply because of their point of entry.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

A general education outcome that reads, “through a diverse set of course, students explore various disciplines as part of an integrated education that causes them to connect and apply their learning across the curriculum,” might in practice mean, “We teach what we want. Students take courses willy-nilly. If they happen to relate, well, that’s cool.”

Paul Gaston, Trustees Professor of English at Kent State University and the final plenary speaker at AAC&U’ conference on General Education notes, “University catalogs and course descriptions should not be autobiographies of the faculty.” Rather, a curriculum should be a distinctive set of courses that moves students along a trajectory intentionally designed by the faculty.

This intentionality, he says, is the key to educational reform. Paraphrasing Plato, Gaston notes, “Students who are told what they are going to learn are more excited about and appreciative of the learning they attain.”

The biggest threat to this concept comes from faculty colleagues who say, “Students will not be able to appreciate this course until many years after it is over.” This is a self-indulgent approach to education. Instead, our course should indulge learning, by having each general education course’s outcomes tied to tangible learning a student will experience as part of their intellectual and personal development.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

A Tale of Two Universities: Faculty members and administrators at Boise State University and Miami Dade College joined forces in this session to share their two stories. Their hope was that the similarities between reform processes at two dissimilar institutions could suggest a few best practices for faculty engagement.

Here are four overarching strategies with specific ideas for investing in each:

Build and Leverage Conditions and Structures to support faculty engagement
Conditions and structures might include:

• Faculty Open Forums
• Drafting faculty beyond “the committee”
• Connecting curriculum to other activities
• Developing ideas based on the university’s mission and values
• Utilizing existing structures (discipline, CETL, IT infrastructure) and new structures (that might add to the university)

Engage Faculty through Intentional Professional Development
Intentional Professional Development might include:

• Faculty work sessions on outcomes-based learning
• Summer course design institutes
• Faculty learning communities for course development
• Campus workshops
• Peer Facilitation Series
• Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Seminars
• Symposia
• Analysis of Teaching
• Adjunct Faculty Workshop Series
• Known Course Development Standards: Know the outcomes, ensure they are on the syllabus, intentionally integrate them into the course, and create rubrics to assess each
• Authentic Assessment

Foster Community Dialogue around Curriculum
Examples of community dialogue opportunities:

• Task Force Open Sessions
• Faculty Information Sessions (Online and Face-to-Face)
• Student Information Sessions, presented by students
• Annual Executive Briefings for Senior Leadership
• Campus-wide Updates as Launch Parties for Assessment Results

Student-based Collaborations that inspire faculty engagement

• Make collaborations written and tangible
• Use a common language across campus
• Employ iterative change
• Identify a champion
• Mapping with Student Services
• Utilize centers and special programs

Thanks to Sharon McGuire and Susan Shadle from Boise State University and Jose Donis, John Frederick, and Marina Rodriguez from Miami Dade College for these specific and tangible ideas.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

We have to face the fact that we have designed curricula that no longer resonate with our students and do not promote the learning the need to succeed in today’s society, says Susan Gano-Phillips, Professor of Psychology at University of Michigan-Flint. Faculty should be able to engage with general education in a way that causes our curriculum alongside societal needs.

I thought this set of talks might give strategic and specific examples of ways that universities might “build cultures of faculty engagement” (which incidentally was the title of the session). Instead, I left with a list of current trends and controversies that threaten and impede innovation and engagement:

1. Productivity: “A narrow conception of productivity threatens to trump student learning and innovation in the curriculum,” Gano-Phillips continues. “Students hate this, Faculty hate this. Yet, we continue to do it.” This threat can be diminished through a learning-outcome-based model of education.
2. Contingent Faculty: Faculty employment also threatens curricular reform. Universities cannot rely on contingent faculty as pinch-hitters or liabilities. Rather, we need to view them as allies in reform processes and innovation.
3. Changes in Technology: Both a threat and a rallying force, technology is daunting for some and an experimental laboratory for others.
4. Disparity in Faculty and Student Identity: Minority faculty appear more in contingent ranks than full-time positions. Yet, student profiles are increasingly diverse.
5. Disciplinary Silos: Faculty departments, libraries, and student affairs leaders tend to silo themselves and divide themselves into like parties. All need to be included in the conversation through integrated general education programs.
6. Surrounding Communities: Major events and crises in a college’s surrounding community can hinder innovation, but if successfully harnessed, can create opportunities for faculty to collaborate, innovate, and engage the community.

These trends were compiled from the collected presentations on this panel, which included Robert Collins, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Dillard University; Michele Cuomo, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs at CUNY Queensborough Community College; Cynthia Gomez, Instructor at Portland State University; and Norman Jones, Professor of History at Utah State University, in addition to Gano-Phillips.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

The creative inquiry project at Clemson University has the goal of “a research project for every student,” says Barbara Speziale, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs at Clemson. It supports a intensive, discovery-oriented approach to learning for all students.

At Clemson, creative inquiry is for all students at all levels. Faculty and staff mentors work with small teams of students over multiple semesters. Creative Inquiry projects are either faculty-developed projects or department-embedded projects. The team-orientation of this program is one of its key characteristics.

Clemson’s creative inquiry projects are available on the program’s website.

Connection to the institution became a core component of Ohio Wesleyan University’s attempt at creative inquiry, says the university’s Dean of Academic Affairs Charles Stinemetz. According to Barbara Andereck, Associate Dean of Accreditation and Assessment, the OWU Connection Program includes a first-year seminar, course connection networks, travel learning courses, student individualized projects, and theory-to-practice grants.

Course connection networks combine faculty members toward discussion and collaboration on shared learning outcomes. Theory-to-practice grants include travel (both abroad and in the US), supplies, and resources to support individual students in the programs who want to continue the work initiated in the program’s experiences.

Core issues for developing institutional creative inquiry programs:

• Funding for or endowing these programs
• Examining budget models for faculty load time
• Maintaining both team-based and individualized approaches for students
• Embedding requirements for inquiry across general education and/or within individual majors

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

E-portfolios are bodies of work that rely on collection, selection, and reflection, says Kathleen Blake Yancey, Professor at Florida State University.The e-portfolio has the ability to bring together multiple types of learning in a single place. It can showcase a deliver curriculum, an experienced curriculum, and a lived curriculum (which may or may not be the same thing).

Every institutional model for an e-portfolio should be deeply tied to the mission of the institution. But, portfolios should not be tied to classes, but rather tied to competencies. They might ask students to recognize parallels between and among disciplines and apply knowledge, skills, etc to student experience.

Learning is not bound by our set of courses, but is rather bound by the experiences afforded to our students. A new learning model based on outcomes can be reflected in a reframed e-portfolio model. Directions must be explicit, specific, and intentional. And reflections must include specific examples from any point in the student’s experience.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

Barbara Wright, Vice President of Western Association of Schools and Colleges suggests that our biggest threats build on the changing demographics of our students, but also our changing perceptions of technology, assessment, learning-outcomes, and alternative higher education.

At colleges, the old business model relied on of knowledge, instruction, learning, degrees, social networking, cultural opportunities, and personal development. All of these things are available outside of college except validation of learning and conferring of degrees.

So, if we want to value and validate learning, do we really need courses? If we no longer sell course and credit hours, how do we measure learning? Assessment. Assessment becomes the vehicle for substantive conversation about quality, proficiency, and learning.

Student work changes. Responsibility and directed learning become the hallmarks of student experience.

Faculty work changes. Courses have a place, but they may also be the box we need to climb out of as we consider student learning. Courses might be replaced by advising, tutorials, and guided study.

Administrative work changes. Planning, budget, and revenue are dramatically affected. A robust assessment structure would be required.

Policy work changes. High quality learning would replace retention at the center of accreditation.

Is this all just a fantasy? Is it plausible? Could it ever work?

Institutions that prioritize outcomes will be the decision makers.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.

“It’s no surprise to anybody that the landscape of higher education is changing, ” says Steve H. Murdock, Professor of Sociology at Rice University, on the demography of classrooms. The American population is changing, growing, becoming more diverse, and indicative of an aging, and shrinking majority population.

The largest population growth in the nation is occurring in the South and West. In 2010, 60% of the population was in the South and West, not the Northeast and Midwest. The real change in population is not growth, but diversity.

“Our population does not look like the people in this room. We are entirely too non-Hispanic white as a group.”

Hispanic growth in Texas was the leading trend, especially in the 18 and under demographic. The rest of the nation has seen even greater diversification, with 2700 counties in the US (almost all of them) demonstrating growth in this population. In metropolitan centers, 54% of growth has been attributed to Hispanic populations. This growth drives not only metropolitan area growth but also suburban growth and growth in rural areas.

By 2050, non-whites are projected to outnumber whites in every age group but our oldest two demographics, according to Murdock.

George Bernard Shaw famously noted, “The mark of a truly educated man is to be moved deeply by statistics.” and as academics, these statistics should move us because they are dramatically related to socioeconomic status.

The divide in socioeconomic status between non-white populations and other populations is deep and pervasive. This is not good news. College matriculation does not reflect these growth patterns. The future of American education is tied to the success of our now minorities who, by 2050, will be the new majorities. Our role in academe must include a focus on the breadth and diversity of students that enter our classrooms.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) annual conference on General Education and Assessment was held at the New Orleans Marriott in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 23-25, 2012. I attended on behalf of Queens University of Charlotte with four faculty colleagues. Read all the articles on this conference here.