Teaching and Learning News

At the end of November, Jon Driver, Vice-President, Academic, sat down for a conversation about his academic vision for the next five years. He emphasized the importance he attaches to teaching within the university culture, addressed the subject of learning outcomes, and talked about some key priorities in the next Academic Plan. Here are excerpts from his comments.

What is the relationship between teaching and research?

There’s a real connection between teaching and research, a two-way connection. First of all, when people are active in research, that makes their teaching more interesting. But also, we can take our research methods and apply them to try and understand our teaching.

How would you compare the place of teaching vis-à-vis research at SFU?

We value teaching and research equally. We try to evaluate faculty members equally based on their teaching and their research. And so it would be nice if we had a culture in which people talked about “What have I done new in teaching” as well as “What have I done new in research.”

What can be done to make good teaching a priority?

On research we’re very good at being able to say, “Your performance is not as good as it should be”, or “your performance is satisfactory”, or “your performance is really good” … On teaching, we tend to say either “Your performance is not as good as it could be” or “It’s satisfactory.” And we stop at satisfactory … In fact, I just reviewed all of the guidelines that every department in the university has for how they evaluate their colleagues during salary review and during tenure and promotion, and what I found was that most – not all, but most – of the departments talk about satisfactory teaching, and then they talk about what you should be doing if your teaching isn’t satisfactory, but they don’t talk about how they’re going to measure outstanding teaching and how they’re going to reward outstanding teaching. And so, having reviewed all of these documents, I’m going to go back to the departments and make some suggestions about what methods they could use to identify the outstanding teachers and reward them through the salary review process or through the tenure and promotion process.

Are there other obstacles to good teaching?

The issue that would be raised by many people is the time issue. If I don’t get rewarded for being a really good teacher and I’ve got a lot of pressure to do research, why would I focus on teaching and learning? One of my answers to that is [that] I wouldn’t expect people to be doing this continually, but … that maybe every few years they would … spend a semester working primarily on some changes in their teaching or getting some new skills around teaching.

You’ve raised the issue of learning outcomes. Why do you think they are important?

I think one of the most important reasons for stating [learning] outcomes and trying to assess them is to communicate to students. Students want to know what the purpose of the course is. They want to know, “How does this course that I’m about to take fit into my overall major?” … The second thing relating to students is that you can explain to them how the evaluation that you’re using relates back to the outcomes … I think for students it’s really important that they get that sense of why they’re in a course and why they are doing the things that they’re being asked to do … The other component of learning outcomes is partly about ensuring that we’re getting the results that we think we’re getting. And one of the ways to do that is to define what you want students to get out of your course and then to try to assess that.

Some people see this process as a threat to academic freedom.

My attitude is [that learning outcomes are] up to the department. I don’t want to tell people what to do. We’re still in the process [of considering learning outcomes] here, but I think one of the outcomes of this project ought to be that assessing how well you are doing should not be a function of my office. It should be your own colleagues who [do that] in the context of external review.

But there do seem to be concerns about a loss of control.

The other problem is that we do have some external bodies that accredit our programs. So, for example, the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board accredits our Engineering programs, and they have very specific requirements around learning outcomes that are much more narrowly defined than what I would expect a department to do, and there’s a tendency for what happens in Engineering to be cited as though this is what it’s going to be like for everybody.

In May you released an Academic Plan for 2013–2018. How would you compare that plan to the previous one?

I’ve tried to put less detail into the upcoming plan and I’m trying to encourage academic departments to come up with their own [approaches for] the way they would like to handle some of the goals of the program … My aim with the Academic Plan is to have some general goals and then encourage departments to find ways that they can meet those goals.

Is the new plan a continuation of the previous plan or does it represent a shift?

I think it’s more a continuation. The plan that we’re just wrapping up now certainly had a focus on the undergraduate student experience. I think perhaps the current plan has got more of a focus on teaching as a component of the undergraduate experience. It references some projects that we have actually already started – like the support we can give to students for whom English is not the first language, that’s mentioned, the learning outcomes [initiative] is mentioned very specifically, getting to a better system for evaluating teaching is mentioned – so there is some reference to ongoing projects, and there probably is more reference generally to teaching and learning rather than the overall student experience.

How do you see teaching contributing to the undergraduate experience in the next few years?

What I would like to see in terms of support for students in the classroom is, firstly, that a more supportive environment is created by having a greater range of teaching practices, so that the way in which teaching is done matches the learning outcomes better … We know that students or people generally don’t learn by sitting in a classroom and having people tell them things. They learn by doing things … We need to worry less about the content and speaking the content of a discipline to students, and we need to worry more about them getting the major principles and the theories and the methods and somehow experiencing that.

The Experiential Education Project concluded that there is breadth but not depth of experiential learning opportunities at SFU. Do we need to do more?

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having a large number of courses with a smallish component of experiential [education]. What we really need to do is select some areas of the university for a deeper experiential education, and when I say select, I don’t mean I would select them. I mean people could self-select … I think we just need to encourage departments to approach it strategically, to identify an area within their curriculum where they think a deeper experiential component would be really valuable to students and to try to build those areas first.

Related links:

Academic Plan 2013–2018

Report of the Learning Outcomes and Assessment Working Group (draft report; see link in right sidebar)

The State of Course Based Experiential Education at SFU (report)

This post is drawn from an article on the Beedie School of Business News blog. Read the full article here.

For a group of undergrads (above) in the Beedie School of Business, classroom theory has been complemented by practical experience in the world of finance, with positive results on multiple levels.

The students act as managers of the Beedie Endowment Asset Management (BEAM) fund, an investment fund launched in 2011 with $5 million in Canadian equities, fixed income, and cash. It’s the largest undergraduate-run fund in Canada and is designed to give students hands-on experience in investment research, analysis, and trading in bonds and equities markets.

During the third quarter of this year, the fund yielded a return of just over 3% and a profit of $147,000, bringing the portfolio above its starting level for the first time since it was established. Ryan McCutcheon, a student who acted as chief risk officer and diversified sector co-manager of BEAM, notes that the program’s benefits go beyond dollars and cents: “Managing the BEAM fund is an incredible hands-on experience, one which I would recommend to anyone with an interest in finance. The calibre of technical knowledge and networking experience you gain from taking part in such a real-world exercise is amazing. Participating in BEAM is far above and beyond regular school and forces you to learn many things which you would not otherwise be exposed to.”

As part of their experience, the BEAM program participants travelled to Toronto for a tour of the city’s financial sector, including visits to the head offices of several banks and hedge funds and guided tours of some of the largest trading floors in North America.

“The trip to Toronto was an amazing experience and really gave us an insight into what it would be like to pursue a career in Canada’s financial hub,” says McCutcheon. “At each visit we had industry professionals waiting to talk to us about their roles and what it was like to work for each company, which was very impressive. Just being able to network with that level of professionals and hear their insights into the markets was a major highlight of the trip.”

The BEAM program is one of many initiatives at Beedie designed to extend student learning experiences beyond the classroom.

This post is drawn from an article on the Beedie School of Business News blog. Read the full article here.

Related links:

Beedie Endowment Asset Management program >>

Beedie School of Business News blog >>

Beedie teaching website and teaching news blog >>

“I assumed university would be the best years of my life,” writes SFU student Zahra Abdulla in the most recent issue of The Peak, SFU’s student newspaper. But academic pressures – some of them self-imposed – soon left her feeling isolated and depressed, and she was forced to withdraw from her classes during her first year.

Abdulla’s case isn’t unusual. What’s somewhat unexpected, and potentially of great interest to instructors, is her account of the role experiential learning played in her recovery. She credits experiential learning, and particularly three work placements, with helping her to move beyond a narrow focus on grades and academic success. In her article, she suggests a number of ways in which experiential elements could be beneficially incorporated in the classroom:

• “Universities could implement a variety of interactive for-credit courses for their students. Course topics [could] include ‘developing compassion’ or ‘living in balance’ and could require students to volunteer in the community, interact with community leaders, and engage in community projects.”
• “Students would benefit from a more collaborative and deep learning style, rather than traditional lectures and exams that foster memorization and a passive approach to learning.”

Abdulla returned to SFU after a break for counselling and will be graduating next summer. Her article concludes on a hopeful note, both for students dealing with pressure and anxiety and for instructors wondering whether their efforts in the classroom make a difference: “Depression may never be eliminated, but meaningful learning options can help students to recognize their full potential and to enjoy their years in university.”

Read Abdulla’s full article (“The Dark Days Are Over”) in The Peak here.

Related links:

Peak article by Zahra Abdulla >>

SFU Health and Counselling Services resources for instructors concerned about their students >>

Workshops on “Dealing with Students in Distress and Distressing” >>

In a guest column published in the Globe and Mail this week, President Andrew Petter argues that post-secondary education is more important than ever to the Canadian economy and to individual workers. He suggests that universities deliver the kinds of workers Canada will need in coming years: individuals “trained to learn and adapt – not simply to know specific facts or functions or to perform a particular task.”

Petter sketches a portrait of university graduates who are “able to conduct research, to think critically, to write effectively, to analyze problems and develop solutions, and to have a propensity to learn. In addition, they require civic literacy, global awareness, an understanding of social behaviour and human diversity; and an appreciation of the natural world. These competencies and capabilities are transferable. Many promote flexibility and agility in the workplace and job market. And most contribute to enhanced citizenship.”

And he suggests that, far from offering an obsolete product, good universities are building on the traditional foundation of a “liberal arts” education by offering experiential learning programs that demonstrate innovation and engagement. He cites SFU’s co-op work placements and field courses; the Venture Connection program, which “helps undergraduate students develop business aptitudes and opportunities”; the SFU Semester in Dialogue program, which “connects students with community leaders, creating teams that explore pressing social, economic, and environmental issues”; and an undergraduate research awards fund that permits students to “spend a semester working on high-end university research of the kind that can expand the scope of human knowledge.”

To read the full column, visit http://ow.ly/eYICs.

Roughly 32% of credit courses at SFU incorporate some form of experiential education, but in most cases the experiential component is limited, and “deeply immersive, highly engaging experiences are few in number and largely inaccessible to the majority of the student body.” That’s the conclusion of a summary report released by the Experiential Education Project (EEP) in early July.

The project team, led by Jennifer McRae and Deanna Rogers under the direction of an advisory committee drawn from the SFU community and chaired by Sarah Dench (director, university curriculum and institutional liaison), was commissioned to compile an inventory of course-based experiential education opportunities at SFU by Jon Driver, vice-president, academic, in late 2010. The initiative grew out of similar surveys conducted previously within the Faculty of Environment and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. It was, in part, a response to the Task Force on Teaching and Learning (2010), which called for the university to “provide more opportunities for … learning that extends beyond the classroom.” It also fits neatly within SFU’s “engaging the world” theme, particularly its call to engage students and communities, and complements the work of SFU’s long-standing and internationally recognized co-operative education program and Work Integrated Learning unit.

What is experiential education?

McRae explains that the project employed a deliberately broad definition of experiential education in order to capture as much experiential activity as possible. Specifically, she and her team used the following definition:

The strategic, active engagement of students in opportunities to learn through doing, and reflection on those activities, which empowers them to apply their theoretical knowledge to practical endeavours in a multitude of settings inside and outside of the classroom.

The survey methodology was also flexible. Potentially experiential courses were identified from course outlines, and the course descriptions were supplemented where possible by faculty interviews and other follow-up activities. Courses were classified as experiential if they included at least one of six broad “practices”:

• Reflective experiences (e.g., journal writing)
• Field experiences (e.g., field trips or field work for labs)
• Creative project experiences (e.g., blogging, video production, and portfolio-based work)
• Community experiences (e.g., internships and community-based research)
• Collaborative experiences (e.g., learner-directed environments and inter-institutional or inter-disciplinary activities)
• Problem-based experiences (e.g., simulations, case studies, and real-world problem solving)

Ultimately, 3,774 undergraduate and graduate courses were identified, 2,684 were reviewed, and 1,213 were classified as “experiential courses.” However, many of the experiential courses qualified on the basis of a “single practice descriptor,” and the report readily acknowledges that “a majority of these single-experience courses would likely not be captured by a second review under a tighter definition.”

What does the report recommend?

Nevertheless, the results provide a starting point for understanding the current landscape. The report presents evidence to suggest that students and instructors have a strong interest in experiential education, and it offers two sets of recommendations for promoting experiential education at SFU. The first set outlines steps for “aligning the course-based curriculum with the [university's] strategic vision”:

• Review and arrive at an institutional definition of experiential education
• Develop infrastructure and support mechanisms for community-based experiences
• Develop an internal teaching exchange program (e.g., the Honeycomb program)
• Continue and preserve Teaching and Learning Development Grants and the Honeycomb Retreat

The second set of recommendations identifies steps for “increasing access to course-based experiential education”:

• Use lectures for content and tutorials for process and experience
• Continue support for innovation in experiential course delivery (e.g., City Studio, Semester in Innovation, The Change Lab)
• Make the experiential opportunities that do exist more visible to students and the broader community
• Focus on developing first-year engaged experiences
• Award more credits for certain experiences

Jon Driver, in his Foreword to the report, interprets the findings as a call to action:

The analysis of a broad range of student experiences at SFU challenges academic administrators to find out what undergraduate students want from their education and to provide support for those instructors who take on the difficult task of creating intensely experiential learning. The report challenges instructors to think less about the content of a course and more about how students learn. And students themselves are challenged to become more engaged with their education.

The full report is available here and on the Experiential Education website and blog.

Back in February, Shauna Jones, coordinator of the Beedie School of Business’s newly created Teaching and Learning Group, held a wine and cheese gathering for instructors. The 22 people who attended this inaugural meeting were asked to respond to a set of questions designed to elicit a group vision. Based on that input, the group developed the following vision and mission statement:

Vision: The international business education community will recognize the Beedie School of Business Teaching and Learning Group as a leader in engaged and experiential learning.

Mission: We are committed to the collective and individual development of scholarly teaching within the BSB. We engage faculty and students to foster effective outcome-oriented learning environments. We model and share successful scholarly best practices that encourage great students.

For now, the group is treating this text as a “draft” statement that will be modified on the basis of feedback from faculty members and students. The inaugural meeting also identified several themes of interest to instructors: “opportunities to learn with and from others, opportunities for teaching development, and opportunities to share with others.”

In response, two interactive sessions have been scheduled so far:

• Interactive polling, May 24, 2012, 2:30 p.m.–4:30 p.m.
• Language and writing, October 2, 2012, 10 a.m.–12 p.m.

Jones welcomes comments and suggestions on the draft statement and on the group’s direction and activities. She can be reached at shaunaj@sfu.ca. More information and a link to an online teaching survey for the Beedie academic community can also be found on the Beedie School of Business News blog.

Two senior lecturers in SFU’s Department of Mathematics will deliver prize lectures at the summer meeting of the Canadian Mathematical Society in Regina, Saskatchewan, in June.

Veselin Jungic on blended learning

The first is Veselin Jungic, who will receive the society’s 2012 Excellence in Teaching Award for “sustained and distinguished contributions in mathematics teaching at the undergraduate level at a Canadian post-secondary education institution.”

Besides being deputy director of the Interdisciplinary Research in the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Centre (IRMACS), Jungic teaches a number of courses, including introductory calculus courses with more than 500 students. He also conducts research on methods and techniques for teaching large classes and has written research papers on the subject. He frequently incorporates online assignments and pioneered the use of Lon-CAPA, an online course management system, for mathematics courses at SFU.

Jungic was instrumental in the development of many of SFU’s outreach programs, including the “A Taste of Pi” program, which features enrichment activities for high school students, and the Math Student Ambassador Program, which connects SFU student volunteers with high schools to speak to students about pursuing university mathematics. In addition to his work with university and high school students, Veselin regularly teaches basic courses in mathematics to adult learners, including students in the SFU Liberal and Business Studies program and First Nations individuals who did not complete secondary education.

Jungic will deliver a prize lecture on “The Blended Learning Approach to Teaching a Calculus Class: What May Change and What Should Stay the Same.” His presentation will examine some general facts about blended learning – which he suggests can be described as an integration of “seemingly opposite approaches, such as formal and informal learning, face-to-face and online experiences, directed paths and reliance on self-direction” – and will analyze the use of the approach for various university-level science classes. Finally, he will discuss an ongoing attempt to introduce the blended learning approach to teaching calculus classes at SFU.

Malgorzata Dubiel on teaching the teachers

The second senior lecturer is Malgorzata Dubiel, who in December received the society’s 2011 Adrien Pouliot Award for “individuals or teams of individuals who have made significant and sustained contributions to mathematics education in Canada.”

Dubiel will deliver a prize lecture on “Mathematics for Elementary Teachers: The Most Important Course You Can Teach?” In her abstract, Dubiel notes that the presentation will consider the evolution of SFU’s MATH 190 Mathematics for Elementary Teachers course, “its influence on similar courses at other B.C. institutions, and its influence on our enrichment programs.” Given that many students aiming for careers as elementary school teachers lack confidence in their ability to teach math and often dislike the subject, and given research findings that suggest people form lasting attitudes towards math by the end of grade 5, Dubiel asks, “Shouldn’t we be investing more into educating those who have a crucial role in introducing the next generation to mathematics?”

Learn more about Veselin Jungic and Malgorzata Dubiel:

Veselin Jungic’s faculty profile page: www.math.sfu.ca/people/staff/faculty/veselin_jungic

Veselin Jungic’s personal website: people.math.sfu.ca/~vjungic/

Malgorzata Dubiel’s faculty profile page: www.math.sfu.ca/people/staff/faculty/Malgorzata_dubiel

Students in the Social Media and Business course achieved measurable results for their real-world clients.

Assistant professor Jan Kietzmann of SFU’s Beedie School of Business knows a thing or two about social media. In December, a paper he co-authored entitled “Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media” won the 2011 Best Article Award from the journal Business Horizons.

Now he and instructor Ashish Gurung are using their new Social Media and Business course to develop the social media expertise of business students at SFU Surrey. The course, which was launched last fall, offers a mix of experiences: visits in class and via Skype with thought leaders like the University of Ottawa’s Michael Geist and representatives of organizations like Translink and Yelp; field trips to Vancouver-based social media players like Invoke and Hootsuite; and online engagement with classmates and instructors through Facebook and Twitter (using the hashtag #BUS450).

The most valuable component of the course, however, may well be the work done by the students themselves. As a final project, they develop social media campaigns for community clients or campus issues. The benefits, in terms of both student learning and community impact, have been remarkable:

• One group used Twitter and Facebook to generate more than 100 potentially life-saving registrations for the BC Transplant Society. The campaign’s social media messaging was endorsed and retweeted by, among others, musicians Jann Arden and Bif Naked, television personality Chris Gailus, and hockey legends Doug Gilmour and Brendan Morrisson.
• Another team raised more than $500 for the Surrey Food Bank and garnered more than a thousand blog views to raise awareness of the food bank’s role in the community.
• A third group used fundraising tweet-ups and other social media activities to collect more than $1500 for soccer-playing youth in Manamani, South Africa.

“Our students worked very hard,” said Kietzmann. “They truly engaged communities – local, national and international – and to that end I am very proud of what they accomplished.”

This is a condensed post. Read the full story on the Beedie School of Business News blog.

See Jan Kietzmann’s faculty profile page.

Jon Driver, VP, academic (centre), took advantage of the Teaching and Learning Social to exchange ideas with SFU community members who share his interest in enhancing the student experience.

Some 110 instructors, administrators, and staff members preregistered for the reception, which was organized by the Teaching and Learning Centre and featured food, speeches, and lots of time for conversation at themed tables (for example, English as an additional language (EAL) and Experiential learning). Each table was equipped with a flip chart to capture the most exciting ideas to emerge from the lively discussions.

Participants were welcomed by TLC director Stephanie Chu, who spoke of her desire to use the event to recognize and strengthen SFU’s teaching and learning community.

President Andrew Petter also addressed the attendees, speaking of the complementary roles of teaching and research and underlining the importance of providing both graduate and undergraduate students with relevant and innovative learning opportunities, including experiential learning activities and the chance to participate in meaningful research.

He was followed by Jon Driver, vice-president, academic, who highlighted the teaching and learning emphasis in the 2010–2013 Academic Plan and surveyed eight current and upcoming initiatives:

• Accreditation process and learning outcomes initiative
• Teaching and Course Evaluation Project
• WebCT Replacement Project
• English as an Additional Language Initiative
• Experiential Education Project
• Undergraduate Semester in Dialogue program
• Classroom upgrades and virtual campus pilot projects
• Teaching and Learning Centre programs

Driver made a number of thought-provoking points: for example, he suggested that the growing percentage of EAL students at SFU should be seen as a strength and an opportunity within a multicultural and globalized world. He also noted the broad involvement of the university community in teaching and learning initiatives, pointing out that his own office often played a supporting role in projects spearheaded by other SFU groups or individuals. See the PowerPoint version of his presentation here.

When Gurpreet Sian and Raakhi Sinha launched their “Popular dance – Introduction to modern and traditional Bhangra” course in September 2010, one challenge was to teach Punjabi dance moves to students with no previous experience. A bigger challenge was to find ways to afford students opportunities to understand Bhangra’s origins and meaning in traditional Punjabi culture, to grasp how Bhangra has morphed from a traditional art form into a worldwide popular dance craze, and to immerse themselves in Vancouver’s vibrant Bhangra scene.

Sinha summarizes the teaching challenge this way: “How do you teach authenticity? How is it that a student can be genuine in doing an art form [when] they don’t understand the culture, they haven’t been brought up in this environment, they don’t eat the food … ?”

Their instructional framework integrated four elements:

• Studio practice
• A course Facebook group with videos to demonstrate choreography
• Community immersion through attendance at Bhangra community events
• A final performance as part of a Bhangra flash mob in downtown Vancouver

In the following interview, Sian and Sinha talk about how they integrated these elements to create a transformational learning experience for their students:

What’s especially interesting is how these instructors moved beyond choreography to offer students an opportunity to explore questions of history, culture, and context while having fun.

What instructional frameworks do you use to assist students to learn about popular culture? How might you use these instructional elements in your own setting?