What does it look like when a unit REALLY supports the teaching/learning process? This is the story of one College-the College of Professional Studies (CPS) at the University of Wisconsin/Stevens Point (UWSP)-and what happened when faculty, staff and administration worked together to create an atmosphere which visibly says, "Teaching and learning is why we are here."
The story began in 1992 in the office of Dean of the College of Professional Studies, Joan North, as she considered future directions of the College. As an institution, as well as a unit, the idea that teaching was our primary task had long been verbalized. However, little concrete evidence indicated this was truly the case.
A quick walk through the classroom buildings would not support the idea that teaching and learning were first in our list of priorities. Students in the vast majority of classes could be seen sitting in a variety of arm chairs-some plastic, some wooden-all built as if "one size fits all" and all uncomfortable. Most of the chairs were sitting in straight rows. The teachers stood at the front of the room behind what looked like WWII or state penitentiary surplus tables. Classroom technology was limited to an overhead projector. In one classroom, the cord for the screen was tied to a chair to keep the screen from rolling back up. Meeting rooms and conference rooms, on the other hand, were carpeted and furnished with tables and comfortable chairs.
Visits with faculty and staff also provided little concrete evidence that teaching and learning were top priorities. Many were upset about the closing of the centralized teaching/learning center leaving them with no support for their teaching. Though classroom observations by peers were required, the sole purpose was evaluation for the administration to use in making personnel decisions. There was little or no peer interaction that was developmental in nature. In fact, even talk about teaching was rare. Additionally, there were few available print resources about teaching and learning and no funds to allow faculty/staff to attend teaching related workshops and conferences unless they presented.
As Dean North considered goals for the unit, she determined that within our College we would "put our money where our mouths were" and there would be visible evidence that, among CPS faculty, staff and administration, teaching and learning come first.
The first step in the process of visibly supporting teaching/learning was the formation of a committee called "The Focus on Teaching Committee." This committee, composed of representatives of all of the units in the College met weekly for one semester to talk about where we were and where we thought we should be going to begin to attend to the teaching/learning process. In January, we took the planning process one step further when the Dean hosted an all college luncheon meeting to broaden the base of ideas by including all interested faculty members. About 30 faculty/staff members were present. The group brainstormed three questions: Where are we now in relation to the teaching/ learning process? Where would we like to be?; and Where are there major gaps between the two? Working in small groups, members of the faculty wrote their ideas on slips of paper taped to the wall. Answers to the first question included such ideas as the physical environment is not conducive to learning (too hot, uncomfortable, in flexible, etc.); very limited travel money (none unless you were presenting); limited access to resources about teaching/learning; few opportunities for collegial talk about teaching, and an uncomfortable relationship between developmental activities and personnel decisions.
Of course, the list of what would we like was primarily composed of opposites of the first list. We would like classrooms that were furnished in such a way that they would support a variety of teaching/learning styles, were attractive, and were comfortable. We would like to have access to a variety of teaching/learning resources. We would like to be able to attend conferences that would help us learn new techniques and strategies. We would like to have the personnel process separated from the developmental process so we could risk trying new teaching methods without the fear of repercussions from colleagues or administrators involved in making personnel decisions. And we would like to see some mechanism within which talk about teaching and learning was the rule rather than the exception.
The third step in the process was to look for gaps between List 1 and List 2. A review of the materials showed major gaps in the following areas:
Once identified, the list of gaps was sent back to the committee members who sifted through all of the ideas and brainstormed solutions to fill the gaps. Three major emphases with related activities emerged- (l) Extensive classroom renovations; (2) Teaching Partners Program; and (3) Access to Resources. We will look briefly at each of these.
No doubt the biggest, most expensive, and most visible change came in the renovation of the classrooms. Our classrooms were generally the standard bare floored, chair desks in rows, overhead projectors, tables in the front of the room and pull-down screens. We were asked what we wanted and we responded-moveable tables and comfortable chairs; carpet on the floors, fresh paint on the walls, and technology that supported our teaching. Though we couldn't have it all in year one, over the course of the next six years, each classroom in the CPS building has been updated. All rooms have been carpeted and furnished with small, moveable tables and padded chairs. Walls have been freshly painted and white boards have replaced blackboards. Most rooms now contain teaching stations equipped with the latest in projection technology.
A second major initiative proposed by the Focus on Teaching Committee was the Teaching Partners Program. This is a collegial support program in which faculty and teaching academic staff members are paired with others from different units within CPS for the purpose of supporting their work in the teaching/learning process. The committee defined the objectives for the program as: (1) CPS faculty perceptions of the teaching/learning component of their positions will increase; (2) CPS faculty will develop a greater sense of collegiality and community as they focus together on teaching and learning; and (3) CPS faculty will more critically reflect with others about teaching/learning-thinking not only about practice but also the meanings/ intentions/beliefs which drive their practice.
The program is clearly a support program in opposition to a remedial or evaluative program. Neither is it a mentoring program. Partners are considered to be equals in the teaching/ learning process. Establishment of this concept from the very beginning was essential. Partnerships in which one or both of the partners did not adhere to this general principle have not been very successful.
Teaching Partner activity is totally separate from the evaluative process conducted for personnel decisions. Teaching partners can not use evaluations in preparing their personnel portfolios. The only acceptable use has been for partners to list their participation on their resumes. This fact lowers anxiety levels and assures faculty members that they need not worry about members of their evaluation committee observing any mistakes that they might make.
Participation as a Teaching Partner is at the invitation of the Dean in consultation with the faculty member who serves as Director of the program. To date, almost 90% of the faculty in the College have participated. In addition, about 10 faculty in other colleges have accepted invitations to become Teaching Partners. New faculty are given priority, but the total group is composed of people with varying levels of experience, expertise and positions within the college Some faculty have requested and are now going through the program for the second time.
A description of activities and suggested timelines is given to participants at a group meeting held the week before classes begin in the fall. There are two other large group meetings during the year in which Partners share their experiences and talk about teaching related issues. In each of the two semesters, participants conduct two observations in the classrooms of their partners. These observations are preceded and followed up with pre and post conferences. The focus of the observations is upon the individual goals of the partners being visited and the extent to which the teaching styles and behaviors of the teachers match their individual goals.
Almost without exception, Partners report the most beneficial part of the program is when their Partners visit their classes and conduct the Small Group Instructional Diagnosis (SGID) with the students. The SGID is a quick and easy process for getting candid information about how students feel the class is going. Students, working in small groups, brainstorm about three questions: (1) What about this class helps your learning? (2) What about this class hinders or does not help your learning? And (3) What specific suggestions can you make for improvement? In most cases, students take this activity seriously and make sound suggestions. They often express appreciation for this process as it is concrete evidence that their teacher cares enough about them and values student opinions enough to ask for this input.
The third major emphasis of the Focus on Teaching program has been to assure the availability of resources to support the teaching/learning process. Three activities come under this heading. The first is the establishment of the Teaching/Learning Library. This library is conveniently located in the room where many faculty members from CPS as well as across the campus meet or eat lunch. The Library is kept current with new books, periodicals, and videotapes being purchased, as they become available. Books may be checked out for as long as faculty members need them.
A second activity has provided faculty members with opportunities to build their personal teaching /learning libraries. Each year at the opening College meeting, faculty/staff members are allowed to order one book on teaching /learning for their personal use-- paid for out of the Dean's operating budget. In addition, all Teaching Partners are given $100.00 to spend on any resource of value to them in their teaching. Some purchase more books, some use the money for seed money to attend a conference, and some use it to buy software to support their teaching. Lastly, Partners are given copies of a book that has earned a reputation as a valuable tool to use in their teaching.*
Support for out-of-state travel to attend a conference or workshop on teaching/learning is the third activity relating to use of resources.Each year, financial support is awarded to two Teaching Partners and to one faculty member in each department allowing them to attend a teaching/learning conference at which they do not present. In return, they are expected to share ideas and materials with Teaching Partners or with department colleagues.
The various initiatives in CPS have had a positive impact on the rest of the campus. As talk of teaching and learning has permeated conversation at the lunch table and other social gatherings, activities to support teaching have increased across the campus. While we can not claim all of the credit for these changes, spillover to the remainder of the campus from the College of Professional Studies is clear.
The Vice Chancellor/Provost followed the lead of CPS by distributing a folder of significant articles on teaching and learning to all new faculty members, giving each unit a copy of a significant book on the subject, purchasing an on-line teaching/learning publication and supporting numerous activities related to the use of technology in the teaching/learning process. Across the campus, other colleges arebeginning to update and modernize their teaching /learning environments-thus eliminating the "academic slums." One other college has adopted the Teaching Partners Program with the same positive results as CPS.
We have had two campus wide Teaching Summits in which faculty, staff, and administration reflected together upon the processes of teaching and learning. In each of the two years, approximately 200 people gave up one or two days of their mid-winter breaks to participate.
A commitment to focus on teaching requires intentionality, follow through, collaboration, and re-direction of some funds. It requires personal commitment from the unit leaders as well as faculty and staff. In a "teaching institution" such as UWSP, it is all too easy to assume that this commitment is already in place. Our mission statement clearly articulates that teaching and learning are our reasons for existence. The words in the mission statement, however, had little meaning until put into action. This commitment in CPS is clear.
So where do we go from here? We aren't sure. We know that, for now, we want to keep "doing what we are doing" in order to make our commitment visible to the students, the rest of the campus, and to the profession. We should not, however, become complacent in the fact that what we are doing are the "right" things to do. Instead, we will need to continually examine the assumptions that underlie our current initiatives. As faculty, students, and the profession change, it is likely that some of our assumptions will become outdated and inaccurate. At this point, we will need to go "back to the drawing board" and consider, Where are we?; Where would we like to be?; Where are the gaps?; and How do we fill the gaps?
*For the last two years, the book given to the Teaching Partners was : Angelo, T.H. & Cross, K.P. ( 1993), Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers, (2nd Edition), San Francisco: Jossey Bass.