On Course Design (and "Learner Based" Pedagogy)

Wow, I actually have something to say about something! Dare I say, something to "contribute"?

[that's the sad sad sad fate of adjuncts and lecturers, this perpetual feeling that we will never EVER be able to have something to contribute because we're not "chosen" by the system to be paid to do scholarship. Sigh... We don't have the time anyway, we're so busy teaching. My angst is always there, under the surface, friends, waiting to emerge.] :(

In any case, my friend Leslie blogged just today about mandatory professional development and universities' "teaching centers" providing course design institutes. Her commenter Jonathan Rees then wrote

I find mandatory administration-imposed course design institutes absolutely terrifying. You're the expert on how to design a successful history course, not some "learning scientist" . . . . Professors are trained professionals. We should be allowed to do our jobs however we see fit.

I agree, only up to a certain point. First of all, I don't think these institutes should be mandatory and they are not in the two universities where I teach. I also agree that each scholar is an expert in how to design a course on their area. Now as to whether we're trained professionals, I'm not so sure about all of us. (And generally universities do let us "do our job however we see fit" in spite of having us do institutes, etc).

My experience participating of multiple professional development events and institutes at two universities in the past 4 years (only one year at U#2) is that there are actually plenty of "trained professionals" out there who could actually use the help! Universities have many "old school" professors who do things the "old way" and who could use a fresh perspective in their teaching.

I think that people such as Ken Bain (of What the Best College Teachers Do fame) actually do have a lot to "teach us about teaching" (Bain came to our campus & I actually got to "hang out" with him thanks to my "insider status" as a member of a faculty fellowship). I have also learned a lot from scholars who argue for a "learner-based" approach to course design such as Dee Fink in his Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses (this was the book we were required to read for my course design institute).

How do the two universities I am involved with approach such faculty development initiatives? The first one pays faculty extra money to participate of these institutes (up to a thousand dollars!). First, the faculty member has to apply and present a compelling case to be selected to take part on the institute.* Then, they provide meals and materials (books and such) and the resources -- extremely well organized presentations and mentorship. And then no one keeps tabs on whether you're following what you designed or not! But they do keep track of us and last year I was actually invited with three other faculty to come speak at the last day of their second institute to share how the implementation of my new course (or redesigned course) had gone.
* I was lucky enough to have been part of the very first one -- taught by folks from my current university, this was so helpful when I missed most of the new-faculty orientation last year!!

The second university actually requires that faculty interested in such professional development opportunities PAY in order to take advantage of that!! They do encourage people to take part in it (and the people who organize the institute are actual professors with years of experience in the classroom, not administrators). Full-time faculty can use their educational benefit to pay for it, but still, their approach is the opposite of U#1.

Last, but not least, I consider myself a pretty good professional, but I don't think my training was exceptional or anything. I had plenty of experience teaching during graduate school (3 years as T.A. 3 years teaching on my own), but mentoring was less than ideal in my graduate institution. I think I can design pretty good literature classes, but I'm sure I can definitely learn new ways to make my courses more relevant. And if I can be paid to do so, wow, that's great!

So these are my 2 cents on this subject!

Edited to add:  I could write on and on and on about the multiple, all compensated, professional development opportunities in pedagogy and in instructional technology that are made available for faculty at U#1-- for both full-time and part-time adjuncts such as myself! I participated of a two year faculty fellowship on learning (don't want to get too specific), and before that I was part of a "blended learning" institute. The technology training is not as good as the teaching one, but the "being paid" part is just a great incentive. ;-)