A colleague, Catherine Ross, Director of the Teaching and Learning Center at Wake Forest University, recently sent a query to the faculty developers listserv requesting examples of literary works focused on teaching and learning.  The interesting list below was the result, with the person who shared the work and comments.

“Who Is To Blame?” Chekhov

Catherine Ross, Wake Forest University: Short story about teaching, learning, and Latin

Ignorant Schoolmaster by Ranciere (1991, translation by Kristen Ross)

Kevin Johnston, Michigan State University: Teaching experiences in early nineteenth century western Europe.

Teaching Stories: An Anthology on the Power of Learning and Literature (2004) edited by Robert Coles, Modern Library.

Fiction, poetry and personal essays by a range of writers, including Hardy, Julia Alvarez, Toni Morrison, Tolstoi, and Howard Nemerov–all on the classroom experience (Warren Rosenberg, Wabash College)

The Student Body: Short Stories about College Students and Professors (2001) edited by John McNally

(Kathryn Watson, Eckerd College)

 The Education of Hyman Kaplan (1968) by Leonard Q. Ross

Emma Bourassa, Thompson Rivers University: An easy read that looks at learning as well as teaching; a bit of insight into adult learning that doesn’t quite match that of the instructor.

In Praise of Pedagogy: Poetry, Flash Fiction and Essays on Teaching Writing (2000) edited by Wendy Bishop and David Starkey.

P. Rachel Levin, Academy of Art University: My favorite is Nervouswork, a poem by William Snyder, Jr.

Teaching and the Case Method (1994) by Barnes, Christensen, and Hansen, Harvard Business School Press.

Ed Nuhfer, California State University Channel Islands: A wonderful collection.

A recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education on April 1, 2011, entitled “College Librarians Look at Better Ways to Measure the Value of Their Services,” prompted me to translate some of the questions that the librarians asked about library services into instructional development terms:

• What and how much did instructors receive through investment of time, energy, and resources in the Schreyer Institute?

• What would be the cost of obtaining the services and resources (human and material) used by instructors at Penn State had they not accessed them through the Schreyer Institute?

Schreyer Institute Teaching Support Grant recipients were well represented at the TLT Symposium–both as attendees and presenters.  It might be a good idea for us to encourage future and past recipients to consider submitting a proposal next year.  Not only is this an opportunity for them to shine, it helps us get the word out about our support and services. 

Many presenters and attendees also mentioned using our materials or availing themselves of our services. 

Clay Shirkey, the keynote speaker at the TLT Symposium, used an accounting example in one of his answers to a question from the audience.  He noted that in rules-based accounting it is easy to get around some rules without technically breaking them, but it is more difficult to get away with something in principles-based accounting.  I may not be paraphrasing this well, but his example got me thinking about rules vs. principles relative to instructional development practices and student learning outcomes.

Instructional consultants and faculty developers are sometimes asked to provide what amounts to ‘rules’ that faculty might follow to become better instructors or improve students’ learning.  Instead, we fall back on principles of good practice that can be adapted and flexed for different faculty, courses, disciplines, and contexts.

The rules vs. principles issue also rang true for student learning outcomes assessment.  All too often we hear about outcomes assessment processes that are highly formulaic or that seem to expect all faculty to use a single model.  I see student learning outcomes more as principles than rules.  There are some good frameworks that can be adapted to a variety of curricula and disciplines, but it is not really reasonable to expect all academic programs to approach learning outcomes assessment in the same way. 

This even works at the scale of the syllabus.  If a course has explicit learning outcomes it is a more flexible document than a syllabus focused primarily on the content of a course.  Courses with explicit learning outcomes can increase clarity for students, but maintain faculty autonomy and foster creativity.  If students manage to achieve the learning objectives, it becomes less important that every instructor and every student move in lock-step along a predetermined course pathway.

An article in The Chronicle of Higher Ed, The Game of Life, about Jane McGonigal who “says that gamers, with their exceptional ability to collaborate, can learn to solve problems like poverty, climate change, a failed education system, and much else.” 

Interesting idea.

Is the gaming population becoming more diverse than it used to be?