News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
May 21, 2007
The Community College Content Literacy Program has some serious fans.
It was effective enough, apparently, to convince one faculty member nearing retirement to stay on and keep teaching. Others who had taught for decades raved about its rejuvenating effect in their classrooms.
“They’re more excited about teaching than even when they started,” said Tim Glotzbach, academic dean at Hazard Community and Technical College, in Hazard, Ky., about the faculty members who have participated so far.
The program responsible for that enthusiasm builds on efforts at the K-12 level and within the Kentucky Community and Technical College System to move from a “teaching centered” paradigm to a “learning centered” one — and while they might appear to be two sides of the same coin, those who work with the program say that one doesn’t necessarily lead to the other.
Linda Hargan, the founder and CEO of the Collaborative for Teaching and Learning, which developed the Content Literacy program, boiled it down to a saying: “I don’t know why they didn’t learn it, because I taught it.”
“Well, this turns that around,” Hargan said. “The focus isn’t on ‘I taught it,’ the focus is on ‘they learn it.’”
And that means a whole array of classroom methods introduced to participating faculty members in an effort to encourage more engagement with the material and make learning more interactive for students, many of whom are the first in their family to attend college or who come from so-called “non-traditional” backgrounds.
Hazard, for one, exemplifies some of the issues common to community colleges, like low retention. But its location in southeast Kentucky — a rural area with a coal and timber-mining base — means that some of those problems are magnified. Glotzbach said that about 80 percent of the students there test into some sort of remedial course. And the student body itself is a mix of people starting second careers, many of whom are leaving the mining industry; more traditional students looking to transfer in two years or study nursing; and a good number who haven’t been in school for years.
“One of the things that we find, sometimes, is we have a lot of students who haven’t been in school for a while or haven’t performed well in the past ... and we really need to work on ways to keep them engaged and enthused about the information,” Glotzbach said.
His hope, he said, is that the Content Literacy program would lead to better student engagement, and from there, improved reasoning skills among students who might eventually help solve some of the more pressing problems endemic to the Appalachian region where Hazard is located.
“For our region, we need students with critical thinking skills,” he said. “We need them to look at situations and ... start to see connections between very dissimilar ideas that might in turn result in a solution.”
For now, that solution lies in the classrooms participating in the program.
Content Literacy is fairly unique in the world of community colleges. It brings a pedagogical approach that has been used in the primary and secondary levels — one that focuses on alternative methods of presenting materials so that students can actively grasp it — into higher education, by starting with the instructors and hoping for results with the students themselves. While most faculty development programs are short-term and not necessarily affiliated with the colleges themselves, the effort is being carried out in the Kentucky system through an outside partnership. It was spearheaded and designed by a nonprofit professional development organization and receives funding from a foundation that promotes access for underserved students in higher education.
Caroline Altman Smith, a program officer with the Lumina Foundation for Education, which gives out approximately $50 million a year in grants to support its educational mission, said the program is getting positive notices so far from faculty and students.
“We believed that in much the same way that students can learn from one another, we believe faculty can learn from one another,” said Jan Muto, assistant for teaching and learning to the chancellor of the Kentucky system.
And from there, the program began in January 2006 with its first group of faculty members at two campuses, Hazard and Jefferson Community and Technical College. It was first structured as a four-day immersion for faculty members just before classes started, but it continued throughout the semester with five one-day seminars where educators could meet face to face and discuss teaching strategies that were working in the classroom.
“A friend of mine says it broke her lecture and she can’t use it anymore,” said Marlena West, who has been teaching anatomy and physiology at Madisonville Community College for 25 years. “In research they’ve told us for years that the lecture is not the best way to teach. It has shown us how to break that lecture — talk for 20 minutes, then do an activity where students are interacting with one another that reinforces that learning so it’s not the same old 60, 90 minutes of lecturing,” she said.
As a veteran faculty member, West has also seen her share of traditional training programs — workshops and seminars that don’t last beyond a few days in length.
“You kind of think you’ve seen everything and done everything,” she said. “Me personally, I have benefited from it, but I know my students are benefiting from it as well.”
West has some numbers to back that up as well. One particularly challenging exam, she said, has seen a 10-percent average grade improvement, results that she said are valid and significant. More concrete and generalizable results are also in the works, but anecdotal evidence continues to support the program’s basic premise. Muto said that outside consultants are in the process of observing classrooms and making more rigorous evaluations.
The program began when the Collaborative for Teaching and Learning, which is located in Louisville, approached the Kentucky system with the Content Literacy concept. The CTL had already had significant experience doing similar teacher training in the K-12 environment, said Hargan, and was ready to try to tackle some of the problems at community colleges. The Collaborative initially contacted Lumina, which became the major donor along with the Kentucky system, which was already taking steps toward a similar learning paradigm. It was time, Muto said, to “quit talking about it and do something.”
After the initial spring 2006 pilot, the program expanded that summer into two more campuses. Muto said there is an average of seven faculty members in each of the four campuses involved with the program, a number she hopes to expand in a future phase. As the project continues, consultants with the Collaborative are helping to coach the participants and follow up as the training begins to become a part of their everyday teaching.
“This is not about having a box of Band-Aids. This is really about changing a faculty member’s perspective on the teaching-learning interchange,” Muto said. “The training process itself, which occurs over the course of a year, is about changing how the faculty defines their role in relation to the student and in relation to the learning.”
Exactly how that’s done depends on the teacher. But the training program emphasizes a number of approaches that focus on more visual learning processes and student interaction. Teachers who have participated also note that the methods aren’t theoretical — they’re used in the program’s workshops, so that teachers learn about new techniques through the techniques themselves.
Some of the tools covered in the workshops, according to Muto, include:
Ideally, the methods coalesce into a single teaching paradigm that views students not as “empty vessels” that exist to absorb lecture materials, but active participants who seek out answers to questions on their own.
Officials at the Kentucky system, as well as the Collaborative for Teaching and Learning, hope to renew the Lumina grant before it expires in September. And representatives at Lumina and CTL said talks were ongoing, but both sides seemed enthusiastic. A second phase of the initial grant is already planned for the fall, which includes an expanded training program and a first-year course on critical thinking for incoming students.
Hugo Back, a psychology professor at Hazard who has been teaching there for 18 years, will teach the new course, but he’s already had experience with the Content Literacy program in his own classroom. “I used to spend a lot of time telling my class to be quiet so they could listen — now it’s buzzing,” he said. “The time just flies by, students like it ... and my test scores are great.”
The ultimate hope is to expand successes in individual classrooms to the system as a whole, making what is now a single paradigm penetrate the larger teaching culture there.
“How can we affect wholesale change within a college? We know that we have to have a critical mass of people who believe in something — now you’re really talking about being able to shift the culture within the college from one paradigmatic view of teaching to another,” Muto said.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
So now colleges are starting to use the failed constructivist teaching methods that have decimated the quality of K-12 education. This is basically whole language for college students and is thus an extremely dangerous situation for higher education. One would hope that college officials would be smart enough not to adopt such nonsense. Apparently there are enough people who majored in Education who now work in important positions in higher education to make reason and logic passé at colleges and universities.
thomassowellfan, at 9:30 am EDT on May 21, 2007
I do not want to either jump on the bandwagon or denigrate the ideas presented here. I have been teaching K-12 and undergraduates in Community colleges and universities.
What is very good about the ideas presented here is the seed that there are numerous ways to encourage learning —at any level by students and faculty.
The first step is to actually realize that there are different things to do and to try them. The second important point is the exchange of ideas among the faculty- just as we know students learn by interaction, so do faculty and supporting cross disciplinary communication is key.
This college has something very right- they are putting support behind their ideas- and if colleges and universities realize the ‘payoff’ in investing in supports for faculty teaching and the scholarship of teaching and learning then improvements will happen. Merely requesting or telling faculty to do thus and so will NOT work.
Let’s think about resources and where they can be most effective- the multiplier effect works- so please encourage institutions to begin.
Mary
Assessment, George Mason University
mary zamon, at 10:20 am EDT on May 21, 2007
Pedagogy is defined as “teaching in a dogmatic and pedantic way", eg the way we teach children. Implementing a child oriented learning model for adult learners seems inappropriate. Drawing on teaching methods that address the needs of children in K-12 and assuming they are appropriate for college students is demeaning and condescending to Kentucky’s college attendees.
It’s difficult to teach “critical thinking” by telling people what to do. Perhaps the program is confusing pedagogy with andragogy. In any event this article does not lead the reader to believe that the program has much insight into educational psychology or andragogical teaching methods.
Steve, Associate Professor, at 10:20 am EDT on May 21, 2007
“Education is what you have left over after you have forgotten everything you learned.” That is how I remember the quoate that I was to respond to for an admission essay to college. It struck me as meaningful then and continues to be what guides me in my own teaching.
The body of knowledge that I try to convey to students is not nearly as valuable to them — or to me — as getting across a sense of engagement and commitment to being an active citizen of the world. What they don’t learn about how to confront an idea, to think critically and compassionately, will impoverish their lives and our society.
There is nothing in the approach described in the article that is incompatible with logic and reason — in fact using logic and reason in class exercises makes for better learning — and better educated citizens — than just hearing a lecture about someone else’s logic or reasoning.
Skye Payne, at 10:20 am EDT on May 21, 2007
I hope I’m not alone in reading this article and wondering what the “rejuvenating” factor is. The pedagogical leanings outlined are nothing new, and I wonder, frankly, what on earth grant money is needed for. Although I disagree that constructivism is “nonsense,” it’s no revolution, either.
EJ, at 10:45 am EDT on May 21, 2007
As I read this, the ideas presented are that PhD and other faculty need to learn about learning and teaching, not just the content of a discipline alone, if they expect to be successful in the classroom AND that people have different learning styles. There are several good books on engaging students in the learning process. Focusing on learning may take more effort than just “teaching” does, but my experience is that the results are much better.
Arah Martin, faculty development professional, at 12:30 pm EDT on May 21, 2007
Clearly, “constructivist” teaching is not very “revolutionary.” Socrates offered it a gizzilion years ago when he advised his friend Meno that all the knowledge was in the student’s head, and Socrates only needed to ask the right questions to get it out and on the table. The biggest difference between “constructivists” and “traditionalists” is that one seeks to have students learn to think, and the other seeks to have students learn the content. Both can exist (and should) cooperatively. Thinking without content is vacuous, and learning content without thinking is stifling. Good teaching would have students learn important content which they (the students) believe (erroneously)they discovered by themselves.
Fred Flener, Retired at University Prof. of Illinois, at 1:55 pm EDT on May 21, 2007
I think what can be most valuable is the opportunity for faculty from various disciplines to take the time to talk about teaching and learning. No, this isn’t revolutionary from a theoretical standpoint but how many folks actually take the time to talk with colleagues about what they do in their classrooms? It sometimes takes a grant to get faculty on to the other side of the podium and I think that is worth the investment in terms of time and dollars.
Carrie, Assistant Professor, at 2:55 pm EDT on May 21, 2007
I am heartened by the comments offered by colleagues. While some may not endorse the activities of our Content Literacy project, there is great benefit in at least talking about teaching and learning and I’m thrilled that folks are weighing-in on the topic. The specific strategies described in the article may not be earth-shattering, but the opportunity for community college faculty for this kind of extensive professional development is unusual in my experience. These faculty spend so much time teaching but often with few rigorous supportive resources provided by learning experts directed at changing their perspective on the roles of teacher and student.
jan, Asst. to the Chancellor for Teaching & Learnign at KCTCS, at 3:45 pm EDT on May 21, 2007
“In research they’ve told us for years that the lecture is not the best way to teach.”
Would someone save me the trouble of trying to find an example or two of this research? I would like to read the evidence. In any case, we should avoid the notion that there is “a best way to teach.” It takes all kinds.
Aside to the editors—nothing is “fairly unique” — unique means “one of a kind.”
Kathryn Kemp, Associate Professor of History at Clayton State University (GA), at 7:20 pm EDT on May 21, 2007
Responding to Fred Flener: this made me think, maybe it isn’t erroneous at all; perhaps we could reconceptualize learning and teaching as helping students ‘discover it by themselves’.
Ursula McGowan, The University of Adelaide, at 3:50 am EDT on May 22, 2007
I’d like to address my comments to three bloggers.
Thomassowellfan: I wonder if you have used the constructivist approach yourself. An approach like that fails when used by people with an attitude like yours. Approaches do not fail on their own. People implementing them wrongly make them fail.
Steve: Your definition on pedagogy is very traditional. The new defiition of pedagogy mirrors some of the theoretical foundations of andragogy. The approaches implemented in Content Literacy Program are based on problem solving and tasks which are the pillars of andragogy.
EJ: The bottom line of the article when saying that the paradigm is revolutionary centers on the fact that it is being used at the higher education level. That is revolutionary!! Having college faculty think out of their “castle mentality” is revolutionary. This also goes for you, Thomassowellan.
JR, Assistant Professor of Foreign Language Education at Shippensburg University, at 9:35 am EDT on May 22, 2007
What this article is describing is called “Educational Theatre” (or Drama), and it’s not new — it’s just not widely accepted in the US yet. Accepted and appreciated in other countries, the US has yet to figure this out — we are now so curriculum and test driven, that students take on “learning” temporarily, until that particular subject or test has passed.
I have two degrees from the Educational Theatre Program at NYU and now work for the largest Educational Drama company in the US — the CUNY/Creative Arts Team (www.cuny.edu/creativeartsteam); these programs have been in place for more than three decades, all we require to spread the methodology of student/learning-centered teaching is for someone to notice how much difference it makes. We take small steps forward every time an article like this one appears — perhaps it will someday catch on all over the country and we won’t have to work so hard to prove participational teaching and learning works better.
Krista Fogle, Executive Assistant at CUNY/Creative Arts Team, at 1:25 pm EDT on May 22, 2007
Thank you JR! I couldn’t agree more. I worked with this project as an educational programs consultant and coach. I engaged in close professional relationships with the professors who participated in the research during professional development trainings, as well as through on-site coaching and observations. It was a joy to observe college students actively engaged in their coursework and taking ownership for their own thinking and learning, as opposed to professors playing the role of “sage on the stage", imparting their knowledge upon students as if it occurred through osmosis.
I will let the project impact on instruction be reflected through the voices of those wonderful professors who were willing to take a risk with this project and step out of the box with specific quotes from a few participants below.
“When it came time for me to do the review for the test, students had all their own work and could review themselves. And then, they all did well on the test, which had never happened before.”
Nursing Professor
“I used to begin the class by turning out the lights and then I would lecture through my slide show. Many of my students would sleep. Now, because of what I do before and after I turn out the lights, my students are engaged even though the lights are out.”
Art History Professor
“I used to ask a question and someone would give me a wrong answer and I’d think, ‘Well, you’re not very smart,’ and move on. Now, I think about what’s the next question I need to ask to help my students understand, to think about what they get and don’t get.”
Mathematics Professor
“I was really not sure that any of this would work. And I was not sure that I wanted to do it even if it did work. And now, I see that I have no choice. There’s no excuse for not doing this. It makes all the difference.”
Reading Professor
“This has changed my life; this has given me a new life. I was finished and this has given me a chance to start over.”
Psychology Professor
Mary Anne Lock, at 1:25 pm EDT on May 22, 2007
Regardless of the perspectives opined, learning is about the learner ... and one thing the American system of education (from K through Ph.D.) does not do well with is focus on the learner.
The theories and practices used throughout this system would have you believe that unless you are in the very classroom with that very instructor at that very moment, it would be impossible for you to learn that material ... that’s laughable!
For the post asking for evidence regarding “In research they’ve told us for years that the lecture is not the best way to teach,” simply stand outside your classroom and randomly select any number of passing students you care to, ask them. The empirical evidence doesn’t get any better than that.
It’s 2007 and the research on the brain and how humans learn is not the exclusive domain of medical professionals and researchers. As such, why don’t our Teacher Education schools have fewer courses on pedagogy and more on learning?
My guess is that most educators can tell you what they know but struggle with telling you how students learn.
About 10 days ago I attended a graduation at Lebanon Valley College (PA) where the keynote speaker was the Teacher of the Year there at LVC the year before. His message about college’s overarching role: “Teach students how to learn!” It was easy to see why he was the Teacher of the Year.
And thanks to JR and Mary Anne!
Michael, at 3:35 pm EDT on May 22, 2007
Perhaps the “castle mentality” exists at Shippensburg, but I’ve had the pleasure of teaching in both the community college and the university system in the last six years. This idea is well in play, which is why, at least in my experience and that of many of my colleagues across the country, this is nothing new, in higher education or otherwise. Congratulations on escaping that castle of yours.
EJ, at 8:20 pm EDT on May 22, 2007
I was a part of this project. I admit that I was very skeptical at first. I decided to go into the project with an open mind. The results were astounding. My student’s test grades improved greatly! My attrition rates went down and I am very pleased with the changes in my classroom. For anyone else who does not agree that this type of teaching and learning approach is very valuable, I challenge you to try some of these strategies in your classroom. Of course, you will have to keep an open mind in order to get results. I believe it will change the way that you teach forever!!
Kathryn, Assistant Professor, at 8:20 pm EDT on May 22, 2007
As the designer and lead of the program discussed in the article, I am most interested in how it was framed in the article, and in the interpretations of many who commented above.
The structure and intent of the program, as currently designed, is to engage community college instructors in a cross-college network to
- discuss current understandings of how people learn
- explore varied strategies (most focused on reading, writing, academic dialogue, and direct demonstration of learning)
- examine formative evidence available from their own practice
- plan for instruction based on that evidence
At the Collaborative, we have used many approaches to get practicing teachers (at all levels) to participate actively in extended self-reflection and improvement of their own practice. Throughout that work, we have found that balancing our approach between what we teach and how we teach helps create a professional learning environment that honors participant discipline expertise, and refreshes perspectives about student engagement — regardless of the discipline or age of the learners.
I agree that the ideas and strategies presented in the article should not be seen as revolutionary. However, it is our experience that structured and intentional professional dialogue focused on continuous progress is sorely absent at all levels — and systematic efforts to promote it (with implementation of new methods to provoke that dialogue) are considered revolutionary by those who choose to engage in the learning process.
If we cannot agree here about what constitutes effective practice, can we agree that engaging in supported and rigorous discussion of what we teach, how we teach, and the ongoing results of those efforts is critical? After all, one of the characteristics of effective teachers is that they are also productive, life-long learners.
Amy Awbrey, Project Director at Collaborative for Teaching and Learning, at 7:00 pm EDT on May 23, 2007
Interesting comments pro and con for addressing teaching and learning. I believe it would be a mistake to bog down in which word, pedagogy or andragogy, is most appropriate. A review of the following might be useful (1) Lee Shulman’s writings RT to teaching and learning (2) The Carnegie Institute for Teaching & Learning (3) Brookfield and Knowles. There are numerous other resources available if one is interested. An interesting concept is a ‘repository’ of information RT teaching and learning styles, which, would be available to all faculty. AD
AD, MSN Nurse Educator at Clinton Community College, at 12:45 pm EDT on June 18, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
SBCTC seeking a visionary and dynamic Director to join team. This critical and innovative position will oversee the workforce ... see job
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
Position Summary: Educational Consultant is responsible for providing academic, personal, career, college ... see job
DeVry College of New York: A growing campus with great opportunities. see job
Job Description: The Department Chairperson provides academic leadership to the Communication, Arts and Philosophy Department ... see job
Live and Work in the “New Downtown Los Angeles", the hottest “In” area in the city! We are the Colburn School Conservatory. ... see job
Position Summary: With minimum supervision and wide latitude for independent judgment provide academic management for the ... see job
The Job Developer is responsible for identifying job opportunities and placement assistance to students, implementing WIA ... see job
Empire State College’s Northeast Center (Latham) seeks applications for a full-time Assessment Specialist. The incumbent ... see job
Exciting Center Support position in Sandy, UT! see job
Some interesting examples here which prove, yet again, that faculty are trained as disciplinary experts rather than teachers. Maybe it’s time for a model change that accommodates both?
Steve Bowman, at 8:40 am EDT on May 21, 2007