About the Grant / Projects & Fellows / Applications / Pedagogical Narratives / Home
Administrative Assistant, Bonnie Tidwell
btidwell@spelman.edu
Coordinator for Instructional Technology, Dan Bascelli dbascell@spelman.edu
Grant Director, Anne Warner awarner@spelman.edu
 |
 |
 |
Ashley Blakemore, Amanda Wheeler, Ariele LeGrand, Michelle Forester, Nikki Clement, and Suneye Holmes (no image)
“Building Virtual Learning Communities: Using the Web for Electronic Research,
Collaboration and Publication” is designed as a faculty development program
to transform the way in which faculty use technological resources and pedagogy.
These changes in faculty strategies and course design address a need to deepen
student skills in communication, research and critical thinking. One indicator
confirming this need came from the newly reframed Spelman portfolio assessment
of first-year writing across the curriculum. Conducted through the First-Year
Seminar in collaboration with the Comprehensive Writing Program, the portfolio
assessment of student writing at college-level showed a failure rate of 17%,
when the typical failure rate for portfolios nationwide is closer to 12%.
A second indicator of the appropriateness of the project came from the student
and faculty response to uses of the web and multimedia technologies, especially
indicated by the former Bush-Hewlett Grant, “The Bush Web Project,”
which substantially increased faculty and student use of technology resources
for teaching and learning. The reception of “The Bush Web Project”
suggested that students respond better to the variety of stimuli offered through
technology than to traditional resources. Therefore, the “Building Virtual
Learning Communities” grant provides faculty with greater means for meeting
the learning needs and styles of students by integrating multimedia technologies
and encouraging collaborative learning through the web projects embedded in
course design.
The grant takes advantage of the increased integration of technology and teaching
through “The Bush Web Project.” However, the principal software
used in the earlier project, WebCT, simulates a traditional, closed classroom
with students preparing work for evaluation by the teacher. The renewal proposal
does not imitate the traditional classroom but makes use of public-access via
the Internet and incorporates a potentially global, interactive audience. In
view of Spelman’s mission to go beyond the local college demographic,
this proposal for technology use allows for competing world perspectives to
enter the classroom.
The grant helps participants change classroom dynamics to allow for better integration
of current technologies with collaborative, interactive work—information
fluency. It gives a substantial number of faculty from many disciplines teaching
tools and “real audience” experiences. The eventual goal is to reproduce
these techniques in other courses. It is a faculty development project whose
benefits should accrue to the students participating in its courses, due to
the pedagogical focus we describe—and to a broader spectrum of students
over time.
This grant is informed by pedagogical research about using technology to implement
good practice in undergraduate education. In the 1996 AAHE Bulletin, in “Implementing
the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever,” Arthur Chickering and Stephen
Ehrmann show how technologies enrich the good practices cited in a broad-based
study from 1987, “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate
Education.” Chickering and Ehrmann show that technology, judiciously used,
is valuable in applying each of the following seven principles:
1. Good Practice Encourages Contacts Between Students and Faculty.
2. Good Practice Develops Reciprocity and Cooperation Among Students.
3. Good Practice Uses Active Learning Techniques.
4. Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback.
5. Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task.
6. Good Practice Communicates High Expectations.
7. Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning.
These principles inform the grant and its commitment to information fluency.
The Flashlight Program, which provides one of the key evaluation tools, was
designed to monitor the ways in which technology proves useful in responding
to the Seven Principles. The grant uses these principles in a unique structure,
a project-driven student group with specialized goals.
The rationale stated above promotes outcomes at the faculty and student level.
The “Building Virtual Learning Communities” grant supports web technology,
research, and communication coming together in such a way to offer a medium
for changing classroom dynamics toward more collaborative, student-centered
activities. These activities using group research and communication will result
in greater student productivity, improved engagement, and improved research
and communication skills. Faculty can work together, often in non-traditional
units, to implement innovative group projects.
1. improved student communication skills, in writing, in working with new media, in “publishing” material on a website, i.e. increased student effort and learning in preparing documents and responding to readers’ reactions;
2. improved student ability to conduct research;
3. improved student engagement and productivity;
4. improved independence and accountability in student activities; and
5. improved student ability to collaborate with peers and with broader, off-campus communities.
1. change in course design and delivery, i.e. new pedagogies that include mentoring, critiquing, and collaborating among students (and faculty) in different disciplines and on a wide variety of topics; and
2. increased faculty ability to manage student groups that use a project-driven model; and
3. increased communication about pedagogies among faculty.
1. increased student awareness of diverse global perspectives, as articulated in the mission statement;
2. identification of effective student pedagogies, as an aspect of successful faculty development; and
3. increased interaction within the academic community and with broader communities, including, for instance, interdisciplinary activities and service learning.
The key questions guiding the evaluation are (1) to what extent has the project
impacted course design and delivery and (2) to what extent has the project impacted
student learning and learning style. A key component of the project will be
the creation of a project website which will make available to the Spelman community
the data collected, faculty narratives, applications, and syllabi. Such a resource
may facilitate an interactive forum or Bulletin Board for exchanges between
Spelman faculty and other teachers and scholars. It may support scholarly publication
or other pedagogical initiatives. The assessment instruments include:
This online questionnaire provides a tool for collecting and processing information
on student perceptions of technology, of their participation in the project,
and of pedagogical changes. Where applicable, group projects will include pre-
and post-measurements of student knowledge and ability related to such essential
skills as conducting of Internet research, evaluating websites, documenting,
synthesizing of academic research materials, and managing tasks closely related
to particular course content. Each course may also include a student reflection
about the methods of the course and self-assessment. These tools provide indicators
of improvement in student research abilities, communication and ability to do
independent work. In addition, this tool addresses key measures, though subjective
ones, of student skills, engagement and productivity as well as of development
of new pedagogical tools by the faculty.
This database will include an archive of project proposals for models and for
evaluative purposes. The project coordinator will ensure that the project courses,
the assessment data, and the narratives from faculty will be archived and kept
online in a password protected website. The assessment of pedagogical artifacts,
syllabi and teaching plans is an important source of evidence that will give
insight into the project’s effectiveness. A comparison of each instructor’s
syllabi, before and after the semester in which the project was implemented,
should reveal the extent to which the project changed methods of instruction.
This extensive archive is a key tool for assessing changes in course delivery
and pedagogy.
An adaptation of the Flashlight questionnaire will be used to measure faculty
perceptions of the comparative benefits of this project. Assessments will include
one at the beginning of the process to ascertain expectations of participants;
an evaluation of training workshops; a survey upon completion of the course;
and follow-up surveys. Faculty responses give a qualitative measure of perceived
value added in pedagogy and student learning and, where appropriate, will be
posted in the online archive for identification and documentation of effective
pedagogies.
The impact and reception of this project in the wider world will be assessed
by a record of “hits” on our sites, tracking the frequency, volume
of access, and implied “popularity” of the courses. This measure
reflects the institutional goal of increased interaction with the broader community
At the midpoint and end of the program, the project director and coordinator
will identify consultants who will evaluate websites created by the participants.
They will review the level of communication skills, attainment of research or
creative goals articulated in each group, and the effectiveness media projects.
This evaluation process should measure success in the first student learning
goal including communication, research, and use of new media.