Lessons from Scaling Innovation 1 COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER June 07, 2012 Melissa Barragan, Community College Research Center Peter Adams, Community

Lessons from Scaling Innovation

1

COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER

June 07, 2012

Melissa Barragan, Community College Research Center

Peter Adams, Community College of Baltimore County

Susan Bickerstaff, Community College Research Center

Annual Conference on Acceleration in Developmental Education

Baltimore, MD

Building Momentum for Pedagogical Improvement: Lessons from Scaling Innovation


2

COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER Lessons from Scaling InnovationCOMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER

We conduct quantitative and qualitative research on• Teaching and learning in higher education• Access to and success in postsecondary education• High school to college transition• Missions, governance, and accountability• Workforce education


3


Our Challenge

•Over 60 percent of entering community college students are referred to developmental education

•Outcomes for students are discouraging–Vast majority of students do not complete the

sequences to which they are referred–Developmental education is not effective for students

near the cut-off point –Completion rates of those who skip the sequence

are similar to compliers


4


•CCRC scan of reforms in developmental education suggests that innovation is widespread

•However, most reforms affect relatively few students and remain small in scale and largely unknown outside their institutions

• In rigorous evaluations, impacts are modest and short-term

Innovation in Developmental Education


5


Instructional Reform Approaches

Structure

Curriculum

Pedagogy

Approaches are NOT mutually exclusive

Structural reforms focus on reorganization of instructional time and delivery (e.g., compressed courses, mainstreaming, and modularization).

Curricular reforms focus on

rationalizing and refining content (e.g., alternative

pathways, contextualization, and

course elimination).

Pedagogical reforms focus on changes to teaching (e.g., student-centered activities, conceptual learning, and metacognition).


6


• CCRC and partner colleges work to scale promising reforms at new institutions.– Faculty-driven effort, with intentional focus on classroom practice

• CCRC researchers document the implementation process and evaluate the impact of reforms on student success.– How can promising innovations in developmental education be

introduced, sustained and scaled to enhance student learning, persistence and academic progression?

• Funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation


7


• Our partners:– Accelerated Learning Program from Community College

of Baltimore County– Concepts of Numbers from Montgomery County

Community College– California Acceleration Project, led by faculty from

Chabot College and Los Medanos College• For more information, read Inside Out or visit

www.scalinginnovation.org


8


•Describe the evolution of ALP faculty engagement and learning at CCBC

•Highlight the ALP Inquiry Network (ALPIN) as a structure for sustained professional learning

•Share preliminary findings from Scaling Innovation research on how structures for faculty learning can create opportunities for pedagogical improvement

Presentation Goals


9


ENG 101

semester 1

ENG 052

semester 1

A L P

The Accelerated Learning Program (ALP)


10


1. Our model was mostly structural.

2. There were no experts to call in.

3. We were afraid the faculty would resist if we started telling them how to teach.

4. We didn’t agree on a pedagogy.

A L P

Why We Thought We Didn’t Needto Do Faculty Development


11


1. Most of our faculty have graduate degrees in literature.

2. Even those with formal training in teaching writing have little training in teaching developmental writing.

3. No one had any training in teaching in an ALP classroom.

A L P

Why We Were Wrong


12


1. We found we wanted to spend time talking with each other about what worked and what didn’t.

2. Our new ALP faculty complained that a two-hour orientation was not adequate preparation.

3. We realized that after four years of teaching ALP, we had figured out some things.

4. We got wonderful encouragement and suggestions from CCRC.

A L P

What Changed Our Minds


13


We’ve arrived at a different concept of faculty development.

Rather than experts teaching novices how to teach.

We now see faculty development as a group of teachers seeking answers to important questions.

A L P

Faculty Development for 2012-2013


14


We also recognized how hard it is to do faculty development at a community college.

• Everyone is teaching five courses

• and serving on committtees

• and we’re spread over three campuses

• so we’ve concluded that there is no silver bullet. Faculty development has to be multi-faceted.

A L P



15


2. Three to four hour orientation sessions for new faculty

3. Half-day workshops in August and January

4. Informal monthly meetings

5. A mentoring system

6. ALPIN

A L P


1. Two twenty-hour faculty institutes


16


Mon why ALP works backward design curriculum development active learning in a writing classroom

Tue integrating reading and writing

thinking skills in the writing classroom Wed addressing affective and life issues

financial literacy Thu improving students’ ability to edit their own writing

culturally responsive pedagogy Fri coordinating the 101 and the 052 classes

selecting texts and readings planning your syllabi planning the first week of the course

A L P

ALP Faculty Institute


17

COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER Lessons from Scaling InnovationCOMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER

Preliminary Findings from Scaling Innovation Research


18


1. Infrastructure for collaboration and refinement is important, but challenging to implement and sustain.

2. Instructors’ questions about teaching in innovative courses vary over time and according to their personal and professional dispositions and identities.

3. Professional learning activities and venues should be responsive to faculty needs.


19


Collaborative Infrastructure• Diverse coalitions build buy-in and ensure sustainability

– Full-time and adjunct faculty – Administrators– Counselors and advisors – Instructional support staff– Institutional researchers– Students

• By reviewing data, the coalition can create processes for ongoing refinement

‒ Course grades, student persistence to subsequent courses, student success in subsequent courses

‒ Artifacts of practice


20


Challenges to Collaborative Work

•Antithetical to professional culture and structure of higher education– Institutional culture– Individual dispositions toward collaborative work

•Skills required are different from those typically associated with faculty role– Leadership, management, coaching

•Successful structures are contextually specific and challenging to sustain (e.g., curriculum writing team)


21


Varying Questions and Needs

Reluctant to change

Satisfied with status quo

Ready to act

Reform Implementation

Fac

ult

y Id

en

tity

an

d

Dis

po

siti

on

How will this reform

address student needs?

What is the problem with the current system?

What is the evidence of success?

How is the new course structured?

Which students are

eligible?

How will students get

enrolled?

What are course

policies?

What are the course

materials?

How are students

assessed?

What are the assignments?

How will I use class time?

What are students learning?

What instructional techniques are most effective?

Disagree with reform premise

Discomfort with new approach

Have ideas for improvement

Unsure how to improve


22


Pathways to Pedagogical Refinement

•Embedding “design principles” into curriculum and structure

‒ Small class size invites pedagogy that is responsive to student needs

‒ Fewer practice problems enables more conceptual and less procedural instruction

•Engaging faculty in the work of reform − Curriculum development

− Ongoing refinement: Review of outcome data and student work

− Training new instructors


23


Purposeful and Responsive Faculty Engagement Activities

Structure

Audience

• What are instructors’ dispositions toward the reform?• What expertise do they bring?• How will participating in the activity benefit them?

Purpose

• At what phase of implementation is the reform?• Do instructors have questions about administrative

issues, course structure, curriculum, and/or pedagogy?

• What structure best meets the goals of the activity?• What format is realistic given time and resource

constraints?


24


Purposeful and Responsive Faculty Engagement Activities

Purpose

StructureAudience


25


It’s really hard to get faculty to look at teaching differently or changing curriculum in drastic ways when they’ve invested their identity in that way of teaching. ‘You’re not challenging a certain curriculum; you’re challenging me or the essence of who I am.’ - Faculty Leader

It has been one of the most positive and rewarding experiences of my professional career in higher education. I’m having

opportunities to do things I didn’t know were possible in this way. Doing research, publications, presentations; those were all things I’ve dreamed of, and now I’m living that dream. - Faculty Leader

Building Momentum Through Reform


26


June 7, 2012

Please visit us on the web at

http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu

where you can download presentations, reports,

and briefs, and sign-up for news announcements.

We’re also on Facebook and Twitter.

Community College Research Center Institute on Education and the Economy, Teachers College, Columbia University 525 West 120th Street, Box 174, New York, NY 10027 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: 212.678.3091

For more information

Documents

Lessons from Scaling Innovation 1 COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER June 07, 2012 Melissa Barragan, Community College Research Center Peter Adams, Community