Closing the Gap: Ideas for Implementj tjng High Impact, Low Cost Faculty/Student Interactj tjons Dr. Jimmie Gahagan, Katie Patton, & Samantha Young 31 st Annual Conference on The First-Year Experience San Antonio, TX – Sunday, February 19, 2012
Learning Outcomes • Understand the importance of faculty/student interactjon • Discover practjcal strategies for facilitatjng faculty/student interactjon on your campus • Refmect on the challenges and opportunitjes of faculty/student interactjon on your campus
“Faculty-student interactj tjon is an E E essentj tjal component C C N N E E of the collegiate MENTORING R R U U C C experience. C C O O PERSONAL F F Signifj fjcant research O O INTERACTION Y Y has demonstrated the T T I I S S N N importance of E E T T N N interactj tjon between I I FUNCTIONAL INTERACTION faculty members and students, both in and INCIDENTAL CONTACT outside of the classroom” (Cox & DISENGAGEMENT Orehovec, 2007). FREQUENCY OF OCCURENCE
(Cox and Orehovec, 2007) Most infrequent and most diffjcult to defjne. Most infrequent and most diffjcult to defjne. An extended relatjonship built on both An extended relatjonship built on both functjonal and personal interactjons. functjonal and personal interactjons. Interactjon is purposeful and revolves around Interactjon is purposeful and revolves around MENTORING the personal interest (s) of faculty and/or the personal interest (s) of faculty and/or student student PERSONAL INTERACTION Occurs for a specifjc, instjtutjonally related Occurs for a specifjc, instjtutjonally related purpose( academic questjons and working on purpose( academic questjons and working on FUNCTIONAL INTERACTION projects) projects) INCIDENTAL CONTACT Unintentjonal contact (polite waves and Unintentjonal contact (polite waves and greetjngs) greetjngs) DISENGAGEMENT No faculty/student interactjon outside the No faculty/student interactjon outside the classroom classroom
“Students learn fj fjrsthand how to Benefj fjts for First-Years think and solve Frequency and quality of student faculty practj tjcal problems interactjons signifjcantly predict fjrst-year by interactj tjng with academic outcomes such as college satjsfactjon and aturitjon (Pascarella and faculty inside and Terenzini) outside the classroom. As a Overcome Professional Distance result, teachers Between Faculty and Students become role Students need to see faculty in a variety of models, mentors, situatjons involving difgerent roles and and guides for responsibilitjes…see faculty as real people lifelong learning.” who are accessible (Chickering) (Kuh, Kinzie, et. al, 2005)
• Promote Intellectual “Frequent interactj tjon with faculty is Development more strongly – Interactjons are crucial to persistence and related to intellectual development of students (Tinto) satj tjsfactj tjon with • Student Validatj tjon college than any – When students feel like they are contributjng other type of and actjve in the academic community it involvement or, fosters academic and interpersonal indeed, any other development (Rendon) • Positj student or tjve Impact on Student instj tjtutj tjonal Afg fgairs characteristj tjc.” – Stronger student-faculty relatjonships will (Astj tjn) have a positjve impact on student afgairs work; by increasing knowledge and experientjal base of the faculty we gain valuable allies in our work outside of the classroom. (Astj tjn)
• Promotes Academic Motj “Students tjvatj tjon appreciated – “Students who perceive their faculty interactj tjons with members as being approachable, respectgul, and available for frequent interactjons caring faculty, stafg fg, outside the classsroom are more likely to and peers who report being confjdent of their academic supported them in skills and being motjvated” (Komarraju, Musulkin, transitj tjoning to & Bhatu tuacharya, 2010) • Increased Persistence college learning and the university – “Regardless of positjon, the primary behavior community.” of stafg that were described by students as making a difgerence were that they cared (Goodman, Baxter- about students, helped meet their needs and Magolda, Seifert, & get their questjons answered, knew them by King, 2011) name, encouraged them, and spent tjme with them.” (Schreiner, Noel, Anderson, & Cantwell, 2011)
Retentj tjon & Faculty/Student Interactj tjons • Vince Tinto (1987) reached this conclusion: “Instjtutjons with low rates of student retentjon are those in which students generally report low rates of student-faculty contact. • Conversely, instjtutjons with high rates of retentjon are most frequently those which are marked by relatjvely high rates of such interactjons” (p. 66).
What Is Out-to-Lunch? • Program for students to dine with faculty members on campus during lunch • Allow students to interact with faculty members outside the classroom
How Out-to-Lunch Works • Students choose a faculty member • Students sign out a tjcket at a number of campus locatjons • Ticket is a voucher for faculty member’s meal – Receive meal free with tjcket and USC ID • Student pays for own meal with their meal plan or other form of payment
Out-to-Lunch Assessment • Data collectjon – Ticket sign-out form • Student residence hall, major, year in school • Intended professor and tjcket number – Student post-assessment • Ratjonale behind partjcipatjon and professor selectjon • Student perceptjons on knowledge gained • Comfort and satjsfactjon scales – Faculty post-assessment • Satjsfactjon, enjoyment, and recommendatjons
• 49.61% partjcipated in Out-to-Lunch as a class assignment • 30.71% utjlized Out-to-Lunch as a way to get to know their professor betuer “I betuer learned the scope and sequence of the class over the next 8 weeks. Also, I learned my professor's expectatjons of high-performing students. Also, I learned how to betuer study, betuer prepare for the class, and also, I learned how to betuer utjlize the 75 minutes in class each day.”
“I think this a great opportunity for a student to have that communicatjon with their professor. It makes them stand out as a person and not just a number in these large classes.” “I think this is a great idea to foster communicatjon between students, especially freshmen who are ofuen scared to come talk to professors about issues in class or on campus.”
Mutual Expectatj tjons Origins • Based on a well-regarded program for undergraduate educatjon at the University of Missouri that brings together students and teachers for open conversatjon • The Mutual Expectatjons program explores the wide gap between students' understanding of faculty roles and the faculty members' understanding of student roles
USC Mutual Expectatj tjons • Designed to bridge the gap in Wo Workshops communicatjon between faculty and students regarding their expectatjons of each other. • Through both large and small groups, a structured dialogue encourages faculty and students to develop a more collaboratjve learning environment
Mutual Expectatj tjons Facilitatj tjon - Students and faculty come together for a 90-minute dialogue to discuss expectatjons of each other in the classroom. - Students and faculty are evenly divided among a number of small discussion tables, where they are allowed to brainstorm individually, discuss expectatjons with their small group, and then share their thoughts and comments about specifjc expectatjons with the larger group. - The dialogue concludes afuer atuendees individually refmect on how they can modify their behaviors to impact the learning environment .
Mutual Expectatj tjons Facilitatj tjon Potentj tjal Topics Potentj tjal Partnerships • Academic Integrity • The Center for Teaching • Technology in the Excellence • The Student Government Classroom • Supplemental Instructors Associatjon • The Faculty Senate and Professors • Online Courses • The Offjce of Judicial Afgairs • Syllabus Structure • University Housing
Mutual Expectatj tjons Assessment • Qualitatjve Data – Faculty and students learned that they must work together to have a great learning environment. Additjonally, both agreed to be more considerate of the input of the other. – Students as a group defjned the meaning of academic integrity and which produced a betuer understanding – Students perceived that as a result of being able to talk and interact with faculty outside of the classroom, they will respect and appreciate faculty more – Faculty suggested that students have “changed” less then generatjonal thinkers propose and that they do care about their learning
Mutual Expectatj tjons Assessment • Quantjtatjve Data – During Fall 2010 The University of South Carolina hosted 2 Mutual Expectatjons Workshops – 99% of faculty and students who atuended a Mutual Expectatjons workshop perceived the interactjon as “very helpful” or “helpful” – When students were asked, “How helpful was this event to your learning?” all responded that is was “very helpful” or “helpful” – Faculty also all agreed that this workshop was either “very helpful” or “helpful” to their overall teaching
Recommend
More recommend
