Building a Community of Teachers: Designing Faculty Interest Groups to Build Pedagogical Expertise

Lauren Pressley, Tracy M. Hall, Anita R. Walz, Heather Moorefield-Lang, Neal Henshaw, & Rebecca K. Miller

Virginia Tech University Libraries, Blacksburg, Virginia

Summary

Here, we explore the University Libraries program to develop instructional expertise within the department, with a focus on the development of a pedagogies interest group focused on understanding, reflecting on, and practicing new and emerging pedagogies in higher education. This poster presents how this model might be applied to other departments interested in facilitating this faculty-driven model of pedagogical development.

Pedagogies Explored

University Libraries’ Hub Framework

Future Considerations and Outcomes

Best Practices

Social Team: The social team has worked to explore specifically the use and interaction of students learning experience in the SCALE-UP classroom. Currently the social team has been active with classroom observations of both students and professors using the SCALE-UP teaching and learning space. Our process involves exploring how students use, learn, and interact in this new social learning classroom space. We have created an IRB for this process and worked to specifically capture qualitative data on the student experience with the SCALE-UP classroom and how it has or has not worked to capture and accelerate learning.

Service Team: The service learning team of the Learning Hub identified two potential roles for University Libraries in service learning. The first clear role is for the library to inform the learning process of the class through provision of resources and instruction. The second role is to be a laboratory for students, promoting participation in service projects that would impact the library’s services and spaces, giving students a service learning project that would directly impact their experience in the library going forward. To this end, the service learning team met with the Senior Associate Director of Community Learning, have explored the catalog of service courses, and volunteered potential projects for consideration in service learning courses.

Online Learning: The online learning team implemented two projects to share best practices, identify and resolve current instructional issues, and expand Library awareness regarding technology tools and pedagogies related to online and technology-assisted teaching and learning. These included:•Monthly brownbag discussions titled: “Online Learning and Technology Tools for Teaching” discussing Screen capture software (Camtasia, Jing); Class Response Systems (iClicker, Socrative, Kahoot, PollEverywhere); Presentation software (Haiku Deck, Emaze, Touchcast, Padlet, Popplet, Text is Beautiful); Visual Literacy; and Systems for online instruction (WebEx, ECHO360, AdobeConnect)•Ongoing faculty interviews to identify online and technology-assisted instructional best practices, technology adoption (and abandonment) criteria, and faculty observations regarding the potential of technology to enhance or disrupting teaching and learning.

• Purposefully connect hub to organizational direction and individual meaning.

• Create a written description of your purpose to create focus.• Emphasize the formation of teams to divide responsibilities and roles

in the hub community.• Set a realistic meeting schedule and agree up front on required time

commitment • Library administration provides freedom to explore and take risks. • Integrate community input and work toward outcomes that can impact

the surrounding community beyond the hub.

Speer, J., Mathews, B., & Walters, T. (2013). Hubs and centers as transitional change strategy for library collaboration [PowerPoint slide]. Retrieved from VTechWorks Web site: http://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/19333

This is an ongoing, active community, so participants are still in the process of learning about their respective areas. Throughout the process the hub has identified trends the larger library should be aware of, facilitated conversations amongst other faculty in the library, and identified areas for further exploration. This process will continue throughout the 2013-2014 academic year. Outcomes of the hub’s work will includes two studies, identification of programs and partners on campus for future collaboration, and a better understanding of the learning programs of Virginia Tech. All of this will lead to better service and a further integration of the University Libraries into the teaching mission of the University.

Recommended Readings

Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Dugid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge. University Press.

Speer, J., Mathews, B., & Walters, T. (2013). Hubs and centers as transitional change strategy for library collaboration. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10919/19333

Virginia Tech. (1998).Learning communities: Shaping the agenda. Blacksburg, Va.: Virginia Tech.