II. Pedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship - Dartblog.com Pedagogy.pdfPedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship Working Group Final Report June 2012 Confidential: Draft Document, Not for Distribution

DartmouthSTRATEGIC PLANNING

IMAGINE THE NEXT 250

II. Pedagogy, Teaching and

MentorshipWorking Group Report

June 2012

Pedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship Working Group Final Report June 2012

Confidential: Draft Document, Not for Distribution 1

Dartmouth College Faculty Strategic Planning Advisory Committee Pedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship Working Group

Final Report

I. Summary

The hallmark and uniqueness of a residential college educational experience is that

students can learn through many different mechanisms, including not only formal teaching and classroom experiences, but also through close interaction with a diverse cadre of peers and faculty, research experiences, extracurricular activities, service learning, internship/practical experience, and the like. Dartmouth’s small footprint and the intimate proximity of its professional schools to undergraduates provide unique opportunities for multi-faceted learning experiences centered on discovery and application, and faculty mentoring for our students. Simply put, we aspire to make Dartmouth the best place for learning, and offer specific recommendations for accomplishing this goal.

Nonetheless, there are several barriers and weaknesses that currently prevent us from capitalizing on our strengths and realizing our full potential. As a result, Dartmouth risks lagging significantly behind peer institutions and losing its lead in higher education. Peer institutions are now focusing heavily on pedagogy and teaching, and are building new strengths by centralizing educational resources and support, implementing a technology-enhanced educational strategy, and embracing the growing trend to demonstrate improved learning through assessment and outcome measures. Moreover, we are not capitalizing on the opportunities and strengths of our professional schools in creating a distinctive and unique educational experience for our students that poises them effectively for their future careers. Indeed, with regard to our scholar-teacher model, it is apparent that many current and prospective students do not realize the potential at Dartmouth to be directly engaged in research and scholarship with faculty. Thus, we are not making the best use of opportunities to create a holistic, integrated and practice-based education. Relatedly, structural barriers make it difficult for faculty to innovate and collaborate in pedagogical endeavors, preventing our teachers from realizing the full potential of cross-disciplinary teaching and learning afforded by our unique environment. Given our historic strengths in pedagogy and technology, Dartmouth can and should become an international leader in the emerging field of the cognitive neurosciences of learning and its innovative application in higher education.

II. Working Group Overview

Topic and Scope Our working group was charged with looking deeply into the issues relating to support and expansion of faculty pedagogy, teaching and mentoring that are necessary to



continue and extend Dartmouth’s leadership in higher education in the coming years. The scope of our work was four-fold:

1. To define and enhance our model of scholar-teacher that is fundamental to Dartmouth, in order to be truly distinctive in higher education.

2. To combine an ethic of educational innovation (for example, digital, new ways of learning, and so on) with our unique model of highly interactive, exceptional education.

3. To facilitate Dartmouth’s distinctive link between Pedagogy and Research. 4. To identify opportunities for collaboration and partnerships across campus, and

with external partners across the world.

Process

Working Group Our working group membership comprises a broad span of campus. From June 2011 - April 2012, our group met once or twice a month. Following a review of our charge and a comprehensive internal discussion, we determined that focused interviews with a broad sampling of the One Dartmouth faculty and staff would provide the most effective input regarding current trends, local implications and aspirations. We synthesized over 50 overarching questions into 12 questions. Working group members submitted three names of colleagues within their area who would provide valuable information to interviewers.

Dartmouth Community Engagement Working group members were then assigned to interviews of people they did not know. PTM co-leaders interviewed President Kim, Provost Folt, the Deans of A&S and the professional schools and leaders of major program areas. Fifty (50) interviews with staff, faculty, Deans and administrators were conducted in Sept-Oct 2011. Interview notes were synthesized and organized around major themes. Additionally, PTM leaders met in three focus groups and an innovation brainstorm session with over 50 students representing undergraduates and graduate students in the winter of 2012. PTM leaders also gave many iterative presentations to relevant SP working groups (including RSC, Digital Dartmouth, Students of the Future, and SE-SPAC) and to key institutional committees (including A&S Curriculum Committee, A&S Divisional Councils, Committee on Instruction, Wentworth Associate Deans meetings). Feedback from these presentations enabled an ongoing evolution of the group’s recommendations. Additionally, many of the group’s members serve on more than one strategic planning working group, allowing for effective communication of ideas across groups.

External Community Engagement Many working group meetings began with discussion of relevant readings detailing key trends in higher education. One committee meeting was devoted to Professor Wesley Jordan (Professor of Neurosciences and Psychology, Former Dean of the Faculty), who discussed lessons learned from leading a curricular reform at St. Mary’s College of Maryland. Working group members suggested speakers for, and attended, many of the Leading Voices in Higher Education Speaker Presentations. Additionally, all members



informally reached out to national colleagues. Working group meetings continued to focus on review of information from community engagement and further evolution of our recommendations.

III. Findings

Contemporary Trends in Higher Education A synthesis of our working group’s research and community engagement reveals the following critical trends that must be effectively addressed in order to sustain Dartmouth’s position as a recognized leader in higher education: 1. Student engagement with learning - rapidly emerging cognitive neuroscience

research on effective human learning, research on effective knowledge transfer and improved methods for assessing learning outcomes highlight the critical need to look beyond traditional lectures and core content to more effective instructional designs and practices informed by active learning principles throughout the entire curriculum. Institutions that continuously innovate to promote effective student learning and engagement will be tomorrow’s leaders in higher education. Institutions that create the new science of learning in higher education, and effectively translate that science into their educational practice, will be the pioneers.

2. Technology-enhanced education - technology and mobile broadband access has

profound impacts on when, where and how teaching and learning happens – and is rapidly changing the education playing field. Leaders in higher education must now effectively integrate the following into their traditional pedagogical strategy:

a. access to content and reference material that are continuously updated; b. asynchronous worldwide distribution of teaching and course materials; c. access to world-class faculty irrespective of physical location; d. peer collaboration and social learning networks; e. background analytics that enable new methods of individualized and

adaptive learning and assessment. 3. A new generation of students - today’s students arrive on campus with expectations

shaped by their world, one that is highly digital, responsive, interconnected, social, mobile, suited to their unique needs and rapidly evolving. Additionally, the rise in student debt and the challenging economy are increasing the premium that many students and their families are placing on the value of their educational investment and its ability to prepare them for graduate and professional school and tomorrow’s workforce.

4. Holistic education - societal and economic trends increasingly demand a more

global, cross-disciplinary, collaborative and experiential approach to higher education, placing a premium on cross/interdisciplinary courses, dual-institution (including international) degrees, collaborative and team-based teaching and



learning, peer-to-peer learning and assessment and learning experiences grounded in service to the institution, as well as to the local and global communities.

5. Contemporary pedagogical approaches – today’s leaders in higher education

recognize the need to educate competent life-long learners who possess critical minds, flexible intelligences and the ability to translate knowledge and theory into practice. Leaders in higher education use the tools of academy-defined competencies and achievement milestones in both broad overarching competencies and in focused areas of deep study. These include progressively challenging levels of student learning, practice and formative assessment; individualized student passports and portfolios that demonstrate progressive accomplishment; capstone or culminating experiences that demonstrate summative achievement of competence; and courses of study that span undergraduate and graduate degree programs.

6. Scholarship of teaching and education – today’s complex educational environment

requires highly skilled faculty who can rigorously combine effective pedagogical practices with cutting edge contributions to their field. Given this extraordinary challenge, leading institutions now define, support and equally recognize this dual skill set in the promotion and tenure process.

Current State of Pedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship at Dartmouth

Affirming our Strengths Dartmouth is recognized as a national leader in providing an intimate and highly

intellectual teaching and learning community that combines an engaged student body with accessible faculty who are both skilled teachers and recognized scholars within their fields. Importantly, this recognition is universally held across campus – extending beyond the undergraduate Arts and Sciences departments to strong graduate programs in STEM and our three highly ranked professional schools. Although challenging to implement, the emphasis and universal pride in our scholar-teacher models attracts and motivates talented faculty who continuously improve their teaching skills while remaining actively engaged in their own research and scholarship. The environment also affords our undergraduate, graduate and professional students valued opportunities for transformational one-on-one faculty interactions, mentoring and research experience.

Many different models exist at Dartmouth for a high-touch learning experience, ranging from in-person one-on-one interactions to innovative use of technology to bringing dispersed students virtually onto campus to interact with our world-renowned faculty. In addition to a daily commitment to high-quality teaching by the faculty, a significant number of innovative and cutting-edge learning experiences and co-curricular teaching collaborations exist within and among schools and departments, including but not limited to the College’s Institute of Writing and Rhetoric (IWR), Rockefeller Center (Rocky), Tucker Foundation (Tucker), Foreign Study Programs (FSP), Presidential Scholars program and the Master of Health Care Delivery Science program (MHCDS). The Dartmouth Center for the Advancement of Learning (DCAL) and its Active Learning



Institute (ALI), as well as programs such as the Teaching Science Seminars, provide contemporary faculty development support open to all Dartmouth faculty. Additionally, programs at Tuck, Thayer and Geisel provide resources and support to faculty interested in developing innovative classes within the professional schools, and the recent revisions to the promotions and tenure guidelines at Geisel strongly support educational scholarship.

Excellence in cutting-edge curriculum design, implementation and assessment exists across the campus, including the Arts and Sciences IWR program, course redesigns facilitated by the Educational Technologies Group, the use of peer instruction, use of active learning modalities in many introductory science classes on campus, strong dean’s office educational program oversight and evaluation at the professional schools and the focus on competency-based education and the emerging office of medical education at Geisel. In particular, The Dartmouth Center for Health Care Delivery Science is an outstanding model of collaborative team course design and delivery in which course and content directors work directly with instructional design teams to continuously develop and improve the student learning experience.

The success of our faculty’s teaching and of these innovative programs manifests Dartmouth’s continued ability to attract the highest quality students and medical residents who are eager to integrate their learning outside of the classroom, through internships, service learning, volunteer work and study abroad opportunities. Additionally, Dartmouth alumni of all ages and programs passionately recall the life changing experiences of their education and training, experiences that continue to inform their current lives and careers.

Recognizing Relative Weaknesses and Concerns As noted above, despite a universal support for the concept of scholar-teacher, our

community engagement demonstrated that many of our faculty do not believe that the model is universally embraced. Junior faculty across campus describe a system whereby teaching is required but not institutionally supported nor rewarded in the promotion and tenure process. Frequently cited examples include the A&S faculty desire to “buy out” of teaching time in order to focus on grant-writing and research activities, the relatively high number of A&S adjunct faculty teaching introductory courses, and the significant increased clinical load for Geisel clinical faculty.

Despite the Dartmouth faculty’s national recognition and pride in teaching-scholar excellence, this is no longer a unique strength for Dartmouth’s undergraduate program. In the past decade, many peer institutions have focused significant resources on cultivating a similar reputation for excellence in undergraduate teaching and pedagogy, and in doing so have implemented a significant infrastructure to coordinate, support and measure their accomplishments. Unlike Dartmouth, where these activities are not coordinated and are often isolated, many of our peer institutions have since implemented an arts and sciences dean or vice-provost of education, who oversees a coordinated office or institute that combines institution-wide curriculum development and oversight, integration of educational technology and instructional design,



implementation of program and learning outcomes evaluation, and faculty development and mentoring.

We do not presently have direct evidence to support or refute our reputation for undergraduate teaching excellence and, more importantly, we have limited evidence to demonstrate that our highly valued teaching consistently results in effective student learning. There is a campus-wide lack of understanding of the current research and best practices for assessment of learning and teaching. In the undergraduate program, current faculty and course evaluations are not effective, and the advising and academic support programs, while excellent in many regards, are isolated from one another, perceived to drain faculty time, and do not provide structured opportunities for students to self-assess, consolidate their learning experiences, reflect and thoughtfully plan a course of study.

Our current infrastructure and support for teaching collaboration and developing new courses is limited, inhibiting innovations that are sustainable over time. Faculty and staff strongly perceive a lack of physical space and other avenues for effective exchange across departments, divisions, and professional schools. Campus-wide there is limited access to, and support for, effective and contemporary instructional design and use of educational technologies. In addition, Dartmouth significantly lacks physical infrastructure to support innovative use of technology or other active learning principles such as team-based learning. Of all of the trends in higher education, the lack of an institution-wide educational technology strategy at Dartmouth poses the most significant threat to our standing as a leader in pedagogy.

IV. Overall Directions, Aspirations, and Strategic Opportunities Faculty and students alike aspire to build on Dartmouth’s reputation as an

institution of excellence in teaching to become the national leader in education innovation. Our overarching recommendation is to focus on transformative learning and the creation of new knowledge, ideas and forms of creative expression as the center of the Dartmouth Experience for all of our learners.



This One Dartmouth approach would be delivered through a competency-based

curricular experience for all learners that leverages the strengths of our strong scholar-teacher faculty, our intimate community and existing advising and academic support structures. We envision the experience cemented through a renewed culture that places a primacy on student engagement with learning and better enables faculty engagement with students. This will require a significant modification of the institution-wide education infrastructure, including directed resources and incentives that invite and support ongoing innovation, collaboration, mentorship and reflection among faculty, staff, and students.

Given Dartmouth’s strong and intimate community, our centers of excellence in brain sciences, faculty development, quality improvement in complex systems, and translational research, and our unique ability to collaborate among the college and three professional schools, we believe that achieving our aspirations is well within our grasp. Furthermore, we believe that regaining the national lead in cutting-edge use of technology in higher education is a campus-wide imperative. V. Recommendations 1. Increase student engagement in learning Rationale: The best learning happens through active engagement in the learning process. We can promote this by leveraging Dartmouth’s uniqueness (intimacy, access to faculty, small footprint, close undergraduate and professional/graduate schools) to increase and emphasize out of classroom and cross-school learning opportunities. In addition, we should provide guidance and encourage deliberate reflection about educational goals, while encouraging students to take responsibility for their learning.



Process and Mechanisms: Mentoring students in charting a unified and deliberate course through Dartmouth The following are some examples of how this could be achieved, but surely other mechanisms exist and should be explored more fully through a focused working group.

a) First year fall/orientation: Students meet with an advising team consisting of faculty, dean, upper-class student, and perhaps a Dartmouth staff person, such as a librarian. Together, the student and team chart a path for the first two years. This would include not only discussion of potential courses but, importantly, providing the student with guidance regarding extracurricular opportunities and mechanisms for engaging in research and other scholarly work with Dartmouth faculty.

b) Fall term/orientation: Take a mini-course on how to succeed at Dartmouth (explains learning objectives, discussion of how people learn, etc.)

c) Mandatory and regular check-ins with advising team. d) End of sophomore year (or summer): demonstrate competencies via a

portfolio (see also Rec #3 below) and map out next two years, choosing a major and Dartmouth Project.

e) Start of senior year: reflect on junior year and approach to senior year.

Note: while the above examples are geared towards undergraduates, a similar design should be implemented by each school within One Dartmouth, and best practices shared between schools.

Enhance out of classroom and cross-school learning experiences a) Create multi-disciplinary ‘centers’ to facilitate faculty-faculty and faculty-

student interaction across departments and schools outside of the classroom. The Rockefeller Center is an example of a successful model that should be replicated for other disciplines. Like the Rockefeller Center, these new centers would provide internship opportunities/matching, hold conferences, sponsor speakers, facilitate student-led forums, and provide training opportunities. Examples include a creating a Sustainability Center, a Science Center.

b) Make it much easier for faculty to design and sustain cross-/trans-disciplinary courses (and full time employment accordingly).

c) Make use of unique Dartmouth programs to add to the overall educational experience. For example, incorporate The Dartmouth Institute (TDI) into mainstream campus activities – perhaps use the new health care delivery pact with China to provide undergraduates with a unique international



learning experience. Similarly, provide opportunities for professional school faculty and graduate students to mentor and teach undergraduates.

d) Building on the existing work of Dartmouth faculty, require a service learning experience in which cross-disciplinary faculty facilitate students applying what they are learning within the classroom to real-world problems, both locally and globally.

e) Similarly to (d), and building on our local strengths, require a global experience of all Dartmouth learners (in concert with recommendations from the Global Dartmouth Working Group).

2. Increase student engagement in the creation of new knowledge, ideas and

methods of creative expression. Rationale: Although the transfer of knowledge from teacher to learner is an important facet of education, true mastery and consolidation of learning is best achieved by active participation in creating knowledge, new ideas and creative forms of expression. The close proximity of the undergraduate campus to professional schools, the presence of world-class researchers and scholars, and our sense of community and intimacy can be leveraged to provide opportunities for all students to engage in creative expression and discovery. Process and Mechanisms:

a) Educate and advise students about methods and opportunities for engaging in research and other scholarly and creative work with Dartmouth faculty.

b) Invest additional resources in internal grants for student projects and other research to enhance the likelihood that all students who wish to engage in rigorous research and scholarly work have the opportunity to do so.

c) Require a “Dartmouth Project” of all students (see Rec #3 below) that will emphasize involvement in creating new knowledge and ideas.

d) Count supervision of student independent research as ‘teaching credit’ towards the normal faculty teaching load. This would result in a reduction of formal classroom teaching responsibilities, but increase the one-on-one time with students. By counting this as part of the teaching load, it would ensure that Dartmouth faculty are indeed using this new found time to engage with students. A consequence would be the need to increase the faculty to maintain the number of courses taught by Dartmouth faculty, rather than adjunct instructors.

3. Prioritize the demonstration of learning and using what students have learned into

practice. Rationale: Students will be better prepared for transferring and using knowledge outside Dartmouth if they have experience demonstrating and practicing what they have learned while here.



Process and Mechanisms: a) Create a new team with expertise in learning measurement and outcomes

development and assessment, and principles of knowledge transfer. b) Identify institution-wide, school- and discipline-specific competencies that all

students should have by the time they leave Dartmouth. By setting learning goals and competencies to achieve, students will have the opportunity to demonstrate learning. The existing curriculum committee would be an ideal forum to discuss and establish specific competencies.

c) Develop a curriculum that intentionally fosters knowledge transfer through (d) and (e), below, as well as additional tools that ask students to demonstrate cumulative, transformed knowledge and meta-knowledge, and the ability to apply new knowledge in practice.

d) Adopt a portfolio-/passport-based education format. Bring experts together to consider different models in a focus group. Items included in a portfolio would explicitly be linked to the achievement of one or more of the competencies.

e) Require a “Dartmouth Project” of all students that will demonstrate learning and the ability to put into practice what they have learned. A Dartmouth Project could include a research-based thesis, but other mechanisms could also be included, such as service/community engagement projects, professional internship projects, and the like.

4. Elevate the discussion of teaching practices. Establish an ongoing process to incentivize innovation and demonstrate excellence in teaching.

Rationale: Advances in technology and the science of learning, along with an explosion in the availability of information, have opened up new opportunities to enhance teaching and learning. Dartmouth is positioned to take a leading role in implementing and evaluating new pedagogical and blended learning methods. We need to encourage and enable faculty to seek out and use innovative methods by providing support and opportunities to experiment and implement. Innovations may not always succeed, but unless we persistently pursue innovation, we shall become complacent. This necessitates a major investment and expansion of DCAL and related support structures, such as Educational Technologies as well as centralization of resources and competencies across the One Dartmouth campus to increase efficiency and communication.

Process and Mechanisms: a) Currently A&S has no one person dedicated to the intellectual and educational

life of undergraduate students. We recommend establishing a Vice Provost for Education for the undergraduate campus, similar to like positions at Geisel



(Senior Associate Dean for Education), Tuck and Thayer. The VPE would be responsible for a guaranteeing an effective overarching instructional design for the undergraduate curriculum, and ensuring the development, dissemination, adoption and evaluation of innovative teaching practices in the undergraduate campus. The VPE would also play a critical role in integrating undergraduate research initiatives with the undergraduate curriculum, advising, academic skills, etc., and would work alongside of the Dean of the Faculty and the Dean of the College. Having a high level administrative educator in this position would also help promote a culture of continuing innovation and consideration of best educational practices

b) Establish a cross-institution Council consisting of the undergraduate VPE, the graduate and professional Education Deans and the Deans of Students from the undergraduate and graduate schools to continue the PTM conversation and to ensure that trans-school educational innovations and opportunities are disseminated and leveraged.

c) Re-organize institutional structures to network DCAL, IWR, Office of Institutional Research (OIR), Educational Technologies, Academic Skills Center and related entities to integrate and facilitate communication and support for teaching, learning, and mentoring under the new VPE. This might involve unification under the auspices of DCAL, or perhaps a new type of center.

d) Require all new faculty to attend DCAL teaching orientation during a free term in first year.

e) Require current faculty to demonstrate continuing education in pedagogical practices, with data included in the annual faculty report or similar documents at the graduate and professional schools.

f) Increase staff support in instructional design and technology-enhanced education to facilitate faculty incorporating new technologies and other new teaching practices into their courses (for example, Instructional Design “SWAT” Teams)

g) Provide stipends to faculty to improve teaching by participating in DCAL development activities and implementing and evaluating new innovations.

h) Fund competitive proposals for “internal sabbaticals” that would provide opportunities for a) development of innovative courses and teaching practices and/or b) development of collaborative teaching across disciplines, departments, and/or schools.

i) Publicize examples of successful new teaching strategies via DCAL, the Dartmouth web page, annual awarded presentations that span the campus, annual Presidential Awards for Excellence in Teaching across the campus, and



through journal articles devoted to educational practices. In addition, create a national symposium every three years on Teaching, Pedagogy and Student Learning.

j) Create a new research agenda/team with expertise in the neurobiology of learning in higher education and knowledge transfer research, and translate this research into effective classroom pedagogy, and disseminate this new knowledge.

k) Provide opportunities and incentives for faculty research on learning and evaluating the efficacy of pedagogical methods.

l) Pursue opportunities to share successful models and approaches with the world, through the use of online resources and partnerships with other intuitions.

5. Leverage the distinctive strengths of the undergraduate, graduate and professional

schools into a cohesive campus-wide educational strategy. Rationale: Dartmouth has an opportunity to create a new, unique educational strength by integrating excellence in education across its four outstanding schools and graduate programs. These programs currently operate in close proximity to one another and have much to offer one another, yet an ongoing campus-wide conversation about educational excellence does not exist. Process and Mechanism:

a) As above, establish a cross-institution Council consisting of the Education Deans and Deans of Students from the undergraduate and graduate schools to continue the PTM conversation and to ensure that trans-school educational innovations and opportunities are disseminated and leveraged. Establish a cross-institution Council consisting of the undergraduate VPE, the graduate and professional Education Deans and the Deans of Students from the undergraduate and graduate schools to continue the PTM conversation and to ensure that trans-school educational innovations and opportunities are disseminated and leveraged. This may necessitate identifying an administrative position that is focused on overseeing a coordinated office or institute that combines institution-wide curriculum development and oversight, integration of educational technology and instructional design, implementation of program and learning outcomes evaluation, and faculty development and mentoring. Having a high level administrator in this position would also help promote a culture of cross-school understanding of the curriculum and educational strengths and opportunities that each professional schools affords Dartmouth, continuing innovation across all schools, and consideration of best educational practices.



b) Encourage the Education Deans of each of the professional schools to define relevant processes and mechanisms for achieving the PTM recommendations within their own school.

c) Incentivize cross-school faculty discussion, collaborations, innovations and educational research through participation in and the expanded educational resources described in recommendation 4, above.

d) Eliminate barriers for medical school clinical faculty at DHMC and the VA Hospital to actively participate in on-campus faculty programs and the life of the campus.

VI. Potential Future Steps Co-Recommendations with Other Groups: Create targeted working groups over the summer to finalize coordinated strategic recommendations, methods and processes between the following groups (refer to meeting notes between groups for additional details):

1. Digital Dartmouth: it is imperative that we design a comprehensive and aggressive strategic plan for the development, blended use and support of technology-enhanced learning at One Dartmouth. Our groups need to coordinate and finalize the conversations begun during the strategic planning process to date.

2. Research, Scholarship and Creativity: a. create strategies for better engaging students in the creation of new

knowledge at Dartmouth b. define a research agenda/center of excellence in research on learning in

higher education 3. Students of the Future:

a. identify and ensure that extracurricular activities are translated into curricular components and then integrated into the overall student curriculum

b. further elaborate charting a course through Dartmouth Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Pedagogy, Teaching, and Mentoring Working Group, David Bucci, PhD Associate Professor of Psychology and Brain Sciences Dartmouth College Co-Chair, PTM working group Leslie Fall, MD Professor of Pediatrics and Associate Dean for Faculty Development Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth Co-Chair, PTM working group



VII. Working Group Membership 1. Ron Adner

Professor of Business Administration, Tuck School of Business

2. David Bucci Associate Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences (CO-CHAIR)

3. Solomon Diamond (D'97, Th'98)

Assistant Professor of Engineering, Thayer School of Engineering 4. Christiane Donahue

Associate Professor of Linguistics; Director, Institute for Writing and Rhetoric 5. Leslie Fall (Geisel'90)

Professor of Pediatrics and Associate Dean for Faculty Development, Geisel School of Medicine (CO-CHAIR)

6. Barbara Knauff (Adv'04)

Assistant Director of Educational Technologies 7. F. Jon Kull (D'88)

Dean, Graduate Studies; Rogers Professor of Chemistry 8. Thomas Luxon

Cheheyl Professor and Director, Dartmouth Center for the Advancement of Learning; Professor of English

9. Robyn Millan

Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy 10. Jay Satterfield

Librarian, Special Collections 11. Antonio Tillis

Chair, Program in African and African American Studies; Associate Professor of African and African American Studies

12. D. G. Webster

Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies

Documents

II. Pedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship - Dartblog.com Pedagogy.pdfPedagogy, Teaching and Mentorship Working Group Final Report June 2012 Confidential: Draft Document, Not for Distribution