SAH EDRS 825 Self Study Teacher Identity Final 042815

Running Head: THE MODERN PROFESSOR

The Modern Professor: A Self-Study Approach to Instructor Identify and the Challenge

of Moving Traditional Courses Online

Seth Andrew Hudson

George Mason University

The Modern Professor

Table of Contents

Abstract 3

Introduction, or, The Modern Professor 4

Rationale 5

Research Problem/Research Question 8

Literature Review and Conceptual Framework 9

Research Methods 13

Teaching Philosophy Stress Test 13

Noise Recording 14

Findings 18

Discussion and Self Critique 21

Conclusion: a lesson from writing class 26

References 27

Appendix A: Teaching Philosophy Stress Test 29

Appendix B: Noise Recording (Waveforms) 33

Appendix C: Analytical Memo 1 & Peer Responses 35

Appendix D: Analytical Memo 2 & Peer Responses 39

Appendix E: Analytical Memo 3 & Peer Responses 42

Appendix F: Hudson Courses Evaluation—Fall 2014 45

2


Abstract

This study investigates the way instructor identity and practice are affected by

moving a traditionally face-face (f2f) course into the online format by employing a self-

study method that combines living educational theory and arts-based inquiry. The

instructor, teaching a games story design course at a large public institution, provides a

background and rationale in regards to the self-study methods employed in addition to

presenting and reflecting on the various data collected via classroom noise recordings,

analytical memos, and reflection on the personal teaching philosophy statement.

Furthermore, the author concludes with a self-critique and discussion of this self-study in

hopes that it might be augmented and adopted by other practitioners in the discipline.

Keywords: arts-based self-study inquiry, game design, living educational theory, online

writing instruction, noise recording, teaching philosophy.

3


Introduction, or, The Modern Professor

Photo 1: The Modern Professor

I sat down to take a photo of a post-it note. It contained notes from a previous critical friend meeting, and I wanted a digital copy for a potential film clip. Reflecting in an instant, I realized what was happening by the composition of the photo. Obviously, the screen has my reflection. Immediately I thought of being “trapped” in the computer, rather than with my students, but I began to look deeper. Behind me is the bookshelf—some sort of “proof” that I have experience—I go to only occasionally as a resource. For some reason, though, I feel the need to have those resources at hand: perhaps on display. As further “proof” of my experience, my MA hangs behind me and just below that a pewter plate with the seal of my alma mater. Why do I need these physical objects? What auratic value do they hold for me? Does that play into my conflict regarding leaving the classroom? That same reflection holds another screen, a laptop—enough said. The real takeaway: the vast majority of my time as an instructor is behind a screen, preparing, grading, researching, etc.. The 45 hours I spend face-to-face with students each semester might be my only reward for this labor.

4


Rationale

In response to factors ranging from geographical limitations to budgetary

concerns, universities are embracing online education as a solution (Redmond & Lock,

2011). My research question asks, what happens to instructor identity when moving from

face-to-face (f2f) to online engagement? This study will be valuable to those challenged

with utilizing online tools for their teaching in the future. Moving forward, some may

not have a choice. Specifically, I hope to target two specific audiences: instructors of

game design and instructors of performing and visual arts, though the topic is relevant to

others teaching in higher education. The former is a relatively new discipline in higher

education, just now beginning to codify best practices. The latter benefits from centuries

of tradition, though those same traditional models may hinder innovation when it comes

to online migration.

Self-study seems a productive way forward for the question at hand. There is

indeed difference between teaching f2f and online; the transition is complicated though,

as many academics’ identities are a product of past f2f teaching (Redmond & Lock,

2011). Though there exists a core of time-honored best practices, and an impressive

body of knowledge regarding online teaching and learning is still forming, how does an

individual navigate such a change in format while maintaining instructor identity? As all

educators have experienced, there are “good” class meetings and “bad,” regardless of the

theoretical base of the practice. Before making this move—these are my students and my

class, so the emotional stakes are high—and studying it in a meaningful way, I must first

ask/answer: What in my practice, currently, authenticates my professional self? How

5


can this knowledge inform moving a traditional workshop environment to a hybridized

course model?

Only with that answer, and related changes to behavior and practice, can I hope to

address my ultimate question: How can I utilize my unique strengths to design and

deliver a course, no matter the setting/format, that maximally benefits students? This

question has implications across higher education as online options are increasingly seen

as a more accessible, more efficient, more cost-effective, and more marketable option for

course delivery (Ham & Davey, 2005).

Rather than relying on the ‘results’ of online instruction through traditional means

of student evaluation and assignment assessment, meaningful as they are (Davidovitch,

2009), self-study allows instructors like myself a different philosophical and political

stance from which to answer these important questions (Brandenburg, 2009), as stance

that challenges the status quo and focuses on the ‘I’ when addressing teaching

effectiveness.

The self-study methodology is uniquely useful in answering this question—we all

vary in discipline, pedagogy, relationship with technology, and teaching style. In other

words, the time has come for instructors to stop reading Chronicle articles about moving

online and get in the messy sandpit themselves. I am an example of a junior faculty

member teaching at a large pubic university—sharing coming experiences with others in

the same boat, the push to move courses online is present and the potential for improving

practice with self-study is there for us. Reflective practice is already a key factor in the

professional development of many, but self-study can take those skills to the next level

6


while helping instructors move online with the same quality and personality they

currently display in the classroom.

Modeling best practices in teaching is important, but it can be tedious and risk

losing the personality/essence of the instructor. Instead of inhabiting a model, this S-S

demands that instructors claim and embrace a personal identity before moving online and

modeling the best practices there. The goal is improved instruction; if one’s passion is

for teaching then this really means improved quality of life! The model will not always

hold the answer, so making the move to artistry—you’ve already mastered the models,

right?—keeps the passion in teaching, passion that invigorates students and infects other

faculty members.

Engage a friend who teaching in the following discussion: would you still teach if

you never again stood in front of a classroom? Getting the conversation started now will

help practitioners down the road when those challenges come. It may be about moving

your teaching out of the classroom, or something else entirely, but finding ways to

challenge yourself and your practice in a meaningful way will improve your practice and

push forward our craft.

I have felt this tension in several ways. First, as a professional I want to try new

things and be at the cutting edge of my field, though am concerned that student learning

may be negatively affected while I experiment. Second, as an administrator I see the real

problems regarding space and resources that might be aided in more online course

offerings. Lastly, as a person who loves teaching, I’m hesitant to move away from the

classroom, a place I’ve spent almost a decade learning and growing with my students.

7

Research Problem/Research Question

How is instructor/professional identity affected by the transition from a f2f course

to the online format and how can self-study methods answer this question, leading to

improved professional practice? The movement to the online format is nothing new,

entire post-graduate degrees can now be earned online, but there is encouragement—one

might even say ‘pressure’—for instructors to move online. Expecting instructors to adopt

best practices should be a constant, but utilizing digital tools to extend the classroom is

something different than moving online entirely. As Redmond and Lock (2011) put it,

“These changes have had an impact on the role and the expectations of university faculty.

As the work of academics moves increasingly to online spaces, it is essential that there is

greater awareness and understanding of the roles and practices that comprise online

teaching presence” (p. 1). Especially pertinent for junior faculty like myself, those

teaching in higher education should address this question proactively rather than entering

the online teaching environment blindly, even with the best of intentions.


Review of Literature and Conceptual Framework

As Wilcox, Watson, and Patterson (2004) suggest, self-study helps improving

practice by demanding we question “the self” and “the story.” Given that I teach story

design, using self-study to tell my story seems apropos. This current research was born

out of a difficult place where I questioned my hesitations to move away from f2f

teaching, seeing that hesitation as weakness. Self-study encourages this discomfort, as

collecting data means capturing our own voices and requiring us to listen to

uncomfortable and even unkind things (Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009).

This journey to the innermost cave—a theme present in Joseph Campbell’s

‘Monomyth’ that has a permanent place in my teaching vocabulary—is required to

complete any journey. In the terms of Whitehead (2010), improving my practices

requires living a contradiction where I claim to uphold a value yet deny it in my practice.

Naturally, students form opinions and make assumptions about the instructor, and

the organization of the course, from the first meeting (Jones, et al., 2008), but

instructors should begin by questioning themselves as professionals and think in

terms of identity.

Inviting other practitioners in the field to participate in my process, and scrutinize

my data, only heightens the tension—data collected on the self, detached, then given to

others for inquiry and reflection is one way to face this contradiction. As thinking

critically about how my actions may be interpreted from multiple perspectives (Samaras,

Hicks, & Berger, 2010), those of critical friends can naturally lead to improved practice

through a constant sense of accountability.

9


My critical friends, composed of colleague-professionals from higher education,

secondary education, and coaching, asked about my motivation for teaching early on.

Traditional means of assessing teaching in higher education—peer reviews, students

evaluations, registration numbers—are not sufficient to answer the question at hand. An

arts-based method, beyond affording a means to reflect on the subject matter

meaningfully, can spark ideas for research questions and inspire the design of a particular

study (Weber & Mitchell, 2004). That was surely the case, here. Though I learned a

great deal about myself, my practice, and my students through this self-study, the arts-

based methodology has inspired whole new tracks of investigation to pursue later on.

There is indeed a difference between teaching f2f and teaching online, but an academic’s

identity remains encapsulated by their past f2f teaching (Redmond & Lock, 2011); self-

study is a way to challenge our presumptions about our professional practice beyond the

traditional methods we have grown accustomed to as a field.

Devising meaning from self-study measures is a challenge, as these standards are

resistant to clarification through language alone (Whitehead, 2010), and the images of

arts-based inquiry can mean or represent many different things depending on who is

viewing and in what context (Weber & Mitchell, 2004). Embracing the ‘I’ for this study

in hopes of professional growth and improvement, that ambiguity—the messy sandpit it

can occasionally be—seems right to fit the initial impulse of this study. The teaching ‘I’

actually gains importance in the online environment, as studies show that students rely

more on faculty away from the f2f environment (Ham & Davey, 2005).

Critical friends can access the data with the opportunity to provide feedback and

integrate my ideas into their own practices (Hamilton, Smith, & Worthington, 2008), but

10


they can get a sense of my identity through how the story is presented. Unique to self-

study, this data is not only applicable to my concern (Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009), but to

my overall approach in this study. Looking at learning outcomes alone—outcomes that

are measured in fairly structured, traditional ways—would not help decipher the

difference between the experience of teaching online and f2f, it would skip to the product

rather than analyze the process.

Ham & Davey (2005) complicate things further: their comparison of virtual

teaching and face-to-face teaching show that students’ dependence on the instructor

actually increases in the online environment. Instead of losing myself entirely online, I

can embrace my new importance to students and hone my practices. And while a

desirable (information) gap is created with the online environment, so to is a lack of

facial expressions and other non-verbal communications that help facilitate learning

(Cunningham, 1996). An increasing number of studies claim that online education isn’t

just more cost effective, efficient, and marketable, but that online education is

qualitatively improved teaching and learning (Ham & Davey, 2005).

Oliver et al (2008) observed that “many evaluation systems have emphasized the

characteristics of the teacher,” instead of looking at student learning in the way the

institution is looking for (p. 620). The focus of these evaluations, many times, has more

to do with the bureaucracy of the course—the clarity of the grading policy, the relevance

of the text, lectures aligning with the syllabus, assignments being returned on time—

rather than student learning success. This study hopes to do something different that

accounts for the space between the syllabus and those course evaluations, it hopes to

account for the classroom experience.

11


`Stanley Fish shared such evidence in the Chronicle in 2005. In “Who’s in

Charge Here?” Fish reported that his practice of trashing student evaluations immediately

upon receipt—surely an impulse that many have resisted time and time again. Knowing

the problems with traditional course evaluation and instructor resistance to this sort of

assessment, self-study asks us to “think beyond traditional borders” (Pinnegar &

Hamilton, 2009). Additionally self-study helps professionals create a body of personal

and professional knowledge (Wilcox, Watson, & Patterson, 2004) that can serve as data

for future studies to contextualize the traditional methods of teaching/course assessment.

12

Research Methods

Living educational theory was the driving force behind this study, as it went hand-

in-hand with challenging my beliefs and practices. To drive the project, though, arts-

based inquiry was used in conjunction with memory work to create a larger narrative in

this case to as a “way to think about and share experience” Hamilton, Smith, &

Worthington, 2008, p. 19). In order to challenge myself with these questions, look at

how I may be living a contradiction, I employed these various methods to create a body

of personal and professional knowledge while revisiting some past evidence.

Teaching Philosophy Stress Test

Among this evidence was a ‘stress test’ of my teaching philosophy (Appendix A). The

separation between reflection and the original text denoted through my use of italics, this

memory work offered a chance to engage my “ideal professional self.” The same

document that I submitted with the application for my current position, the original

statement outlined what I saw as my process. In the context of this project, though, I

made it a point to revisit paragraph by paragraph rather than to reflect on the experience

as a whole. This sort of critical autobiographical reflection fits the memory work method

of self-study (Samaras, 2011).

My intent was to analyze the writing on the page rather than to recall what I was

“actually” trying to say. I found that many of the questions brought to the fore with this

self-study were lingering for some time; I was truly living a contradiction by denying my

beliefs in my approach (though perhaps not in my practice). Titled, Making Tables:


Empowering Students to Develop a Voice,” I begin by justifying my practices in a sort of

‘apology’ for our limited time together.

Teaching presence in the classroom and online is established from the outset of

any course, as “students form opinions and make assumptions about the instructor, and

the organization of the course,” before any f2f interaction (Jones, et al, 2008). It stands to

reason, then, that the teaching philosophy is the first step. A statement of “my ideal

teaching self,” an instructor’s philosophy is an entrée to the university. Though the

thought came later in my current inquiry, it seems this exercise of “stress testing” one’s

teaching philosophy a natural practice—perhaps one that should be undertaken with

regularity.

Noise Recording

Early in my self-study, a critical friend—a seasoned and well-respected writing

instructor—encouraged me to ask: “What are my best classes?” “How do I encourage a

community of writers?” “How do I present the importance of our in-person meetings?”

This last question about f2f class sessions stuck with me, but the language of my

syllabus, assignments, and even teaching philosophy are just words on a page. In hopes

of capturing what it ‘means’ to be in class—with the aim of preserving those portions in a

hybrid environment—I had to get a reliable sense of what class is like. Though I have

some positive peer evaluations in the past, I was not satisfied and seek to improve. From

these observations alone it would seem that I’m modeling best practices, but my

questions need something more. This is where arts-based inquiry becomes vital.

Arts-based inquiry forces us to think beyond traditional borders (Pinnegar &

Hamilton, 2009). In hopes of creating something beyond text, I chose to record the

14


“noise” of the classroom. Rather than look at transcripts of the discussions of video

recordings of sessions, looking at waveforms (visual representations of dynamic audio

files) of the noise begs interpretation. If a syllabus outlines practice—an artifact that

points to beliefs, values, and practices—at the outset of a semester and teacher

evaluations sum up the results at the end, looking at the ‘energy’ of the class through

noise recordings can give something unique; somewhere in the middle.

Sound from class meetings was captured via Blue Snowball iCE condenser

microphone in GAME 332 RS: Story Design for Games, a class that had 26 students

enrolled at the time of the study, meeting from 10:30 AM to 1:10 PM on Fridays.

The course is required for Computer Game Design students, as well as those in the Film

and Video Studies program in the Screenwriting Track. It is also designated as a Writing

Intensive Course by the university’s Writing Across the Curriculum Program, and also

designated as a Research and Scholarship Intensive course by the university’s Office of

Scholarship, Creative Activity, and Research program—as such, the course and instructor

as subject to assessment beyond the standard measures for other courses at the same

university.

Though individual voices may have been distinguishable through the recordings,

no transcription was planned and nothing that could identify unique individuals is present

in these findings. Recorded in a large computer classroom with high ceilings, wall-to-

wall windows on one side, and construction entirely of concrete, the space would

generally be considered not optimal for recording—for the present study, however, these

complications that muffle clarity were ideal.

15


Given the nature of the recordings, the researcher analyzed the waveforms for the

various recordings. A waveform is a visual representation of the shape or form created

by a wave, in this case sound waves. The sound captured was recorded using Apple’s

Garageband software, offering the ability to isolate and analyze the waveforms from

individual class recordings. This arts-based approach afforded a tremendous opportunity

for reflection and wide possibilities for varying interpretations. Rather than a traditional

transcription of speech from class or video observation, this method should allow a fresh

means of analysis and potential for discussion about the experience in the classroom

rather than the instructor’s practice.

Though crudely recorded, visual representations of two of our class meetings can

be found in the appendices (Figure 1 & Figure 2). These can be interpreted as showing

the varying levels of student interaction in the room. One of my goals in facilitating

student learning is encouraging collaboration with peers. In fact, peer review and editing

of documents is something I already use the online space to do with great success.

Answering my critical friend’s question of “What’s the importance of meeting in

person?” can begin with these images. In a self-paced environment, though beneficial for

the learning of some, being part of something communal can be lost. Getting ‘caught up’

in the energy of a classroom is, to my mind, an important part of the higher education

experience. Though this same sensation, with a similar outcome, could happen in an

online chat room or Skype session, this self-study hopes to gather the essence of the live

experience. Oversimplified; the classroom is the live show, the online format is a

broadcast.

16


Not specifically annotated in the appendices are possible ‘types’ of noise.

Though less appropriate for this study, and less reliable due to the crude recording

method, the noise can also be coded. Broadly, noises are either: lively (loud) activity,

moderate activity, laughter, individual voices, and the instructor’s voice. Carefully coded

and more reliably recorded, this method could speak volumes the in-class experience, tied

to various activities to better differentiate between those activities best-suited for f2f

instruction and online delivery.

17

Findings

Findings: Teaching Philosophy Stress Test

After analysis of the data collected and consultation with critical friends, the

findings of this self-study were mixed. The ‘Teaching Philosophy Stress Test’ provided

a means of contextualized reflection directly tied to my practice. Perhaps ironically, the

questions at hand in this study were addressed in the teaching philosophy, written several

years prior, though some contradictions were apparent. Pertinent to the question at hand,

my teaching philosophy mentions utilizing “online tools to keep the conversation going

outside of class, […] realizing that student feedback and collaboration can be even more

successful in the digital environment.” (Hudson, 2013, Appendix A) Interesting, then,

that my instinct is to hesitate moving away from f2f interaction with students; however, I

follow the statement above with a definitive statement that “these tools cannot replace a

good table read or workshop.” It would seem that my current research question was

asked and answered long ago, but with the tools of self-study I can revisit it in a more

meaningful way.

Critical friends noted specific themes throughout my reflection, mainly the idea of

valuing the student voice and facilitating learning rather than delivering content. The

blending of efficient delivery of content and a joyful experience can actually be key—the

two need not be mutually exclusive. In the context of this self-study, a course in games

writing, it’s important to note how unnatural writing is for students (Vendler, 2000).

Helping students develop enthusiasm is key to making the skills stick, different for

writing where a process is taught rather than content. If we have “too little delight in the

access of the knowledge, it won’t stick (Vendler, 200, p. 30). With only a semester to


teach vitally important skills of writing, analysis, and criticism, it would seem that the

“joy” factor must be there for students and professor alike.

Findings: Noise Recordings

How do we measure things like joy, enthusiasm, energy? Traditionally these are

not part of the assessment lexicon in higher education. In fact, only five of the sixteen

items in the professor’s course evaluation deal with the professor/student relationship of

the course of the semester. Other items deal with the planning of the course, the time

taken to return graded materials, and choice of textbook (APPENDIX F). The visual

interpretation of noise recordings might be an answer to the “middle” of the course.

Engaging the waveforms via arts-based inquiry seemed logical once underway.

Visually interpreting the waveforms offered challenges, chief among them a possible lack

of precision. Weber and Mitchell (2004) submit that “[w]hat a specific image can mean

or represent at any given time depends on a lot of factors, including who is doing the

viewing and the context in which the image is viewed” (p. 42). In a sense, then this

noise recording portion of the study was as much an experiment with method as it was an

effort to answer the researchers initial question.

Though further studies would benefit from improved recording techniques, some

basic trends surfaced. In general, spikes in volume were dismissed as either a recording

anomaly—the instructor tends to pace about the room and would occasionally pass a few

feet from the microphone while talking. Prolonged instances of volume increases,

defined as lasting for more than a minute, were analyzed in terms of their frequency,

duration, and with thought toward the type of assignment/activity.

19


Generally speaking, collaborative student activities geared towards graded

assignments (grade-bearing) meant less noise activity, while warm up (practice-honing)

activities like specific writing prompts and challenges accounted for the prolonged noise

activity. The distinction between these is important when questioning the role of the

professor in classroom learning versus the face-to-face model. Vaughn (2010) challenges

faculty in this situation to engage in a transformational shift where students co-construct

knowledge through interactions. Interestingly, then, the activities related to grade-

bearing material seemed to produce less energy in the classroom.

One critical friend highlighted the peril in the noise recording assumption that

prolonged increases in class volume equaled, well, anything at all. Roughly recalled, his

criticism held that noise “doesn’t mean that they’re learning.” The distinction between

grade-bearing and practice-honing activity speaks even louder in the light of this criticism

—the only “evidence” of learning comes in the form of well-wrought assessment of

carefully-engineered assignments. If students enter the grade-bearing exercises with less

enthusiasm, less joy, it may speak to a larger issue of students working for grades rather

than improvement.

Of note, is the last 20 minutes of our March 13th meeting (Appendix B, Figure 5).

It represents a film screening and discussion where students viewed and reacted to the

final scene from Last of the Mohicans (1992). If there is something to be said for the

“live” nature of class where students share an experience, perhaps something as simple as

screening a film can mean more when we’re gathered together? A question for another

time, but worth noting.

20


Discussion and Self Critique

My literature includes the thoughts Helen Vendler (2000) shares about the

teaching of writing: we (writing/literature instructors) seek to teach others to love what

we have loved. That is what I do in class, but now it seems this self-study has taken the

same path: “Writing not done out of love will never serve to teach others how to love

what we have loved” (p. 31). My self-study, with its faults exposed for the world to see,

is an act of love. Adding my voice to the larger conversation will hopefully help others

embrace the uncertainty of practice and embrace their passion for teaching in meaningful

ways.

In attempting to answer the question “How is instructor/professional identity

effected by the transition of a f2f course to the online format and how can self-study

methods answer this question, improving professional practice? “ the key was to start by

identifying that in-class teacher identity. Open to viewing flaws in my practice, and even

questioning why I teach in the first place, self-study allowed me to take an honest look at

my current practice. With this investigation, literature review, and aided by critical

friends I can now begin the move toward the online model with greater confidence. It

appears that I will teach my first hybrid section of GAME 332 RS: Story Design for

Games this coming summer.

The theme of instructor emotion was the real catalyst for this project, as reflected

in Analytical Memo 1. I questioned my hesitation moving away from f2f teaching in

terms of my own emotional need for student adoration/approval, assuming this was a

weakness in my teaching. Digging deeper into the question—dealing with self-doubt and

challenging my own beliefs was no easy task—I have come to realize that this emotional

21


tie to the classroom is not ‘bad’ or ‘weak’ on my part. Through this study, it now appears

that my love of teaching and sincere goal of engaging students should be empowering;

teaching with emotion means that an instructor cares beyond professional accolades.

Revisiting my teaching philosophy, a document that was part of my application to

my current position, through memory work drove this idea home. In it, I question my

practice up front and through reflection realize that I justify my practice to an extent from

the outset. I do feel confident as an instructor, but living educational theory and

constantly challenging myself to improve will serve as a productive outlet for the self

doubt I am prone to (outside of my professional life). Presumably, many professors have

such a document somewhere in a digital dropbox or tucked away in a file cabinet.

Perhaps we should dust them off and tear them apart in the name of improved practice

and professional growth.

My noise recording idea was the direct result of critical friends. It is my attempt

to answer: “What do my best classes look like?” Though the results of the arts-based

inquiry of class recording waveforms lack some of the rigor needed for any statistical

analysis, they gave me a whole new way to think about the classroom experience for me

and my students. Though performing as the “sage on the stage” is thought to be negative,

I wonder now if that same “stage” should be embraced.

I love performance, mainly theater and live music. I also love to read plays and

listen to the same music in the comfort of my home, on the Metro, in the gym, etc.. The

point of seeing theater, in my estimation, is not the show itself but rather the discussion

you have with others about the experience over dessert following the performance.

Though I have read the script beforehand, and in many cases wrote pages and pages in

22


response, there is no substitute for being there. The same goes for music: the fidelity of a

well-engineered recording that is the product of months in the recording studio can be

breathtaking, but seeing those performers live is something else. The idea of sitting in

your seat and having an experience of your own, though with the ‘tribal’ essence of the

assembled group, is what I seek most.

Reflecting now, that is the impulse behind recording the noise of the class.

Instead of trying to parse out the language of students or review my quality as a lecturer,

the hope is to capture the feeling we get in the classroom. Without some insight into that

experience, the convenience of online teaching and its proven effectiveness is the logical

way forward—we would listen to the recording of our favorite artists, never seeking a

live performance. I joked in my self-study course that I wanted to co-author a paper with

a critical friend, one who is a professional coach outside of higher education, and call it

“I’m a little bit coaching; I’m a little bit rock and roll.” There is some truth in jokes—

that term, “rock and roll,” might speak volumes to my passion for the classroom

experience.

Early in this study I questioned instructors’ passion for online teaching, calling

on my reader to ask a friend who teaches: “Would you keep teaching if you never stepped

foot on a campus or had f2f contact with a student?” Though phrasing the question in

absolute terms was good for research, critical friends helped me realize that this shift to

the online format need not be all-or-nothing. My instinct to use these drastic terms—

absolutes are something I avoid with vigor—plays into the larger implications for higher

education. With some entire degree programs now offered completely online, the fear

that the “delicate guidance novices require” could be lost entirely (Wilcox, Watson, &

23


Patterson, 2004). Would higher education survive without instructor and student together

in the classroom?

Critical friends aided me in answering my question; also in improving as a

practitioner and growing as a teaching professional. It was especially hard to have my

motives called into question. As mentioned previously, I am prone to self doubt and am

in the same “fake it ‘til you make it” club with many junior faculty. Coming through the

process of self-study, emerging from the inner-most cave, I have indeed been tested on a

level beyond finishing a dissertation and constructing a strong tenure case. Those are

well-worn paths with substantial hoops to jump through along the way—this process may

have been an even greater challenge. I think critical friends, even the peers and loved

ones I have shared this study with, would say I have changed and in ways that will

benefit my teaching and scholarship.

The change will hopefully continue. As a sample among many of early-career

professors trying to navigate the landscape of higher education, my self-study has helped

me embrace the fact that my many doubts are really just room for growth. Without them,

teaching would be stale and I would not serve my students well. Self-study has taken

these doubts from ‘fears’ and turned them into ‘questions’ that I might continue to answer

and help others answer.

Particularly difficult to answer, I found myself resisting the definition of my own

values and beliefs what the chief struggle of this exercise. When asked about these

important aspects of my professional self, I always approached with a “not necessarily”

attitude, holding that my beliefs did not really exist. That impulse is part of my academic

self: everything relies on context for meaning and depends on who is making meaning;

24


language to describe these things is ultimately meaningless. Struggling with that impulse

will continue, though now I see self-study methods as a way forward. I may not arrive at

right and/or wrong answers, but strong research and dissemination of findings can help

others.

The shift to online education is underway, and though it may not be an absolute

shift away from the classroom we as professionals owe it to ourselves and our students to

engage the uncertainty in a meaningful way. Looking back at one’s teaching philosophy

is a great way to start—regardless of the question we seek to answer about practice,

revisiting it can be a guidepost and reminder of our ideal teaching selves. Even if not for

a grant application, promotion, or tenure dossier, revising that document and renewing

our dedication to the field should be a regular undertaking.

As for the noise recording method, it is at the very least an attempt to capture

what happens in the classroom. Others in my field may not adopt the same research

design—I hope to refine it in the future because I see potential—but it could serve as a

call to try something new in self-assessment. Stop relying on course feedback and

student performance. Find something that speaks to you. Regardless of the outcome, the

process will yield something important that leads to professional growth. If my greatest

contribution to the field, for now, is inspiring others to question not only professional

practice, but the processes through which they question, this self-study has been a

worthwhile undertaking.

25


Conclusion: a lesson from writing class

When helping students craft a story, we often rely on the three-act structure. It is

not the only way to tell a story, but instead a model to follow that leads to better plot

development and writing. Students soon find they have an idea for a beginning and an

end, but get to the long middle and become lost. Usually this results for a lack of

character development from the outset, and other details needed to create a world,

because many of those important details are not in the script. “You have to know it, even

if you never tell your audience,” is a sentiment I often share. Now I am in the long

middle, a place where the story is underway and we have the basic themes and

overarching conflict. At this point in the story, the good writer includes a plot point or

pivot that complicates things for our main character. The portion of the story leading up

to it has to be included in the rationale or the story is not believable, but an inciting

incident changes the scenario and the character to move things forward.

This self-study may be that plot point (Plot Point 1) that complicates matters.

Professors like myself play the role of the protagonist, they have to shift their actions and

expectations as a result of new knowledge, but doing so while acknowledge the past and

keeping the overarching conflict in mind. That is my story; that is our story as

professionals. If we avoid those inciting incidents that complicate things and put us in

peril, we will never grow.

26


References

Brandenburg, R. (2009). Assumption interrogation: an insight into a self-study researcher’s

pedagogical frame. In Tidwell, D.L., et al (Eds.). Research methods for the self-study of

practice, self-study of teaching and teacher education practices 9. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-

4020-9514-6.12

Cunningham, D. (1996). From distance mode to the classroom. (Cover story). Primary Educator,

2(6), 1.

Davidovitch, N. (2009). Myths and facts about student surveys of teaching the links between

students' evaluations of faculty and course grades. Journal of College Teaching &

Learning, 6(7), 41-49. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Fish, S. (2005). Who's in Charge Here?. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(22), C2-C3.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Jones, P., Naugle, K., & Kolloff, M. A. (2008). Teacher Presence: Using Introductory Videos in

Online and Hybrid Courses. Learning Solutions Magazine. Retrieved from

https://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/107/teacher-presence-using-introductory-

videos-in-online- and-hybrid-courses/print

Oliver, B. Tucker, B. Gupta, R., & Yeo, S. (2008). eVALUate: an evaluation instrument for

measuring student’s perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment

& Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(6), 619-630. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Pinnegar, S., & Hamilton, M.L. (2009). Data collection methods in S-STEP research. In Self

Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices 8

27


Redmond, P., & Lock, J. V. (2011). Does teaching presence change over time? Paper presented

at Global Learn Asia Practice 2011 - Global Conference on Learning and Technology,

Brisbane, Australia (April, 2011).

Samaras, A. (2011). Self-study teacher research: Improving your practice through collaborative

inquiry (pp. 103-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Samaras, A.P., Hicks, M.A., & Berger, J.G. (2010). Self-study through personal history. The

International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices.

Vaughan, N. D. (2010). A blended community of inquiry approach: Linking student engagement

and course redesign. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 60-65.

Vendler, H. (2000). What we have loved, others will love. In Richter, D.H. (Ed.) Falling into

theory: Conflicting views on reading literature, 2nd edition. (pp. 31-40) Boston, MA:

Bedford/St. Martin’s.

Weber, S. & Mitchell, C. (2004). Visual artistic modes of representation for self-study. In J. J.

Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds). International handbook

of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 979-1037). Dordrecht, The

Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Whitehead, J. (2010). How do I improve my practice? Creating and legitimating an epistemology

of practice. In Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 1:1,

91-104, DOI: 10.1080/71369312

Wilcox, S., Watson, J., & Paterson, M. (2004). Self-study in professional practice. In Loughron,

J. J., Hamilton, M.L., LaBoskey, V., & Russel, T. (eds.) International Handbook of Self-

Study in Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (pp. 273-312).

28

Appendix A: Teaching Philosophy Stress Test

Stress-Testing a Teaching PhilosophyLooking for evidence of my teaching practice beyond personal observation in

class, I decided to revisit some relevant documents—in this case, the teaching philosophy I submitted (October of 2013) in applying for my current role. The following will break down the statement in regards to my teacher identity, role in the classroom, and how those two might factor into the realm of online education.

Revised October, 2013 / Reflected March, 2015

Making Tables: Empowering Students to Develop a Voice

Often times, the phrase “for our purposes” finds its way into our discussions and

assignments—this is a constant reminder that our class is a group endeavor. Each is

entitled to embrace his or her opinion, but occasionally, for our purposes, we must adopt

a certain level of inter-subjectivity to get the most out of our semester together. We think

about ourselves as members of various communities, chief among them our audiences

and end users. First we must question ourselves, being mindful of our influences, before

we can hope to participate creatively and productively in our culture.

Reflection: I notice now my tendency to justify practices to my students in real-time.

“For our purposes” might neglect the students’ own desires, the statement reminding

them that they are participating in a course rather than growing as individuals. Along

those same lines, I feel the need to highlight the time limitation, “our semester together,”

almost making an excuse for the limited experience they will gain from the course.

I generally cast my students as makers of tables. They strive to make sturdy tables of the

best materials, on time and on budget. They must first research the materials and decide

which is best for this particular project. My courses start with a study of exemplars in

“what works” and analysis of “what the author does” to the audience. Once students

begin to appreciate best practices and understand important voices in the medium, their


voices take over. Once we are confident in achieving the table’s basic purpose, we can

focus on artistry.

Reflection: The table-maker analogy is one that I borrowed from a game-writing text—

one I always attribute in quoting the line. At it’s heart is the notion of hard work being

the key to unleashing creativity. I hope this sentiment frees them from fear rather than

limiting scope; the blank page is daunting, so putting it in terms of a tangible (yet

complex and vital) object might help them move forward.

Check your syllabus: “We will write every single day.” I utilize online tools to keep the

conversation going outside of class, to the point of realizing that student feedback and

collaboration can be even more successful in the digital environment. These tools cannot

replace a good table read or workshop, however, so this just allows for a more intense

classroom experience.

Reflection: This paragraph speaks for itself in terms of my current project—I praise the

use of online tools then dismiss their ability to replace the f2f experience I refer to as

“intense.” Questioning my word choice, I see that my focus on f2f meetings is

“experience” rather than utility. I see this as my embracing the flipped-classroom model

to an extent, but should an instructor be looking to make time “useful” rather than

“intense”? One key question for my study: “What can the f2f experience provide that the

online experience cannot?”

Seeing the look on a student’s face when his or her first scene is read in class remains a

constant source of joy. Be it dread or delight, the author becomes an audience member

with 25 other students hanging on every word. Regardless of previous notions of their

abilities, the students see their words come to life—instead of discussing North By

Northwest, we now spend our time considering “2-Character Scene: Draft One.” After

30


all, we can only determine if a table is sturdy once our elbows have rested on it for a

while.

Reflection: JOY. There it is. I do love the classroom when things go well—the

experience for students does something more than produce “better work.” If my goal is

to help them “work better,” these looks on faces might be one of the chief measures of

success or failure in that regard. For the purposes of the study at hand, I’ll leave my

motives aside and focus on the students, though I am always skeptical.

As skilled craftsmen, our task is not the reinvention of traditions, but rather skillful

execution of those most relevant to our individual purposes. Mastered first, these skills

are what enable the artist to come through. Though my enthusiasm and excitement for

new methods in the class might call for experimenting with new things, my first

responsibility to students is to make sure their tables stand sturdily.

Reflection: My hesitance to move to the online format could be read as a contradiction,

here: why would I hesitate to take on this challenge? It could be a sincere, deeply-rooted

belief that it’s not in the best interest of my students. Perhaps I simply lack the

confidence to conduct a class without the ability to “read the room,” but that same

ability—permitting some self praise—might be what makes me effective as a teacher.

I will continue to grow through reflection, along with each and every one of my students.

If they throw away their manuscripts and forget our lessons on Aristotle, they will leave

with a new respect for themselves as artists and craftsmen. In my humble view,

transmitting information and giving summative feedback is the most basic function of

teaching. The true goal should be empowerment. A student that asks questions and

relentlessly pursues answers in the classroom will use those skills for a lifetime of

learning.

31


Reflection: Here’s that growth. I do believe in empowering students; it is how I

see the role of higher education, regardless of discipline. With the pressures of

tenure, though, I also know that the clarity of that information and the timeliness

of returning grades can be counted over “nobler” intentions. The hesitance to

moving online line may come from protecting my own interests: wanting stellar

reviews to help with my dossier, not wanting to risk something new and failing.

Confidence in my abilities allows me to experiment in the classroom, experience

provides me with the judgment to know what works, and my passion for student learning

makes each new challenge a pleasure to pursue.

Reflection: Confidence? I am indeed living a contradiction at this point. Though this

closing thought is meant to show confidence—makes for a better philosophy statement in

a job application—it really may just be for show. Questioning practice doesn’t have to

come from doubt and insecurity, though, so it would seem that I still

have the chance to decide what this philosophy “means” more than define what it “is.”

32

Appendix B: Classroom Noise Recordings

Figure 1: Noise Recording from March 13th, 2015

Figure 2: Noise Recording from March 20th, 2015

Figure 3: First 40 minutes

Figure 4: Second 40 minutes

Figure 5: Last 20 minutes from March 13th, 2015 (Film Screening)


Appendix C: Analytical Memo 1 & Peer ResponsesSeth Andrew HudsonEDRS 825Dr. SamarasJanuary 27th, 2015

Analytical Memo 1My personal relationship to the phenomenon:

I am connected to my personal learning event as a lifelong student and educator. Often, the line between professional practice and artistic expression continues to solidify then blur as my career continues. As I think about better serving my students, then, I am naturally exploring my own processes/fears/aspirations/habits/etc.. I wonder if I will be better able to serve my students by pushing further with my own creative work. Rather than a practitioner in a creative field that ends up in education, my goal was always education. I am not—at least I don’t think—doubting my credentials or qualifications, but wondering if personal and professional benefit may come from spending more time with my creative self.

Reflection on the research question:My current research question, one that will undergo many revisions, asks: can an

emotional need for student approval/admiration/validation be a positive in good teaching? I arrived here by questioning my own motives for preferring in-person teaching to the online environment, and realized that I might derive more pleasure out of the classroom experience. At first this felt wrong: shouldn’t a real “pro” be able to teach anywhere?

Possible links and other connections:Linked to my question are thoughts surrounding the spread of online education,

the attitudes of different stakeholders involved in online/traditional educations, and a revisiting of teacher attitudes. Also linked is teacher education. Though not all in higher ed receive any “formal” training in this regard, we might revisit our approach. (BONUS QUESTION(s): Can a professor who “learned” to teach face-to-face be as effective online as one who came through the online ranks all the while? Can a student be expected to learn in this environment when there earliest education was traditional?)

My place in the study:I, luckily, was provided with some teacher training in grad school, and was able to

teach from the beginning—a 23-year-old teaching English Comp to 19-year-olds. My previous training, and a career enhanced by reflective practice, make me well suited to pursue this inquiry. Since, I’ve learned from other educators by participating in various collaborative groups, finding that many ties exist in teaching across disciplines. Many ties that I tend to trace back to composition. Those things that I know, however, are all up for questioning once again.

The timeliness of the study:Given challenges in regards to budget, class size, 4-year completion rates, job

placement, and the like, a fresh look at how and why we teach in higher ed is overdue.

35


This question of in-person v online interaction may illustrate changes that need to be made, or at least bring some new questions to the front pages.

Potential Problems with the study:This is not therapy. The research question started there, though, so I have to

watch out for the pitfall of making this too personal/specific. Personal is good, but I would like to keep half an arm’s distance away so I have a better sense of emerging themes. Another problem may be disciplinary specificity—I teach creative writing and cultural studies, mostly. Hopefully, enough legwork and reading will guide this in useful directions that can aide my colleagues and future professors.

Reflection on Analytical Memo 1:Did I just right an analytical memo? (Tried to rely on Saldana for guidance) I’m

not sure. This future/current “study” I keep referring to is loosely formed, even in my head. This is usually the sort of thing that gets honed in literature review, but I’ve wandered from my comfort zone.

Peer Response Notes for Analytical Memo

Author: Seth Andrew Hudson

Peer respondent name: Alice Petillo

Seth, you are clearly “in” your self-study project. This is my current area of weakness so I found this interesting. I noticed that your memo seems to explore the following 3 topics:

1. You describe your professional direction as being fundamentally aimed toward education, using the vehicle of teaching creative writing. I think you may be wondering about your professional identity and whether having your own creative writing work is a necessary condition of being an effective teacher of creative writing. You express a desire to keep growing, ie. to move out of your comfort zone.

2. You are examining various sources of your current preference for f2f teaching: your own past history as a learner, your past history as a teacher teaching composition, your enjoyment of the context of the classroom, and the validation you receive from positive interactions with students.

3. You have been and are engaged in reflective practice and want to apply that here.

I would be interested more specifics about the mentioned ties that you trace back to composition. I believe this might be a reference to your earliest teaching experiences.

36


Your wonderings seemed to echo the quote about critical consciousness that Andrea made in her Analytic Memo. You are aware that your ideas come from your particular life experiences and you want to be open to how different experiences or ideas might inform the online experience. I wonder if you may also be asking yourself what might the process of adapting to an online teaching experience look like for you.

Author’s name: Seth Hudson

Peer respondent name: Elizabeth Coberly

a. What do you find most interesting and significant about this analytical

memo? Why?

I like how easy it is to hear Seth in his memo. His tone brings me

right in and it sounds like he is right there talking about his topic. There is

nothing stuffy about it and that makes it easy to read. His section

headings were also very helpful in terms of setting out a flow from one

point to the next.

I also like how personal the memo is. He is very clear about trying

to understand his own motivations as an educator and wanting to learn

about how the change from in-person to online education impacts a

teacher’s sense of validation. I would think this would be a very timely

topic for research.

b. Do you have any questions about this analytical memo? (e.g., any points that

are unclear to you that you think could be explained more fully.) Why?

I would like to know more about why “spending more time with my

creative self” is significant. This thought only emerged once and it is a powerful

statement but I didn’t see any more explanation on why that might be important.

c. Any other comments?

37


This topic sounds fascinating and I would love to hear more about his

findings. I think this may be critical work for 2015 and beyond.

38

Appendix D: Analytical Memo 2 & Peer ResponsesSeth Andrew HudsonEDRS 825Dr. Samaras10 February 2015

Analytical Memo 2—A Major Challenge: How?

Research Questions: In preparing to try a move to the hybrid course environment, self-study seems a productive way forward. Though there exists a core of time-honored best practices, and an impressive body of knowledge regarding online teaching and learning still forming, how does an individual navigate such a change in format. As all educators know, there are “good” class meetings and “bad,” regardless of the theoretical base of the practice. Before making this move—these are my students and my class, so the emotional stakes are high—and studying it in a meaningful way, I must first ask/answer: What in my practice, currently, authenticates my professional self? (How can this knowledge inform/enhance moving a traditional workshop environment to a hybridized course model?)

Only with that answer, and related changes to behavior and practice, can I hope to address my ultimate question: How can I utilize my unique strengths to design and deliver a course that maximally benefits students?

Research Methods:Living educational theory (LET), memory work, and narrative inquiry will drive this research. Through honest, systematic, and transparent collection of existing materials, memory work will be enhanced through reflection and even a narrative approach to relevant past documents created by the researcher as well as anecdotal evidence. Additionally, using narrative inquiry to understand and make sense of the other data will add a layer of complexity to the study. Trying to discover where I’m really coming from is key to this project as a whole. The LET framework will afford me some guidance in challenging my own assumptions and lead to new knowledge regarding my practice, my beliefs, and the relationship between the two.

Data Collection: What and Why?As mentioned above, I hope to scour my digital and actual memory for artifacts. I plan to use documents from my teaching, professional development (framing statements and teaching philosophies), and even teaching-related work as a graduate student. My own work in regards to the subject of writing and the teaching of writing, may also be sited. I think these examples are important to call upon, as they were written “honestly” in the past and I can observe a healthy distance in the context of this study.

Additionally, as I am performing this study in the context of moving my course to a hybrid model, I will be collecting media from my class in the form of short videos and


general audio recording. These will not be looking to extract spoken “text” from the course, but rather to document the student reaction to various activities—getting at what we “actually do” in our time together. I have my syllabi and list of assignments; I have student evaluations and my own surveys, but I want to capture what “being there” is all about to the student. Asking these questions directly may be a natural next step in future work, but these very basic methods will hopefully give a sense of the “real” classroom.

Context: Making it MatterThis study will be valuable to those challenged with utilizing online tools for their teaching in the future. Moving forward, some may not have a choice. Specifically, I hope to target two audiences: instructors of game design and instructors of performing and visual arts. The former is a relatively new discipline in higher education, just now beginning to codify its best practices. The latter benefits from centuries of tradition, though those same traditional models may hinder innovation when it comes to online migration.

Validity: Measures and MeansChiefly, validity will come from the review and feedback of critical friends, as well as adherence to best practices involving LET and narrative inquiry. I am already meeting with critical friends in this regard, one an experienced online writing instructor and another who teaches computer programming at the graduate level. These varied backgrounds will help the study, especially as I teach in a subject that lies somewhere between the two.

Additionally, I will change my practice as a result of the study and implement newly identified strategies into my hybrid teaching (provided the course runs, dependent on enrollment). Lastly, the class will return to the classroom the following fall, so I will have the opportunity to test the new knowledge I’ve created.

Peer Response Notes for Analytical Memo


Peer respondent name: Tom Opfer

a. What do you find most interesting and significant about this analytical memo? Why?Seth, your ultimate question is well-written. It is evident you have a passion for this research and will change your current practices with your findings. It is evident that you have spent time thinking about this and have your critical friends identified. I look forward to reading more about your work throughout the semester.

40


b. Do you have any questions about this analytical memo? (e.g., any points that are unclear to you that you think could be explained more fully.) Why?There are so many variables in online learning, but it appears that you are open-minded to receiving your results and formulating best practices.

c. Any other comments?It was nice to read your memo. I have certainly listened to your comments in class, but it is nice to see this in writing. I know little about the LET framework, but I look forward to reading more about your work this semester.

Peer Response Notes for Analytical Memo 2


Peer respondent name: Dalal Alkandil

a. What do you find most interesting and significant about this analytical memo? Why?

One of the things I liked best about your memo is that it is so well written and clear that you see the importance and value in hybrid courses or blended learning (if that is an appropriate term). Your experience is the best medium to take this study further. I think it is wonderful that you plan to use living educational theory (LET), memory work, and narrative inquiry to capture a well-rounded finding. I look forward to learning more as I read your work this semester.

b. Do you have any questions about this analytical memo? (e.g., any points that are unclear to you that you think could be explained more fully.) Why?

Your research question includes the “I” aspect. I very am interested to see how it may develop over the term.

c. Any other comments?

Your data collection is wonderful however I hope you are not taking in more than you need for this project.

41

Appendix E: Analytical Memo 3 & Peer Responses

Seth Andrew HudsonEDRS 825Dr. SamarasMarch 24th, 2015

Analytical Memo #3: So What and For Whom?I was engaged with “so what” early on in my academic career. The simple

formula for interesting sentences in academic writing was: “tell me something; then tell me why I should care.” This sentiment, shared by an English Literature professor struck a chord. Instead of making a convincing argument with reasoned-logic and proof, I was simply making my reader care. Mind you, these are likely just two ways of saying the same thing, but making someone care about what you say gave my academic writing purpose.

This sentiment carries into the question “So What? (and for whom), in that I am attempting to connect with colleagues beyond numbers and accepted metrics. My research question asks, what happens to instructor identity when moving from f2f to online engagement? Self-study is most useful in answering this question because we all vary in discipline, pedagogy, relationship with technology, and teaching style. In other words, it’s time for instructors to stop reading Chronicle articles about moving online and get in the messy sandpit themselves.

So What? Balancing the self and the self for others.I am just an example of a junior faculty member teaching at a large pubic university—sharing coming experiences with others in the same boat, the push to move courses online is present and the potential for improving practice with self-study is there for us. Reflective practice is already a big factor in the professional development of many, but self-study can take those skills to the next level while helping instructors move online with the same quality and personality they currently display in the classroom.

So What? BOLD claims. Modeling best practices in teaching is important, but it’s boring. Instead of inhabiting the model, this S-S asks instructors to claim and embrace a personal identity before moving online and modeling the best practices there. The goal is improved instruction; if one’s passion is for teaching then this really means improved quality of life! The model will not always hold the answer, so making the move to artistry—you’ve already mastered the models, right?—keeps the passion in teaching, passion that invigorates students and infects other faculty members.

So What For Me?I have taught in higher education since 2005, but have never once thought of my teaching through the lens of identity or personality. I saw craft, with the belief that research, practice, reflection, and more practice would make me a competent teacher. I think (hope) that strategy succeeded—a serviceable teacher that can run a classroom and teach the subject well. Now I want to be better, like I hope all of my colleagues want. That old


method of research/practice/reflection may have run its course. Setting new goals means new methods. This self-study will do that. In the process I will learn more about myself and more about the thing I love to do, so personal satisfaction will come right alongside the professional development.

So What and For Whom?My study asks us to question practice by finding identity where it might already exist.

What is your classroom like? Do your students care if you’re there? How does your teaching philosophy for an identity rather than your pedagogy? Do you want to teach online? Why? Would you keep teaching if you never stepped foot on a campus or had f2f contact with a student?

Ask a friend who teaches. What do they say? Getting the conversation started now will help practitioners down the road when those challenges come. It may be about moving your teaching out of the classroom, or something else entirely, but finding ways to challenge yourself and your practice in a meaningful way will improve your practice and push forward our craft.

The question of “so what?” took an ugly turn in class a few years ago. A group of students weren’t taking an exercise seriously, their work lacked depth so I asked them to tell me the “so what?” of their 3-4 page character analysis. When a group member responded, lacking level of inquiry I was hoping for, I responded “sure, but so what?” The student responded, agitated: “So what this class?! So what this stupid assignment?! So what everything?!”

Indeed.

Peer Response Notes for Analytical Memo 3Author: Seth HudsonPeer respondent name: Dalal AlQandilWhat do you find interesting and significant about this analytical memo?Wow Seth, I wish I was reading/responding to your memos earlier. You are such a luring writer. I love your comment stating “ it’s time for instructors to stop reading Chronicle articles about moving online and get in the messy sandpit themselves”. YES! It is time for us to stop reading about others’ writings and really get up and get in. Your quote reminded me of Benjamin Franklin’s quote “Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing”.I also loved when you stated “Reflective practice is already a big factor in the professional development of many, but self-study can take those skills to the next level while helping instructors move online with the same quality and personality they currently display in the classroom”. As my interest is in integrating the reflective portfolio for EFL pre-service teacher development, I too now believe that self-study is the new paradigm that allows educators to think outside the box in multiple fresh ways. I agree with you that it is self-study that is allowing us to explore our own unique inquiries and tailor-make our own methods to understand it! I thank you for bringing this up, I never thought about this question: Do your students care if you’re there? Like a true writer, you had ended your piece with something that left the reader to think about. “Indeed” so what?

43


Your writing is very articulate and engaging. I hope you think about writing a book upon receiving your PhD. It is evident that you are a good writing instructor and deep thinker. A winning quality for self-study researchers/writers.Do you have any questions about this analytical memo? Why?I didn’t understand this question: How does your teaching philosophy for an identity rather than your pedagogy? I look forward to reading what you write in this paper.Any other comments?I like how you have identified areas that are missing in the educators’ identity and without self-study we possibly would have neglected it for many more years. Perhaps you will explore this for your dissertation and create the next best question.

Author: SethDaniah Aleissa3-31-15

I like your study because online courses have always been a concern to me as a

teacher and as a student. I know I will struggle in such a setting. However, I liked that

you are looking more into the instructor identity. You need to think about yourself in the

classroom, instructor identity is not the same in every class; it changes based on f2f

depending on your students age, setting, etc.

How does your teaching philosophy for an identity rather than your pedagogy?

Could you talk more about this question I don’t completely understand what your saying

Do you want to teach online? Why? Would you keep teaching if you never stepped foot on a campus or had f2f contact with a student?

Great questions. I wouldn’t teach if I never stepped foot on a campus because I believe

f2f is important to know your students and there may not be the same level of

engagement among students or that they may not be as active or won’t participate as

much.

44


Appendix F: Teaching/Course Evaluations

45

Documents

SAH EDRS 825 Self Study Teacher Identity Final 042815