Transforming Teaching: Technology’s Role

I was impressed by Daryl’s thoughtful blog post on the Dennis Trinkle article on the The 361° Model for Transforming Teaching and Learning with Technology (http://www.educause.edu/LibraryDetailPage/666?ID=EQM0543)

I’d like to respond to Daryl and to the article. I think we all can agree that “putting learning first” is a good idea, but the devil is in the details. Daryl linked to some great resources dealing with needs assessment. And while I don’t disagree that this can be key, I want to take it one step further: technology is helping us to change how we think about teaching and learning. The emphasis now is more on the learning, and professors as mentors for learners and not just keepers/dispensers of knowledge. The article talks about Depauw’s emphasis on learning outcomes. How widespread is the intentional tracking of learning outcomes on our campus? How do we assess and measure higher order thinking? Creativity?

About “Technology as the New Liberal Art” I have 2 separate thoughts. First, I am interested in the potential for collaboration inherent in this idea and the ways we have been talking about “information fluency.” Neither have agained a foothold in our curriculum and I think that needs to happen. Second, Daryl says: “dependent on a body of faculty willing to swap their teacher hats for learner hats on a regular basis. The current context of technology in education allows too much for the faculty to step aside so students are allowed direct access to technologists.” This is a really interesting observation. It is good practice for professors to be fellow (if more advanced) learners! But I wonder if it is true that it is not good for students to just go for it and use technologies they are comfortable with (or can get help with) to complete projects even if their professors aren’t proficient with that particular technology. I think of a project my students did one semester using iMovie. They understood I wouldn’t be helping them with the technical aspects. It went fine. But this isn’t always the case. This would be an interesting topic to talk more about. What kind of model are we going for?

One major block in our road has to do with number 2 on their list: align IT with institutional mission and culture. I had to do some digging to find our University Mission Statement, evidenced by the URL:http://president.richmond.edu/board/Mission_Statement.htm. It says:The mission of the University of Richmond is to sustain a collaborative learning and research community that supports the personal development of its members and the creation of new knowledge. A Richmond education prepares students to live lives of purpose, thoughtful inquiry, and responsible leadership in a global and pluralistic society.

I can understand the second sentence more than the first. But I am still pondering how we “align” with it… The IS mission statement is pretty clear, as is the CTLT’s, but the DePauw people make a point that I am hearing over and over: mission works when eveyone is clear about the mission and working on the same one!
Finally, I just wanted to note that we are using Dyknow on our cacmpus and that Dave Berque has been here to talk about it. I have seen how the tool has really transformed the math professors’ classroom time, assignments and even exams. I think this shows that technology works 2 ways: Berque saw problems and developed a tool to solve them, but now other professors using the tool find new ways to improve their classes! It works both ways: starting with the tool and starting with the problem.