CTLs Vs. Greg Maddux: An Optimistic Message from the Editor-in-Chief

?About a week away from my shipping this issue to our webmaster for publication, I felt compelled to thank Todd Zakrajsek once again for his contribution. As part of his special series for this journal, his contribution to this issue, I think, reclaims a sense of optimism for Centers of Teaching and Learning (CTLs). It certainly has been easy over the last two years to devote our attention to loss—loss of funding, of face-to-face programming, of projects that had been well underway. While I don’t for a second want to under-estimate the degree of loss many of us have indeed experienced, professionally as well as personally, I hope that this issue of JCTL might provide faculty developers with a moment to pride ourselves in what we have learned about ourselves and the possibilities of our work

Engage the Sages: A Model for Offering Professional Development to Faculty and Graduate Students in Teaching

Even at large, state research universities, teaching is the institution’s core mission. Accordingly, we designed, publicized, and offered a professional development series to enhance the teaching skills and excellence of our faculty and graduate students at our large, state research university. Our professional development series consisted of 18 voluntary events, seminars, and workshops over the course of the academic year. Participants who completed a specified number of event surveys and an overall reflection earned a professional development certificate in teaching. Data indicated that our series was personally valuable to our participants, and they believed it promoted teaching at our university

How Can CTLs Create and Support a Culture of Faculty Writing?

If it falls within their goals and mission, Centers for Teaching and Learning (CTLs) are typically positioned to create and support a faculty writing culture. In this paper, we wish to add to the growing research on the role CTLs play in faculty success, with a specific focus on writing. In particular, we describe how we created, supported, and enhanced a faculty writing culture on our campus. Over a three-year period, we developed a variety of short and longer-term writing initiatives designed to meet the needs and goals of our faculty members. We describe each of these initiatives, ways that we promote them, and how these activities contribute to our efforts to provide a supportive culture for faculty writers. We close with additional possibilities for CTLs to foster and sustain a culture of faculty writing

Writing Confidence and Capability: The Journey to Academic Identity

The expectation to create written publishable work as an academic credential can seem a burdensome imperative rather than a fulfilling activity. A writing group community enables academics (teachers and researchers) to revisit the joy of writing and to develop their writing repertoire and writer’s voice. This article captures the experience of writing group participants in a UK widening participation university. This writing group and its associated model is deconstructed and evaluated, to assess impact on confidence for writing and development of academic identity, allowing for useful recommendations and practical applications

Are Faculty Prepared to Teach Flexibly? Results from an Evaluation Study

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, there were hardly any formal/established professional development (PD) program s that intentionally prepared faculty to teach flexibly. The uncertainty around the modality of the fall 2020 semester, required faculty to be prepared to teach their courses in flexible methods in order to meet the needs of their students and the constraints of their institution. This article is an updated report on the evaluation of the Flexible Teaching for Student Success (FTSS) Initiative at Boise State University—a three-tiered faculty development initiative designed to prepare faculty to teach their courses in flexible formats. Evaluation surveys and a follow up survey were delivered to participants to assess the overall impact of the initiative on teaching practices. Results indicated that faculty had overall positive experiences in learning how to teach flexibly. The ratings were slightly more positive for Tier 1, which was of longer duration and more intensive, compared to Tier 2. Faculty in both tiers felt that purposeful training in flexible teaching made positive impacts on student learning. Implications drawn from the FTSS Initiative are shared to help inform the design of future PD programs that prepare faculty to teach flexibly

Flexible Teaching for Student Success: A Three-Tiered Initiative to Prepare Faculty for Flexible Teaching

The COVID-19 pandemic brought some unique challenges for the academic community. To counter the disruption caused by campus closure, faculty who taught in-person, blended, and hybrid courses needed to be prepared to pivot to remote instruction. This article describes the design and evaluation results of a three-tiered professional development initiative that focused on preparing faculty to teach with flexibility, whatever may be the necessary teaching environment. This design may serve as a model for professional developers building similar programs for faculty. The authors also share a resource—a Flexible Learning and Instruction Plan (FLIP)

Investigating the Transition to Remote Teaching During COVID-19: Recommendations for Campus Leaders and Centers for Teaching and Learning

To assess the perceived role and ability of centers for teaching and learning (CTLs) in supporting faculty in a time of crisis, we asked the following research questions: (1) how did CTL staff view their involvement in the process of responding to the coronavirus pandemic and shifting to virtual instruction; and (2) how did CTL staff perceive their capacity to help instructors transition to remote instruction. In pursuit of these questions, we conducted a content analysis of open-ended survey responses from 143 unique CTL staff participants. Our findings indicate that participants in CTLs who were highly involved in the pandemic response experienced active engagement (e.g., being at the table with decision-makers), frequent communication (e.g., regularly attending transition task force meetings), and recognition (e.g., feeling as though their expertise and input was valued and seen). CTL staff that did not feel involved in the process tended to frame their experiences as responding to top-down demands (e.g., fulfilling task-oriented roles rather than comprehensive engagement with decision-makers), navigating poor communication (e.g., receiving important information late in the process through email), and feeling undervalued (e.g., feeling taken for granted).  CTL staff that felt prepared to respond to virtual instruction discussed having extensive expertise and/or strategies outlined for success, previouslyprepared and/or robust programming for faculty support in place, and collaborations with other departments or centers on and off campus. However, CTL staff that felt less able to address the needs of faculty expressed problems with being understaffed and illequipped (e.g., having inadequate expertise). Across all respondents, CTL staff discussed working additional hours to address greater responsibilities and/or faculty demand. To maximize the CTL’s ability to support faculty, we suggest that institutions bolster opportunities for CTLs to be involved in the decision-making process (even if an advisory role) about policies impacting instruction and communicate frequently and openly with CTL directors. If unable to devote additional  resources for staffing, we recommend that administrators foster collaborative partnerships across departments (e.g., Office of Information Technology)  to leverage cross-institutional expertise. Furthermore, CTLs should work to develop relationships with faculty and institutional partners through continual programming, in order to build expertise, create relationships with faculty, and embed themselves within the larger institutional framework

Faculty Perceptions of the Spring 2020 Transition from Face-to-Face to Online Instruction: A Case Study of American University with Takeaways and Lessons Learned

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, American University (AU) transitioned all of its instruction online. Here, we report on the efforts undertaken to facilitate the transition and faculty perceptions of those actions and online teaching. In preparation for the transition, American University formed the Instructional Continuity (IC) team, comprised of the Center for Teaching, Research & Learning and the Academic Technology office. The IC team was charged with developing and implementing a responsive and comprehensive training and support schedule that began on March 16, 2020. A survey of faculty toward the end of the semester revealed general satisfaction with the support they received in transitioning to online instruction and with student learning outcome attainment. Faculty who had taught online before were more likely to show self-efficacy in online instruction compared to those who had not taught online before, despite similar, high satisfaction with student learning outcomes. We offer insights on key aspects of our efforts and the institutional structure that undergirded the largely successful transition of AU’s faculty to online instruction

CTLs in the Time of COVID: A Message from the Editor-in-Chief

I have to take myself back to 9/11 to find a match for a sustained national crisis even remotely similar to what the U.S. has experienced since the onset of COVID-19. One of my more dominant memories of that earlier catastrophe involves a writing course I taught that day, a class that started just after the second tower had fallen. For all we knew, we were at war; and assessing for myself the diversity of that particular room full of students, I began to solicit comments from as many class members as possible, trying to help students emerge as speaking subjects before any wartime narrative might vilify a group with which they aligned. In the midst of these awkward discussions (no one really knew what to say), one student shouted an expletive and slammed a paper folder onto his desk. “My paper,” he said, with a tone of angry disappointment, “is about friendship.” As I came to understand it, his distaste for his own project stemmed from a reckoning with relevance, a perspective forced from the urgency of world events. A hastily written paper on friendship, one of those papers a student hoped to be finished rather than actually be good, had no place on a world stage. While I am aware of no center for teaching and learning (CTL) worker who wishes their programming to be anything less than good, the COVID pandemic has produced for us all a similar reckoning with relevance

Recovering from Burnout and Budget Cuts by Cultivating Faculty Writing Communities

Valdosta State University (VSU) implemented writing-focused faculty learning communities (FLCs) to recover from burnout and budget cuts. Specifically, Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT)- sponsored faculty writing communities at VSU build community across ranks and disciplines, promote a growth mindset, and create a supportive safe space for faculty writers to cultivate resilience and care for themselves, colleagues, and VSU. The essay draws on existing literature about burnout, FLCs, and centers for teaching and learning, reviews institutional history, and analyzes participant observations, self-reflections of facilitators, and personal narratives from participants in faculty writing communities at VSU. The authors ultimately argue that center sponsored faculty writing communities can be a “change agent” for individuals and institutions in crisis, renewing college campuses as intellectually and socially vital places