Revitalize your Research Instruction!: Applying the ENGAGING Constructivist Framework in the Library Instruction Classroom

In a workshop filled with collaboration, reflection, activity, and discussion the presenters will explore Dr. Paul Vermette’s (2009) ENGAGING framework to make meaningful classroom experiences. Whether you teach face-to-face, online, or develop online tutorials, this workshop will help you hone your teaching skills and prepare you for your instructional needs. By exploring evidence-based practices that maximize student learning, participants will leave the session with teaching strategies to incorporate into library instruction and a framework for designing future sessions. Help your students have more fun, learn more and maybe even change their perceptions about what information literacy instruction can accomplish. Outline of 75 minute workshop: 3 minutes: Introduction of presenters and warm-up activity finding commonalities of pairs in the room 7 minutes (Vermette): Gronk activity in pairs (aka: A teaches B draws) 15 minutes (Moore): Debrief Gronk with the essential question, “Why did the learning happen during this activity” 6 minutes (Langridge): Enticing Effort – Building relationships using sentence starters - I hope the instructor… - I need to learn this because… - I will work hard if… 8 minutes (Moore): Negotiating Meaning – modeling 3 more thinking activities (thinking that causes learning) - Graphic Organizers – Use a T chart to compare… - True/True test (the participants are provided a true statement about information literacy instruction and they hypothesize why it is true) - Short article/paragraph – participants create questions they have about the passage 3 minutes (Vermette): Group Wisely – Why do we group in classes? How were you grouped for this session and how did the grouping have an impact on the conversation? 8 minutes (Moore): Active Learning – Participants make a list of activities we have done in the session to promote or entice learning (session facilitators will then share their list) 2 minutes (Langridge): Graphic Organizers – Linking back to the negotiating meaning activity and showing graphic organizer options in handout packet 2 minutes (Moore): Intelligence Interventions – Share 100 products that students can produce (1 page handout for participants to take with them) 5 minutes (Langridge): Note Making – Participants choose one phrase they have written down during the session and answer the question, “Why did you write it down” (promotes metacognition and reflection) 5 minutes (Moore): Grading Wisely – How can we incentivize students especially if the instructor of the course is not allocating points to the activities being done in the library. 10 minutes (Vermette): Closing and questions – Participants take a team ENGAGING quiz where they work to apply the framework to their own instructional need

Higher Education Instructional Change in a U.S. Context: Investigating the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Innovations at Niagara University

A metà Settembre 2013, due degli autori di questo articolo sono stati a Lecce (Italia) realizzando una presentazionein una conferenza sull’istruzione superiore. In quella sede, è stato possibile condividere con i partecipanti i dieci cambiamenti più potenti e significativi che hanno avuto luogo nel vasto panoramadell’accademia americana. L’elenco si componeva di sviluppi di tipo teorico; così come da diversi livelli di implementazione e pratica presso l’Università di Niagara, nell’angolo Nord Est degli Stati Uniti. Tra le iniziative messe in evidenza è stata prima e soprattutto menzionato il lavoro di Ernest Boyer sulla Scholarshipof Teaching and Learning (SoTL), ovvero la sua visione su strade alternative comunque accademiche, basate sulla didattica, per il successo della formazione universitaria. Il percorso tracciato dal movimento SoTL cambia la cultura universitaria, collocando l’insegnamento come priorità; e la “scholarship” (ricerca didattica) emergente dagli studi sull’innovazione didattica come una disciplina di ricerca che può alinearse ad altre nell’ambito accademico. Le esperienze all’Università Niagara forniscono sia un caso di studio dell’implementazione dei suddetti concetti in una moderna istituzione americana; sia un’opportunità per la comparazione con i vari casi delle istituzioni italiane. Inoltre, il lavoro portato avanti dall’università di Niagara risulta competitivo con riguardo ad alcune delle più riconosciute università americane, potendo essere considerato all’avanguardia dell’emergente movimentoSoTL. Questo articolo fornisce un breve resoconto e definizione del modello di Boyer su SoTL, suggerendo come le istituzioni potrebbero adottare tale paradigma sia come strategia per lo sviluppo professionale accademico, sia come adeguata base per la valutazione del lavoro del docente universitario

Think-Pair-Share as a Springboard for Study Buddies in a Virtual Environment

Many powerful teaching techniques have not yet fully transitioned from face-to-face use to the new remote instructional paradigm forced on teacher educators and teacher candidates during the pandemic. Experiences by candidates and by instructors in this new environment need to be compiled and shared as we head forward into structures and situations. This article describes how one such technique, Think-Pair-Share (Lyman, 1981) inspired assigning Study Buddies in a co-taught graduate level teacher education course, Managing Culturally Responsive Classrooms, in the summer of 2020. Two teacher candidates, two professors and Dr. Frank Lyman, offer insight and suggestions about this practice, its possibilities and its limitations as the course moved from a traditional implementation to a virtual setting

Planning Learning Experiences in the Inclusive Classroom: Implementing the Three Core UDL Principles to Motivate, Challenge and Engage All Learners

In 2010, Vermette, Jones, Jones, Werner, Kline & D’Angelo published a lesson planning format, the PLE (planned learning experience) designed to help teachers meet the demands of the ever diversifying, ever demanding American secondary classroom (Vermette et al., 2010). This model helps teachers do more than simply create a “lesson plan” (a list of maneuvers for the teacher), but provides a framework for crafting authentic, meaningful and engaging learning experiences for all students. Given this great challenge, this article deconstructs the PLE in light of the three core principles of UDL (Universal Design for Learning) and considers the ramifications of each on student achievement. Specific recommendations in the area of curricular design and lesson implementation in the inclusive classroom will be explored

Use of an Interdisciplinary Sustained Mentoring Collaboration to Enhance Teaching and to Develop a Tool Kit for Continued Growth

ABSTRACT During the 2012 spring semester, three individuals who care deeply about the quality of teaching and learning in higher education embarked on a journey with the humble goal of improving the teaching ability of a single accounting professor. This goal was broadened when they realized the "model" they developed had general application. The model included sustained mentoring across an entire semester followed closely by communications among the team members. The uniqueness of their approach included the addition of a student who was double-majoring in education and accounting to the team. It should be noted that this study is an extension of a similar study recently completed by two of the authors. The previous 36 BRC Journal of Advances in Education Vol. 2, No. 1 study produced the "Driver/Guide" model. This study extended the model to include the perspective of a student and the creation of a detailed list of teaching tools developed and implemented in the class. Though the studies were similar in nature, the results achieved in this study confirmed the robustness of the Driver/ Guide model and further validated its usefulness and applicability. As such, there are numerous references to the Driver/Guide 2011 study in this paper