Faculty Development Targets/Levels
- Essential digital literacy: using computer and browser effectively, deep and wide web search, UAF specific info resources, essential information handling (managing links and resources). Outcome: demonstration of skills, initial implementation of personal environment.
- Modern curriculum design (UBD Framework) and pedagogy (Constructivism, Connectivism, Community of Learners, Critical Thinking, the Info Fluency triad). Outcome: substantial progress toward course design
- Understanding social software and the personal learning environment: survey of primary affordances and tools used to create collaborative learning experiences, individual use of those tools, info fluency skills (managing/sharing/assembling information) and subsequent customization of own PLE.
- Implementation: creating the learning and activity spaces, implementing curriculum design, class management.
- Harder to test for essential literacy parts of #1, but easier to have latter items demonstrated
- Level 2 and 3 could be reversed... maybe should be?
Placement
Determining where faculty fall in their proficiency of skills required in the levels mentioned above could be handled by having them complete a single activity, specifically designed at each level to demonstrate their mastery. Those who are already proficient should be readily able to point to examples where they are applying competencies (from each of the levels above) in their lives (and hopefully classes) currently.
For instance... in the case of #1, learners write about their personal learning environment and describe strategies they use when undertaking research to find information they are looking for. Where do they look? How do they store the information they find? How do they access it in the future? From where are they able to access it? (I also believe it is beneficial to have them include live links and/or screenshots to accompany the writing, not only to illustrate what their PLE currently looks like, but to also demonstrate their understanding of how to capture a screen image and manipulate it.)
Cohort-based Training
We highly recommend a cohort-based approach to faculty training. Participants in a cohort benefit from sharing ideas, problems, and solutions. They learn from questions and scenarios posed by peers. Ideally, they will form a support network to rely upon after the training has ended. Optimal cohort size is 15 members. We particularly like to see departmental cohorts; we believe this further enhances communication and motivation. We recommend providing an incentive to department heads for supporting group participation in training initiatives.
Faculty Training Course offered with Continuing Education Units
(note from Heidi - I don't think full-time faculty would care if it has CEUs or not - it might matter to an adjunct though)
CEUs may include academic short courses, non-credit workshops, supervisory skill seminars, or other professional training seminars. CEUs can be offered at anytime of the year and do not have to begin or end during an academic semester.
Instead of tuition, fees are collected. Fees begin at a minumum of $45 and traditional increase $10/additional ceu. There is no maximum amount that can be charged but if the fee is more than what the lowest level of tuition costs (currently $134/cr), then the network charge kicks in.
CEU credit courses are typically non-graded.
From the Board of Regent’s Policy Chapter 10
R10.04.090. Evaluation of Student Performance and Course Level Definitions.
Cooperation with departments will be vital. Suggested departments might be CIOS, ED, and JRN.
Motivation/Marketing
The innovation adoption curve of Everett Rogers is a model that classifies adopters of innovations into various categories, based on the idea that certain individuals are inevitably more open to adaptation than others. Is is also referred to as Multi-Step Flow Theory or Diffusion of Innovations Theory.
Five adopter categories are: 1.Innovators- Brave people, pulling the change. Innovators are very important communication. 2.Early Adopters- Respectable people, opinion leaders, try out new ideas, but in a careful way. 3.Early Majority- Thoughtful people, careful but accepting change more quickly than the average. 4.Late Majority- Skeptic people, will use new ideas or products only when the majority is using it. 5.Laggards- Traditional people, caring for the "old ways", are critical towards new ideas and will only accept it if the new idea has become mainstream or even tradition.
These categories follow a standard deviation-curve, very little innovators adopt the innovation in the beginning (2.5%), early adopters making up for 13.5% a short time later, the early majority 34%, the late majority 34% and after some time finally the laggards make up for 16%.
(see e.g. http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_rogers_innovation_adoption_curve.html and http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Levels%20of%20theories/macro/Diffusion%20of%20Innovation%20Theory.doc/)
The hope would be that this faculty training be adopted through the various departments by first training some early adopters, and then adding incentive for those adopters to market and diffuse their literacy.
Ideas for this motivation include:
- Added incentive for department heads or group leaders to gain literacy as a role model.
- Incentive for referral. Early adopter refers other people in their department and so on.
- Early adopters may provide incentive within their own department or to cohorts as they see a need for digital literacy and how that literacy can provide a higher return on investment from a worker.
I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones.
- –John Cage (1912 - 1992)
