Student essay submissions have already arrived at the department offices and program directors have begun the review and editorial process. Artwork developed by students has also become an integral part of the book with both the cover art and thematic icons growing out of work created by the students.

While the contributions have been piling up, the ultimate goal of this cumulative work is not merely to show off the work of a few, but to engage with ideas of the many. To this end, the program is also soliciting submissions from professors. Given the desire to collaborate and share ideas across campus, it makes sense to provide a forum for both students and faculty to share their ideas, their beliefs and their writing with one another. “This is an important question to ask,” says Dr. Devine, “regardless of whether it’s graded or not”, and certainly regardless of whether you’re a humble freshman or a venerated Ph.D.

One might be tempted to think that the end of a semester allows teachers and students to end our engagement with the curriculum, but truly effective teaching rests on ongoing interaction with materials, questions and each other. Continuing our examination and exploration of beliefs and values in a free exchange of ideas, as the Honors Program has suggested, allows us to do just that.

If you are faculty member interested in contributing to the Honors Program’s publication project, you can contact Jodi Devine or Paul Moore for more information, or e-mail completed essays to honors@bgsu.edu by January 15^th 2010.

Essentially, the Common Reading Experience brings together the BGSU community by providing a common discussion source. Prior to the beginning of classes, faculty, staff, and incoming first-year students read the same book. A committee chooses the book each year with input from different groups on campus, including the college deans. When classes begin in the fall, students across different disciplines and backgrounds will share in the “BGSU community” discussion. Some instructors and departments also integrate the Common Reading into their curriculum. While maintaining an academic tone, the Common Reading allows first-year BGSU students to become part of a communal, discussion environment.

During the fall semester the CTL’s Interact at the Center blog will have weekly posts dedicated to this year’s Common Reading, This I Believe. Faculty, administrators and students will be “guest bloggers.” They will present their reactions to the book, along with sharing their own “This I Believe” statements. Our blog will also have postings titled “Classroom Highlights” and “On Campus,” which will offer insight into how different classes and departments incorporate This I Believe. Each week we will provide audio samples of essays from the book, as well as resources to help you integrate the Common Reading into your course discussions.

For more information concerning BGSU’s Common Reading Experience, including books selected in the past and other background questions, please visit: http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/infosrv/cre/. You are also invited to visit NPR’s “This I Believe” website http://www.thisibelieve.org, which includes podcasts and curriculum guides.

The deadline for the Instructional Improvement Grant is approaching fast. The deadline for proposals is 5pm, March 2nd.

Awards of up to $1000 are provided for proposals that lead to significant and demonstrable improvement in pedagogical skills and/or have a positive effect on student learning.

More information and guidelines concerning proposals are available at:

http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/provost/profDevel/fdcgrants.htm

Or call 419-372-5387.

If I taught something and no one learned it, what happened?
(In other words, can I say that I really TAUGHT it?)

Some of the key points the group discussed during the session were the nature the science of learning and importance of faculty knowing about the implications for their courses and the students they teach. Halpern encourages faculty to think about the big ideas of their course (Ten years after your course, what do you want students to remember or be able to do?); be clear about learning outcomes, and encourage/foster a learning environment that allows for practice at retrieval of knowledge and establishes challenging learning opportunities that addresses and transforms their mental models.

Furthermore, it’s important for students (and faculty) to realize that learning is “effortful,” yet rewarding – often most difficult initially, then easier with more efforts and practice… like most things in life. The diverse group of participants provided and discussed examples from foreign languages, musical performance, and the sciences.

Later, participants reviewed Halpern’s list of 25 principles (full list with citations available here or as MS Word file) and selected individual principles that are essential for student success, such as:
• Perceptual motor grounding
• Testing effect
• Spacing effect
• Stories and Example Cases
• Discovery Learning

One concern brought up in Halpern’s address as well as in this discussion session that is an important question for all teachers – (paraphrased) “So, if these methods lead to better, durable learning, don’t these take up more time in the class? What goes and how do we choose?” A great question for all instructors, department chairs, and deans as well!

Halpern suggests focusing your planning on students’ lives today and in the future – What are or will be their needs? What skills and knowledge will best prepare them for a world that doesn’t exist yet? These questions will continue to be explored and certainly more will be generated as additional findings emerge from the “learning sciences” discipline, as well as from the cognitive and neurological sciences.

For the BGSU community, to view this keynote, visit the DVSS (digital video streaming server), log in, and search for “Halpern” — the video is approximately 70 minutes.

[From the Creative Commons website:]

What You Can Do Here

Creative Commons helps you publish your work online while letting others know exactly what they can and can’t do with your work. When you choose a license, we provide you with tools and tutorials that let you add license information to your own site, or to one of several free hosting services that have incorporated Creative Commons.

With a Creative Commons license, you keep your copyright but allow people to copy and distribute your work provided they give you credit — and only on the conditions you specify here. For those new to Creative Commons licensing, we’ve prepared a list of things to think about. If you want to offer your work with no conditions, choose the public domain.

On November 21st BGSU Libraries will be hosting its final session dedicated to discussing and learning about Creative Commons.  The sessions are from 2:30-4:30pm in 113 Olscamp Hall and 1011 Cedar Point Center (Firelands campus).  Registration isn’t needed for this event, you’re welcomed to just show up for the session.  For more information, please send questions to: ctl@bgsu.edu or call 419.372.6898.

For BGSU community – Click here to view (with description, time, scheduling options, etc)

For other non-BGSU viewers – Click here to view (with no other data or scheduling options)

Dr. Carroll began by comparing the scholarly communication movement of today to recycling 20 years ago – now recycling is commonplace as will scholarly communication (open access/author’s rights, etc.) eventually, due to changing times, needs, and the availability of digital tools.
Copyright laws are the crux of the issue behind the scholarly communication movement and the pressing need for change. The first laws, enacted in the early 18th century, were intended to protect those who wanted to make money from their written works rather than those who wrote for impact, as researchers and scholars do. Currently, when an author signs over their copyright to the publisher, they become limited in their own access to the work as well as limit many others due to what Dr. Carroll calls “the pay wall.”

From the price of individual journals offered through library subscriptions or access costs for individual articles online, the prices have skyrocketed, leaving many institutions to make difficult decisions about what they can or can no longer afford for their faculty and students. (Access to some individual journals can cost over $10,000 per year.) Carroll asks that researchers and authors make responsible decisions regarding the publication of their works – to consider the effects of simply signing the first or “opening offer” a publisher extends.
The issue of open access (OA), where the consumer of the works (reader, researcher) does not have to pay for access to the published works, often leads to misinformation about OA… “Open access does not mean lower quality or less rigor.” In fact, Carroll listed several ways that OA is good for authors/researchers:

• increases impact (# of citations) due to easier access by researchers
• serendipitous researchers come across works more often, making previously unforeseen connections
• researchers need broader access to a myriad of sources/literature
• helps international and poorly financed researchers – access/cost
• medical researchers – providing out of date treatments due to lack of access to most recent findings
• current pay-for journals are not searchable because they are not linked (lots of information could be added to the general pool of accessible resources)

One example Dr. Carroll highlighted was the OA journal, PLOS (Public Library of Science), and its successful growth over the past few years, including a 90% rejection rate, high impact, and the ability to publish peer-reviewed works immediately on the web. Other journals are using a similar model, but many other options are being investigated as viable options. (See Philosophers’ Imprint from the University of Michigan, which has been in service since 2001)

When considering to transfer your copyright to a publisher, Carroll asks authors to take an “Aretha Franklin moment” — “You better think…” In other words, you may be limiting or hurting yourself and other future researchers by giving away all copyright control to a publisher.

So, what can faculty authors do?

• Check current authors’ rights with publishers (these can sometimes be altered after the fact)
• Negotiate with the publisher – they are getting used to this process and providing options for authors (it’s your call – they want to keep a good relationship with you too)
• Many publishers already allow some form of open access, but most authors still are not asking/requesting; it’s a usually a workflow issue, habit, or simply non-awareness (most faculty are simply not aware of their options nor the benefits of OA)

As Dr. Carroll opined, “we’re reaching the tipping point… (and we) need help to push this forward.” Spread the word and become a part of the soon-to-be-in-crowd of Open Access authors!

For more information:

• BGSU’s Scholarly Communication page (including BGSU Author’s Addendum .doc form)
• Michael Carroll’s blog on issues related to copyright, law, technology, and music
• SPARC’s Resources for Authors
• What you can do to promote Open Access
• Peter Suber’s Open Access Overview (Brief version — Full version/links )

===================================================

What are your thoughts on Open Access and author’s rights? How knowledgeable are faculty or graduate students (future scholars) in your department?… Click on the COMMENTS link below to get started!

• Make sure students understand the who, what, when, why, and how of the assessment BEFORE the group project begins.
• Create a peer evaluation tool that is specific to the purpose, goals, and tasks of the group project.
• Be the “guide on the side” as a resource to students and to ensure whole group participation.
• Ensure content of the quantitative peer evaluation form is measurable to discourage popularity points.”
• Use formative (mid-process) evaluations not as a grading device, but to keep the group on track and to resolve problems as they occur.
• Use summative evaluations that allow students to evaluate their own role in the group as well as each of their group members.
• At the conclusion of the group project and evaluation process, seek students’ input to assess the overall experience.

Gueldsenzoph and May also include a peer evaluation form that can be adapted and used with your group assignments.

If you would like to learn more about creating effective group projects in you classroom, the Center is hosting a discussion titled, Designing Effective and Meaningful Group Projects on Friday, January 9 from 10-11:30.  Register for this workshop here.

Gueldenzoph, L. E. & May, L. G. (2002). Collaborative peer evaluation: Best practices for group member assessments. Business Communication Quarterly, 65(1), 9-20.

How do you design group projects?

Faculty Focus Series

These discussion-based workshops feature faculty members talking about their service-learning courses and experiences working with all aspects of service-learning and civic engagement. If you would like to present in a workshop or know of someone who you think would be beneficial to hear from, please let us know!