Long Beach

By Suzanne Aurilio - 2/25/2008 I wanted to run some ideas and questions by you regarding English 100 and the SAGE Course Transformation project. Unfortunately, I don’think the Pachyderm templates will work for us. I think that in order for these types of e-modules to be successful in English 100, they must

By lkennedy - 2/21/2008 I wanted to run some ideas and questions by you regarding English 100 and the SAGE Course Transformation project. Unfortunately, I don’t think the Pachyderm templates will work for us. I think that in order for these types of e-modules to be successful in English 100, they must contain content that is not possible to deliver in a face-to-face setting. In other words, we don’t want to just replicate what we already do in class in the new medium. We thought an interface similar to livejournal would work better. (http://www.livejournal.com/explore/) Maybe software like this already exists for academic institutions, and I’m fairly certain it could just be imported into beachboard. The livejournal-type interface allows students to set up profiles and interact with each other with ease; instructors could even design lessons focusing on the rhetorical choices students make through the everyday act of customization (constructing a profile, for example). Students would use the space for discussions, peer review sessions, commenting, and posting responses to and reflections about in-class work. Here are the threshold concepts we will use; students should: 1. Conceptualize and practice academic writing as a social process and as a "conversation" or "network" that is always occurs; academic writing strives to enter into these networks or conversations and always larger than the writer herself 2. Recognize and practice the rhetorical functions of the combinations of all media (written, oral, aural, visual) 3. Recognize the rhetorical choices they make when constructing their own identities through writing The livejournal-type interface is the overarching function that will allow more specific practices to come into existence and will help achieve the threshold concepts listed above. We have in mind two specifics within the interface. First, we envision a feature in the program that will allow instructors to comment on student writing differently than the current options (mainly Microsoft Word) offer. Second, we envision YouTube style tutorial videos that would be linked to instructor comments and would offer tutorial demonstrations on the comment’s content. I received the following rationale for such a program from one of our regular Composition lecturers, Elizabeth Guzik. I believe it is necessary to quote her at length, since she really explains the need for the program she advocates: "In composition classes, one of the greatest challenges faced by instructors [. . .] is the sheer volume of information about writing that needs to be conveyed in a marked paper. Furthermore, students who are more technologically savvy tend to think hypertextually. The current paradigm of paper grading—student hands in paper, teacher marks up paper, student looks at comments and doesn’t understand them but thinks he or she does, teacher does not realize comments are unclear until next paper returns with the same mistakes—is going to seem too linear and not interactive enough to students who are accustomed to personalization, hypertextuality, and on-screen interaction. [W]hen I’ve tried to grade the papers online entirely, I find that Microsoft Word, as it currently exists, does not make the process of marking sentence level errors and marginal comments easy or efficient. There are some sentence level issues like words out of order or comma errors that are much faster to mark on a hard copy because I can freehand draw proofreading marks directly onto the page. In Word, I have to use keyboard shortcuts or the mouse to insert a comment after I have highlighted the error and then explain the comment in full in the comment. The instructional technological advance that would be most helpful to teachers and students of composition would be some kind of software solution that would allow instructors to grade papers online in a way that would allow for the kinds of quickly drawn freehand marks that go with grading hard copies but also allow teachers to type long marginal and all terminal comments. Even more importantly though [. . .] would be a solution that includes a hypertextual structure that would allow students who didn’t understand the issues raised in the instructor comments to follow links to additional materials to help them understand the grammar, style, citation, etc. problems that were marked. Thus, if the instructor noted that there was a pronoun agreement error in the paper, right from the interface that the student is viewing the marked paper through, the student should be able to click on links that would take him or her to another page with a detailed explanation of that particular error. Ideally, those links would be to media rich sites: short YouTube-style videos that the student could watch on the grammar issue, interactive web pages with quizzes that gave the students immediate feedback on their answers, and/or links to real time chat or discussion boards so that there was the ability to talk to others about what had been learned." A program that will allow interactivity between students and instructors in student papers undoubtedly already exists. Additionally, because of the expertise we have in our department, we feel we can develop the tutorial videos mentioned above, which can then be linked within the program, so students can watch them when reviewing their instructor’s comments. Our Writer’s Resource Lab already has print tutorials web-ready, and we have received permission from the Writer’s Resource Lab Coordinator to use our student tutors to make tutorial videos and possibly launch their own YouTube channel. If we could adopt a product that would allow all of this to come into existence, our instructors could use face-to-face class time to work on issues that are better suited for traditional classroom time: particularly reading strategies and rhetorical tools for interpretation. Based on the preceding description, I have the following questions: 1) Do you have the resources to search for the type of interface and software products we envision? 2) Would you need to see a demo? 3) Is it possible to pay our writing center tutors extra for creating the tutorial videos, so they don’t have to do so without compensation? Thanks for reading this, and let me know if you would like to meet to discuss these ideas further. Best, Sarah ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Sarah J. Arroyo Assistant Professor Department of English California State University Long Beach

By Suzanne Aurilio - 11/19/2007 Terre Allen writes: Our faculty transforming course design

By Suzanne Aurilio - 11/14/2007 From Terre Allen: The ppt attached is a Transforming Course Design briefing for our Provost, Vice-Provosts, and various Associate VPs. The purpose of our meeting with senior campus senior management is to establish a dialogue about cost reduction and what that means on our campus. We also want to make sure that our overall approach is consistent with the vision of Academic Affairs. Click on title of the post for the PowerPoint slides.

By Suzanne Aurilio - 11/19/2007

By Suzanne Aurilio - 10/31/2007 SAGE Designs for Learning: Linking GE Assessment Outcomes to Transforming Course Design [advisory role for SFSU] The central goal of the SAGE Designs for Learning project is to link assessment activities with improved student learning and student success. The CSULB general education program initiated an assessment project called S.A.G.E (Student Achievement in General Education) during the 06/07 academic year. In SAGE Designs for Learning we plan to extend the SAGE project by adding a course redesign component. Eight faculty partners teaching GE foundation courses will use their SAGE assessment outcomes to identify student learning challenges that impact student learning and student success.


Featured Campus Project: CSU San Bernardino

The focus of our project is the transformation of our first-year experience project, the Gateway Program. We plan to restructure the program so that the third Gateway-enhanced course that students take will be a large class (such as PSYCH 100, HSCI 120, or HIST 142) transformed—through technology and other pedagogical strategies—from a lecture-based format into inquiry-based courses that promote active learning and greater teacher-student interaction and are consistent with the Gateway Program philosophy.

 Utilizing the three Gateway-enhanced large classes in Spring 2008 as part of the Spring 2008 offering will enable us to achieve our learning outcomes at a much lower cost than the previous approach, which would have us offering sixteen Gateway-enhanced courses in the Spring 2008 capped at 20 students.

 You can learn more about our project on our website.