National Academies Press: OpenBook

Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World (2009)

Chapter: 3 Improving the Learning Experience

« Previous: 2 The Context for Change
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"3 Improving the Learning Experience." National Research Council. 2009. Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12602.
×
Page 64

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

3 Improving the Learning Experience Changes are needed in the undergraduate experience in agriculture. The changes include new curricula and content, but it will also be vital to improve how learning and teaching occur. This chapter will describe aspects of teaching and learning that are in need of reform, with a focus on the dis- ciplines within food and agriculture. It therefore serves as context and back- ground for readers who may not be familiar with the research on teaching and learning. The committee hopes that implementation of these ideas will help to both enhance the relevance of undergraduate education and retain students in agriculture. The chapter also provides a number of examples of research-based teaching strategies and discusses ways to raise the profile and impact of high-quality teaching within institutions and disciplines. Interested readers are encouraged to consult some of the many excellent reports on undergraduate teaching and learning that have been published in the last several years (e.g., AAAS 2004; Boyer ­Commission 1998; NRC 1996a, 1997, 1999c, 2003abc; Seymour and Hewitt 2000; Tobias 1992). As throughout most of higher education, teaching in agriculture is strongly influenced by the skills and motivation of the faculty. Most teaching is good, but all teaching can be improved. Effective teaching in higher education incorporates pedagogical strate- gies that create hospitable classroom climates supporting diverse learning processes and cultural understanding. The traditional approach to college- level instruction—especially in science, technology, engineering, agriculture, and mathematics disciplines—has historically been lecture-based delivery; as discussed below, the passive lecture format may not be as effective as desired in promoting student learning. Tutorials, laboratories, field-based learning experiences, problem-based learning, and other models can be 35

36 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World especially effective in reaching students. It should be noted, however, that hands-on activities are not always “minds-on.” Effective educational activi- ties require planning and structure to support student learning and achieve learning objectives. Most higher-education faculty members arrive at their teaching positions after earning research doctorates. Few receive any formal training in how to be effective teachers or are exposed to pedagogy, the science of teach- ing. In fact, when thrust into the classroom, most faculty members teach the way they were taught during their own student experiences—which, for most, is almost exclusively lecture-based—despite research demonstrating that interactive engagement is more effective in enhancing student learning. It is not that faculty are unwilling to use research-based methods; rather, few have had the opportunity to expand their repertoire with new teaching techniques and tools or to learn about the need to provide more student- centered learning environments. The committee applauds the work of a number of professional societies and journals that are committed to agricultural and undergraduate education (several of which are listed in Box 3-1). In drawing attention to the chal- lenges and opportunities in agricultural education, the committee hopes that the community will call upon these organizations, joining as members, attending their meetings, publishing in their journals, and benefiting from their many years of scholarship. Since the 1991 conference on undergraduate education in agriculture (compiled in NRC 1992), there have been important advances in the sci- ence of learning. The National Research Council volumes titled How People Learn (NRC 1999ab, 2005b) provide an excellent summary of what has been learned from education, cognitive science, psychology, and related fields and how to apply it to classroom practice (see Box 3-2). The National Research Council’s 2003 report on undergraduate teaching in the STEM disciplines (NRC 2003b)—science, technology, engineering, and mathematics—provides an excellent overview of the concepts that influ- ence learning and synthesizes them into seven principles that may be useful for universities in thinking about reforming classes and curricula: • Learning for understanding is facilitated when new knowledge and existing knowledge are structured around the major concepts and principles of the discipline. For a recent discussion of student laboratory experiences with application to both under- graduate and high-school laboratories, see NRC (2005a).

Improving the Learning Experience 37 BOX 3-1 Selected Resources for Undergraduate Education in Agriculture Professional societies and associations: • American Association for Agricultural Education: <http://aaaeonline.org/> • Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education: <http://www. aiaee.org/> • National Association of Agricultural Educators: <http://www.naae.org/> • The National Council for Agricultural Education: <http://www.teamaged.org/> • National Farm & Ranch Business Management Education Association: <http:// www.nfrbmea.org/> • National Postsecondary Agricultural Student Organization: <http://www.nation- alpas.org/> • National Young Farmer Educational Association: <http://www.nyfea.org/> • North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture: <http://www.­nactateachers. org/> In addition, many disciplinary societies have sections and committees dedicated to issues of education, a number of whom have developed extensive ­resources and programs. Journals: • CBE–Life Sciences Education: <http://www.lifescied.org/> • Community College Journal of Research and Practice • Journal of Agricultural Education: <http://aaaeonline.org/jae.php> • Journal of Career and Technical Education: <http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/ JCTE/> • Journal of Extension: <http://www.joe.org/> • Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education: <http://www. aiaee.org/journal.html> • Journal of Natural Resources and Life Science Education: <http://www.jnrlse. org/> • NACTA Journal: <http://www.nactateachers.org/nacjournal.htm> • Learners use what they already know to construct new under­ standing. • Learning is facilitated by the use of metacognitive strategies that identify, monitor, and regulate cognitive processes. • Learners have different strategies, approaches, patterns of abilities, and learning styles that are a function of the interaction between their h ­ eredity and their prior experiences.

38 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World BOX 3-2 How People Learn The National Research Council reports How People Learn (NRC 1999ab, 2005b) reveal several principles that can help to guide instruction: • New knowledge is built on a foundation of existing knowledge and experi- ence. Everyday conceptions are resilient and must be actively challenged and engaged to support conceptual change. • Learning for understanding requires a deep foundation of knowledge, un- derstanding facts and ideas in the context of a conceptual framework, and organiz- ing knowledge for effective retrieval and use. • Metacognitive strategies help students to learn and take control of their own learning. These strategies—such as predicting outcomes, explaining to oneself, and noting failures of comprehension—can be taught effectively in the context of subject matter. Those principles suggest that it is important for faculty to know the common conceptions and misconceptions that students bring to a topic, to directly engage students in confronting those conceptions, to use formative assessment to monitor student thinking, and to adapt teaching based upon the assessment. They also show the importance of determining the core concepts that organize a discipline, of structuring topics to support conceptual understanding, and of paying explicit attention to reflective assessment. Summit presentation: M. Suzanne Donovan, Program Director, Strategic Educa- tion Research Partnership Institute; Study Director, How People Learn, National Research Council • Learners’ motivation to learn and their sense of self affect what is learned, how much is learned, and how much effort will be put into the learning process. • The practices and activities in which people engage while learning shape what is learned. • Learning is enhanced by socially supported interactions. Once curricula are designed and implemented, the path to educa- tion reform is far from complete. One especially important component is assessment, which enables an instructor or an institution to determine whether a particular activity, course, or major has been effective in meet- ing its learning goals. How else is it possible to determine whether students have learned what is being taught? NRC (2003b) provides an overview of

Improving the Learning Experience 39 research on effective assessment of student learning that may be helpful to institutions and faculty members. The document provides a wealth of information beyond the several points mentioned here, but some elements bear highlighting: • Multiple assessment measures provide a more robust picture of what a person has learned. • Educational assessment must be aligned with curriculum and instruc- tion if it is to support learning. • Assessment practices should extend beyond emphasis on skills and discrete bits of knowledge to encompass more complex aspects of student achievement. • Assessment should provide timely and informative feedback to stu- dents on their learning to inform the practice of a skill and influence effective and efficient acquisition. • Assessment must be designed from the beginning of the instruc- tional process to ensure that the desired type of information is available for assessment. • For assessment to be effective, students must understand and share the goals for learning that are assessed. The scholarship of teaching and learning has emerged as an important area of focus in higher education and has itself become a subject of research, following the impetus provided by Boyer (1990). That has led to academic study of and research on the most effective methods of teaching and even to the creation of subdisciplines on discipline-based education research in several fields. But the research base can help in the improvement of teach- ing and learning only if mechanisms that facilitate faculty implementation of the results of the research are put into place. Effective teaching and learning have become even more important as the student body has become more diverse, but effective teaching has benefits for all students. Students have different learning styles and different ways of assimilating information, and using a “one size fits all” approach in any classroom is not likely to meet with success. Moreover, the increased diversity of undergraduate classrooms helps to increase the variety of view- points and experiences in a way that benefits all. University faculty facilitate learning for greater numbers of students if they also provide a diversity of experiences in their classrooms. As elementary and secondary education experiences become increasingly collaborative, students are primed for this type of interaction when they reach college.

40 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Skills Development As is discussed throughout this report, graduates need a growing set of skills and competences to succeed in today’s professional world. While con- tent knowledge and technical skills will remain important, 21st-century stu- dents also need transferrable skills that will be useful in any career. Although agriculture graduates are not alone in needing these skills, the qualities that make agriculture colleges unique (see Chapter 1) make it especially appropriate that agriculture leads the way. These skills should be integrated throughout a curriculum and other student experiences rather than taught in separate courses. In fact, many of the strategies for teaching and learning discussed throughout this chapter can provide opportunities for develop- ing these skills. Moreover, necessary experiences should be continual and extended over courses at all levels to allow additional achievement and growth throughout an undergraduate career. Departments and colleges are encouraged to conduct explicit planning to define how the skills will be incorporated into their academic offerings and how student achievement in these areas will be assessed. Among the competences that students should develop are teamwork and working in diverse communities, working across disciplines, communica- tion, critical thinking and analysis, ethical decision-making, and leadership and management. Those qualities are discussed briefly below. Teamwork and Working in Diverse Communities It is increasingly recognized that the challenges of the future will require the participation of many people working together in common pursuits. Yet college students rarely have the opportunity to engage in team-based activities as part of their academic work. Although many institutions offer collaborative activities (such as lab partners), they are generally intended more to extend resources than to afford educational experience. The committee believes that students should be provided with opportunities to work together both in and outside the classroom, to interact with and depend on people with different backgrounds, and to work on projects that will lead to better results than any student could have obtained alone. It will be especially important for students to gain experience in working with those who bring different backgrounds, skills, and perspectives. The workplaces of the future will be far more diverse than those of the past; students should be encouraged to gain multicultural awareness and to be comfortable in working with people of varied ages, ethnicities, and nationalities and with varied work styles.

Improving the Learning Experience 41 Working across Disciplines Closely related to working with others is the ability to work and speak across traditional disciplinary boundaries. Employers need their personnel not only to interact within disciplines but to bring expertise from different fields together to solve problems of common interest. As detailed in reports about interdisciplinary research and training (e.g., COSEPUP 2004), indi- viduals in different disciplines often have trouble even speaking the same language. Agriculture colleges can and should help to prepare their students to speak not only to experts in their own field but more broadly with those in other fields and with the general public. Communication College graduates need excellent written and oral communication skills to work together, to speak to diverse audiences, and to communicate their knowledge and expertise more widely. Universities should provide all stu- dents with numerous opportunities to write and speak about a variety of topics to audiences that extend beyond their classmates. Students should be able to speak to those from other fields, from other countries, and from other sectors. Students should receive guidance and instruction by appropriate experts so that their communication skills improve. Peer review is especially encouraged: students should develop the skills and comfort not only to read and write their own work but to observe and critique that of others. Critical Thinking and Analysis Employers need workers who can make good decisions even when relying on data that are incomplete or even contradictory. Few academic institutions provide explicit training in critical thinking and analysis, and few classroom experiences challenge students in this regard. Moreover, mathematical analysis is often not incorporated into classes beyond a very basic level, and students have few opportunities to engage in quantitative reasoning. For example, students are rarely presented with real data or asked to suggest a strategy when the data do not point to a single “correct” answer. Textbook examples often downplay confounding data and simplify scenarios. Even laboratory and field experiences may involve some means of data cleaning so that students will be able to draw the “correct” inferences. The natural environment can make pedagogical activities more difficult, but it is vital that students have the opportunity to engage with real-world

42 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World systems and to be forced to evaluate disparate data; they should be asked to make decisions on the basis of these data and to explain and defend their choices. Ethical Decision-Making Closely related to critical thinking and analysis is the need for students to make ethical decisions. That includes weighing sometimes contradictory aspects of disparate data and balancing competing interests. Professionals in all fields are asked to make tradeoffs all the time, and students need oppor- tunities to hone their decision-making skills when they have appropriate guidance and the decisions are less critical. That type of thinking can easily be incorporated into classroom activities and assignments. For example, students could be asked to assess the risks and benefits associated with various practices to balance concerns coming from scientific, economic, environmental, and other arenas. Leadership, Management, and Business Skills that complement working in teams are motivating others and managing complex tasks, teams, and budgets. Students are almost never provided with formal opportunities to develop leadership and management skills. Many students assume leadership roles in extracurricular activities, but they are rarely given guidance on how to be an effective leader or manager or how to develop and work with budgets. Those skills are essen- tial for surviving and thriving in the professional world, and the committee encourages institutions to build opportunities for students to hone them as part of their formal and informal undergraduate preparation. Closely coupled are facilitation and conflict resolution skills, which will enable teams and groups to work together effectively and to respond to challenges as they arise. Institutions should also look for opportunities to instill basic business and financial skills in their students. Case Studies and Problem-Based Learning Food and agriculture provide numerous real-world examples that can be brought into the classroom and used to enhance student learning, provid- ing opportunities for students to practice the variety of transferrable skills described above. Case studies and problem-based learning provide ideal opportunities for students to work together in diverse teams, to consolidate

Improving the Learning Experience 43 information from a variety of disciplines, to communicate in both oral and written forms, to analyze data and evaluate evidence, and demonstrate leadership skills. Problems taken from, or at least based on, actual experiences provide context and relevance to students (Capon and Kuhn 2004; Gijbels et al. 2005). Faculty can use examples from their own research, industry con- tacts and community organizations can propose challenges for courses, and extension activities can suggest issues of concern in a given state (see Chapter 5 for a discussion of the role of outreach, extension, and industry connection in fostering undergraduate education). Those types of cases and problems also provide opportunities for stu- dents to learn by doing. They may even be able to contribute to solutions to the real-world problems that they are given. For example, one of the ­posters presented at the summit described a capstone experience at California Polytechnic State University that has students working on real problems of commercial interest (Box 3-3). Case studies and problem-based learning can help students to understand why academic knowledge matters. BOX 3-3 Learning by Doing at California Polytechnic State University Many agriculture colleges stress a “learn by doing” pedagogy designed to better prepare students and allow them to demonstrate competency. California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo has had experiential learning as a trademark for over 100 years, with ample opportunities for students to incorpo- rate internships, laboratory classes, and capstone senior thesis projects into their curriculum. An “Enterprise Project” option gives students access to learning in the context of commercial projects in livestock, fruit, vegetable, and honey production. After they have completed coursework on the topic, students are given responsibil- ity in one of the commercial enterprise project areas under the supervision of a faculty member. The goal of the project is to be profitable and for students to gain credit, practical experience, and potentially a share of the profit. Additional benefits are a stronger work ethic, sense of accomplishment, experience in teamwork, analysis, synthesis, and assessment. Poster presented at Summit: Jonathon L. Beckett, Lynn E. Moody, Mary A. ­Whiteford, and Mary E. Pedersen. “Learn by Doing Pedagogy in Agriculture through Enter- prise Projects.”

44 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Service Learning and Community Engagement Agriculture lends itself to what has been termed “service learning,” in which students learn and receive academic credit for participation in activities that meet community needs (Astin et al. 2000; Battistoni 2001; Gelmon et al. 2001). One could see service learning as the intersection of community service and academic study. By drawing on scholarship in the natural and social sciences, civic engagement helps to make content knowledge come alive and allows students to contribute to the needs of their community. Service learning also helps to connect the university with the community. Testifying to the importance of recent developments in ­ academic–community interactions, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has established an elective classification in community engagement: Community Engagement describes the collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. Particular elements of the Carnegie classification include the engage- ment of faculty, students, and community in mutually beneficial and respect- ful collaboration that addresses community needs, deepens student learning, enriches scholarship, and enhances community well-being. Such activities can focus on outreach—applying institutional resources for community use—or partnership—in which collaborative interactions are common. These are some of the same elements that the committee highlights as inte- gral to successful partnerships in Chapter 5. Community engagement and service learning are natural outgrowths of many of the best practices discussed throughout this report. Because agriculture encompasses many areas of study and application with obvious community connections, the committee hopes that agriculture colleges will take advantage of opportunities for students to engage with their communi- ties and receive academic credit for service learning. Several institutions have taken substantial steps to incorporate service learning throughout their campuses (see Box 3-4 for one example). Campus Compact serves as a clearinghouse for engaging students in service learning. See <http://www.compact.org/> for more information. See <http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/index.asp?key=1213> for more information.

Improving the Learning Experience 45 BOX 3-4 Center for Excellence in Curricular Engagement at North Carolina State University North Carolina State University (NCSU) established a center devoted to service learning and curricular engagement in 2007, integrating the institution’s land-grant mission with a commitment to educational innovation and leadership development. The NCSU Center for Excellence in Curricular Engagement hopes to expand community-engaged teaching, learning, and scholarship at the university; col- laborate with other institutions to advance curricular engagement throughout North Carolina; and establish NCSU as a leader in curricular engagement. The center offers consultation and development opportunities for faculty and workshops for all members of the university community, promotes the scholarship of teaching and learning on campus and beyond, and partners with campus- and community- based organizations to enhance and create opportunities for community-engaged learning. Additional information about the center is available at <http://www.ncsu.edu/­ curricular_engagement/>. Cooperative and Active Learning Cooperative learning began in elementary schools in the late 1960s largely through the research and efforts of Robert Slavin, Elizabeth Cohen, Spencer Kagan, and David and Roger Johnson. As a result of recognition that cooperative learning is an effective teaching and learning strategy for higher education, it appeared on the college instruction scene in the 1990s. Cooperative learning is more than just group work; it incorporates several elements: positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction, indi- vidual accountability, interpersonal skills, and group processing (Johnson and Johnson 1989; Johnson et al. 1991; McNeill and Payne 1996; McNeal and D’Avanzo 1997; Michaelsen et al. 2002). Cooperative learning often involves specially prepared lessons in which well-formed groups approach questions that are designed for teamwork. In one example of this type of cooperative learning, Beichner et al. (1999) have pioneered the SCALE-UP project, in which classes of up to 100 students are taught by dividing the students into small groups whose members work collaboratively with each other and with other groups in classrooms redesigned for collaborative work. Such studio classrooms make See <http://scaleup.ncsu.edu/> for more information about SCALE-UP.

46 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World it easier for students to work together, turning the classroom from an instruc- tor-centered to a student-centered environment. Classroom architecture that supports—rather than impedes—cooperative learning would help to break down some barriers to active learning. Although the committee does not expect universities suddenly to dedicate millions of dollars for classroom renovations, it hopes that universities will seriously consider pedagogy and instructional needs as part of the planning for new construction and renovation. That is, if an institution is building or renovating a building that includes classrooms, the committee hopes that the instructional spaces will be aligned with learning objectives and with the types of instruction that could be incorporated into the spaces. Collaborative and active learning also includes a variety of less for- malized arrangements, including tasks on which groups of students work together over only a minute or two. For example, the Peer Instruction technique developed by Eric Mazur (1997) intersperses a traditional lecture class with a series of ConcepTests, short conceptual questions that students consider individually before discussing them in small ad hoc groups and trying to convince each other of their answers. Results show that students not only answer correctly immediately on reconsideration of a question after small-group discussion but retain the knowledge until the end of the term (Crouch and Mazur 2001). Numerous research studies and meta-analyses show that students learn more from teaching methods in which they are actively engaged than from traditional lecture formats (Hake 1998; Wright et al. 1998; Fagen et al. 2002; Knight and Wood 2005; Michael 2006; Armstrong et al. 2007). Therefore, it might seem surprising that so much of science instruction, including instruction in agriculture, depends on passive lecture courses. As active learning slowly becomes more common, the role of faculty changes; as students take more responsibility for their own learning, faculty may serve more as guides and facilitators than as the providers of knowledge (Kirschner et al. 2006). Learning Communities In recent years, several colleges and universities have established learn- ing communities that bring together students through connected coursework Project Kaleidoscope has been advising institutions on developing facilities that sup- port teaching and learning. Resources are available at <http://www.pkal.org/collections/­ PKALFacilitiesResource.cfm>.

Improving the Learning Experience 47 around a theme or major, often including themed residence halls. The general purpose of these learning communities is to create a sense of cam­araderie and shared experience, especially in environments in which the size of the university may intimidate (Shapiro and Levine 1999; Taylor et al. 2003; Laufgraben and Shapiro 2004; Smith et al. 2004). The settings also provide teaching and learning venues outside the normal classroom, allowing a variety of instructional strategies that can address different learning styles and provide multiple assessment opportunities that facilitate learning. Learning communities in which there is a focus on the agricultural sciences have been developed in many universities and colleges. Models that are residential, academic, or a combination of the two exist at such universities as Auburn, Colorado State, Iowa State, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska–Lincoln, New Mexico State, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Purdue, Tennessee, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech. For example, students at Purdue have several agricultural learning-community choices in which to enroll: Agricultural Education; Animalia; and Wood, Water and Wild Wonders. The benefits are varied and are both academic and nonacademic; for example, the retention rate is almost 5% higher among students who participate in learning communities at Purdue than among other students. Extracurricular Activities The undergraduate experience consists not only of coursework and asso- ciated formal academic responsibilities but of extracurricular activities and other aspects of college life. For many students, the structured curriculum makes up only a small part of what they find valuable in a college experi- ence. In fact, these noncourse experiences are likely to be more influential than formal course experiences in their career decision-making. Student organizations and the sense of responsibility that often comes with them can be important motivators and influences for students and should not be undervalued. Students may also have extracurricular opportunities to con- nect directly with issues related to food and agriculture, such as supporting school farms or community gardens, working with an institution’s dining service to influence menus and purchasing, and volunteering in the com- munity to address issues of nutrition, hunger, and obesity. See <http://www.purdue.edu/sats/learning_communities/instructors/facts/success.html> for more information.

48 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Undergraduate Research Research experiences for undergraduates (REU) can provide students with the opportunity to contribute to original research, to gain first-hand experience in conducting research, and to participate in laboratory com- munities. These experiences have been helpful in retaining students in their disciplines so that they complete science degrees and pursue gradu- ate study at a higher rate (Bauer and Bennet 2003; Kardash 2000; Lopatto 2003, 2004, 2007; Rueckert 2002; Hunter et al. 2007; Russell et al. 2007). Such experiences can take many forms, including independent studies, senior theses, research or laboratory courses, substantive labs supplement- ing existing courses, short-term experiences during vacations or January terms, or even having students holding part-time jobs supporting faculty laboratories. As discussed in Chapter 6, the committee hopes that it will become common for undergraduate students in food and agriculture pro- grams to have the opportunity to participate in research; achieving this aim will require support and facilitation by universities and funding agen- cies as such experiences often require significant personnel and financial resources. REU programs have been quite common in the basic sciences; the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), for example, support such initiatives. Some REU students participate in formal institutional summer programs that bring in a cohort of students to conduct research with a variety of faculty. Other REU opportunities are made available by indi- vidual laboratories, often supported by supplements to existing research awards funded by an agency. Agriculture-focused funding agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture, can learn from the experiences of the other agencies in developing funding opportunities and providing REU supplements to facilitate undergraduate research opportunities. Of course, agriculture students can also be encouraged to participate in existing REU programs—including those outside of agriculture—to gain experience in the field or laboratory and an appreciation for what research is. International Experiences and Perspectives The increasingly international nature of agriculture suggests the need for students to have greater exposure to international perspectives. Such oppor- tunities can take the form of learning-abroad programs—in which students spend a semester or more studying in another country—and by increasing

Improving the Learning Experience 49 the international content in courses at U.S. institutions. At present, however, participation in such experiences is relatively rare. Learning-Abroad Programs Most institutions offer some type of “study-abroad” program for their students; for example, the American Council on Education (ACE) estimates that 91% of institutions offer opportunities in education abroad (Green et al. 2008). The percentage of students participating is far lower: the same ACE survey found that more than one-quarter of institutions had no students graduating in 2005 who had studied abroad. Learning-abroad programs are excellent in improving cultural sensitivi- ties and increasing understanding of another country and its language, and the committee fully supports these goals. Yet there also is an opportunity to supplement these general programs with targeted opportunities for inter- ested students that combine general cultural immersion with experiences focused on the global agricultural infrastructure. Even many institutions with a strong tradition in food and agriculture have not featured these fields in their international programs. In recent years, however, several programs have started to address agricultural topics with a multidisciplinary approach focused on a specific commodity or a specific region (see, for example, a description of the Michigan State University programs in Box 3-5). That approach provides a contextual view of issues while using a manageable framework as its basis. Such programs increase the depth of students’ understanding and prepare them for future roles, whether in academe, government, industry, or other sectors. Of particular utility to institutions looking to expand their international programs may be the recently announced Center for Capacity Building in Study Abroad, a joint project of NAFSA: Association of International Educa- tors and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. The center, launched in 2008, supports learning abroad by identifying opportunities in emerging and high-demand study-abroad markets, helping institutions to access these markets, building a database to support institutional expansion efforts, and fostering information-sharing among institutions. See <http://www.studyabroadcenter.org/> for more information about the Center for Capac- ity Building in Study Abroad.

50 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World BOX 3-5 Michigan State University International Programs Michigan State University has one of the country’s most extensive international- program offerings, including 50 study-abroad programs in the College of Agricul- ture and Natural Resources (CANR). The university as a whole has made a strong commitment to internationalization, even featuring those programs as a central element of its 2006 reaccreditation self-study. As explained in a presentation at the Leadership Summit, the university recognized that internationalization means not only engaging in outreach to other counties but encouraging true discussion and understanding of different ways of doing things and of different belief systems. CANR’s study-abroad opportunities have great variety and are often focused on particular regions of the world and their local concerns. For example, the Con- servation and Biodiversity in Parks and Nature Reserves in South Africa summer program provides students with perspectives on land management by considering the effects of land-based activities and international policies on the natural commu- nities in these ecosystems, including the role of game reserves, nature reserves, and national parks as management tools. The program addresses both scientific and social issues, such as what happens when restrictions to protect biodiversity are imposed on a society and the effect of hunting in private game reserves on the surrounding communities. Another example is a community-engagement program in rural Ireland, in which students not only have an immersive living experience but work with local lead- ers to foster community development activities in the Tochar Valley. The program provides students with real-world, practical experience and direct connection to people working in their own communities. Additional information about CANR’s international programs is available at <http://www.canr.msu.edu/overseas/>; see <http://www.accreditation2006.msu. edu/­internationalization/index.html> for information about the ­Internationalization Self-Study. Summit presentation: Frank Fear, Senior Associate Dean, and Paul Roberts, D ­ irector, Study Abroad and International Training, College of Agriculture and N ­ atural Resources, Michigan State University. International Perspectives in U.S. Course Content Increasing the inclusion of internationally based lecture topics, case studies, and research programs in existing structures would deepen students’ understanding of international perspectives and the increasingly intercon- nected food and fiber supply chain. Despite the benefits, few institutions require students to take international-focused courses; ACE reports that only

Improving the Learning Experience 51 BOX 3-6 Globalization of the Science Classroom at the University of Maryland A number of courses at the University of Maryland, College Park, are working to add a global perspective with support from the Freeman Foundation. The East Asia Science and Technology (EAST) program seeks to introduce East Asian themes into a variety of undergraduate science and engineering courses, including honors seminars, required introductory courses, and general-education offerings. Faculty participants are named as EAST fellows and provided with support to develop new courses, work with colleagues abroad to develop global courses, and create modules to introduce an East Asian perspective into existing courses. EAST program courses incorporate a number of interactive pedagogical e ­ lements—such as active learning, problem-based research, team-based learn- ing, and student peer review—and opportunities to engage with experts on East Asian issues. At the time of the Summit, 13 EAST fellows were offering 18 courses that reached some 1,600 students. Two of the courses were transnational and were offered concurrently at the University of Maryland and an East Asian university. In addition to the courses, the EAST program incorporates exchange of students and faculty and numerous collaborations in curriculum design and research. Summit presentation: Robert Yuan, Professor Emeritus of Cell Biology and M ­ olecular Genetics, University of Maryland, College Park; Vanessa Sitler, ­senior undergraduate student in business management, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, College Park. 37% of institutions require a course with an international or global focus, according to a 2006 survey (Green et al. 2008). The committee believes that students should have the opportunity to be exposed to global perspectives even without leaving their U.S.-based classroom. Forming unique partnerships with foreign universities might be one way to encourage instructors and students to engage in those topics and potentially to collaborate on issues of mutual interest and identify new approaches to searching for solutions (see Box 3-6 for an example), but more modest ways to incorporate international perspectives will also have value. Instructional Technology Advances in technology are helping to move education from hour-long class meetings several times a week to round-the-clock continuous “virtual

52 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World learning communities.” They also help students become comfortable with using a variety of technologies that may serve them well in future endeavors. Minimal uses of technologies—such as static course Web sites and e-mail contact with instructional staff—have been around for more than a decade, but innovative forms of instructional technology can transform the educa- tional environment and lead to substantial changes in how information is transferred, how students interact with their teachers and fellow students, and even how students “attend” class. For example, expansive course Web sites enable students to interact with each other and with instructional staff, extending classroom ­interactions to 24 hours a day (e.g., Colbert et al. 2007). Commercials tools such as Blackboard make Web sites easier for even the most technophobic faculty member to develop and maintain. High-speed Internet connections and advances in videoconferencing technology make it possible to link class- rooms from around the world virtually and provide real-time international perspectives without requiring any travel. To be sure, some instructional technology merely provides a mechanism for conducting activities more efficiently than but not fundamentally dif- ferently from nonelectronic approaches. For example, providing access to course material and lecture notes or even allowing homework submission on course Web sites may be valuable but does not break new pedagogi- cal ground. However, technology can enhance the ability of instructors to conduct formative assessment, such as in Just-in-Time Teaching, in which students provide feedback to their instructors a few hours before class by answering questions posted online (Novak et al. 1999). Other uses of technology enhance the learning process in ways that were not previously possible. Students can now perform simulations, collect and analyze data, and tap into information collected by others whenever they have access to a computer; this enables them to engage more directly with original scholar- ship and experimentation without expensive laboratories or the challenges introduced by large classes. Moreover, in today’s connected culture students can do all those things while sitting in the classroom, in the coffee shop, in their dormitory, in their pajamas, and in places around the world. Educational technologies also enhance students’ in-class experiences. For example, “clickers” allow students to respond to questions posed by an instructor and provide feedback to instructors on student understanding in real time (Beatty et al. 2006; Fies and Marshall 2006; Barber and Njus 2007; Caldwell 2007; Preszler et al. 2006; Bruff 2009). These wireless devices See <http://www.jitt.org/> for more information about Just-in-Time Teaching.

Improving the Learning Experience 53 provide a mechanism for instructors to get instant and anonymous feedback from students during class. Typically, an instructor will pose a carefully designed multiple choice question to the class, and students will respond with their best answer to the question. If students overwhelmingly answer correctly, the instructor can move on the next topic, with the reassurance that students are on board; but if student responses reveal lack of under- standing, the instructor has the opportunity spend more time discussing the confounding topic right then. This formative assessment in the classroom allows faculty to be in more nearly constant touch with what students are learning, not only what they are teaching—and to do so in real time, not weeks later on the midterm examination. In the words of University of Colorado biologist Bill Wood, clickers may have become the “greatest new teaching tool since chalk.” Distance learning is growing as an industry and as a way for students to obtain educational experiences on their own schedules and without leaving their homes. For example, nearly 20% of those enrolled in degree-­granting postsecondary institutions take at least one online course (Allen and ­Seaman 2007). It is likely that land-grant universities will be especially called on to expand and enhance their online offerings in an effort to serve the popula- tions of their states more efficiently and to enable course enrollment with- out requiring student to take courses or even set foot on campus. Distance education is even being used to support extension activities. Early in 2008, for example, a consortium of 74 land-grant universities launched eXten- sion, a national Web site that provides farmers not only resource informa- tion—similar to what they received through state extension networks—but opportunities for collaboration and communication on a wide variety of issues (Guess 2008). Implementing Change Developing an undergraduate experience that integrates the skills and experiences discussed throughout this report will require the attention of a wide variety of stakeholders. Resources will also be required for some interventions, but it is important that institutions not use a lack of resources as an excuse not to act. In some cases, funding agencies may be in a position to implement new programs to target specific educational innovations. In other cases, agen- cies may be able to provide relatively small supplements to existing grants See <http://www.eXtension.org/> for more information about eXtension.

54 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World to achieve those aims. For example, the National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsors many undergraduate research experiences by providing supplements to NSF-funded research awards made to individual investigators (the agency also provides funding for dedicated programs that offer research experiences for undergraduates). Agencies can encourage the development of educational activities that leverage the support already provided to researchers. To that end, one of the criteria used by NSF in making awards is the “broader-impacts criterion,” which includes contributions to teaching and learning, broadening the participation of underrepresented groups, enhancing the infrastructure for research and education, disseminating results broadly, and providing societal benefits.10 Those approaches may serve as models for other agencies and private sponsors to think about ways to encourage the development of best practices in teaching and learning with relatively modest investments. When institutional grants and other funds are available, the committee hopes that deans, department chairs, and other administrators take advantage of the opportunity to support and encourage such goals as high-quality teach- ing, active and service learning, extension and outreach, and international experiences. Although new and external funding will certainly help institutions in effecting change, the committee strongly argues that institutions need to take the necessary steps even if additional funding is not available. Institutional priorities will need to emphasize undergraduate education, and universities may need to make tough decisions about redirecting support from other programs. Adoption of Effective Teaching Methods Despite decades of research demonstrating the effectiveness of teaching methods, including active student engagement, adoption by individual fac- ulty has been slow. That suggests that one of the most important challenge in reforming teaching and learning is not basic knowledge of what works but putting the information in the hands of faculty, providing the necessary infrastructure, and providing the appropriate incentives for faculty to imple- ment the methods. Most faculty are not aware of the research on teaching and learning, because it is not a formal part of most graduate training. They enter profes- 10See <http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf> for examples of activities that are responsive to NSF’s broader-impacts criterion.

Improving the Learning Experience 55 sorships without much pedagogical knowledge and often revert to teach- ing how they have been taught, which often means that undergraduate classes—and especially those at the introductory level—tend to be lecture- based passive environments. As will be discussed below, faculty develop- ment can provide a mechanism for enhancing knowledge of research in teaching and learning. Although it is important, simply telling faculty about education research is unlikely to be sufficient to effect change. Lack of information is only one of the barriers to the implementation of research-based teaching methods. For example, Henderson and Dancy (2007) found a number of situational barriers that limit education reform, including student attitudes and prepara- tion, expectations of content coverage, limited instructor time, departmental norms, student resistance, class size, classroom layout, and structure of instructional time. Those barriers present an important challenge that will need to be addressed. Even bringing the challenges into the open can have a powerful effect in encouraging faculty to overcome them. As one mecha- nism, centers for teaching and learning could offer faculty development opportunities and discussions in which faculty can work together. Provid- ing opportunities for science faculty to interact and work more closely with education researchers also appears to help in implementation (Henderson and Dancy 2008). Role of Graduate Education This report is focused on undergraduate education, but graduate students play an important role as well. Graduate students serve as teaching assistants and often have more contact with undergraduates than do members of the faculty. They serve as mentors in research and teaching laboratories. They have viewpoints and experiences that can be helpful in curriculum develop- ment and are often less confined to a single discipline or field of study than are faculty. Perhaps most important, graduate students—and postdoctoral r ­ esearchers—are the faculty of the future. Therefore, engaging them in con- versation about the reform of undergraduate education while they are still s ­ tudents and trainees will pay off for years to come. And it will make those graduate students and postdocs more valuable on the job market if they can demonstrate depth in their thinking about teaching and learning (see Box 3-7 for an example of a program designed to help graduate students to be effec- tive teachers).

56 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World BOX 3-7 Enhancing Graduate Training in Teaching and Learning: Delta Program at the University of Wisconsin The Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) at the University of Wisconsin–Madison has a goal of developing a national faculty in the natural and social sciences, engineering, and mathematics with the knowledge and experience to forge successful professional careers that include implementing and advancing effective teaching and learning practices. Building on a prototype at UW–Madison, CIRTL’s Delta Program now connects six research universities in a curriculum of graduate courses, inter­generational small-group programs, and internships embedded within an interdisciplinary learning community. Every facet of Delta is designed around models familiar to r ­ esearchers in these disciplines. For example, the courses are project-based, and require students to define a learning problem; understand their student audi- ence; explore the literature for prior knowledge; hypothesize, design, and imple- ment a solution; and acquire and analyze data to measure learning outcomes. Delta internships are research assistantships in teaching, in which a graduate student or postdoctoral researcher partners with a faculty member to address a learning problem. Delta activities are also designed to provide each gradu- ate and postdoctoral participant with a portfolio, letters of recommendation, and p ­ resentations/­publications in teaching and learning analogous to those in their disciplinary research curriculum vitae. Since 2003, more than 1,600 UW–Madison graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, staff, and faculty have participated in the Delta learning community. The Delta Program has enabled graduate students and others early in their careers to develop the skills and confidence they need to become creative, well- prepared professionals who will enter the national workforce with the ability to teach effectively and improve science education broadly. Additional information about CIRTL is available at <http://www.cirtl.net/>; informa- tion about the Delta Program is available at <http://www.delta.wisc.edu/>. Centers for Teaching and Learning A number of institutions have established centers dedicated to improving undergraduate instruction. Whether they are called centers for teaching excel- lence, centers for teaching and learning, or something else, they are typically staffed by education professionals who work with faculty, graduate teaching assistants, and others to improve undergraduate education (Singer 2002). Implementing several of the ideas discussed in this report might be best carried out by such centers. They already provide an existing infrastructure in a local setting, have resources and expertise to conduct workshops and

Improving the Learning Experience 57 other activities, and tend to have a campuswide reach. In addition, they can serve as a valuable resource to an institution by providing individual consultation and programming to those seeking to improve teaching on their campus. Faculty Development Implementing the changes that would promote effective teaching and learning in undergraduate agricultural education and support the success of a diverse student population will require adequate resources. Although support for academic research is often available to faculty from external and internal sources, few resources are available for teaching. Educational innovation may be relatively inexpensive, but it is not without some costs: faculty need resources to enhance their teaching, to develop new courses, or to learn new teaching techniques. Teaching assistants (TAs) can often be critical in enabling faculty to implement new teaching techniques, and their support can often be provided through instructional budgets. TAs not only help to take on time-consuming responsibilities, but involving TAs in educational innovation offers an excellent opportunity to provide graduate students and others with professional development experiences. Resources are also needed to allow faculty to keep up with the scholarship and practice of undergraduate education: support for books, journal subscriptions, society memberships, and participation in relevant meetings and conferences. Per- haps the scarcest resource for many faculty is time itself, and release time may be an appropriate investment in curriculum reform. Faculty development, in general, is essential for helping to prepare faculty to take advantage of the research on teaching and learning. Faculty development will have to be multifaceted to include both formal train- ing and support for participation in ongoing networks; it should occur at several levels and be conducted by a variety of communities. Universities have an obvious responsibility to ensure that their faculty are kept current with research on teaching and learning, new pedagogical techniques, and developments in instructional technology. Professional societies have an important role to play in supporting high-quality education in their disci- plines and can bring expertise in teaching and learning to individual fields of study. Funding agencies, accrediting bodies, and other national organi- zations can help to promote and support activities to convene faculty to discuss these issues and promote the scholarship of teaching and learning. Relatively inexpensive investments in such activities will pay dividends for years to come.

58 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World There are many models of faculty development, from individual work- shops to year-long sabbaticals focused on teaching and learning. It is likely that in-depth—but brief—experiences provide maximal benefit for a small investment of time or resources. For example, the National Academies has developed a week-long faculty-development institute for under­graduate faculty in the biological sciences with a particular focus on research uni- versities (see Box 3-8). Another type of model is a network of faculty dedi- cated to a common purpose, such as Project Kaleidoscope’s Faculty for the 21st Century network (see Box 3-9). BOX 3-8 National Academies Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education in Biology The authors of the 2003 National Research Council report Bio2010: Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists recognized the central role of faculty development in effecting changes in undergraduate education, and they devoted one of their eight recommendations to campus-level and national faculty development (NRC 2003a). As a direct result of that recommendation, the National Academies estab- lished the National Academies Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education with support from HHMI, the Research Corporation for Science Advancement, the Presidents’ Committee of the National Research Council, and the University of Wisconsin–Madison (Wood and Gentile 2003; Wood and Handelsman 2004; Pfund et al. 2009). The summer institute seeks to transform undergraduate biology education at research universities nationwide by improving classroom teaching and attracting diverse students to science. Teams of two or three faculty members, most of whom teach introductory courses, learn about and implement the themes of “scientific teaching” (Handelsman et al. 2004)—active learning, assessment, and diversity—during a week-long workshop dedicated to teaching and learning. Participants work together to develop materials and lessons that they agree to implement in their courses in the following year. The impact of the summer institute is far greater than the individual teaching materials; rather, it seeks to transform how individual faculty members view their teaching and, by extension, influence other members of their departments and their disciplines to make similar transformations (Pfund et al. 2009). Participants are named National Academies Education Fellows in the Life Sciences and are encouraged to become ambassadors for education reform on their campuses and throughout their professional communities. The aim is, therefore, to leverage a pro- gram that directly reaches 40 faculty per year—who themselves teach over 15,000 students per year—into one that reaches hundreds of thousands of students. Additional information about the Summer Institute is available at <http://www. AcademiesSummerInstitute.org>.

Improving the Learning Experience 59 BOX 3-9 Project Kaleidoscope Faculty for the 21st Century Since 1994, Project Kaleidoscope (PKAL) has been managing a national net- work of emerging leaders in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), known as Faculty for the 21st Century (F21). The network encourages faculty to become agents of change and visible leaders on their cam- puses and in their disciplines. The goal of the PKAL F21 network is to foster every F21 member’s capacity for leadership by providing opportunities to explore new ways of thinking about students, about science and technology, and about society. PKAL intends to build a supportive alliance among and between the F21 members and the affiliated net- work of current leaders in STEM education. The F21 network now includes more than 1,200 faculty at over 500 colleges and universities around the country. F21 members are nominated by senior administrators on their campuses, who must make a commitment to enhance the leadership capacities of their nomi- nees. The collaboration between PKAL and participating campuses is an essential ingredient of the F21 network in recognition that groups working together can a ­ ccomplish more than those working in isolation. Additional information about the PKAL F21 network is available at <http://www. pkal.org/activities/F21.cfm>. Summit Presentation: Jeanne Narum, Director, Project Kaleidoscope. The committee believes that institutions should include teaching-focused workshops and experiences as part of graduate education and postdoctoral training. Graduate students and postdoctoral scholars make up the next generation of faculty, and early intervention in their training can lead to faculty who are already familiar with education research and comfortable with student-centered pedagogies when they begin their faculty careers. One national effort that strives to prepare graduate students for careers at a variety of academic institutions with a variety of missions, student bodies, and faculty expectations is the Preparing Future Faculty (PFF) initiative.11 Individual PFF programs address the full scope of faculty responsibilities; provide multiple mentors to students, including mentors in teaching; and engage a cluster of diverse institutions so that students have opportunities to work with faculty and gain teaching experience in a variety of settings. 11See <http://www.preparing-faculty.org/> for more information about the PFF program.

60 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Faculty Rewards One of the greatest obstacles to the reform of teaching and learning cited at the Leadership Summit was the institutional reward structure, especially the criteria for promotion and tenure. A thorough review of institutional t ­enure-review policies is far beyond the scope of this report, but the com- mittee believes that the importance of the issue merits a brief discussion here.12 There was a strong feeling among participants in the summit that tenure criteria are strongly tilted toward faculty members’ research productivity and that too little attention is paid to teaching and service. Faculty, under- standably, are driven by what their employers value: in the current reward structure, this means research activities, especially being published and securing external grant support. Even though teaching and learning are at the heart of academic institutions, they rarely play a substantial role in the evaluation of faculty. In part, that is because of the perceived difficulty in measuring teaching quality objectively, but there are strategies for evaluating faculty teaching and student learning (NRC 2003b). Many institutions do offer some sort of teaching award, but some complain that such awards can be little more than popularity contests that reward entertaining or dynamic instructors. The competitions are often based solely on student evaluations and rarely consider measures of student learning. Moreover, an institution may give only a handful of the awards each year, leaving many excellent instructors without recognition or acknowledgment. Implementing high-quality educational practices and enhancing institu- tional rewards for teaching and learning will require renewed emphasis at all levels, including the top of an institution. When the driving force for the process flows from the president and provost, the attention of internal and external stakeholders can be focused on support and encouragement for teaching. Some of the changes that will be required are a refocusing of faculty hiring and evaluation to include consideration of learning outcomes, valuing the scholarship of teaching and learning in the promotion and tenure process, and adopting other strategies for honoring and supporting teaching. A number of ideas for rewarding undergraduate teaching and supporting student learning were offered at the Leadership Summit. Some institutions have created teaching tracks in which instructors are judged primarily on the basis of the quality of their teaching and that are separate from the 12For a more thorough discussion of institutional rewards for teaching, see, for example, NRC (2003b).

Improving the Learning Experience 61 research-track faculty that have been the standard. The positions sometimes have distinct titles, such as “professor of the practice of . . . .” In most of the cases discussed, however, the teaching track does not offer the possibility of tenure, and there are often limitations on involvement in faculty governance; this raised concerns about a two-tier system in which teaching faculty are relegated to a lower rank. Some institutions have established tenure-track faculty positions in discipline-based education, affording faculty the same opportunities and responsibilities as traditional research-focused faculty members. Those holding such positions are expected to conduct original research, publish in peer-reviewed publications, secure extramural funding, and become leaders in their fields; the only difference is that their research is focused on education. One institution participating in the summit had come to the conclu- sion that teaching should not be considered the individual responsibility of faculty members but the collective responsibility of an entire department. That change in mindset helped to encourage an open discussion of teaching and learning at that institution instead of something that happened behind closed doors. The institution even decided to offer teaching awards to entire departments; in addition to public recognition, the award comes with a prize of unrestricted funds that the department can spend as it sees fit. Because such unrestricted funds are so uncommon at most institutions, this can be a powerful motivator for even a recalcitrant department to focus on teaching quality and student learning. Perhaps most interesting were institutions that had incorporated under- graduate teaching into their tenure criteria (see overview in Bush et al. 2006). One speaker described an extensive plan at the University of Wisconsin- M ­ adison (UW–Madison) that pays attention to teaching in tenure consider- ation. As explained in Box 3-10, UW–Madison has developed a structure in which teaching can be a primary area of accomplishment for tenure consideration; it can also serve as a secondary area that is taken seriously for faculty who have research as their primary area of focus. Policies like those at UW–Madison can serve as models for other institutions in drafting similar criteria that give appropriate consideration to teaching. What may be more of a challenge, however, is getting universities to both adopt and enforce such policies. Some concern has been raised about the danger of creating a “caste system” in which some faculty concentrate on teaching and others are com- mitted mostly to research. Institutions that choose to pursue such a path will need to ensure that compensation, advancement, job security, and respect are provided equally to teachers and researchers.

62 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World BOX 3-10 Valuing Teaching for Tenure and Promotion at the University of Wisconsin–Madison The University of Wisconsin–Madison has taken steps to value under­graduate teaching in the criteria for granting tenure. As described by Caitilyn Allen, pro­ fessor of plant pathology, who served as chair of the university-level tenure com- mittee in 2005–2006, UW–Madison made a commitment to incorporate a rigorous and fair evaluation of teaching for consideration of tenure. The university has established a culture that has the support of the administration; this means that department decisions based on teaching cannot be outweighed by concerns about external grant support. Tenure dossiers at UW–Madison must describe achievements in research, teaching, outreach (extension), and service; a candidate must show “excellence” in one and “significant accomplishment” in a second; any candidate with a teach- ing appointment is judged partly on the basis of teaching. Those seeking tenure primarily on the basis of teaching must demonstrate a national or international reputation that is demonstrated by scholarly work related to teaching. More com- monly, teaching is considered an important accomplishment to support a primary focus on research or extension. Among the metrics used to evaluate teaching are the following: • Numbers of courses and students taught, taking into consideration how many were new preparations and student mentoring outside class. • Student evaluations, including numerical ratings for each course, but also qualitative student evaluations for a selection of courses and exit interviews with a handful of randomly selected students from each course. Even if individual student responses are not always objective or fair, the collective wisdom of many students usually provides an accurate picture of an instructor. • Peer review, in which two faculty members observe two class sessions each semester and write an evaluation that is discussed with the junior faculty member. For those seeking tenure primarily on the basis of teaching, an indepen- dent committee of master teachers from outside the home department is brought in to assess the candidate’s teaching. • Evaluation of teaching materials, including a two-page statement of teach- ing philosophy and practice, new curriculum development (when relevant), and copies of original teaching materials, such as syllabi, assignments, examinations, and laboratory or field exercises. • Measures of the effect of the candidate’s teaching-related work beyond his or her own classroom, including peer-reviewed articles, textbooks, and other ped-

Improving the Learning Experience 63 agogical materials; presentations at regional, national, and international meetings; grants to develop courses or curricula or to conduct pedagogical research; and documentation that the candidate’s teaching activities have resulted in changed practices beyond the campus. • Letters from off-campus experts on teaching in the candidate’s field who review and assess the faculty member’s teaching dossier in the case of someone being considered primarily on the basis of teaching. In many ways, those measures are directly comparable with measures used for research productivity, so they should not be foreign to most faculty. Allen noted that the reviews are not pro forma but are taken seriously. There are examples of candidates with good external funding and substantial publica- tion records who failed to be promoted because of the absence of high-quality teaching. The university coupled the altered procedures with institutional resources to support faculty as teachers: partnering young faculty with master teachers and developing mentor committees, providing peer review and comments on teaching, offering workshops and symposia to generate ideas and build a culture of teach- ing, granting teaching leaves to assist in course development and revision, and awarding small grants for computers and software, memberships, subscriptions to teaching-oriented publications, and attendance at education-focused conferences. And it has taken steps to continue to value teaching after tenure, for example, by making it one criterion for annual merit salary adjust­ments, requir­ing sabbatical appli­cations to include a justification for teaching development, nominating in- structors for teaching awards, and publicizing faculty teaching ­accomplishments. For additional information see the University of Wisconsin–Madison’s Guidelines for Recommendations for Promotion or Appointment to Tenure Rank in the Biologi- cal Sciences Division at <http://www.secfac.wisc.edu/divcomm/­biological/Tenure- Guidelines.pdf>. Summit Presentation: Caitilyn Allen, Professor of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin–Madison.

64 Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Support for teaching can also be incorporated into faculty hiring. Actions such as emphasizing and providing appropriate descriptions of teaching opportunities in position descriptions, asking for statements of teaching phi- losophy and experience as part of an application, discussing teaching and learning during interviews, asking candidates to conduct a sample class during a campus visit, and involving students in the campus visit can send a signal that teaching is valued and provide information that hiring committees can use in assessing a candidate’s teaching ability. Institutions could also consider devoting a portion of startup costs to education-related expenses; even a small amount of money can go a long way in emphasizing the importance of teaching and providing the impetus for faculty to learn more about effective teaching strategies or teaching materials. Those steps, if taken early, can help to reinforce attention to education that can last for an entire career. Steps to promote teaching in early-career faculty can enhance the syn- ergy between research and teaching that contributes both to more relevant teaching and to more innovative research. Such programs as NSF’s Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program13 and the HHMI Professors program14 help to bridge teaching and research and to support faculty members who excel in and integrate both. Institutions can and should also support the development of good teachers. As discussed above, faculty development is a vital component, but generally helping to build institutional capacity should be a goal. That can include discussions of teaching and learning during faculty meetings, hosting speakers on education as part of department seminar series, offer- ing certificate programs in undergraduate education for graduate students, designing new classroom spaces that support active learning, and providing opportunities for the development of new seminars and laboratories. Those steps, taken together, can foster a culture of excellence in under- graduate education in which faculty, staff, administrators, and students work together to improve teaching and learning. Faculty who receive training in evidence-based methods and materials can be more effective teachers and promote enhanced student learning. The ultimate outcome should be well-prepared students who have the motivation and confidence to pursue their interests and careers of choice. Using research-based methods and supporting instruction that fosters these goals will help our universities to be leaders in undergraduate education. 13See <http://www.nsf.gov/career/> for more information about the NSF CAREER program. 14See <http://www.hhmi.org/research/professors/> for more information about the HHMI Professors program.

Next: 4 Breaking Down Silos in the University »
Transforming Agricultural Education for a Changing World Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $61.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

During the next ten years, colleges of agriculture will be challenged to transform their role in higher education and their relationship to the evolving global food and agricultural enterprise. If successful, agriculture colleges will emerge as an important venue for scholars and stakeholders to address some of the most complex and urgent problems facing society.

Such a transformation could reestablish and sustain the historical position of the college of agriculture as a cornerstone institution in academe, but for that to occur, a rapid and concerted effort by our higher education system is needed to shape their academic focus around the reality of issues that define the world's systems of food and agriculture and to refashion the way in which they foster knowledge of those complex systems in their students. Although there is no single approach to transforming agricultural education, a commitment to change is imperative.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!