1. Jessica Gregg
  2. http://ceils.ucla.edu
  3. Associate Director for Educational Development
  4. CIRTL INCLUDES - Toward an Alliance to Prepare a National Faculty for Broadening Success of Underrepresented 2-Year and 4-Year STEM Students
  5. https://ceils.ucla.edu/ucla-cirtl-includes/
  6. CIRTL, UCLA
  1. Marc Levis-Fitzgerald
  2. Director center for educational assessment
  3. CIRTL INCLUDES - Toward an Alliance to Prepare a National Faculty for Broadening Success of Underrepresented 2-Year and 4-Year STEM Students
  4. https://ceils.ucla.edu/ucla-cirtl-includes/
  5. UCLA
  1. Erin Sanders
  2. https://ceils.ucla.edu
  3. Director
  4. CIRTL INCLUDES - Toward an Alliance to Prepare a National Faculty for Broadening Success of Underrepresented 2-Year and 4-Year STEM Students
  5. https://ceils.ucla.edu/ucla-cirtl-includes/
  6. UCLA Center for Education Innovation & Learning in the...
Public Discussion
  • Icon for: Mia Ong

    Mia Ong

    Facilitator
    March 20, 2017 | 11:24 a.m.

    Hi Erin, Marc, and Jess. Thank you for your video. You have clearly been busy building your extensive network and strengthening partnerships to better serve URG students. Can you say more about the survey you designed for faculty at community colleges -- what are some sample questions/topics, and what are you hoping to learn? And what do you mean by "collective impact" for the project? How will the impact be measured? Thanks. 

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 20, 2017 | 01:35 p.m.

    Thanks for your interest in our video and project!

    The survey asks current CC faculty about the pathways to their profession -- what inspired them to teach in the CC system? what types of professional development did they get along the way?  what do they wish they knew before teaching in CC?  etc.

    We would like to design some CIRTL training materials that would better prepare graduate students interested in CC careers. We also are very interested in creating programs (or collaborating with existing programs) that provide an authentic teaching experience (i.e., internship opportunities or job shadowing) to those students serious about a CC career.

    Regarding measuring impact, we are actively working through the project metrics with our other two regional collaborative

  • Icon for: Mia Ong

    Mia Ong

    Facilitator
    March 20, 2017 | 04:51 p.m.

    Thanks, Erin. What an inspiring endeavor your project is! Most graduate students are aggressively socialized to pursue positions in 4-year research institutions. It's great that your project will develop experiences and tools to provide graduate students with a meaningful, alternative career option of teaching in the CC system.

  • Icon for: Jeanne Century

    Jeanne Century

    Facilitator
    March 20, 2017 | 02:13 p.m.

    Hi Erin - I appreciated the core idea of your work: focusing on the teachers at CCs. So many others focus on moving students from CCs to 4-year institutions but don't give the thought you have to findings ways to increase the quality of their experiences while they are there.  I also appreciated how thoughtful it seems you have been about learning what is working already and going straight to the source - those already teaching in CCs. With all of this great data-based groundwork, I'm curious about the metrics you are thinking of using for tracking success moving forward?  Thanks, Jeanne

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 20, 2017 | 02:36 p.m.

    Thanks so much for your interest!  Metrics have not been a trivial issue for us to settle on.  As we're looking at this pathways issue in three different regions, we are the only urban center and seem to have issues unique to our region (e.g., the large adjunct pool all competing for full time CC jobs). Other regions have concerns about recruiting a large and diverse pool of candidates.  This complicates the idea of finding common metrics across regions.  But that in and of itself is informative and will help shape the types of interventions conceived.  

     

    In addition to the community colleges, we also have engaged a number of 4-year college partners in this project.  And so another direction we're tracking is graduate student interest in CC careers.  Here is one example of a metric we have discussed tracking success -- increasing the number of graduate students expressing interest in or those who successfully acquire a full-time CC position within our region.   

     

    Any suggestions or ideas would be most welcome!

     

    Best wishes,

    Erin

  • Icon for: Jeanne Century

    Jeanne Century

    Facilitator
    March 20, 2017 | 04:34 p.m.

    Very interesting, Erin. I agree with you on the idea that identifying different issues that are unique to regions is in itself important. Those differences can be very useful to track as well. While there are differences in focus perhaps (some on recruitment, others on too much demand) I expect you also have some things you are interested in that are common across all locations. For example, measuring the nature and quality of the the instruction; the CC faculty attitudes about their students; about teaching etc. If you have the agreed upon expectations for these outcomes that would be common across all CC instructors, then you might be able to start examining relationships between those outcomes and the more varied  conditions (rural/urban, etc.). 

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 20, 2017 | 09:08 p.m.

    Thanks for the feedback, Jeanne.  Your ideas are solid and will more than likely be incorporated into the common metrics across the RCs. We anticipate that certain themes will emerge in the results of our CC faculty survey so what we ultimately focus on is informed by our pilot project assessment.

    Best wishes,

    Erin

  • Icon for: Kimberly Douglas-Mankin

    Kimberly Douglas-Mankin

    Project Director
    March 21, 2017 | 05:09 p.m.

    Hi Erin, thanks for your work!  Having attended a community college many years ago, I appreciate your focus on CC faculty.  I'm the Project Director for LEVERAGE -- which focuses on the engineering career pathway, I'm wondering what demographics you collected in your faculty survey.  I'm particularly curious whether your results could inform content we could deliver through LEVERAGE to support the success for diverse pre-engineering community-college faculty.  

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 21, 2017 | 05:33 p.m.

    Hi Kimberly,

    We have not yet administered the CC faculty survey (our IRB approval process has taken far longer than we ever expected).  But we do seem to be on track for the launch of the survey in the next month.  The survey requests demographic data from all participants and does cover all STEM faculty (Engineers included!).  It sounds like our efforts to support the CC faculty-bound community of graduate students dovetails nicely.  Let's get in touch and talk specifics! 

    Best wishes,

    Erin

  • Small default profile

    Jeremy Roschelle

    Guest
    March 21, 2017 | 07:38 p.m.

    I am excited about the structure of your initiative. It seems mathematics is sadly a turn-off experience for community college students and an obstacle to their progress -- what are you learning about what kinds of faculty development are needed to turn this around? In general, how do you see the alliance aligning (a) what faculty say they need and want to (b) what could make a big difference for their students?

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 27, 2017 | 11:59 p.m.

    We have a group focused on math specifically.  Four questions we are trying to address specifically are as follows: 

    1)      To what extent should we introduce future CC faculty to promising curricula, e.g. integrated math, or to promising pedagogies, e.g. team-based learning, or a blend of both?

    2)      How do we prepare mathematical science future CC faculty for CC math teaching?

    3)      How do we prepare STEM future CC faculty to help their students that are simultaneously struggling with math skills?

    4)      How do we most effectively partner with national math organizations, e.g. AMATYC, ASEE, etc.

    I wish we had the answers to your questions but I do believe the CC faculty survey being administered will shed light on this issue and help us frame interventions addressing the above questions optimally as a multi-region alliance.

  • Small default profile

    Josh Freeman

    Guest
    March 21, 2017 | 10:19 p.m.

    Thanks for creating such a great video. It really is useful in understanding how you are approaching the problems now, with an eye towards the future.

    - Josh 

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 27, 2017 | 11:59 p.m.

    Thanks for the feedback!

  • Icon for: Janice Jackson

    Janice Jackson

    Facilitator
    March 23, 2017 | 12:55 a.m.

    It is exciting to see a focus on the development of CC faculty.  The collective impact approach across three regions is ambitious.  I would be interested in learning about the models you've mentioned to design your project.  I look forward to seeing where this work takes you.

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 28, 2017 | 12:03 a.m.

    Two internship programs I could point you to now that we are looking at as models or partners in developing interventions are Project Match (associated with LACCD) and the Future Instructors Training Program through College of the Canyons. More to come though for sure! 

  • Icon for: Mia Ong

    Mia Ong

    Facilitator
    March 23, 2017 | 05:24 p.m.

    I watched your video again and enjoyed it a second time. I understand that Strategic Goal 1 is to prepare ALL STEM faculty to serve URG students, and that Strategic Goal 3 is to prepare URG STEM future faculty (meaning graduate students?). How do you anticipate the tools and training to be the same or different between Goals 1 and 3? Thanks.

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 28, 2017 | 12:05 a.m.

    As you've probably gathered, the three strategic goals are completely connected and interlinked.  I don't think we'll be creating separate training materials but instead will use our alliance partners to inform the development of training materials to serve all three goals.

  • Icon for: Janice Jackson

    Janice Jackson

    Facilitator
    March 27, 2017 | 11:38 p.m.

    I am interested in the response to Mia's question.  All the best.

    Janice

  • Icon for: Erin Sanders

    Erin Sanders

    Co-Presenter
    March 28, 2017 | 12:13 a.m.

    The focus of SG1 and SG3 aim to support both current and future faculty. But in SG1 the focus is on the training all faculty to serve diverse undergraduate student groups whereas in SG3 the focus is on the recruitment aspect of a more diverse professoriate.  The teaching development tools can be shared across all three SGs. 

    I hope this helps!  There is a lot of great work being done in all three SGs. Their intersection is our focus in developing a successful alliance.

    Thanks again for the interest in our project and great questions!

     

  • Further posting is closed as the event has ended.