Check back here for a new call for proposals for 2017 – 2018 Innovation Fellows to develop new or substantially revised courses in support of the new general education curriculum (scheduled to launch for incoming freshmen in Fall 2018). The new CFP will be shared in late August 2017. For more information about the new general education curriculum, please see the General Education Revision Blog: http://sites.stedwards.edu/seugened/2017/05/16/course-development-guidelines-supported-by-academic-council-for-general-education-framework-components/
Need help preparing a proposal for the Innovation Fellowship or the Technology for Innovative Learning & Teaching Pilot Project Grants? Not sure if your idea fits the CFPs? This hour-long workshop will review successful proposal strategies, as well as pitfalls in proposal preparation. Participants should come with ideas and will leave with a proposal outline and/or rough draft.
- Proposals are due March 10.
- Guidelines & Submission
Technology for Innovative Learning & Teaching Pilot Project Grants
- Pre-proposals due February 24
- Final proposals due March 10
- Guidelines & Submission
Innovation fellowships support faculty who need time, resources, and expertise to include pedagogical experimentation in their courses by providing a $1200 stipend, participation in the Summer 2017 Innovation Institute, May 15-26, 2017, and a community of faculty fellows focused on pedagogical innovation. We encourage applications that focus on a wide variety of pedagogical innovations and experimentation with an emphasis on design or redesign of courses as part of the new general education curriculum or to support our Quality Enhancement Plan, “Vocation: Discovering One’s Purpose in a Changing World”.
Proposals are due Friday, March 10, 2017. For more information about the fellowship, the institute, and detailed instructions for applying, please consult the CFP and Guidelines for 2017-2018 fellowships.
Thanks to all of the innovation fellows who joined us for the reunion yesterday. Each table had a lively discussion about what they found valuable about the fellowship (especially from the perspective of time) and what they want to try next. We asked each table to share just two insights from that discussion. Here is what we heard:
Benefits of the Innovation Fellowship included:
- Dedicated space and time to think about teaching
- Discussion with colleagues devoted specifically to teaching, and even more so with structure and guidance.
- Collective knowledge of SEU faculty
- Better understanding of risk in the classroom and strategies for helping students feel more secure by managing their expectations
- Value of discussing your pedagogical project repeatedly with colleagues and support staff who can help you realize your idea
As part of the Innovation Institute, Innovation Fellows will participate in their choice of three of five workshops that will provide more focused resources related to the fellow’s project. These workshops will also be open to others in the St. Edward’s University community, and fellows may participate in additional workshops if desired. To see the list of available workshops and sign up, please visit the Workshops 2016 page. Workshops begin Wednesday, May 18 and continue through Tuesday, May 24.
May 16 – 25
Based on feedback from last year’s fellows, we have condensed the institute down into a 1.5 week model. All fellows will attend a set of core workshops and activities together, and then will select an additional 3 workshops from a list of topic choices, based on what is most useful to your project.
Week 1: May 16- 20
- Mon, Wed, and Fri: core, required sessions, 10 am – 2 pm, lunch provided
- Tues, Thurs: Additional, optional workshops run in 1-2-hour blocks between the hours of 10 am – 2 pm. Lunch on your own.
Week 2: May 23- 25
- Mon: Core sessions, 10 am – 2 pm, lunch provided
- Tues: Additional, optional workshops run in 1-2-hour blocks between the hours of 10 am 0 2 pm. Lunch on your own
- Wed: End-of-Institute presentations: 1:00 -4:30 pm
We are pleased to announce the Innovation Fellowship and Global Innovation Fellowship recipients for 2016-2017. This fellowship supports faculty with the resources and expertise needed to experiment with the pedagogy in a course. We consider this fellowship a marker of significant potential and achievement; these fellows are not only pursuing valuable pedagogical innovation but also are contributing in significant ways to the university’s mission and goals. Please join us in congratulating the 2016-2017 fellows:
Shannon Baley, Visiting Assistant Professor, University Studies
Innovation Fellow | American Dilemmas/ Living Newspaper
Patricia J. Baynham, Professor, Biology
Global Innovation Fellow | Embedding Australia into Biology 1305
Lisa M. Goering, Professor, Biology
Global Innovation Fellow | Evolution Down Under, Capstone with Australia topics
Jennifer Jefferson, Visiting Assistant Professor, University Studies
Innovation Fellow | The American Experience
Katherine Lopez, Assistant Professor, Accounting
Innovation Fellow | Intermediate Accounting
Jack Musselman, Associate Professor, Philosophy
Innovation Fellow | Legal Ethics
Georgia Seminet, Associate Professor, Spanish
Innovation Fellow | Mexican Literature of the XXth and XXIst Centuries
Amy Nathan Wright, Visiting Assistant Professor, University Studies
Diversity Innovation Fellow | Domestic Academic Travel Experience
See the Innovation Fellowship Blog for the full list of fellows with abstracts of their proposed course redesigns.
We received many excellent submissions this year. The Innovations in Teaching Committee (composed of a faculty representative from each school), as well as the Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence, the Director of Munday Library, and the Director of Instructional and Emerging Technology reviewed all proposals, ranked them by selection criteria–significance of innovation; connection to the Holy Cross mission and strategic goals of the university; feasibility of the proposed experiment; potential impact on student learning; and planned public dissemination and potential for scholarship and publication based on this experiment–and made recommendations as to which proposals should be accepted.
All Fellows will participate in the Innovation Institute, currently scheduled for May 16-27, 2016, offered by the Center for Teaching Excellence, the Munday Library, and the Office of Instructional Technology.
We thank everyone who submitted a proposal and are looking forward to seeing the courses develop. Fellows (both past and present) share their projects with the faculty via the Innovation Fellowship Blog as well as through events organized by the Center for Teaching Excellence and the Office of Instructional Technology.
CFPs are available online for both the 2016-2017 Innovation Fellowships and the 2016 Technology for Innovative Learning & Teaching Pilot Project Grants. Proposals for each are due Monday, February 8, 2016. There is an abbreviated TLTR form for those submitting combined proposals.
These opportunities are open to both tenure-track and non-tenure-track (including adjunct) faculty. You may apply for one or both of these opportunities, even if you have already applied for and received a Presidential Excellence Award for the summer of 2016.
More Information is available online:
After having composer, Yevgeniy Sharlat, visit our class one of the students got inspired to go back to writing music and performed a brand new piece for us at the end of the semester. Having a diverse group of visiting artists have been a great asset to the class.
After working together on assignments, some students who never talked to each other developed friendships and continued working together.
Your learning and growth:
I’ve learned that it is much easier to come up with a solution by working in a group of fellows. Each of us has a broad range of experiences and various ways of solving problems that could benefit others.
Yes, I would like to design more assignments with student initiated learning.
Impact on others:
The library I am creating would be useful for other students and faculty on campus, especially in the Fine and Performing Arts. Lectures are easily accessible and have synopsis written by students.
1. Where are you in your experiment?
So far we’ve had half of the scheduled artists visit the class, some virtually and others in person. It seems that having an artist physically present in the class works better than the alternative; however, both methods are effective in their own ways. We had artists give demonstrations both in the class and virtually in their studio. Having them in the class was a blast but some artists were reluctant to demonstrate by bringing their materials to the classroom. It is much easier for them to do from the studio.
Having students prepare the introduction and questions was effective: it made students more alert and engaged in the conversations. Many of the questions posed during a talk would not have come up without advance research. That made the Q&A part more interesting for everyone.
The lectures are now alive on YouTube, and we are working out ways to write better descriptions for future use. Having lectures recorded enabled students who missed the class still see them and respond to them.
There are still a few more artists coming into the class later this semester, therefore I have not collected any response papers yet. Those promise to be reliable indicators of the experiment’s effectiveness.
2. How are things going?
• Students are more involved in interviewing the artists. Their questions are more informed and engaging. The participation and interest are much greater than before.
• As each student could pick the artist of their choice to research, it’s more likely that their subject was more in line with the student’s own interests and creative aspirations.
• Approximately half of all students found virtual presentations to be less effective than physical ones. The other half was OK with either method. Having visiting artists lectures recorded allowed all of the students see the lectures whether they were present or not.
• I look forward to utilizing the recorded lectures in future classes.
• Having a group responsible for an assignment often means students who are normally passive get away not doing the work. Since there were many aspects to visiting artists assignments – interview, introduction, a YouTube description and a response paper – all students had to participate in some form or other.
• Having artists walk students though their process was an eye opening experience for many students. It inspired them be creative.
• All artists were very impressed by the informed introduction made by students before their presentations.
Since a lot of material has not yet been submitted by students, it is hard to fully gauge the effect the artists research has had on students. So far the response has been very positive.