UELO Discussion Summary: Spiritual and cultural perspectives (self and others)

UELO: Students will identify and analyze one’s own spiritual and cultural perspectives and demonstrate respect for other’s views and values.

Principles

Discussion focused on developing personal spirituality and developing perspective on diversity in religion and spirituality as separate outcomes.

Specific religious literacies – as content area knowledge – might fall under “Knowledge of liberal arts and sciences”

Religious literacy is different that spirituality, but they are often confused.  This is very holy cross.  There is a tension in some Holy Cross schools, especially in high schools, that leadership of the church want things to be very specific, that this is as Catholic school. One thing the brothers are happy about at St. Edward’s is that we can be spiritual and not necessarily have to be Roman Catholic or even Christians.

Religious literacy can be taught in courses outside of RATS department. And, philosophy professors don’t see their courses as fulfilling that requirement as developing students’ spiritual perspectives.

This is kind of a diversity issue, just as much as religion.

Spirituality is a developmental issue; not the same thing as knowledge about religion.

Catholic perspective: not just us and ourselves, us and God; also us and community

if just doing service not good if you are not reflecting on it.

Need to put this learning into practice with co-curricular, community/civic engagement, or service learning.

Concerns and Needs

Current CULF program is geared towards race, ethnicity, with belated sexuality; pulling religion into diversity courses has been batted around for a decade.

Current conception of CULF focuses on covering certain marginalized groups, rather than talking about the idea of diversity.  Would like to see classes that are proposed to fit the EULO and teach it in their own way, instead of a course based on a master syllabus and master list of topics.

How do you teach 800 students in any kind of consistent way, when you have a bunch of separate courses taught in narrow and deep ways?

CULF courses integrate religious diversity. These courses fulfill cultural perspectives, but we are not getting into spirituality.

The role that religious groups have had in social justice is missing; some of the positive roles that religion has had; there is a hesitancy to talk about religion and spirituality in co-curricular activities (afraid we will make them pray a lot).

Currently, our service hour quota satisfied by study abroad or community outreach.  We need more opportunities for serving.

We need to rethink how we approach diversity; they are a bullet list of groups that you must address instead of the idea of diversity itself.  We have to address all of these marginalized groups.

We need to separate the writing component; not as it is now because 2 courses; research paper course and social problems course.

Core purpose that dilemmas is trying to achieve is important; it is in our mission statement; but sometimes you feel that you are straight-jacketed.  Faculty would embrace those courses more if they could put more of their own personality and experience on those courses.

Students are frustrated by rigidity; we need some structure and flexibility within the structure.s

CULF courses have become ossified. Problems with these courses go away when you give people freedom from the rigidity.

There is a need for broader survey of religions; then students might find some commonality.

Stepping back to demonstrable qualities; we would know it was working if our students who are feeling marginalized are feeling less marginalized.

There can be communication challenges between student life and faculty; assessment of the co-curriculars is a challenge.

Currently: don’t have to do a service learning project to graduate?  Capstone has civic engagement, but this may not mean service.  Cvic engagement in the capstone can range from writing a letter to the editor or go to a human trafficking fundraiser.

Would be reluctant to just require a certain number of hours of service.  It has to be focused, have an educational / learning component, and be assessed.

Shouldn’t we have some sort of mission-guided, gen-ed based service or civic engagement piece?

We need to make sure our students are ready to serve, and that the community is ready to receive our bounty.  Whatever we develop should be very intentional.  Capstone has always been on the border of burdening the community.  We have to make sure that the community is ready to receive our bounty.

It is hard to get international students engaging with american students.  One challenge is that where we have students think about self and others is American experience and dilemmas,

but our international students struggle in those because they assume American knowledge and we have to develop special sections for international students, so they end up getting pulled out and can’t be part of that experience.

Best Practices

  • Every student needs a course in religions survey, world religions, or what is religion (for sensitivity to religious diversity).
  • CULF curriculum: begin by reflecting on self, belief systems and values, then move on to reflect on others’, belief systems, and values.
  • In CULF, respect and familiarity with your own and others’ cultures is the diversity aspect.
  • If a reflection and a maturation is difficult to achieve in the classroom, what about co-curricular activities?  Deliberate collaboration between first year courses and Campus Ministry; maybe a social justice component that encourages students to think through their values systems.
  • Intentionally connecting service work (such as the service work quota) to ethical anaysis or moral reasoning goals.
  • Service learning: connects social and spiritual together when you are doing service work.
  • Civic engagement across the curriculum, in conjunction with moral reasoning; putting it in practice; not just talking about it or doing but connecting the two.
  • Classes that are proposed by professors that fulfill and teach about this UELO in your own way.
  • American experience does a good job at looking at social identity as a role in people’s place in American history.  It teaches the underside of American history.  Though today students have been exposed to it more than they had been when course was designed in 1990.  Forces students to be aware of social identities.  You might lose the result that all students have walked through that gate early in their time at St. Ed’s.   Coordinator could communicate points that are most important and then give people a lot of room.
  • Based on the assessment that we do, CULF courses are working, but those kind of outcomes could be put in other courses.
  • Exposure to American social problems and pushing them to think critically about these and not have a knee-jerk reaction. Additional program assessment shows that we are achieving the stated learning outcomes of the courses.
  • Civic Enagement American Dilemmas – does well the connection between what’s happening in the class and what happens outside of the class.  They do a deliberative selection paper, to have them reflect on their values and the values of the organization they’ll be aligned with.  Scripted journals, group work looking at policy, which helps them understand multiple perspectives.  They know how to navigate news organizations, policy discussions, etc.  Stronger connection between what they’re doing in the class, and how to apply that thinking in their everyday life. There is reflection and scaffolding. Reflection on what they’ll do after the class. Students doing the capstone paper as a group; we have tracked how this experiment worked, and it has worked well.   Individual paper that draws on their values, and what position they will take.
  • Transofrmation in CULF 2321 with civic engagement sections would be a good model to pilot.  They use HEPs.  I think we need some structure, and flexibility within the structure, so that students have a common experience but with some flexibility.
  • Values work in CULF courses addresses the spiritual development issue.
  • We could do a better job of encouraging faculty members to bring student life programming issues into the classroom, e.g., relationship violence campaign.
  • It needs to be a requirement.  You need to do 2 co-curriculars on campus, and you’re going to do it.  Let’s make our courses require co-curriculars.  Getting out of the classroom, and doing something that connects back to the classroom.
  • E-portfolio may be a way to get students to reflect on co-curriculars and how they support this learning outcome.  Eportfolios would make it usefl.  If it is just a requirement, then you need to do two things related to history, two things related to X.  A punchcard approach.  But with an e-portfolio you could do it better, with a reflection.
  • Presentational speaking is required of all majors and students so it is built in diversity
    • 1st speech is about an important person
    • last speech is about a service learning experience
    • extemporaneous topic: is it important to have a faith tradition
  • Service learning: labor-intensive; need a center for service learning.
This entry was posted in ELO, Results and tagged , , , by Rebecca Davis. Bookmark the permalink.

About Rebecca Davis

Rebecca Frost Davis Director of Instructional and Emerging Technology Rebecca Frost Davis joined St. Edward’s in July 2013 as Director of Instructional and Emerging Technology, where she provides leadership in the development of institutional vision with respect to the use of technology in pursuit of the university’s educational mission and collaborates with offices across campus to create and execute strategies to realize that vision. Instructional Technology helps faculty transform and adapt new digital methods in teaching and research to advance the essential learning outcomes of liberal education. Previously, Dr. Davis served as program officer for the humanities at the National Institute for Technology in Liberal Education (NITLE), where she also served as associate director of programs. Prior to her tenure at NITLE, she was the assistant director for instructional technology at the Associated Colleges of the South Technology Center and an assistant professor of classical studies at Rhodes College, Denison University, and Sewanee: The University of the South. She holds a Ph.D. and M.A. in classical studies from the University of Pennsylvania, and a B.A. (summa cum laude) in classical studies and Russian from Vanderbilt University. Dr. Davis is also a fellow with the National Institute for Technology in Liberal Education (NITLE). As a NITLE Fellow, Dr. Davis will develop a literature review relevant to intercampus teaching, which will cover contextual issues such as team-teaching, teaching through videoconferencing, and collaboration; a survey of intercampus teaching at NITLE member institutions; and several case studies of intercampus teaching at liberal arts colleges, including interviews with faculty, students, support staff, and administrators. This work will be summarized in a final report or white paper to be published by NITLE. At Rebecca Frost Davis: Liberal Education in a Networked World, (http://rebeccafrostdavis.wordpress.com/) Dr. Davis blogs about the changes wrought by new digital methods on scholarship, networking, and communication and how they are impacting the classroom. In her research, she explores the motivations and mechanisms for creating, integrating, and sustaining digital humanities within and across the undergraduate curriculum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.