This chapter describes a collective faculty effort to administer, proctor, score, and interpret student work that created an unexpected opportunity for deep discussions of teaching, learning, and assessment.
This article addresses the importance of leadership in general education reform, using three case studies. We argue that campus leadership that fosters collaboration, trust, and a sense of stewardship among constituents is more likely to be successful in the challenging task of substantially reforming general education curricula.
A perceived decline in effective faculty participation in campus leadership and governance is well documented, both in the literature and via anecdote. Characteristics common within the culture of higher education make nurturing campus “citizenship” among junior faculty challenging. This essay describes findings from an interview‐based study of junior faculty in which understanding of professional responsibilities beyond teaching and research was explored. The study documented the deep sense of unpreparedness with which new faculty approach key issues in higher education, including those associated with governance and leadership. Two possible strategies for redressing that unpreparedness, both showing preliminary but positive results, are described.
When the University of North Dakota began working to improve general education, two concerns were recognized. The first issue, which faculty and administrators across campus found immediately engaging, was how to change general education so that it would be a better program, more likely to yield clear student learning benefits. A second concern, less obvious but ultimately more significant, was how to make general education really matter. This cross-campus faculty engagement in general education goals has been extremely energizing, essentially making the program matter to faculty across disciplines; and this heightened faculty interest is already translating to students as faculty engage more purposefully with the program. 23 3 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, no. 121, Spring 2010A few years ago, in the midst of a multiyear study of general education, a professor involved in the research articulated a finding that had become inescapable: it seemed few students believed general education was relevant. Students did not perceive that their University of North Dakota (UND) faculty valued general education, and they themselves, outside of vaguely supportive but probably gratuitous remarks about the "importance of a well-rounded education," couldn't identify much that was productive about their experience with the program. In the view of students participating in the study, general education simply wasn't significant. What could be done to make a general education program matter to those engaged with it?We kept that question at the forefront of our minds during our subsequent general education reform, and one outcome of our focus was development of a program that integrated general education goals into many majors, offering extensive opportunities for faculty and students to invest in the goals beyond the first-and second-year curriculum. Although it now appears vital, the need for longitudinal integration became apparent only in hindsight.The symptoms of inadequate integration should have been obvious. Students' dismissive comments about general education were one signal.
INTEGRATED GENERAL EDUCATIONNEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING •
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.