17 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2019
    1. What follows is a flexible, four-part lens for evaluating key possible dimensions of a CTL’s work — hub, incubator, temple, sieve — derived from a heuristic developed by others to categorize the literature on purposes of higher education (Stevens, Armstrong, & Arum, 2008).

      Interesting way to use an object as a way to describe the work of CTLs--hub, incubator, temple, sieve

    2. Because documentation of student learning impacts may not reflect the core objectives of all CTLs — and because this investigation is resource-intensive

      Measuring impact of on student learning outcomes is resource-intensive. This makes me think of the Tracer project.

  2. May 2019
  3. Mar 2019
  4. Feb 2019
  5. Nov 2018
  6. Sep 2018
  7. Jul 2018
  8. May 2018
  9. Mar 2018
  10. Feb 2018
    1. Connecting the Dots:A Proposed Accountability Method for Evaluating the Effi cacy of Faculty Development and Its Impact on Student Outcomes

    1. “It seems like there’s less introducing of brand-new technology in teaching and learning, as opposed to really thinking more about how do you teach well with it.”

      Or do you even need to teach with it?