Faculty Cohorts On Teaching
The CTE鈥檚 Faculty Cohorts on Teaching program seeks to bring faculty together to explore innovative approaches to significant teaching and learning questions. Participating faculty spend a year investigating a new pedagogical or course design approach to be implemented in at least one of the courses they teach. A late spring kick-off meeting sets the stage for the conversation, and then monthly seminar meetings during the academic year are organized around relevant readings in the pedagogical literature and case studies developed by cohort participants.
All Boston College faculty are eligible to participate. To learn more about the benefits and expectations of the cohort program, please see the tab below.
2025-26 Cohort Applications
We are now accepting applications for the 2025-26 cohorts "Exploring Alternative Grading Approaches" and "Rethinking Student Learning in the Age of GenAI." Interested faculty should submit a brief online application that includes a project proposal explaining what they hope to gain from their cohort participation by March 15.
Participating faculty receive a $2,500 stipend and the opportunity to interact with an engaged group of colleagues. Please note that individuals who have administrative roles and teach are eligible to participate in a cohort but ineligible to receive the stipend, as per Boston College policy. Faculty who choose to participate can expect to:
- attend a kick-off meeting the spring before the cohort launches;
- participate in monthly cohort meetings during the academic year;
- develop a short teaching case to be shared with other members of the cohort;
- experiment with at least one significant revision to their teaching during the cohort year; and
- submit a brief final report within one month of concluding the cohort, as well as participate in other assessments the CTE conducts of the cohort program.
Exploring Alternative Approaches to Grading
Grades loom large in student-faculty relationships, in some cases eclipsing the focus on course content and student learning and formation, and instead funneling faculty energy towards the work of justifying grades. Over the years, the CTE has heard from faculty who are frustrated with that dynamic and who also worry that the grades they assign reflect students鈥 prior knowledge or skills rather than their current learning in the course. In this context, faculty are looking for alternative approaches to grading that promote trust between students and instructors, de-emphasize competition between students, support student wellbeing, and cultivate curiosity and risk taking.
This cohort seeks to bring together faculty who are interested in better understanding how grading practices intersect with questions of justice in teaching and learning. Participants will have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the latest scholarly debates on these questions and explore a range of grading approaches within their specific teaching contexts. We welcome participants from varied disciplines and with varied questions: those who are new to the conversation and those who may have already experimented with alternative approaches to grading; those who are looking to revise how they grade a particular聽 assignment or redesign their grading scheme for an entire course.
Our first meetings will provide participants the opportunity to dig into their pedagogical values and teaching contexts, analyze the challenges of traditional grading practices, and consider a variety of alternative grading models. During those discussions, we鈥檒l keep an eye on the relationship between course-level pedagogical decisions and institutional expectations. If you are looking to buildmore just learning environments, and think grading is one piece of that puzzle, this cohort could be for you.
Rethinking Student Learning in the Age of GenAI
While many initiatives related to GenAI in higher education focus on experimenting with tools, developing practical teaching strategies, and designing assessments (e.g., creating 鈥淎I-proof鈥 assignments), essential questions remain: Does the advent of GenAI require us to change how we teach? If so, how? The development of a technology like GenAI is not unprecedented in education. Similar debates about the impact of technology on student learning arose with the ubiquity of the internet, the launch of Google, and the widespread use of Wikipedia, to name just a few recent examples. In this new age of GenAI, are these earlier questions still relevant, or do they need to evolve?
This cohort provides a space for faculty to examine how technological advancements since the internet's emergence have (re)shaped student learning, reconsider their current learning goals, and determine if revisions are needed in today's context. Faculty will collaborate to reflect on their teaching practices in light of new AI tools and opportunities. Regardless of whether you have made a deliberate choice not to teach with GenAI or have been exploring ways to integrate AI into your courses, we invite you to join us in examining our new technological context and its implications for teaching and learning.
Some of the questions this cohort will explore:
- What learning goals are most relevant in a GenAI-enhanced educational environment?
- How does GenAI challenge traditional learning objectives, such as mastering foundational knowledge?
- How do we teach critical thinking and information literacy in the era of GenAI?
- What is involved in using AI tools ethically and effectively and what kind of instruction might we give to students to that end?
- Are "AI-proof" assignments viable, or should assessments embrace AI as a collaborative tool?
- How does the role of the educator evolve when students have access to GenAI tools that can generate answers or solutions?
Applying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching
As instructors have confronted pedagogical challenges from teaching in a pandemic to addressing GenAI, many have sought out findings from cognitive psychology and other learning sciences. These insights, valuable in any context, suggest ways to support student learning by focusing on their metacognition, motivation, reflection, and self-agency. The 鈥淎pplying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long collaborative inquiry into this fruitful intersection of theory and practice.聽
There will be opportunities to explore how principles derived from learning sciences have been enacted in a range of disciplines, class types and sizes. Participants will each identify a learning problem common to the courses they teach, and then explore different pedagogical responses to that problem, informed by the learning science literature. Participants will explore a particular response in depth by making its implementation the subject of a case they develop and discuss with the group.
- Alexander Auner (Pysics)
- Lauren Bent (WCAS)
- Amanda Berman (Music)
- Eunji Cho (CSON)
- Natana DeLong-Bass (Theology)
- Scott D. Easton (SSW)
- Nicole Eaton (History)
- 脕ngeles Picone (History)
- Arvind Sharma (WCAS)
- Margaret Thomas (Eastern, Slavic, and German Studies)
- Erika Ward (Mathematics)
- Lauren Wilwerding (English)
Exploring Alternative Approaches to Grading
Grades loom large in student-faculty relationships: when students focus more on their grades than on their own learning, faculty can find themselves devoting more energy to justifying grades rather than providing meaningful, learning-focused feedback. Over the years, the CTE has heard from faculty who are frustrated with that dynamic and who also worry that the grades they assign reflect students鈥 prior knowledge or skills rather than their learning in the course. In this context, faculty are looking for alternative approaches to grading that promote trust between students and instructors, de-emphasize competition between students, support student mental health, and cultivate curiosity and risk taking.
This cohort seeks to bring together faculty who are interested in better understanding how grading practices intersect with questions of equity. Participants will have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the latest scholarly debates on these questions and explore a range of grading approaches within their specific teaching contexts. We welcome participants from varied disciplines and with varied questions: those who are new to the conversation and those who may have already experimented with alternative approaches to grading; those who are looking to revise their grading system for a major assignment or redesign their grading scheme for an entire course.
Our first meetings will provide an opportunity to dig into your pedagogical values and teaching contexts, analyze the challenges of traditional grading practices, and consider a variety of alternative grading models. During those discussions, we鈥檒l keep an eye on the relationship between course-level pedagogical decisions and institutional expectations. If you are looking to advance equity in student learning and achievement, and think grading is one piece of that puzzle, this cohort could be for you.
- Regan Bernhard (Psychology & Neuroscience)
- Sarah Ehrich (English)
- Ali E. Erol (Communication)
- Angela Kim Harkins (STM)
- Aeron Hunt (English)
- Clarissa Keen (Chemistry)
- Raquel Mu帽iz (LSEHD & Law)
- Heather Olins (Biology)
- Christopher Polt (Classics)
- Mary Colleen Simonelli (CSON)
Community-Engaged Learning
Numerous 天美传媒app faculty have experimented over the years with incorporating various kinds of community engagement into their courses. Whether that鈥檚 traditional service learning, which involves student volunteer work with a community partner, or a community-based research approach that engages students in projects emerging from local needs, community-engaged learning can help students explore the real-world relevance of our disciplines while also benefiting the community. That said, community-based approaches also have the potential to do more harm than good: poorly-designed approaches can inadvertently reinforce students鈥 preconceptions about community deficits and burden community partners rather than support them. This cohort seeks to bring together faculty from various departments to investigate what鈥檚 necessary to meaningfully incorporate community-engaged learning in their courses, in both small and substantial ways.
For this particular cohort, we will embrace a broad definition of 鈥渃ommunity-engaged learning,鈥 welcoming faculty interested in a range of approaches to engaging communities 鈥 both within and outside 天美传媒app 鈥 in the pursuit of a variety of pedagogical goals. We welcome participants looking to design courses or assignments that investigate contemporary social challenges, involve Participatory Action Research or other kinds of collaborative inquiry with community stakeholders, or provide students with structured ways to reflect on the connections between classroom learning and real-world experience. If you鈥檙e teaching a course in which student exploration of or engagement with community concerns serves to further course learning goals, then this cohort could be for you. Please note that courses based around formalized opportunities for students to practice the skills of their future professions (internships, practicums, clinicals) are probably less of a good fit for this cohort; reach out if you have questions about whether your project aligns with the cohort鈥檚 goals.
- Stanley Uche Anzie (Philosophy / PULSE)
- Sharon Bckman (Law)
- Yohana Gil Berrio (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Latricia Best (Sociology / AADS)
- Eddie Bonilla (History)
- Donna Cullinan (Nursing)
- Jonathan Krones (Engineering)
- Laura Steinberg (Schiller Institute / EES)
- Hongyan Yang (Core)
More Just Grading
Students depend on feedback in order to assess their progress and direct their future efforts in a course. In theory, grades are a key way by which students receive that feedback and serve as a meaningful measure of student learning. However, in practice, translating complex learning experiences into a single data point can be difficult. Over the years, the CTE has heard from more and more faculty looking to better align their grading systems with their goals for inclusive learning environments. Faculty are looking for creative approaches to grading that promote trust between students and instructors, de-emphasize competition between students, support student mental health, and cultivate curiosity and risk taking.
This cohort seeks to bring together faculty who are interested in better understanding how grading practices intersect with educational justice. Participants will have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the latest scholarly debates on these questions and explore a range of grading approaches within their specific teaching contexts. We welcome participants from varied disciplines and with varied questions: those who are new to the conversation and those who may have already experimented with alternative approaches to grading; those who are looking to revise their approach to a particular assignment or redesign their grading scheme for an entire course.
Our first meetings will provide an opportunity to dig into the challenges of traditional grading practices and discuss a variety of grading models, while considering the relationship between course-level pedagogical decisions and broader institutional expectations. If you are looking to advance justice in student learning and achievement, and think grading is one piece of that puzzle, this cohort could be for you.
- Allison Adair (English)
- Scott Cummings (Theatre)
- Hanne Eisenfeld (Classics)
- Eric Grube (History)
- Cal Halvorsen (SSW)
- Andrea Heberlein (Psychology)
- Ashley Longacre (Public Health)
- Babak Momeni (Biology)
- Sylvia Sellers-Garc铆a (History)
- Margaret Thomas (Eastern and Slavic Languages)
Teaching for Inclusion and Social Justice
As institutions of higher education admit increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to cultivate more inclusive and just learning environments, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students in their learning. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: pedagogical approach, classroom interaction, and curriculum development.聽
Our seventh (and final) offering of the 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants are asked to identify at least one new pedagogical strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course design, content, or climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focus most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.
- Mike Barnett (LSEHD)
- Don Brady (WCAS)
- Tara Casebolt (Core/Global Public Health)聽 聽聽
- Vanessa Conzon (CSOM)
- Nicole Gross-Camp (Environmental Studies)
- Callid Keefe-Perry (STM)
- Ali Kulez (STM)
- Renee Pastel (Communication)
- Christopher Polt (Classical Studies)
- Lacee Satcher (Sociology/Environmental Studies)
- Samantha Teixeira (SSW)
- Daniela Urosa (Law)
Applying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching
As instructors have confronted numerous pedagogical challenges over the past two years, many have sought out findings from cognitive psychology and other learning sciences. These insights, valuable in any context, suggest ways to support student learning by focusing on their metacognition, motivation, reflection, and self-agency. The 鈥淎pplying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long collaborative inquiry into this fruitful intersection of theory and practice. Participants will each identify a learning problem common to the courses they teach and then experiment with implementing different pedagogical responses to that problem, informed by the learning science literature.
- Naomi Bolotin (Computer Science)聽
- Mark Chandler (WCAS)聽
- Paul Cichello (Economics)聽
- Jeff DaCosta (Biology)聽
- Jason Donnelly (Theology)聽
- Ellen Goldstein (Math)聽
- Tony Lin (Eastern, Slavic, and German Studies)聽
- Sean MacEvoy (Psychology and Neuroscience)聽
- Vena Offen (Core)聽
- Christine Repsha (CSON)聽
- Laura White (CSON)聽
- Robin Wright (Core)
Teaching for Inclusion and Social Justice
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: pedagogical approach, classroom interaction, and curriculum development.
The 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants are asked to identify at least one new pedagogical strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focus most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.
The 2021-22 participants include:
- Liam Bergin (Theology)
- Jason Donnelly (Theology)
- Isabel Lane (English)
- Tony Lin (Eastern, Slavic, and German Studies)
- Suzanne Matson (English)
- Scott Olivieri (Capstone)
- Christy Pottroff (English)
- Min Song (English)
- Holly VandeWall (Philosophy)
- Masayuki Wasa (Chemistry)
Traditions of Formation and Our Teaching
At its best, education is holistic, not just imparting skills and knowledge but inviting the growth of our students into individuals who see themselves within a greater purpose and who see a meaning to what they learn that transcends and integrates subject matter. This shared ideal of formation can take shape differently in our respective settings, which vary by level of study as well as by field, and can reflect our different positionalities and perspectives.
This cohort invites faculty to join in a year-long inquiry where they will reflect on what formation means in their teaching, beginning with an investigation of resources from developmental psychology, anti-oppressive pedagogies, and Jesuit pedagogy and spirituality. We will consider how our own formation affects our work with students, and what is distinctive about formation at 天美传媒app.聽 All participants will be asked to propose and implement a change in their teaching to further student formation as a goal in itself. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, especially those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of formation.
The 2021-22 participants include:
- Deborah聽DeChiara-Quenzer (Philosophy)
- Donna Cullinan (Nursing)
- Meg Holly (English)
- Tim Lindgren (CDIL)
- Jason McCool (Music)
- Erik Owens (Theology)
- Christine Repsha (Nursing)
- Sherri St. Pierre (Nursing)
- Sandy Tarrant (Law)
- Crystal Tiala (Theatre)
Traditions of Formation and Our Teaching
At its best, education is holistic, not just imparting skills and knowledge but inviting the growth of our students into individuals who see themselves within a greater purpose and who see a meaning to what they learn that transcends and integrates subject matter. This shared ideal of formation can take shape differently in our respective settings, which vary by level of study as well as by field, and can reflect our different positionalities and perspectives.
This cohort invites faculty to join in a year-long inquiry where they will reflect on what formation means in their teaching, beginning with an investigation of resources from developmental psychology, anti-oppressive pedagogies, and Jesuit pedagogy and spirituality. We will consider how our own formation affects our work with students, and what is distinctive about formation at 天美传媒app.聽 All participants will be asked to propose and implement a change in their teaching to further student formation as a goal in itself. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, especially those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of formation.
The 2020-21 participants include:
- Karen Arnold (LSEHD)
- Jessica Black (SSW)聽聽
- Melissa Brown (SSW)
- Nicole Eaton (History)
- Martha Hincks (English)
- Anna Karpovsky (CSOM)
- Matthew Petillo (Theology)
- Christopher Polt (Classical Studies)
- Katie Rapier (Philosophy)
- Meghan Sweeney (Theology)
Teaching For Inclusion And Social Justice
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: pedagogical approach, classroom interaction, and curriculum development.The 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants are asked to identify at least one new pedagogical strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focus most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.
The 2020-21 participants include:
- Donna Cullinan (CSON)聽聽
- Rebecca Franckle (Biology)
- Hanne Eisenfeld (Classical Studies)
- Nancy Kimelman (Economics)
- Alejandro聽Olayo-M茅ndez (SSW)
- Hilary Palevsky (Earth and Environmental Sciences)
- Akua Sarr (Office of the Provost)
- Sylvia聽Sellers-Garc铆a (History)
- Rachel Spooner (CSOM)
- Nam Wook Kim (Computer Scicence)
Teaching for Inclusion and Social Justice
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: pedagogical approach, classroom interaction, and curriculum development.The 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants are asked to identify at least one new pedagogical strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focus most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.聽
The 2019-20 participants included:
- Nadia Abuelezam (Nursing)
- Andy Crow (English)
- Lisa Cuklanz (Communication)
- Natana DeLong-Bas (Theology)
- Laura Hake (Biology)
- Cal Halvorsen (Social Work)
- Stacie Kent (History)
- Jim Mahalik (LSEHD)
- Karen Miller (History & African and African Diaspora Studies)
- Greer Muldowney (Art, Art History and Film)
- Cassie Ryan (Woods College/Nursing)
- Jenna Tonn (History)
Applying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching
As Silvia Bunge reminded us in her 2015 Excellence in Teaching Day keynote, our students鈥 learning habits 鈥 as well as the teaching habits many of us have inherited 鈥 are not always well-suited to help students realize their full potential in the classroom. Luckily, recent findings from cognitive psychology and other learning sciences suggest ways to help students learn more effectively by developing empowering capacities such as metacognition, motivation, reflection, and self-agency.聽 The 鈥淎pplying Learning Sciences to Our Teaching鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long collaborative inquiry into this fruitful intersection of theory and practice.聽 Participants will each identify a learning problem common to the courses they teach and then experiment with implementing different pedagogical responses to that problem, informed by the learning science literature.
The 2019-20 articipants included:
- Juliana Belding (Math)
- Jessica Black (Social Work)
- Dominic Doyle (STM)
- Joyce Edmonds (Nursing)
- Sarah Ehrich (English)
- Martha Hincks (English)
- Anna Karpovsky (CSOM)
- Cherie McGill (Philosophy)
- Raquel Mu帽iz (LSEHD)
- Heather Olins (Biology)
- Tracy Regan (Economics)
Called To Serve: Preparing Students For Careers Working With And For Others
This cohort explores the particular pedagogical demands associated with preparing students to enter careers centered around service to others: careers where the (physical, emotional, spiritual, and intellectual) health and well-being of others are at stake and where civic and ethical responsibility is paramount. Among the questions participants explored:
- How do we professionalize our students while also inviting them into critiques of the profession?
- How do we balance the teaching of technical skills with the formation of students鈥 professional identities and dispositions (towards collaboration, personal commitment, leadership, etc.)?
- Should student 鈥渟elf-care鈥 be on the syllabus? How can we prepare students to care for themselves as they enter fields focused on caring for others?
- How do we appropriately judge and grade someone's ability to be an effective practitioner?
- What are the different challenges and opportunities of teaching undergraduates vs. graduate students in this liberal arts context?
Although the 鈥淐alled to Serve鈥 cohort is most obviously geared towards faculty teaching in 天美传媒app鈥檚 professional schools, the cohort is open to all interested faculty at 天美传媒app.
The 2018-19 participants included:
- Susan Coleman (SSW)
- Andrew Davis (STM)
- Angela Harkins (STM)
- Laura Anne Lowery (Biology)
- Colleen Simonelli (CSON)
- Samantha Teixeira (SSW)
- Jon Wargo (LSOE)
- James Weiss (Theology)
- Celeste Wells (Communication)
Teaching For Inclusion And Social Justice
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: pedagogical approach, classroom interaction, and curriculum development.
The 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants are asked to identify at least one new pedagogical strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focus most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.聽
The 2018-19 participants included:
- Amey Victoria Adkins-Jones (Theology & African and African Diaspora Studies)
- Melissa Brown (SSW)
- Andr茅s Castro Samayoa (LSOE)
- Fugan Dineen (Music)
- Cherie McGill (Philosophy)
- Babak Momeni (Biology)
- Heather Olins (Biology)
- Tracy Regan (Economics)
- Bill聽Roozeboom (STM)
- Heather Rowan-Kenyon (LSOE)
- Anjali Vats (Communication &聽African and African Diaspora Studies)
- Catherine Warner (History)
Teaching For Inclusion And Social Justice
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion and social justice in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: curriculum development, pedagogical approach, and classroom interaction.
The 鈥淭eaching for Inclusion and Social Justice鈥 cohort invites faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants were asked to identify at least one new strategy they want to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We seek faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter doesn鈥檛 necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcome a broad definition of inclusion and justice in this conversation, we focused most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.
- Audrey Friedman (Teacher Education, Special Education, and Curriculum and Instruction)
- Lori Harrison-Kahan (English)
- Melissa Kelley (STM)
- Margaret Lombe (Social Work)
- Timothy Mangin (Music)
- Nelson Portillo聽(Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Jennie Purnell (Political Science)
- Colleen Simonelli (Nursing)
- Christopher Stroup (STM)
- Laura Tanner (English)
- Brian Zimmerman (English)
Simulations In The Classroom
Simulations are being used by Boston College instructors across a range of academic disciplines to provide an engaged and interactive learning experience for their students. The purpose of the 鈥楽imulations in the Classroom Cohort鈥 was to connect these instructors and bring them together to share their knowledge and experiences with participants looking for guidance and support in refining their existing simulations with new and innovative practices, as well as those interested in exploring the use of simulations in their teaching for the first time.
The CTE defines simulations broadly as interactive experiences designed to teach students particular content or competencies by having them engage directly with the information or the skills being learned. This can take many forms, such as: a medical procedure taking place in an emergency room; member states of the European Union in a simulated summit; role playing key philosophers critiquing a specific text; or teams of students simulating chemical reactions to solve a problem.Participants were asked to either incorporate a simulation into their teaching for the first time or identify one new strategy they want to implement into their existing simulations.
- Kathleen Bailey (Political Science)
- Sharon Beckman (Law)
- Sarah Ehrich (English)
- Jennifer Erickson (Political Science)
- Elida Laski (Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Scott McDermott (Business Law and Society)
- Theresa O鈥橩eefe (STM)
- Lindsey O鈥橰ourke (Political Science)
- Erik Owens (Theology)
- Delvon Parker (Operations Management)
- Tracy Regan (Economics)
- Carolyn Romano (Social Work)
- Margaret Thomas (Slavic & Eastern Languages and Literatures)
- Susan Tohn (Social Work)
Creating Inclusive Classrooms
As institutions of higher education welcome increasingly diverse student bodies and seek to expand the diversity of perspectives reflected in their curricula, faculty can sometimes struggle to carve out classroom spaces that support all students as they strive to meet their learning goals. The question of inclusion in the classroom has implications for all parts of our practice: curriculum development, pedagogical approach, and classroom interaction.
The 鈥淐reating Inclusive Classrooms鈥 cohort invited faculty to participate in a year-long inquiry into this complex pedagogical puzzle. All participants were asked to identify at least one new strategy they wanted to implement in one of their courses meant to improve either the inclusiveness of their course content or their classroom climate. We sought faculty from a range of disciplines to participate, particularly those whose subject matter didn't necessarily lend itself to discussions of 鈥渄iversity.鈥 Although we welcomed a broad definition of inclusion in this conversation, we focused most of our emphasis around questions of race/ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability.
- Yonder Gillihan (Theology)
- Annie Homza (Teacher Education)
- David Scanlon (Teacher Education)
- Eve Spangler (Sociology)
- Sherri St. Pierre (Nursing)
- Meghan Sweeney (Theology)
- Susan Tohn (Social Work)
- Celeste Wells (Communication)
Contemplative Pedagogies
Instructors at Boston College and other schools have begun to introduce contemplative pedagogies into their classroom practice. These pedagogies can take a wide variety of forms, ranging from beginning each class period with a moment of silence to classroom activities that encourage students to reflect more deeply on implications of the disciplinary material they are learning for their lives outside the classroom. The聽Center for Contemplative Mind in Higher Education聽offers both examples and resources. Instructors incorporating these practices teach in a wide range of disciplinary and professional fields, and we encouraged applications from faculty across the university. Participating faculty explored the use of such practices in their own teaching. The cohort was open not only to faculty who had already begun to integrate contemplative pedagogies into their classes but also to faculty who were only beginning to consider their use. All participants were asked to identify at least one contemplative practice to integrate into their teaching and commit to exploring with their faculty colleagues the effectiveness of these practices.
- Karen Arnold (Education Leadership and Higher Education)
- Can Erbil (Economics)
- Angela Harkins (STM)
- Oh Myo Kim (Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Paul Kline (Social Work)
- Julie MacEvoy (Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Paula Mathieu (English)
- Shawn McGuffey (Sociology)
- Franco Mormando (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Matthew Petillo (Theology)
- Alan Richardson (English)
- Patricia Riggin (Theater)
- David Storey (Philosophy)
- Laura Tanner (English)
- Laura White (Nursing)
- Brian Zimmerman (English)
Hybrid Course Design
The聽Academic Technology Advisory Board (ATAB), a committee of the Office of the Provost that supports the innovative use of technology in teaching, generously funded the Hybrid Course Design cohort for 2016-2017 as part of their Special Projects funding. ATAB sought applications from faculty who were interested in transforming a face-to-face course into a hybrid course. Faculty were expected to redesign one of their 2016-2017 courses so that at least 25% of it took place online. Faculty were asked to plan for incorporating innovative uses of technology that went beyond the use of native tools already in Canvas (e.g. Panopto, discussion boards). Specific examples included animation, creative embedding of video materials, simulations, and interactive material for assessment. Whether a hybrid course was the end goal -- or this was a stepping stone on the way to developing a fully-online course -- we welcomed instructors' interest in the cohort.
- Jessica Black (Social Work)
- Vincent Cho (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)
- Mary Cronin (Information Systems)
- Ikram Easton (Slavic and Eastern Languages and Literatures)
- Nicole Eaton (History)
- Larry Ludlow (Educational Research, Measurement and Evaluation)
- Sam Richardson (Economics)
- Laura Rumbley (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)
- Martin Scanlan (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)
MediaKron
The聽Academic Technology Advisory Board (ATAB), a committee of the Office of the Provost that supports the innovative use of technology in teaching, generously funded the MediaKron cohort for 2016-2017 as part of their Special Projects funding. ATAB sought applications from faculty who were interested in developing a MediaKron project for one of their 2016-2017 courses. MediaKron is a web-based toolkit for digital thinking and storytelling developed at Boston College for Boston College faculty. Faculty have found MediaKron a useful tool both for organizing and communicating content to their students and as a platform for students to engage in multimedia projects as part of the course. Inviting students to go beyond the traditional essay can open up new possibilities for creative and critical engagement with the course. Visit the聽MediaKron website聽to see examples of past MediaKron projects.
- Daniel Bowles (German Studies)
- James Bretzke (STM)
- Belle Liang (Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Ernesto Livon-Grosman (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Karen Miller (History)
- Catherine Mooney (STM)
- Christopher Polt (Classical Studies)
- Nelson Portillo (Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology)
- Rita Rosenthal (Communication)
- Sarah Ross (History)
- Samantha Teixeira (Social Work)
- Cinthya Torres (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Robin Wood (Nursing)
Flipped Classroom
As more faculty 'flip' their classrooms at Boston College, the Center for Teaching Excellence convened this cohort for instructors to think together about how to approach this pedagogical shift with their students. In this cohort participants considered key factors such as: the level of the course, the subject matter of the course, the size of the course, the instructor鈥檚 own familiarity with the flipped classroom, the ways in which the course is being flipped, and the way the rest of that instructor鈥檚 department and school are integrating flipped pedagogy.
- Mike Barnett (Teacher Education)
- Maureen Connolly (Nursing)
- Nanci Haze (Nursing)
- Annie Homza (Teacher Education)
- Sean MacEvoy (Psychology)
- Colleen Simonelli (Nursing)
- Carolyn Wilson (Accounting)
- Pete Wilson (Accounting)
- Ellen Winner (Psychology)
- George Wyner (Information Systems)
MediaKron
The聽Academic Technology Advisory Board (ATAB), a committee of the Office of the Provost that supports the innovative use of technology in teaching, generously funded the MediaKron cohort for 2015-2016 as part of their Special Projects funding. ATAB sought applications from faculty who were interested in developing a MediaKron project for one of their 2015-2016 courses. MediaKron is a web-based toolkit for digital thinking and storytelling developed at Boston College for Boston College faculty. Faculty have found MediaKron a useful tool both for organizing and communicating content to their students and as a platform for students to engage in multimedia projects as part of the course. Inviting students to go beyond the traditional essay can open up new possibilities for creative and critical engagement with the course. Visit the聽MediaKron website聽to see examples of past MediaKron projects.
- Scott Cummings (Theater)
- Stephanie Leone (Art History)
- Nancy Netzer (Art History)
- Joe Nugent (English)
- Bonnie Rudner (English)
- Johann Sadock (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Martin Scanlan (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)
- David Scanlon (Teacher Education)
- Laurie Shepard (Romance Languages and Literatures)
- Amy Smith (Nursing)
- Eric Weiskott (English)
- Laura White (Nursing)
- Christopher Wilson (English)
- Lichuan Ye (Nursing)