| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

2010 Fall Directors Meeting Session — Faculty Engagement and Development

Page history last edited by Ariane Hoy 13 years ago

The notes below come from the Faculty Engagement and Development strategy session.  This session was held at the 2010 Fall Directors' Meeting (November 7-9, 2010).  In writing up the notes, I have also integrated additional contextual information or examples where relevant (e.g., campus examples of best practices).  These notes will also be added to the Bonner Initiatives Wiki, where volunteers for this initiative will be invited to contribute on various next steps.  ~ Ariane

 

 

Faculty Engagement and Development

This session was held at the 2010 Fall Directors Meeting, November 9, 2010.

 

These notes include:

  • Participating Campuses
  • Strategies for a Faculty Track for SLI
  • Best Practices and Strategies for Faculty Engagement (to document and share as resources)
  • Next Set of Activities

 

More than 30 administrators participated in this dialogue, including representatives from:

  • Allegheny College
  • Bates College
  • Berea College
  • Berry College
  • Earlham College
  • Mars Hill College
  • Maryville College
  • Rhodes College
  • Saint Mary’s College of California
  • Siena College
  • Stetson University
  • TCNJ
  • Warren Wilson College
  • Washburn University

 

 

Strategies for a Faculty Track at SLI

In 2011, we hope to include a Faculty Track at the annual Summer Leadership Institute, to be held at Siena College.  A key purpose of this track will be to attract faculty who already are or want to be engaged with the Bonner Program on their own campus and nationally.  We also hope to do this in a way that enhances individual Bonner Programs and builds collaboration on campus, enabling Bonner administrators, students and faculty to better enhance and connect academic opportunities to the ongoing work of their programs and centers.  

 

What would make this appealing for faculty to attend?

The group addressed this question and generated some key ideas.   A prevalent idea was that the Bonner Faculty Track should mirror the core goals that the program upholds (e.g, community impact, student development, and campus-wide infrastructure—and the relationship between them); the design and components of the track would therefore mimic these, for example by seeking presentations and papers that are co-presented by faculty members along with a student and/or partner.  

 

The Faculty Track at SLI should provide:

    • a networking opportunity for faculty with engaged colleagues
    • working sessions and exhanges with colleagues from diverse roles and institutions but who share common goals or types of work, as well as with one’s own campus team
    • the opportunity to co-present research and civic work with students and partners
    • a professional opportunity that would be viewed as a contributor to advancement or tenure
    • the opportunity for some faculty to be tapped as experts on particular subject areas
    • the opportunity to be inspired by speakers and participants from the Bonner Network  
    • the opportunity to learn helpful best practices and strategies for enhancing one’s own or colleagues’ work on service-learning, community-based research and policy research—for example by learning how to better integrate students in course leadership and organizational roles to help carry out such projects, or how to develop a good syllabus

 

In addition, we hope to find ways to:

  • make the track affordable (free or low-cost)
  • make it academic, heady, and fun
  • possibly link attendance to longer-range incentives and opportunities (such as Learn & Serve funding)
  • potentially link with opportunities to publish one’s work in a journal or professional publication (note: the Foundation hopes to pursue avenues for this publication)
  • launch an awards program, perhaps in concert with national Bonner partners organizations like the American Association for Colleges and Universities

 

Best Practices and Strategies for Faculty Engagement

 

One role of the Foundation will be to identify, document and share best practices and strategies.  Resource material to help other staff and faculty utilize these models will be gathered and/or created (supplementing already-existing resources).  In addition, these best practices can inform the identification of sessions and presenters for SLI.

 

Members of the group also brainstormed and shared the ideas below.

 

 

Catalyzing support and incentives

 

Mini-grants

In many cases, administrators talk about the effectiveness of providing small grants ($500-$1,500) to faculty members to spur the creation of course-based service-learning and CBR.  Sources of grants can be institutional funding; for example at Bates College, the Harward Center apportions some of its operating budget for mini-grants each year.  Center staff can also seek third party funds; common sources are Learn & Serve America, Campus Compact, and local /family foundations.  

  • Add examples of mini-grant proposals/forms here (Macalester, others)
  • Add links to CNCS Learn & Serve
  • Add links to searchable grant-making sites

 

Data supporting student learning and teaching

Add books and sources here

Add examples of data collection strategies

 

Course load reduction/changes

Add examples of how this is triggered

Add institutional examples

 

Personal relationship development and match-making

Regardless of the institutional incentives, to carry out faculty engagement service administrators often need to spend time building relationships with individual faculty members and departments.  This involves face-to-face meetings, as well as learning about the given faculty members’ research and teaching interests.  Where administrators can act as match-makers, connecting a faculty member with a particular service partner because of a potential fit (partner need with faculty interest), this can help initiate the connection and projects.

 

In some cases (such as with Princeton University’s CBL office), staff take the time to document partners’ information and research interests and needs.  See this example from Princeton University, where long-term committed partners’ needs are documented on this web page.

 

Add examples of staff who have done this well (Lisa Whitaker, Lynchburg)

Add link to Princeton (Trisha Thorme, categorization of partners needs) and CBR book

 

Student-initiated and student leadership roles for service-learning

 

Students as Service-Learning Assistants— Allegheny, College of Saint Benedict, Rhodes, and others

Having students serve as service-learning assistants who perform a number of roles in a specific course or on campus has been a viable way to increase faculty engagement in service-learning.  These students’ roles have included arranging and carrying out logistics for service placements or projects, as well as serving as course/section leaders.  Programs that have this model include Allegheny College, Rhodes College (where assistants receive a $300 stipend), and College of Saint Benedict.

 

Students as Seminar Leaders— Warren Wilson College

Similar to the example above, students at Warren Wilson College act as peer group leaders within  all first year seminars.  Training is provided to these students (and faculty) about how to set up service and lead course-based reflection.

 

Student Labor Position/Team focus on service-learning—Berea College

Get description (Ashley Cochrane)

 

Student CBR Fellowship Program— Bates College

Get description (Georgia Nigro)

 

Engaged Learning Facilitators— Saint Mary’s College of California

Get description (Jennifer Pigza, Beth Hampson)

 

Student Leaders in Community Engagement— Saint Mary’s College of California

Get description (Jennifer Pigza, Beth Hampson)

 

UTA for Service-Learning — University of Maryland

Get description (Jennifer Pigza, now at Saint Mary’s)

 

Individually designed majors or academic programs—list schools that have

 

Fourth Credit Options—list schools that have (Waynesburg College)

 

 

Faculty engagement in co-curricular service projects and trips

 

Faculty preparatory workshops and reflection sessions for campus-wide service days—TCNJ

Some programs have created ways to engage faculty in the typical campus-wide service events organized by the service center.  TCNJ has done this strategically, connected to the fulfillment of an 8-hour service requirement by all (1,400) first year students, carried out through more than 30 annual service events. More than 40 faculty have been recruited to offer relevant educational knowledge and, in many cases, course connections.

Get description (Paula Figueroa-Vega/Pat Donohue)

 

Faculty involvement in international service immersion tripsWest Virginia Wesleyan College (Belize work), Defiance College (McMaster Program), Siena College (India work) and Washburn University (Nicaragua work)

Some programs have intensive service immersion experiences connected to course-work with disciplinary or multi-disciplinary collaboration.  Faculty members teach courses related to (often before) these trips and also participate.  In many cases, the institution is seeking to have a long-term relationship with the international community, one that will involve annual activites.

Get descriptions (LeeAnn Brown, Mathew Johnson, Rick Ellis)

 

Faculty development workshops, colloquia, learning circles, and seminars

 

Annual faculty development series—Berea College

Get description (Ashley Cochrane)

 

Faculty development workshops—Davidson College

Get description (Stacey Riemer)

 

Faculty Practicum in CBR—Rhodes College

Get description (Walt Tennyson)

 

Year-long faculty colloquium—Dickinson College

Add description (Shalom Staub)

 

Strategies that connect faculty with (Bonner) community partners long-term

 

Partnering faculty with site/issue teams—TCNJ and Siena

As programs adopt a site/issue team structure, some of them are also working to identify and connect relevant faculty members to a given team (e.g., faculty member with knowledge of environmental sustainability works with the environmental team).  These faculty may attend some team meetings and trainings, as well as work with individual students on projects.  

Add to description (Pat Donohue and Mathew Johnson)

 

Co-roles in research (for students, faculty, and partners)—Rhodes College

Get description (Walt Tennyson)

 

Issue-based organizing—Bates College (food charrette)

Get description (Ellen Alcorn)

 

Next Set of Activities

 

Immediate:

 

  • Meet with potential national partners (e.g., AAC&U, American Democracy Project, etc.) to discuss involvement.

 

  • Develop announcement letter; target audience for this should also include academic deans.

 

  • Develop an RFP (that underscores the conceptual and core principles—such as students and partners as colleagues).

 

  • Create and carry out a survey of faculty research and topical interests.

 

  • Develop a work plan for the documentation and creation of best practice and strategy resources

 

Mid-range:

 

  • Explore and develop a plan for journal or publication opportunity (each selection should be co-written by faculty member with a student and/or partner)

 

  • Explore and carry out recruitment strategies for within and outside the Bonner Network (e.g., network of regional Campus Compact offices)

 

  • Launch a listserv focused on faculty challenges and solutions (linked to planning for SLI?)

 

  • Engage Bonner Network administrators and faculty as recruiters and presenters at other conferences and professional networking opportunities that they are already attending

 

  • Explore and launch a Bonner Faculty Fellows program—work to identify and secure 4-5 faculty fellows for the network

 

  • Pick a couple of issues (e.g., food, immigration issues, college access) and coordinate small (e.g., 3-5 campuses’ reps) gatherings that involve faculty, students, and partners in gatherings (using same principles outlined above)

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.