II. INTELLECTUAL CLIMATE INSIDE THE CLASSROOM
OBJECTIVES
We assert that the goal of education at the University of North Carolina should be to promote an educational enterprise that draws heavily on the unique strengths of a research university, and that such an enterprise should be rich in student-faculty and student-student interaction.
BACKGROUND
Educational systems across the country are dominated by information transfer and passive learning. A research university, populated by a faculty of scholars, is uniquely placed to understand how each discipline comes to generate new information and how the disciplines assess that information in the context of controversy. Research is, at its core, an active learning experience. As a consequence, the faculty at a research university are positioned to provide an educational environment in which students can learn not only the information created by the various disciplines, but also the skills required to process that information, to evaluate assertions, to participate in the resolution of controversy and to create new knowledge. These are skills best learned in an environment rich in faculty-student and student-student interactions 3/4 an active learning environment. Such an environment can be fostered both within and outside the classroom through mentoring relationships.
At the current rate of information generation, the half-life of information is short. It is unlikely that we can provide our students with even a large fraction of the information they will need during a lifetime. We have a much better chance at providing an environment in which our students can learn how to learn and can gain experience at evaluating new information, solving problems, dealing with uncertainty, dealing with controversy, understanding the fundamental tools used by the various disciplines, and working together. It is with these higher levels of intellectual activity that we, as a research faculty, have the real opportunity to include in the educational experience those features which flow so naturally from our research experience.
BARRIERS TO ACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM
Why has active learning not come to dominate the educational process in our universities? Every study of educational methodologies indicates that active learning far outperforms passive approaches. Certainly the faculty at UNC is highly motivated in terms of interest in education. Certainly the students at UNC are highly interested in an educational system that can prepare them for the realities of life after UNC. Barriers must exist.
1. Lack of Supportive Culture. The University culture as a whole is insufficiently involved in creating an active learning environment. There is no coordinated, high-level institutional involvement in promoting active learning.
2. Misperceptions about Active Learning. There is the perception that active learning methods are time-consuming and resource intensive; that research and education compete for faculty resources and that active learning methods will require more faculty time spent on educational matters at the expense of research; and that active methods cannot be effectively employed in large courses or in introductory courses. Finally, there is the perception that both students and faculty are reluctant to participate in active learning.
3. Lack of Information about Active Learning. Most faculty have not had much exposure to active learning approaches in their own education and hence have little experience with the approach and few, if any, role models.
4. Inadequate Resources for the Support of Active Learning. There are serious physical constraints on our capacity to use active methods in existing classrooms.
Any change has its cost. But we contend that active learning approaches consume no more time or resources than passive approaches. We believe that active methods are efficient and much more intellectually compelling for both students and faculty. In addition, there is considerable evidence that active learning approaches can be applied successfully even in large, introductory courses. As a consequence, we are convinced that, in a supportive atmosphere, a significant increase in the level of active learning could be achieved by relatively straightforward mechanisms designed to increase access to information, opportunities and resources.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We believe that relatively modest changes could lead to large increases in the amount of student-faculty and student-student interaction in the classroom. Our recommendations are based on trying to reduce the barriers, both perceived and real, that stand in the way of using active learning methods and to generate an environment that encourages the use of active learning methods. We focus on methods for providing access to information about what works and what doesn't, and on the expansion of student-faculty opportunities for active learning experiences.
1. Establish a process to provide continuous appraisal of the educational enterprise at UNC.
Major Recommendation:
1A. To perpetuate the process of educational reform from the top down, we recommend the creation of a new entity, the Academy of Distinguished Teaching Scholars, modeled after the National Academy of Sciences and similar entities at the University of Texas, Austin and The Ohio State University. This new institution would provide advice to the administration on educational matters. It is critical that some entity have a long-term mission to make assessments and recommendations concerning the educational system at UNC-CH. It is also important that such an entity have some authoritative basis for those recommendations. We see this authority coming from the mission of the organization and the stature of the members chosen. In addition, like the National Academy, we imagine that such an institution would draw into its deliberations many outside faculty members and students. That is, we do not see the existence of such an organization as absolving the rest of us from our educational responsibilities; rather the organization would serve as the center of activism in the push for educational excellence. (See Section VII, 2B; see Appendix IIA for a suggested charter based on the Austin Academy.)
Additional Recommendation:
1B. Following the decision to go forward with these recommendations, we suggest that a significant effort be made to involve the faculty, students and community at large in the process of welcoming change. In part, this can be done by holding a meeting on educational issues here on campus that would be open to UNC faculty, students and legislative representatives. We envision this meeting bringing UNC faculty, students and legislative representatives together with distinguished scholars from other institutions to examine the future of the educational enterprise and our own plan for positioning ourselves in a leadership role in that future.
2. Expand opportunities for mentored learning experiences.
Major Recommendation:
2A. Establish an Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program to promote greater participation by students, particularly those in their first and second years, in faculty mentored research, scholarly inquiry, and artistic creation; and establish an Office of Undergraduate Research to provide administrative support.
The quality of student-faculty interaction in large part determines the intellectual vitality of a university. Yet, as a recent UNC Student Government report noted, "Many students graduate never knowing a professor on a personal level, never benefiting from the advice, never tapping the inspiration that faculty can offer." Rich opportunities for intellectual exchange exist at UNC, including honors seminars, independent projects, research opportunities, and informal dialogue; many students, especially seniors, already avail themselves of these resources. But because of obstacles both real and perceived, far fewer students in their first and second years undertake research projects.
Research in its broadest sense cannot be considered an extracurricular activity. It is an integral part of the University's mission. The Office of Undergraduate Research and the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program will help the University make full use of its potential by expanding opportunities for all undergraduates to conduct independent study and research. The Program will provide organizational assistance necessary to place students in research activities; identify and implement novel means for students to become involved in the professional activities of the faculty; promote cooperation and information sharing among existing departmental programs; create courses to provide exposure to the intellectual tools underlying the disciplines; facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration; publicize the research accomplishments of undergraduates and their faculty or graduate student mentors; and, finally, provide a unified voice to seek financial support for undergraduate research from the public and private sectors.
Additional Recommendations:
2B. We recommend allowing undergraduate students to receive an additional credit hour for true mentored independent study associated with a three-credit course. This fourth credit hour would be reserved for activities dominated by student-faculty interaction. For example, a fourth credit hour should not be allowed for a project involving a student's doing library research and writing a paper unless the activity is structured to involve extensive interaction between the student and a faculty member. This change should be effected at the administrative level.
2C. We recommend the creation of a system that would allow faculty to create, propose, and submit for evaluation special educational experiences that would carry a cohort of students, whether graduate or undergraduate, through a shared educational experience either within the existing system or within a system tailored to the educational objectives defined for that cohort. The benefits of keeping a group of students together for a portion of their educational experience are well known. Educational experiences targeted to particular cohorts offer a powerful mechanism to explore a broad array of educational opportunities without undergoing the risk or expense of trying them out for the entire undergraduate student body. A cohort system provides some of the advantages of a small college without sacrificing the benefits of a large research university. Such a system could be used for both small and large changes in educational opportunities. For example, we can imagine its being used to allow faculty to explore educational opportunities by organizing cohorts of students in the same dormitory. We can also imagine faculty putting forward more complex proposals, like the 1969 faculty initiative to establish a New College. What we seek here is the sanctioning of the use of cohorts and the establishment of a mechanism to evaluate faculty proposals.
3. Increase access to information about active learning approaches.
Major Recommendation:
3A. We recommend an expansion of the Inquiry Track Program to serve as a faculty based organization to promulgate active learning. The Inquiry Track Program would promote active learning strategies, seek out additional faculty to try active learning methods, and provide a forum (the Inquiry Colloquium) for faculty to discuss active learning strategies. As such, it would serve the need for a bottom-up component in the coordinated effort for change.
Additional Recommendations:
3B. We recommend the creation of various databases that would serve the faculty and student communities by providing access to information about active learning in general and about what is being done at UNC-CH in particular. Given that many faculty and students have had little exposure to active learning methods, it would be valuable for both groups to have more access to information about what is being done on campus, where resources might be found, and what works and what doesn't. In particular, we recommend:
I. a computer database that lists the various courses offered at UNC and explicitly describes the pedagogical approach used in each course.
ii. a computer database that contains the experiences of UNC faculty using active learning approaches. We would also like the Center for Teaching and Learning to expand its collection of videos illustrating the successful application of active learning methods in the classroom.
iii. a computer database containing student success stories, in their own words, concerning educational experiences at UNC.
3C. We recommend that a significant effort be made to increase exposure of faculty, students and the public to the active teaching approaches being employed at UNC. For example, we could:
I. report on UNC teaching success stories in UNC publications. In particular, it would be good to see some articles in Endeavors about teaching that stress the relationship of teaching and research.
ii. run annual symposia on student research with significant coverage in UNC media.
iii. publish articles on active teaching approaches in UNC media. This recommendation could be carried out through initiatives by the various UNC publications, by the proposed Office of Undergraduate Research, and through articles generated by the Center for Teaching and Learning and the Inquiry Track Program.
4. Reduce classroom constraints affecting the use of active learning approaches. These recommendations complement those in Section VI (Intellectual Climate and Common Spaces).
4A. A significant barrier to faculty-student and student-student interactions in many classrooms, particularly large ones, is acoustics. Students cannot hear the comments of others who sit in front of them. This undermines opportunities for student-student interaction in a large room and reduces the value of student-faculty interactions. This simple barrier makes it almost impossible to have a discussion in a large class. Active learning is extraordinarily difficult in a room with poor acoustics. At minimum, in large classrooms sound systems are needed that support several microphones without generating feedback from speakers in the room. If we are going to continue large attendance classes, more classrooms should be organized with tiers of chairs in a "U" to bring students closer to each other.
4B. Many small classrooms have chairs bolted to the floor in the traditional all-face-the-teacher configuration. Active learning approaches often suggest alternative arrangements to facilitate student-faculty and student-student interactions. More emphasis should be placed upon addressing the need for flexible seating. We should at least use chairs which do not need to be bolted to the floor.
4C. One way to increase student-student and student-faculty interactions in courses with large enrollments is to employ breakout sessions. These sessions require space either within the main classroom or nearby. The location and arrangement of the large classrooms on campus seldom allows this. As new classrooms are designed, access to multi-use spaces which could serve this need should be considered. The possibility of electronic breakout sessions should also be entertained. Smaller classrooms could be linked electronically with video to provide large class capabilities as well as proctored breakout capacity.
4D. Computers and multi-media technology have provided new access channels to information. These technologies have been extensively touted as new tools for use in passive learning paradigms. However, they can also be used to provide support for active learning. Powerful information access tools in the hands of students can free up class time for interactive activities. Computer technology can also provide, through simulations and role playing, support environments within which students can play an active role in the learning process.
I. To take advantage of these new opportunities, the University needs to provide ample access to electronic technology for students outside the classroom in order to provide a more powerful environment inside the classroom for interactive learning. This means much more access than is currently available.
ii. We recommend an expansion in the number of classrooms within which computer centered instruction can take place. These classrooms would have from 10 to 20 computers, with seating for three or four at each computer and a central location for the instructor. Here, student groups would tackle exercises using computer simulations or role-playing software and the instructor would be available to provide on-the-spot mentoring as well as class direction.
CONCLUSIONS
Meaningful change is unlikely to come about because a directive, or even a whole list of directives, mandates it. Change will occur when we take a personal interest in it and work towards it. With a faculty eager to do their best in an environment of competing pressures and a student body eager to prepare themselves for a rapidly changing world, what we all need are tools; tools to make it easier to bring active learning roles into the classroom, tools to support more student-student and student-faculty interactions, tools to provide more mentored educational opportunities, and tools to keep these issues under continual examination. What we as departmental Chairs or faculty or students should look for in this report is not a directive that tells us what to do but, rather, tools we can use to make environmental changes that will help us increase the intellectual content of the classroom experience.
CHAPTER I | TABLE OF CONTENTS | CHAPTER III