- Sep 2019
Educational development is often embedded in a highly variable campus ecosystem where other units or individuals may take on some of these roles.
role of CTLs is highly dependent upon the campus
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
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.
While these are excellent frameworks for evaluating instructor-level change, our field is pivoting from an emphasis on 1:1 work or workshops to longer-term, systemic change initiatives
Shift from one-off sessions to more sustained faculty development efforts
“What are you most proud of?”
Great question prompt to find out how CTLs are impacting universities at the organizational level.
These guidelines offer a lens that is distinct to our field and represent emergent directions in our work that are important to capture, particularly larger-scale change initiatives in alignment with college and university priorities.
CTLs need guidelines for evaluation of their work. In the last two years, more research is beginning to emerge on how to analyze the unique impacts of CTLs.
These guidelines define evaluation as information used for local decision making, which can also make a CTL’s work visible on campus.
Evaluation to raise visibility of CTLs on campus.
- system change
- student learning outcomes
- measuring impact
- CTL as temple
- CTL as sieve
- role of CTLs
- CTL as hub
- CTL impact on student learning outcomes
- CTL as incubator