In Spring 2022, a group of campus leaders–faculty, students and staff–met to surface, discuss and prioritize various dimensions of the future of teaching and learning at the UW. They identified the pandemic as a key driver of change, since it greatly increased overall familiarity with online learning and surfaced issues that were present prior to the pandemic but became more salient because of it.
Members
- Suzanne Allen, Vice Dean, School of Medicine & Clinical Professor
- Robin Angotti, Chair, Senate Committee on Planning & Budgeting
- Bryan Blakely, AVP for Digital Learning Innovation, Continuum College
- Dianne Harris, Dean, College of Arts & Sciences
- Darcy Janzen, Director, Digital Learning, UW Tacoma
- Chris Laws, Chair, Faculty Senate
- Penelope (Pen) Moon, Director, Center For Teaching & Learning
- Marisa Nickle, Sr. Director, Strategy & Academic Initiatives, Academic & Student Affairs
- Phil Reid, Vice Provost, Academic & Student Affairs
- Mustapha Samateh, President, Associated Students of the UW
- Linda Wagner, Director of Academic Programs, GIX
- Joy Williamson-Lott, Dean, Graduate School
- Aaron Yared, President, Graduate & Professional Student Senate
Approach
The group decided to identify key “dimensions” or aspects of teaching and learning that would be important to consider for the university’s future. Many of these dimensions have several key components that the group was also asked to identify. Seven dimensions were identified as shown on the attached document. After identifying and defining these dimensions and their key components, the group voted on which to prioritize for near-term efforts, discussed the results of that vote, and then voted for a second and final time. The recommended priority dimensions are presented below with all dimensions provided in the attached document.
Recommended dimensions
Although all seven identified dimensions are relevant to the future of teaching and learning, there was strong consensus on prioritizing the following three dimensions for near-term efforts:
1. Providing course and program access to existing communities – 9 votes
- Key question: How can an evolution in teaching and learning practices promote greater access to bottleneck courses, labs, clinical settings, and/or high-demand degree programs?
- Impact of progress in this area: Improving course and program access will improve the student experience (including reduced anxiety, improved well-being), offer greater access to degrees, decrease time to degree, and will increase flexibility and support for DRS accommodations.
- Topics/tactics/implications for a working group to explore:
-
- Defining capacity and the extent to which demand for course and program access is currently met.
- Explore how new course modalities might address capacity/demand issues.
- How to address policy implications with regards to degree requirements, curricular approval processes, and other intersections with policy.
- How to use our physical space to accommodate students as multimodal learners.
- How to promote Universal Design and offer flexible, accessible instructional support.
2. Quality – 8 votes
- Key questions: Given the variety of instructional modalities we will need to support, how do we develop means to promote, aid and assess efforts to maintain/improve instructional quality for ALL modalities of student learning?
-
- Impact of progress in this area: Attention to quality will maintain or enhance the academic reputation of the UW, ensure accreditation (both university wide and at the school/college and program levels), create processes for continual improvement of our instructional programs, clarify the value of courses and programs regardless of modality.
- Topics/tactics/implications for a working group to explore:
- How to evolve our current assessment strategies with an eye towards student learning outcomes and authentic assessment.
- Explore the intersection of instructional quality with Tenure and Promotion
- Address legacy academic policies around quality (e.g., Distance Learning designation).
- Identify support services for faculty throughout their careers to approach teaching as an ongoing reflective practice.
- Establish a shared language, common criteria and processes to promote and achieve quality instruction across modalities.
3. Culture – 7 votes
- Key question: How do we shift the presumption that college is largely an in-person, residential experience to include instructional modalities beyond in-person and meet the needs of diverse learners?
- Impact of progress in this area: A focus on culture change will help the UW move beyond the pedagogical limitations of all in-person instruction to benefit from the affordances of other modalities. By shifting away from viewing online instruction with a deficit lens, we can support learning across modalities, select the best approach for a given course, and help students develop the 21st Century skill of engaging well in digital contexts.
- Topics/tactics/implications for a working group to explore:
- How to identify and articulate the value of alternative pedagogies.
- Determine how to measure student learning outcomes across modalities.
- Identify best practices for creating vibrant learning communities that extend beyond in-person, synchronous participation.
- Identify ways to support faculty who are comfortable teaching in digital environments (e.g., faculty development and hiring).
- How to respond to needs and implications at the campus-level since a “one size fits all” approach is unlikely to work.
Other dimensions
In addition to the three priorities listed above, other dimensions identified, in order of priority to the group, included:
Career preparedness: a close 4th that needs reframing
Originally framed as career preparedness, this topic received six votes, only one less than the next priority topic. It focused on identifying and communicating the connection between curricular/co-curricular experiences and career preparation. Discussion centered on surfacing the existing career-relevant skills in the curriculum, creating stronger ties with industry partners and developing workforce-aligned curricula, credentials and learning experiences. How group members talked about this topic varied and there was general consensus that to move forward we would need to reframe it in ways that best resonate with the broader UW community.
Flexibility: student leaders want to see folded in to future efforts
While the dimension of flexibility was not prioritized and received no votes in the final round, it is important to note that both the ASUW and GPSS student leaders initially selected it. This dimension involves providing students with access to course and research materials easily (presumably electronically). It also includes flexible, accessible support services and learning spaces. Student leaders felt these elements could be included in the prioritized dimensions of providing course and program access and culture. It will be important to students, going forward, to make sure these ideas are not lost and are, in fact, included in prioritized next steps.
Providing course/program access to new communities: important in the long-term
The dimension of providing course/ program access to new communities received two votes in the final tally. The group generally agreed that this dimension is important but not as immediate of a need as providing access to existing communities.
Community connectedness
This dimension involves the intersection of teaching and learning with community engagement efforts to develop, sustain, and coordinate impactful partnerships. Benefits of this dimension include increasing student sense of community and belonging as well as positioning the UW as a leader in the larger community (local, state, nation, world). Work in this area would explore the connection of teaching and learning with “real world” problem solving and building intentionality around community-based service/internship/clinical opportunities for members of those communities.