Tag: Community

L.A. Community Colleges, CSUs Partner on Nursing Initiative

After tussling over proposed legislation to allow community colleges to offer a bachelor’s of nursing degree, Los Angeles County’s 19 community colleges and the California State University system are working together to tackle local nursing shortages. The partnership, spearheaded by Compton College, may signal a new phase of cooperation between the two systems.

The Nursing 2035 Initiative aims to foster collaboration between community colleges, the CSU system and other stakeholders; conduct research; and devise strategies to graduate more registered nurses in the region over the next decade. The project also includes the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation, the Department of Economic Opportunity with the County of Los Angeles and California Competes, an organization focused on higher ed and workforce development in the state.

Keith Curry, president of Compton College, said the need for more nurses in the region is dire. Lightcast, a labor market analytics firm, projected 6,454 job openings for registered nurses in Los Angeles County annually through 2035, but degree-completion data from 2023 shows local colleges only produced 5,363 graduates with relevant degrees that year.

Curry described a nearby medical clinic’s emergency room as “flooded” with patients at the same time aspiring nurses face barriers to entering the profession, such as vying for limited spots in nursing programs. Programs, meanwhile, struggle to grow because of challenges with retaining nursing faculty, who can find better wages working in hospitals, and competition for scarce clinical placements.

The goal is “really trying to address health disparities in the community I’m from, and nursing is just another one of those issues that we have to address,” Curry said.

Teamwork After Tensions

The move comes after Gov. Gavin Newsom encouraged more CSU–community college partnerships on nursing last year after he vetoed two bills that would have allowed some community colleges to offer B.S.N. programs as part of a pilot program.

At the time, community college leaders argued that expanding their nursing offerings beyond associate degrees would make nursing education more affordable and combat nurse shortages in the state. But CSU leaders opposed the legislation, countering that the new programs would be duplicative and force the CSU’s existing programs to compete for resources, like clinical placements. (The two systems have also cyclically battled over community college baccalaureate degrees since the state allowed them a decade ago.)

Newsom came down on the CSUs’ side.

“All segments of higher education should continue to focus on building these programs together,” he wrote in one of his veto messages, “and I am concerned this bill could inadvertently undermine that collaboration.”

The initiative is an attempt to do just that, Curry said.

“It’s not us versus them,” he said. “It’s about how can we partner together to solve a problem. So, I felt that CSU has to be the table.”

Jose Fierro, president of Cerritos College and co-chair of the Los Angeles Regional Consortium, a coalition of L.A. County’s 19 colleges, said he and other community college leaders were “disappointed” by Newsom’s rejection of community college B.S.N. degrees because he felt like they would help his place-bound students. He said his campus is nine miles on average from local universities.

Students “may not be within driving distance because they would have to uproot their families, or because of the high cost of housing, they wouldn’t be able to move to a different city to be able to access these programs,” he said.

At the same time, he believes the collaborative approach will benefit students.

“We are bringing county representatives, hospital representatives, state officials, California State and community colleges to look at our programs and our shortage of nurses in a comprehensive manner,” to think about “how can we work together to meet the needs of the community?”

An Example for Others

Some nursing partnerships between community colleges and CSUs already exist. For example, California State University, Northridge, has an A.D.N.-B.S.N. Community College Collaborative Program, which allows students earning nursing associate degrees at partnering community colleges to earn a B.S.N. on an accelerated timeline. A program at Cal State Long Beach also allows nursing associate degree students to take B.S.N. classes while in community college.

Nathan Evans, deputy vice chancellor for academic and student affairs and chief academic officer at the CSU Office of the Chancellor, believes the Nursing 2035 Initiative can serve as an example of how community college and CSU leaders can strategically confront local nursing shortages together.

“The boundaries of our institutions don’t have to be what they were in the past,” he said. “Our hope is that this is a model of what collaboration looks like between our segments and there’s a lot less friction in terms of the student experience, that there are clear road maps for students, particularly in the nursing field.”

As a first step, the group plans to research the region’s nursing education and workforce and release a report in the fall with policy and budget recommendations on how to expand nursing programs in the area. The goal is to work on the recommendations through 2035.

Evans said the initiative is “using data to really drive a needs assessment and then allow that to lead us to, what are the ways we collectively can respond?”

The hope is that process leads to new, innovative partnerships, said Fierro. For example, he can imagine CSUs offering B.S.N. programs on community college campuses, or partnering with community colleges on collaborative programs, so that students who struggle to commute to universities because of work or family obligations have more options.

“To me, the main objective is to ensure that we bring that value to the local communities,” he said, “regardless of whose name is issuing the diploma.”

Source link

April 4, 2025
Community Colleges Expand Four-Year Degree Options as Illinois Joins National Trend

In a significant shift for higher education access, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker announced his support for new legislation that would allow the state’s community colleges to offer bachelor’s degrees in high-demand fields. The move aligns Illinois with a growing national trend that has seen dramatic expansion in community college baccalaureate (CCB) programs across the country.

“By allowing our community colleges to offer baccalaureate degrees for in-demand career paths, we are making it easier and more affordable for students to advance their careers while strengthening our state’s economy,” Pritzker said in his February announcement.

The proposed bills, SB2482 and HB3717, would make Illinois the 25th state to implement such programs, joining states like California, Washington, and Florida that have already embraced community college bachelor’s degrees as a way to meet workforce demands and increase educational access. The measure appears to be stalled in the state legislature.

The Illinois initiative addresses practical challenges faced by many community college students. According to State Representative Tracy Katz Muhl, 78% of community college students work while in school, making relocation to four-year institutions impractical.

“Community college students are deeply rooted in their local communities—they work here, raise families here, and contribute to the local economy,” says Dr. Keith Cornille, President of Heartland Community College. “By expanding community college baccalaureate programs, we’re meeting students where they are.”

The proposal has gained support from education leaders including Illinois Community College Board Executive Director Brian Durham, who highlighted the potential to increase access to affordable higher education without burdening students with excessive debt.

A recent survey revealed that 75% of Illinois community college students would pursue a bachelor’s degree if they could complete it at their current institution—a statistic that demonstrates significant untapped potential in the state’s third-largest community college system, which serves 600,000 residents annually.

Illinois’ move follows a remarkable expansion in community college baccalaureate programs nationwide. According to a recent report from The Community College Baccalaureate Association (CCBA) and higher education consulting firm Bragg & Associates Inc., 187 community colleges across the country were offering or authorized to offer bachelor’s degrees as of last year.

This represents a 32% increase from Fall 2021, when only 132 institutions had such authorization. Today, approximately one-fifth of the nation’s 932 community colleges offer bachelor’s degrees, with the number of CCB degree programs rising from 583 to 678—a 17% increase in just two years.

“It’s a big jump over the last two years,” says report author Dr. Debra Bragg, president of Bragg & Associates Inc. Bragg anticipates “tremendous growth” in coming years as more states recognize the potential of these programs.

The movement began in 1989 when West Virginia became the first state to authorize a community college to confer bachelor’s degrees. By 2010, several more states—including California, Michigan, Florida, Texas, and Georgia—had followed suit. Some states have embraced the model completely, with Florida, Delaware, and Nevada authorizing all their community colleges to confer bachelor’s degrees.

Geographic and demographic patterns
Community colleges offering bachelor’s degrees are not distributed evenly across the country. According to the CCBA report, 62% of CCB colleges are located on the West Coast, where there is “less density” of higher education institutions and longer commutes to traditional four-year schools.

“Geographic access to college, measured through proximal distance from a student’s home to college, correlates with students deciding whether they will ever participate in higher education,” the report notes. “Research on ‘education deserts’ shows most students choose to attend college within 50 miles of their home.”
Washington (32), California (29), and Florida (28) lead the nation in the number of community colleges offering bachelor’s degrees. These institutions tend to be concentrated in large city and suburban areas (36%) or rural and town settings (27%) rather than in small cities or midsize urban areas.

Perhaps most significantly, CCB programs appear to be effectively serving traditionally underrepresented student populations. Approximately half of all community colleges offering bachelor’s degrees qualify as minority-serving institutions (MSIs), with Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) comprising 71% of these MSIs.

Data from the 2021-22 academic year shows that about half of all CCB graduates come from racially minoritized groups. Hispanic or Latinx students made up the slight majority (52%) of these graduates, followed by those identifying as Black or African American (29%) or Asian (9%).

Women are also well-represented among CCB graduates, accounting for 64% of degree recipients. This aligns with broader trends in higher education, where women generally attain degrees at higher rates than men.

The gender distribution varies by field of study. While business programs attract the largest portion of both male and female students (around 40% for each), men are more likely to pursue STEM fields (34%), while women gravitate toward nursing programs (26%).

The CCBA report highlights that CCB degrees are primarily focused on workforce preparation. Business programs dominate the offerings, followed by health professions, education, and nursing—all areas that align with significant workforce needs.

This workforce alignment is a key selling point for Illinois’ proposed legislation. The initiative comes as Illinois employers report growing demand for workers with bachelor’s degrees in specialized fields, mirroring workforce gaps seen in other states with successful CCB programs.

CCBA President Dr. Angela Kersenbrock sees these workforce-focused degrees as central to the community college mission. “To me, this is the community college really embracing its missions,” says Kersenbrock. “I know some folks say this is community colleges stepping over their mission. But I think it’s a full embracing of what they should be doing… closing equity gaps, being the people’s college, setting people up for economic success and mobility, and being very responsive to what a community needs in terms of workers and employees.”

Despite the growth and apparent success of community college baccalaureate programs, they are not without controversy. Some traditional four-year institutions view them as mission creep or unwelcome competition.

Illinois’ proposal faces similar scrutiny. Critics question whether community colleges have the resources, faculty expertise, and infrastructure necessary to deliver quality bachelor’s degree programs. Others worry about potential duplication of existing programs at four-year institutions.

Supporters counter that CCB programs typically focus on applied fields with clear workforce connections rather than traditional academic disciplines. They also emphasize that these programs often serve students who would otherwise not pursue bachelor’s degrees at all, rather than pulling students away from existing institutions.

Looking Ahead
If Illinois passes the proposed legislation, it will join a diverse group of states finding success with community college baccalaureate programs. States like Washington, California, and Florida report positive outcomes in terms of both degree attainment and workforce preparation.

For Illinois’ sprawling community college system—the third largest in the nation—the change could significantly reshape higher education access. Community colleges often serve as entry points to higher education for first-generation college students, working adults, and others who face barriers to traditional four-year institutions.

“This initiative isn’t about competing with our university partners,” notes one Illinois community college president. “It’s about creating additional pathways for students who might otherwise never earn a bachelor’s degree.”

As more states consider similar legislation, the community college bachelor’s degree appears poised to become an increasingly common feature of American higher education. With workforce demands continuing to evolve and traditional college enrollment patterns shifting, these programs offer a flexible approach to meeting both student and employer needs.

For Bragg, the trend represents a natural evolution of community colleges’ historical mission.

“Community colleges have always adapted to meet changing educational and workforce needs,” she observes. “Bachelor’s degrees are just the latest example of this responsiveness.”

As Illinois moves forward with its proposal and other states watch closely, the coming years will likely see further expansion of bachelor’s degree options at community colleges nationwide—continuing a transformation that is making higher education more accessible to students who need it most.

Source link

April 1, 2025
AI-Powered Teaching: Practical Tools for Community College Faculty – Faculty Focus
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transitioned from a speculative concept to a transformative tool in higher education, particularly within community colleges. This article explores AI’s historical evolution, critically assesses its benefits and challenges for teaching, and provides evidence-based strategies for faculty to integrate AI effectively. Drawing on the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), it argues that AI can enhance accessibility and efficiency while preserving the human essence of education. A case study from a California community college illustrates these principles in action. Faculty developers and instructors can use this framework to harness AI’s potential, ensuring it supports rather than supplants their pedagogical roles.

Introduction

In Ayad Akhtar’s 2023 play McNeal, ChatGPT performs alongside Robert Downey Jr., a theatrical milestone reflecting artificial intelligence’s (AI) encroachment into domains once deemed uniquely human (Akhtar, 2023, as cited in “From Čapek to ChatGPT”). This echoes Karel Čapek’s R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots), where artificial beings, created to serve, ultimately undo their creators (Čapek, 1920/2004). A century later, AI is no longer fiction but a dynamic force in community college education, reshaping how faculty teach, and students learn. For instructors serving diverse, often underserved populations, AI raises critical questions: How has it evolved into a pedagogical tool? What are its merits and limitations? How can it enhance teaching without diminishing faculty agency?

This article addresses these questions through a three-part exploration: tracing AI’s historical development, critically evaluating its role in community college classrooms, and offering practical, evidence-based strategies for faculty. Grounded in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), it expands on prior work (e.g., Davidson, 2021; Pritts, 2023) to position AI as a partner in faculty development. A case study illustrates these principles in practice, aligning with Faculty Focus’s mission to improve teaching and student success in higher education.

Historical Context: AI’s Evolution and Educational Implications

AI’s journey from myth to modernity informs its current educational applications. Ancient tales of Talos, a bronze automaton guarding Europa, and Pygmalion’s animated sculpture reveal humanity’s early fascination with artificial life (Hamilton, 1942). By the 3rd century BC, Greek inventors like Archytas built the steam-powered Flying Pigeon, an early self-operating device (Berryman, 2003). The 18th-century Jaquet-Droz automata—mechanical dolls mimicking human actions—furthered this vision (Riskin, 2016). Philosophers like Descartes and Leibniz speculated on machine cognition, while 19th-century pioneers Babbage and Lovelace laid computing’s foundations (Copeland, 2012).

The modern AI field emerged in 1950 when Alan Turing posed, “Can machines think?” (Turing, 1950), followed by John McCarthy’s naming of “artificial intelligence” (McCarthy, 2007). Early systems like MYCIN, which diagnosed infections using rule-based logic, showcased potential but lacked adaptability (Buchanan & Shortliffe, 1984). The 1990s introduced machine learning, enabling AI to learn from data—email spam filters improved iteratively, marking a shift from static programming (Mitchell, 1997). The 2010s brought deep learning, with neural networks emulating human cognition; Google’s AlphaGo defeated Go champion Lee Sedol in 2016, devising strategies its creators couldn’t predict (Silver et al., 2016).

Since 2020, generative AI—exemplified by OpenAI’s GPT-3 and ChatGPT—has produced human-like text, transforming fields from healthcare to education (Spitale et al., 2023; Topol, 2019). In classrooms, AI’s trajectory is evident: 1980s grading software evolved into 2020s virtual tutors, shifting from peripheral aids to central tools (Baylor & Ryu, 2003). For community college faculty, this history contextualizes AI’s rapid ascent, highlighting its capacity to augment teaching—yet it also underscores the need for critical oversight, a theme explored next.

AI’s integration into community colleges offers transformative potential but demands scrutiny, particularly given the sector’s diverse student body—often first-generation, working adults, or developmental learners (Cohen et al., 2014).

Benefits: Accessibility and Faculty Efficiency
AI enhances accessibility, a cornerstone of community college missions. Hybrid and HyFlex models, supported by AI-driven platforms like Zoom, allow asynchronous learning, vital for students balancing work and family (Quality Matters, 2022). A 2022 report documented a 220% surge in preference for online/hybrid courses (from 9% in 2020 to 29% in 2022), reflecting AI’s role in broadening access (Kelly, 2022, as cited in Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty benefit too: automated grading reduces routine burdens, while NLP tools like ChatGPT provide instant student support, amplifying instructors’ reach (Barnes & Noble Education, 2022; Topol, 2019).

Challenges: Engagement and Skill Development
However, AI’s efficacy hinges on student self-regulation, a persistent challenge where developmental courses predominate (Zimmerman, 2002). Virtual settings often lack in-person dynamics—non-verbal cues, spontaneous discussions—potentially weakening engagement (Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty unease is notable: 54% prefer fully in-person instruction, citing discomfort with digital mediation (Barnes & Noble Education, 2022). Overreliance on AI risks undermining critical thinking; Pritts (2023) warns that tools generating papers may erode analytical skills, echoing SoTL calls for active learning (Davidson, 2021).

Ethical Considerations: Equity and Agency
Ethical dilemmas loom large. Algorithmic bias in grading systems can exacerbate inequities, disproportionately affecting marginalized learners (O’Neil, 2016). Access disparities—unreliable internet or devices—threaten equitable implementation (Means et al., 2020). Spitale et al. (2023) highlight AI’s dual edge: it clarifies concepts but also crafts compelling disinformation, posing risks to academic integrity. Without oversight, AI could shift from facilitator to arbiter, diminishing faculty agency—a concern rooted in Čapek’s cautionary tale (1920/2004). Faculty development must address these tensions to ensure AI serves educational goals.

AI and Academic Integrity: Redrawing Assessment
The rise of AI tools like ChatGPT has forced educators to rethink traditional assessment methods. As discussed in Inside Higher Ed (2025), the prevalence of AI-generated content has made it increasingly difficult to distinguish between student work and machine-generated output. This has led to a growing concern over academic integrity, particularly in community colleges where students may lack the resources or support to navigate these challenges effectively. However, rather than viewing AI as a threat to academic honesty, educators can use this moment to redesign assessments that emphasize critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving—skills that AI cannot easily replicate. For example, instead of traditional essays, instructors might assign reflective portfolios, oral presentations, or collaborative projects that require students to engage deeply with the material and demonstrate their understanding in ways that go beyond what AI can produce. Faculty development programs should focus on equipping instructors with the tools and strategies to design assessments that are both AI-resistant and pedagogically sound, ensuring that students are evaluated on their ability to think critically and apply knowledge, rather than their ability to generate text.

Practical Applications: Strategies for Faculty Development

To harness AI’s benefits while mitigating risks, community college faculty can adopt five evidence-based strategies, each enhancing teaching practice and student success:
1. AI as a Virtual Tutor: NLP models like ChatGPT offer 24/7 support. A developmental math instructor might direct students to ask, “Explain quadratic equations,” receiving tailored responses, freeing class time for conceptual exploration (Topol, 2019). Faculty can train on integrating such tools via workshops, enhancing their tutoring capacity.
1. Hybrid Course Design: AI platforms enable asynchronous lectures, reserving in-person sessions for interaction. A sociology instructor could post AI-generated summaries on social inequality, then facilitate debates, accommodating diverse schedules (Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty development can include HyFlex training to optimize this balance.
1. Creative Exploration: Tools like MidJourney foster innovation. An English instructor might have students generate visual interpretations of Their Eyes Were Watching God, sparking discussions on symbolism (Hutchison & Woodward, 2014). Workshops on AI-driven creativity can empower faculty to adapt this approach.
1. Personalized Feedback: AI tools like Grammarly flag errors, allowing instructors to refine feedback with comments like, “Expand this argument,” blending efficiency with mentorship (Pritts, 2023). Faculty can learn to leverage AI feedback systems through peer mentoring.
1. Redesigning Assessments for AI-Resistance: In light of the challenges posed by AI-generated content, faculty can adopt assessment strategies that prioritize critical thinking and creativity. For example, instead of traditional essays, instructors might assign reflective portfolios, oral presentations, or collaborative projects that require students to engage deeply with the material and demonstrate their understanding in ways that go beyond what AI can produce. Faculty development programs should focus on equipping instructors with the tools and strategies to design assessments that are both AI-resistant and pedagogically sound, ensuring that students are evaluated on their ability to think critically and apply knowledge, rather than their ability to generate text.
At Sacramento City College (SCC), a 2023 pilot integrated AI into developmental English courses. Faculty used ChatGPT as a virtual tutor, assigning students to draft essays and refine them with AI feedback before submission. Instructors then provided final critiques, focusing on argumentation over mechanics. A survey of 50 students found 78% felt more confident in writing, while faculty reported a 30% reduction in grading time (SCC Faculty Development Report, 2023, unpublished). However, 20% of students lacked reliable internet, prompting SCC to expand Wi-Fi access. This case underscores AI’s potential to enhance teaching efficiency and student outcomes, while highlighting equity challenges faculty developers must address.

In response to concerns about AI-generated content, SCC also piloted a new assessment model in which students were required to present their essays orally and engage in peer review sessions. This approach not only reduced the risk of AI-generated submissions but also fostered a deeper understanding of the material through active engagement and collaboration. Faculty reported that students were more invested in the learning process and demonstrated higher levels of critical thinking and creativity in their work.

Conclusion

AI’s evolution—from ancient myths to ChatGPT’s theatrical debut—mirrors humanity’s quest to extend its capabilities. In community colleges, it offers accessibility and efficiency, yet risks eroding the relational core of teaching. Faculty development can bridge this gap by equipping instructors with strategies to integrate AI as a tutor, design tool, creative aid, feedback enhancer, and discussion catalyst. The SCC case study illustrates this balance in practice. As Davidson (2021) and Pritts (2023) argue, the goal is to delegate routine tasks to AI while reserving inspiration and mentorship for faculty—a principle rooted in SoTL. By fostering AI literacy and ethical oversight, faculty developers can ensure AI amplifies, rather than supplants, the human element of education.

Moreover, as the Inside Higher Ed article highlights, the rise of AI-generated content presents an opportunity to rethink assessment practices. By designing assessments that emphasize critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration, faculty can ensure that students are evaluated on their ability to engage deeply with the material, rather than their ability to generate text. This shift not only addresses concerns about academic integrity but also prepares students for a future in which AI is an integral part of the workforce.

David E. Balch, PhD, is a professor at Rio Hondo College and has published articles in the areas of ethics, humor, distance education, and AI.

Robert Blanck, MA, has 35 years’ experience in teaching and administration within the fields of education and business. Blanck earned the Lean Six Sigma Black Belt designation for industrial quality control.

Note: this article used collaboration between the human authors and the AI program Grok (xAI).

References

Barnes & Noble Education. (2022, June 28). College 2030™ report: Higher education’s preparation post-pandemic. Business Wire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220628005207/en/

Baylor, A. L., & Ryu, J. (2003). The API model: Using AI to enhance learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504554

Buchanan, B. G., & Shortliffe, E. H. (1984). Rule-based expert systems: The MYCIN experiments of the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project. Addison-Wesley.

Čapek, K. (2004). R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots) (C. Novack, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1920)

Davidson, C. N. (2021). The new education: How to revolutionize the university to prepare students for a world in flux. Basic Books.

EDUCAUSE. (2023). AI and academic integrity: Rethinking assessment. https://www.educause.edu

Hutchison, A., & Woodward, L. (2014). A planning cycle for integrating digital technology into literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 67(6), 455–464. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1225

McCarthy, J. (2007). What is artificial intelligence? Stanford University. http://jmc.stanford.edu/articles/whatisai/whatisai.pdf

Means, B., Bakia, M., & Murphy, R. (2020). Learning online: What research tells us about whether, when and how. Routledge.

Mitchell, T. M. (1997). Machine learning. McGraw-Hill.

O’Neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown. Note: changed the date from 2016 to 2017

Pritts, N. (2023). AI and the future of critical thinking in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 123–135.

Quality Matters. (2022). 2022 higher education trends report. https://www.qualitymatters.org/research

Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., Dieleman, S., Grewe, D., Nham, J., Kalchbrenner, N., Sutskever, I., Lillicrap, T., Leach, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., Graepel, T., & Hassabis, D. (2016). Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529(7587), 484–489. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16961

Spitale, G., Biller-Andorno, N., & Germani, F. (2023). AI model GPT-3 (dis)informs us better than humans. Science Advances, 9(5), Article eade7823. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ade7823

Topol, E. J. (2019). Deep medicine: How artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Basic Books.

Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Source link
March 31, 2025
AI-Powered Teaching: Practical Tools for Community College Faculty – Faculty Focus
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transitioned from a speculative concept to a transformative tool in higher education, particularly within community colleges. This article explores AI’s historical evolution, critically assesses its benefits and challenges for teaching, and provides evidence-based strategies for faculty to integrate AI effectively. Drawing on the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), it argues that AI can enhance accessibility and efficiency while preserving the human essence of education. A case study from a California community college illustrates these principles in action. Faculty developers and instructors can use this framework to harness AI’s potential, ensuring it supports rather than supplants their pedagogical roles.

Introduction

In Ayad Akhtar’s 2023 play McNeal, ChatGPT performs alongside Robert Downey Jr., a theatrical milestone reflecting artificial intelligence’s (AI) encroachment into domains once deemed uniquely human (Akhtar, 2023, as cited in “From Čapek to ChatGPT”). This echoes Karel Čapek’s R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots), where artificial beings, created to serve, ultimately undo their creators (Čapek, 1920/2004). A century later, AI is no longer fiction but a dynamic force in community college education, reshaping how faculty teach, and students learn. For instructors serving diverse, often underserved populations, AI raises critical questions: How has it evolved into a pedagogical tool? What are its merits and limitations? How can it enhance teaching without diminishing faculty agency?

This article addresses these questions through a three-part exploration: tracing AI’s historical development, critically evaluating its role in community college classrooms, and offering practical, evidence-based strategies for faculty. Grounded in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), it expands on prior work (e.g., Davidson, 2021; Pritts, 2023) to position AI as a partner in faculty development. A case study illustrates these principles in practice, aligning with Faculty Focus’s mission to improve teaching and student success in higher education.

Historical Context: AI’s Evolution and Educational Implications

AI’s journey from myth to modernity informs its current educational applications. Ancient tales of Talos, a bronze automaton guarding Europa, and Pygmalion’s animated sculpture reveal humanity’s early fascination with artificial life (Hamilton, 1942). By the 3rd century BC, Greek inventors like Archytas built the steam-powered Flying Pigeon, an early self-operating device (Berryman, 2003). The 18th-century Jaquet-Droz automata—mechanical dolls mimicking human actions—furthered this vision (Riskin, 2016). Philosophers like Descartes and Leibniz speculated on machine cognition, while 19th-century pioneers Babbage and Lovelace laid computing’s foundations (Copeland, 2012).

The modern AI field emerged in 1950 when Alan Turing posed, “Can machines think?” (Turing, 1950), followed by John McCarthy’s naming of “artificial intelligence” (McCarthy, 2007). Early systems like MYCIN, which diagnosed infections using rule-based logic, showcased potential but lacked adaptability (Buchanan & Shortliffe, 1984). The 1990s introduced machine learning, enabling AI to learn from data—email spam filters improved iteratively, marking a shift from static programming (Mitchell, 1997). The 2010s brought deep learning, with neural networks emulating human cognition; Google’s AlphaGo defeated Go champion Lee Sedol in 2016, devising strategies its creators couldn’t predict (Silver et al., 2016).

Since 2020, generative AI—exemplified by OpenAI’s GPT-3 and ChatGPT—has produced human-like text, transforming fields from healthcare to education (Spitale et al., 2023; Topol, 2019). In classrooms, AI’s trajectory is evident: 1980s grading software evolved into 2020s virtual tutors, shifting from peripheral aids to central tools (Baylor & Ryu, 2003). For community college faculty, this history contextualizes AI’s rapid ascent, highlighting its capacity to augment teaching—yet it also underscores the need for critical oversight, a theme explored next.

AI’s integration into community colleges offers transformative potential but demands scrutiny, particularly given the sector’s diverse student body—often first-generation, working adults, or developmental learners (Cohen et al., 2014).

Benefits: Accessibility and Faculty Efficiency
AI enhances accessibility, a cornerstone of community college missions. Hybrid and HyFlex models, supported by AI-driven platforms like Zoom, allow asynchronous learning, vital for students balancing work and family (Quality Matters, 2022). A 2022 report documented a 220% surge in preference for online/hybrid courses (from 9% in 2020 to 29% in 2022), reflecting AI’s role in broadening access (Kelly, 2022, as cited in Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty benefit too: automated grading reduces routine burdens, while NLP tools like ChatGPT provide instant student support, amplifying instructors’ reach (Barnes & Noble Education, 2022; Topol, 2019).

Challenges: Engagement and Skill Development
However, AI’s efficacy hinges on student self-regulation, a persistent challenge where developmental courses predominate (Zimmerman, 2002). Virtual settings often lack in-person dynamics—non-verbal cues, spontaneous discussions—potentially weakening engagement (Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty unease is notable: 54% prefer fully in-person instruction, citing discomfort with digital mediation (Barnes & Noble Education, 2022). Overreliance on AI risks undermining critical thinking; Pritts (2023) warns that tools generating papers may erode analytical skills, echoing SoTL calls for active learning (Davidson, 2021).

Ethical Considerations: Equity and Agency
Ethical dilemmas loom large. Algorithmic bias in grading systems can exacerbate inequities, disproportionately affecting marginalized learners (O’Neil, 2016). Access disparities—unreliable internet or devices—threaten equitable implementation (Means et al., 2020). Spitale et al. (2023) highlight AI’s dual edge: it clarifies concepts but also crafts compelling disinformation, posing risks to academic integrity. Without oversight, AI could shift from facilitator to arbiter, diminishing faculty agency—a concern rooted in Čapek’s cautionary tale (1920/2004). Faculty development must address these tensions to ensure AI serves educational goals.

AI and Academic Integrity: Redrawing Assessment
The rise of AI tools like ChatGPT has forced educators to rethink traditional assessment methods. As discussed in Inside Higher Ed (2025), the prevalence of AI-generated content has made it increasingly difficult to distinguish between student work and machine-generated output. This has led to a growing concern over academic integrity, particularly in community colleges where students may lack the resources or support to navigate these challenges effectively. However, rather than viewing AI as a threat to academic honesty, educators can use this moment to redesign assessments that emphasize critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving—skills that AI cannot easily replicate. For example, instead of traditional essays, instructors might assign reflective portfolios, oral presentations, or collaborative projects that require students to engage deeply with the material and demonstrate their understanding in ways that go beyond what AI can produce. Faculty development programs should focus on equipping instructors with the tools and strategies to design assessments that are both AI-resistant and pedagogically sound, ensuring that students are evaluated on their ability to think critically and apply knowledge, rather than their ability to generate text.

Practical Applications: Strategies for Faculty Development

To harness AI’s benefits while mitigating risks, community college faculty can adopt five evidence-based strategies, each enhancing teaching practice and student success:
1. AI as a Virtual Tutor: NLP models like ChatGPT offer 24/7 support. A developmental math instructor might direct students to ask, “Explain quadratic equations,” receiving tailored responses, freeing class time for conceptual exploration (Topol, 2019). Faculty can train on integrating such tools via workshops, enhancing their tutoring capacity.
1. Hybrid Course Design: AI platforms enable asynchronous lectures, reserving in-person sessions for interaction. A sociology instructor could post AI-generated summaries on social inequality, then facilitate debates, accommodating diverse schedules (Quality Matters, 2022). Faculty development can include HyFlex training to optimize this balance.
1. Creative Exploration: Tools like MidJourney foster innovation. An English instructor might have students generate visual interpretations of Their Eyes Were Watching God, sparking discussions on symbolism (Hutchison & Woodward, 2014). Workshops on AI-driven creativity can empower faculty to adapt this approach.
1. Personalized Feedback: AI tools like Grammarly flag errors, allowing instructors to refine feedback with comments like, “Expand this argument,” blending efficiency with mentorship (Pritts, 2023). Faculty can learn to leverage AI feedback systems through peer mentoring.
1. Redesigning Assessments for AI-Resistance: In light of the challenges posed by AI-generated content, faculty can adopt assessment strategies that prioritize critical thinking and creativity. For example, instead of traditional essays, instructors might assign reflective portfolios, oral presentations, or collaborative projects that require students to engage deeply with the material and demonstrate their understanding in ways that go beyond what AI can produce. Faculty development programs should focus on equipping instructors with the tools and strategies to design assessments that are both AI-resistant and pedagogically sound, ensuring that students are evaluated on their ability to think critically and apply knowledge, rather than their ability to generate text.
At Sacramento City College (SCC), a 2023 pilot integrated AI into developmental English courses. Faculty used ChatGPT as a virtual tutor, assigning students to draft essays and refine them with AI feedback before submission. Instructors then provided final critiques, focusing on argumentation over mechanics. A survey of 50 students found 78% felt more confident in writing, while faculty reported a 30% reduction in grading time (SCC Faculty Development Report, 2023, unpublished). However, 20% of students lacked reliable internet, prompting SCC to expand Wi-Fi access. This case underscores AI’s potential to enhance teaching efficiency and student outcomes, while highlighting equity challenges faculty developers must address.

In response to concerns about AI-generated content, SCC also piloted a new assessment model in which students were required to present their essays orally and engage in peer review sessions. This approach not only reduced the risk of AI-generated submissions but also fostered a deeper understanding of the material through active engagement and collaboration. Faculty reported that students were more invested in the learning process and demonstrated higher levels of critical thinking and creativity in their work.

Conclusion

AI’s evolution—from ancient myths to ChatGPT’s theatrical debut—mirrors humanity’s quest to extend its capabilities. In community colleges, it offers accessibility and efficiency, yet risks eroding the relational core of teaching. Faculty development can bridge this gap by equipping instructors with strategies to integrate AI as a tutor, design tool, creative aid, feedback enhancer, and discussion catalyst. The SCC case study illustrates this balance in practice. As Davidson (2021) and Pritts (2023) argue, the goal is to delegate routine tasks to AI while reserving inspiration and mentorship for faculty—a principle rooted in SoTL. By fostering AI literacy and ethical oversight, faculty developers can ensure AI amplifies, rather than supplants, the human element of education.

Moreover, as the Inside Higher Ed article highlights, the rise of AI-generated content presents an opportunity to rethink assessment practices. By designing assessments that emphasize critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration, faculty can ensure that students are evaluated on their ability to engage deeply with the material, rather than their ability to generate text. This shift not only addresses concerns about academic integrity but also prepares students for a future in which AI is an integral part of the workforce.

David E. Balch, PhD, is a professor at Rio Hondo College and has published articles in the areas of ethics, humor, distance education, and AI.

Robert Blanck, MA, has 35 years’ experience in teaching and administration within the fields of education and business. Blanck earned the Lean Six Sigma Black Belt designation for industrial quality control.

Note: this article used collaboration between the human authors and the AI program Grok (xAI).

References

Barnes & Noble Education. (2022, June 28). College 2030™ report: Higher education’s preparation post-pandemic. Business Wire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220628005207/en/

Baylor, A. L., & Ryu, J. (2003). The API model: Using AI to enhance learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504554

Buchanan, B. G., & Shortliffe, E. H. (1984). Rule-based expert systems: The MYCIN experiments of the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project. Addison-Wesley.

Čapek, K. (2004). R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots) (C. Novack, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1920)

Davidson, C. N. (2021). The new education: How to revolutionize the university to prepare students for a world in flux. Basic Books.

EDUCAUSE. (2023). AI and academic integrity: Rethinking assessment. https://www.educause.edu

Hutchison, A., & Woodward, L. (2014). A planning cycle for integrating digital technology into literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 67(6), 455–464. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1225

McCarthy, J. (2007). What is artificial intelligence? Stanford University. http://jmc.stanford.edu/articles/whatisai/whatisai.pdf

Means, B., Bakia, M., & Murphy, R. (2020). Learning online: What research tells us about whether, when and how. Routledge.

Mitchell, T. M. (1997). Machine learning. McGraw-Hill.

O’Neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown. Note: changed the date from 2016 to 2017

Pritts, N. (2023). AI and the future of critical thinking in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 123–135.

Quality Matters. (2022). 2022 higher education trends report. https://www.qualitymatters.org/research

Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., Dieleman, S., Grewe, D., Nham, J., Kalchbrenner, N., Sutskever, I., Lillicrap, T., Leach, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., Graepel, T., & Hassabis, D. (2016). Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529(7587), 484–489. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16961

Spitale, G., Biller-Andorno, N., & Germani, F. (2023). AI model GPT-3 (dis)informs us better than humans. Science Advances, 9(5), Article eade7823. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ade7823

Topol, E. J. (2019). Deep medicine: How artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Basic Books.

Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Source link
March 31, 2025
Community College of Philadelphia Averts a Strike

The Community College of Philadelphia reached a tentative agreement with its faculty and staff union, staving off an impending strike, 6ABC Action News reported.

The union, AFT Local 2026, or the Faculty and Staff Federation of Community College of Philadelphia, threatened to strike Wednesday morning if a deal wasn’t reached. But union and college leaders say they worked through Tuesday night to arrive at an agreement after more than a year of bargaining over employee contracts.

“After a long night of bargaining, Community College of Philadelphia is glad to have reached a tentative agreement with our partners in the Faculty and Staff Federation,” Donald Guy Generals, president of Community College of Philadelphia, said in a press release. “We are grateful for the hard work and collaboration that brought us to this milestone. The agreement secures fair terms and wage increases while ensuring the financial sustainability of the College. The College is thankful the spring semester will proceed uninterrupted for our students, faculty and staff.”

The outstanding issues previously holding up an agreement were union proposals for wage and staffing increases and SEPTA passes for employees and students. The tentative agreement includes class size reductions and wage increases that were a compromise between the college and the union’s proposals. The union will also be invited to join ongoing discussions with SEPTA about securing public transportation benefits, according to the release from the college.

“We showed what can happen when faculty, staff and students stand in real solidarity with each other,” Rainah Chambliss, co-president of the federation, said in a union press release. “This campaign wasn’t just about us. It was about our students and our community.”

Source link

March 27, 2025
llinois Community College Bachelor’s Degree Bill Stalls Amid Equity Concerns

Illinois Governor JB PritzkerA legislative initiative backed by Illinois Governor JB Pritzker that would allow community colleges to offer four-year bachelor’s degrees in high-demand fields has temporarily stalled in the state’s General Assembly, with lawmakers raising concerns about potential impacts on minority-serving institutions.

The bill, which was one of Gov. Pritzker’s top legislative priorities announced in his February State of the State address, failed to advance from the House Higher Education Committee before Friday’s deadline for most non-spending bills.

Rep. Katie Stuart, who chairs the committee, declined to call House Bill 3717 for a vote, though she indicated the legislation may still have a path forward this session.

“I don’t think around here anything’s really ever dead, and I think there’s a path forward,” Stuart told reporters following last Wednesday’s committee hearing.

Stuart, whose district includes Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, expressed specific concerns about how the proposed expansion might affect institutions that primarily serve minority students, such as Northeastern Illinois University and Chicago State University.

“If we’re not careful about what programs are allowed, that it could collapse the existing programs in those institutions, collapse their student base, and just make them not able to be operational,” Stuart explained. “And then we wouldn’t have a four-year institution serving those communities.”

This sentiment reflects growing concerns in higher education about maintaining equitable access while expanding educational options, particularly when considering the vital role that historically minority-serving institutions play in providing educational pathways for underrepresented populations.

The governor’s proposal, introduced as House Bill 3717 by Rep. Tracy Katz Muhl, aims to make bachelor’s degrees more affordable and accessible, particularly in rural areas where four-year universities may not have a significant presence.

“With lower tuition rates and a greater presence across the state — especially in rural areas — community colleges provide the flexibility and affordability students need,” Pritzker said when introducing the initiative. “This is a consumer-driven, student-centered proposal that will help fill the needs of regional employers in high-need sectors and create a pathway to stable, quality jobs for more Illinoisans.”

The bill would allow community colleges to offer bachelor’s degrees in select fields, provided the college’s board of trustees demonstrates the program would address an “unmet workforce need” in their service area and that the institution possesses adequate resources and expertise to sustain the program.

Following last week’s committee hearing, a coalition of presidents from several public and private universities in Illinois, including Chicago State and Northeastern Illinois University, released a statement acknowledging their concerns while expressing willingness to find a compromise.

The university leaders noted they were concerned about “duplicating efforts and increasing costs at a time of limited resources,” but added they are “encouraged by negotiations and remain committed to working collaboratively to build a higher education ecosystem that serves all of our students and employers.”

Despite missing the committee deadline, both Rep. Stuart and the governor’s office expressed optimism about reaching a compromise that addresses the concerns of all stakeholders.

.

Source link

March 21, 2025
Judge Rules Drake Didn’t Defame Des Moines Community College

A federal judge recently dismissed claims that Drake University defamed Des Moines Area Community College, the latest development in a fraught trademark battle between the two institutions, the Des Moines Register reported.

Their ongoing legal dispute, which began last summer, is over the letter “D.”

Drake University sued the community college after it changed its logo to a simple, block-style “D.” The university has used a “D” as its logo for decades and argued the similar branding creates confusion.

U.S. Chief District Judge Stephanie Rose concluded in November that Drake was likely to prevail, given the logos’ similar color schemes and other details, and issued a preliminary injunction that the community college stop using the new logo. The order led to two pending appeals, one from the community college to reverse the preliminary injunction and one from Drake asserting the ruling didn’t include some older logos. The community college achieved some wins in February when Rose determined DMACC tried in “good faith” to change the logo and Drake should put more money toward helping the college switch the logo if Drake ultimately wins the case.

Meanwhile, counterclaims from DMACC accused Drake of defamation. The college dropped those claims after Drake asked the court to dismiss them but then brought defamation claims against the university again on behalf of the Des Moines Area Community College Foundation after Drake sent out an email about the case to its alumni in July.

Rose wrote on Friday that the foundation took “giant interpretive leaps from the content of the email” such that the defamation claims were “untenable.”

“While zealous advocacy is expected, counsel must ground their pleadings in reasonable factual and legal interpretations,” she chided.

Drake President Marty Martin said in an email statement to The Des Moines Register that he was pleased by the outcome. But DMACC shows little sign of giving up.

“DMACC and the DMACC Foundation continue to believe that Drake does not own the letter ‘D’ and the scope of Drake’s rights are now the subject of appeal,” spokesperson Dan Ryan said in a statement.

Source link

March 21, 2025
Community colleges are providing new opportunities for learning on the job in logging and oystering

SHINGLETOWN, Calif. — On a cold morning in October, the sun shone weakly through tall sugar pines and cedars in Shingletown, a small Northern California outpost whose name is a reminder of its history as a logging camp in the 1800s. Up a gravel road banked with iron-rich red soil, Dylan Knight took a break from stacking logs.

Knight is one of 10 student loggers at Shasta College training to operate the heavy equipment required for modern-day logging: processors to remove limbs from logs that have just been cut, skidders to pull logs out of the cutting site, loaders to stack and sort the logs by species and masticators to mulch up debris.

For centuries, logging was a seasonal, learn-on-the-job trade passed down from father to son. But as climate change and innovations in the industry have changed logging into a year-round business, there aren’t always enough workers to fill jobs.

“Our workforce was dying,” said Delbert Gannon, owner of Creekside Logging. “You couldn’t even pick from the bottom of the barrel. It was affecting our production and our ability to haul logs. We felt we had to do something.”

Related: Interested in innovations in higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.

Higher ed, examined

Our biweekly newsletter delivers deeply reported higher ed stories directly to your inbox.

Around the country, community colleges are stepping in to run apprenticeship programs for heritage industries, such as logging and aquaculture, which are too small to run. These partnerships help colleges expand the workforce development programs central to their mission. The partnerships also help keep small businesses in small industries alive by managing state and federal grants and providing the equipment, courses and staff to train workers.

As industries go, logging is small, and it’s struggling. In 2023 there were only about 50,000 logging jobs in the U.S., but the number of logging companies has been on the decline for several years. Most loggers are over 50, according to industry data, and older generations are retiring, contributing to more than 6,000 vacant positions every year on average. The median annual salary for loggers is about $50,000.

Student logger Bryce Shannon operates a wood chipper at a logging site as part of his instruction at Shasta College in Redding, Calif. Credit: Minh Connors for The Hechinger Report

Retirements have hit Creekside Logging hard. In 2018 Gannon’s company had jobs to do, and the machines to do them, but nobody to do the work. He reached out to Shasta College, which offers certificates and degrees in forestry and heavy equipment operation, to see if there might be a student who could help.

That conversation led to a formal partnership between the college and 19 timber companies to create a pre-apprenticeship course in Heavy Equipment Logging Operations. Soon after, they formed the California Registered Apprenticeship Forest Training program. Shasta College used $3.5 million in grant funds to buy the equipment pre-apprentices use.

Related: Apprenticeships are a trending alternative to college but there’s a hitch

Logging instruction takes place on land owned by Sierra Pacific Industries lumber company — which does not employ its own loggers and so relies on companies like Creekside Lumber to fell and transport logs to mills.

Each semester, 10 student loggers like Knight take the pre-apprenticeship course at Shasta College. Nearly all are hired upon completion. Once employed, they continue their work as apprentices in the forest training program, which Shasta College runs in partnership with employers like Gannon. State apprenticeship funds help employers offset the cost of training new workers, as well as the lost productivity of on-the-job mentors.

For Creekside Logging — a 22-person company — working with Shasta College makes participation in the apprenticeship program possible.Gannon’s company often trained new loggers, only to have them back out of the job months later. It can cost tens of thousands of dollars to train a new worker, and Creekside couldn’t afford to keep taking the financial risk. Now Gannon has a steady flow of committed employees, trained at the college rather than on his payroll. Workers who complete the pre-apprenticeship know what they’re getting into — working outdoors in the cold all day, driving big machines and cutting down trees.

Workers who complete the apprenticeship, Gannon said, are generally looking for a career and not just a seasonal job.

Talon Gramps-Green, a student logger at Shasta College in Redding, Calif., shows off stickers on his safety helmet. Credit: Minh Connors for The Hechinger Report

“You get folks that are going to show up every day,” Gannon said. “They got to test drive the career and know they like heavy equipment. They want to work in the woods. The college has solved that for us.”

Apprentices benefit too. Workers who didn’t grow up around a trade can try it out, which for some means tracking down an elusive pathway into the work. Kyra Lierly grew up in Redding, about 30 miles west of Shingletown, and previously worked for the California Department of Forestry as a firefighter. She’s used to hard work, but when she looked into getting a job as a logger she couldn’t find a way in. Some companies had no office phone or website, she says. Jobs were given out casually, by word of mouth.

“A lot of logging outfits are sketchy, and I wanted to work somewhere safe,” said Lierly, 25. She worked as an apprentice with Creekside Lumber but is taking a break while she completes an internship at Sierra Pacific Industries, a lumber producer, and gets a certificate in natural resources at Shasta College.

“The apprenticeship made forestry less intimidating because the college isn’t going to partner with any company that isn’t reputable,” Lierly said.

Related: In spite of a growing shortage in male-dominated vocations, women still aren’t showing up

Apprenticeships, with their combination of hands-on and classroom learning, are found in many union halls but, until now, was not known to be common practice in the forested sites of logging crews.

State and federally registered apprenticeships have gained popularity in recent years as training tools in health care, cybersecurity and telecommunications.

Federal funding grew steadily from $145 million in 2018 to more than $244 million during the last years of the Biden administration. That money was used to support apprenticeships in traditional building trades as well as industries that don’t traditionally offer registered apprenticeships, including teaching and nursing.

The investment aims to address the shortage of skilled workers. The number of working adults in the U.S. doesn’t align with the number of skilled jobs, a disparity that is only slowly recovering after the pandemic.

Labor shortages hit especially hard in rural areas, where trades like logging have an outsized impact on their local economies. For regional heritage trades like logging, just a few apprentices can make the difference between staying in business and shutting down.

Lucas Licea, a student logger at Shasta College in Redding, Calif., operates a loader. Credit: Minh Connors for The Hechinger Report

“There’s a common misconception of registered apprentices that they’re only in the building trades when most are in a variety of sectors,” said Manny Lamarre, who served as deputy assistant secretary for employment and training with the Labor Department during the Biden administration. More than 5,000 new occupations have registered with the department to offer apprenticeships since 2021, he said. “We can specifically support unique small occupations in rural communities where a lot of people are retiring.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon, who was confirmed earlier this month, said in her confirmation hearing that she supports apprenticeships. But ongoing cuts make it unclear what the new federal role will be in supporting such programs.

However, “sharing the capacity has been an important way to get apprenticeships into rural and small employers,” said Vanessa Bennett, director at the Center for Apprenticeship and Work-Based Learning at the nonprofit Jobs for the Future. It’s helpful when employers partner with a nonprofit or community college that can sponsor an apprenticeship program, as Shasta College does, Bennett said.

Once Knight, the student logger, completes the heavy equipment pre-apprenticeship, he plans to return to his hometown of Oroville, about 100 miles south of Shingletown. His tribe — the Berry Creek Rancheria of Tyme Maidu Indians — is starting its own logging crew, and Knight will be one of only two members trained to use some of the most challenging pieces of logging equipment.

“This program is awesome,” said Knight, 24. “It’s really hands-on. You learn as you go and it helps to have a great instructor.”

Student logger Dylan Knight drives a masticator, which grinds wood into chips, as Shasta College instructor Chris Hockenberry looks on. Credit: Minh Connors for The Hechinger Report

Across the country in Maine, a community college is helping to train apprentices for jobs at heritage oyster, mussel and kelp farms that have struggled to find enough workers to meet the growing demand for shellfish. Often classified as seasonal work, aquaculture jobs can become year-round careers for workers trained in both harvesting shellfish and planning for future seasons.

“I love the farm work and I feel confident that I will be able to make a full-length career out of this,” said Gabe Chlebowski, who completed a year-long apprenticeship with Muscongus Bay Aquaculture, which harvests in Damariscotta, Maine. A farm boy from rural Pennsylvania, Chlebowski worked in construction and stone masonry after high school. When his parents moved to Maine, he realized that he wanted a job on the water. With no prior experience, he applied for an oyster farming apprenticeship and was accepted.

“I was the youngest by five years and the only person who’d never worked on water,” said Chlebowski, 22. “I grew up in a landlocked state surrounded by corn fields. I had the work ethic and no idea what I was doing in boats.”

Related: Modern apprenticeships offer path to career — and college

The apprenticeship program was launched in 2023 by the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, which joined with the Maine Aquaculture Association and Educate Maine to create a yearlong apprenticeship with Southern Maine Community College. Apprentices take classes in shellfish biology, water safety, skiff driving and basic boat maintenance. Grants helped pay for the boots, jackets and fishing bibs apprentices needed.

“The workforce here was a bottleneck,” said Carissa Maurin, aquaculture program manager for GMRI. New workers with degrees in marine biology were changing their minds after starting training at aquaculture farms. “Farms were wasting time and money on employees that didn’t want to be there.”

Chlebowski completed the apprenticeship at Muscongus Bay in September. He learned how to repair a Yamaha outdoor motor, how to grade oysters and how to work on a 24-foot, flat-bottom skiff. He stayed on as an employee, working at the farm on the Damariscotta River — the oyster capital of New England. The company is known for two varieties of oysters: Dodge Cove Pemaquid and Wawenauk.

Oyster farming generates local pride, Chlebowski said. The Shuck Station in downtown Damariscotta gives oyster farmers a free drink when they come in and there’s an annual summer shucking festival. But the company is trying to provide careers, Chlebowski said, not just high-season jobs.

“It can be hard to make a career out of farming, but it’s like any trade,” he said, adding that there is work to do year-round. “Welding and HVAC have trade schools and apprenticeships. Why shouldn’t aquaculture?”

Chlebowski’s apprenticeship turned into a career. Back in Shingletown, students in the logging program hope for the same result when they finish.

Until then, they spend Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays in the woods learning how to operate and maintain equipment. Tuesdays and Thursdays are spent on Shasta College’s Redding campus, where the apprentices take three classes: construction equipment operation, introduction to forestry and wood products and milling.

At the end of the semester, students demonstrate their skills at a showcase in the Shingletown woods. Logging company representatives will attend and scout for workers. Students typically get offers at the showcase. So far, 50 students have completed the pre-apprenticeship program and most transitioned into full apprenticeships. Fifteen people have completed the full apprenticeship program and now earn from $40,000 to $90,000 a year as loggers.

Related: Some people going into the trades wonder why their classmates stick with college

Mentorship is at the heart of apprenticeships. On the job, new workers are paired with more experienced loggers who pass on knowledge and supervise the rookies as they complete tasks. Pre-apprentices at Shasta College learn from Jonas Lindblom, the program’s heavy equipment and logging operations instructor.

At the logging site, Lindblom watches as a tall sugar pine slowly falls and thuds to the ground. Lindblom’s father, grandfathers and great-grandfather all drove trucks for logging companies in Northern California.

An axe sticks out of a freshly cut tree at a logging site used to train student loggers enrolled at Shasta College in Redding, Calif. Credit: Minh Connors for The Hechinger Report

This is a good area for apprentices to “just be able to learn at their pace,” he said. “They’re not pushed and they can get comfortable in the machines without developing bad habits along the way.”

Lindblom, who studied agriculture education at Chico State University, spent all his breaks during college working as a logger. He works closely with the logging companies that partner with the program to make sure he’s teaching up-to-date practices. It’s better for new loggers to learn in this outdoor classroom, he said, than on the job.

“The majority of these students did not grow up in logging families,” he said. “This is a great opportunity to pass on this knowledge and share where the industry is going.”

Contact editor Christina A. Samuels at 212-678-3635 or samuels@hechingereport.org.

This story about learning on the job was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn't mean it's free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Source link

March 19, 2025
Community College of Philadelphia staff schedule strike authorization vote (CBS Philadelphia)

Higher Education Inquirer : Community College of Philadelphia staff schedule strike authorization vote (CBS Philadelphia)

Community College of Philadelphia staff schedule strike authorization vote (CBS Philadelphia)

Source link

March 11, 2025
Rebelling together against the myth of the lone creative genius: how arts-based pedagogies enhanced community learning

by Katherine Friend and Aisling Walters

When we write about creativity, we often refer to the work of geniuses; [distancing] ordinary members of society from the act of creativity by reinforcing a perception that they could never be creative themselves (Dymoke, 2020: 80).

Digital story by Kate Shpota

The state of creativity

The damage wrought by the stereotype of a creative as an isolated genius seems likely to increase within the current context of the UK school system, where an overloaded curriculum and assessment driven pedagogies dominate. The 2023 State of Creativity report notes that creativity has been ‘all but expunged from the school curriculum in England’. Educators across schools and departments in HEIs are attempting to resist the current educational practice which promotes students as consumers and centres our students as active producers in their own learning. Yet, as education policy from primary through to higher education continues not only to cut its emphasis on the humanities and creativity, but also eliminate arts and humanities departments altogether, higher education runs a profound risk of further alienating students from the benefits of creative thinking and artistic practice.

Our undergraduates, being educationalists, use sociological and psychological lenses to understand the social and cultural landscape affecting both classroom learning and community education more broadly. Nevertheless, despite education being at the intersection of many academic disciplines (Sociology, English, Philosophy, History to name a few), students are often reluctant to incorporate alternative approaches into their learning and even less so into their assessments.

Fear and discomfort

As educators, we ask students to embrace discomfort when learning different theoretical approaches or understanding alternative viewpoints. But often, we do not ask them to embrace discomfort in operating outside of the neoliberal HE system, a ‘results driven quantification [which] directs learning’ (Kulz, 2017 p. 55). Within this context, learning focuses on the product (the assessable outcome), rather than the process (the learning journey). Thus, it is unsurprising that our undergraduates initially baulked at the idea of an assessment that incorporated a creative element, preferring essays and multiple-choice exams instead. Hunter & Frawley (2023) define arts-based pedagogy (ABP) as a process by which students can observe and reflect on an art form to link different disciplines, thus encouraging students to lean into uncomfortable subject matter and explore their place within in the wider world. To build more dynamic and critically analytical students, we had to simultaneously encourage an ABP approach so they would understand their academic and theoretical course content more fully while scaffolding their learning through a series of creative activities designed to engage students with different forms of learning and reflection. By incorporating cultural visits, mentorship, and creative assessments into the module, art enhanced subject teaching while encouraging students to think more deeply about their own practice (Fleming, 2012). Yet, incorporating practice was not enough, we were faced with the question: how do educationalists ask students to engage with their vulnerabilities around creative practice (the belief and the engrained fear that they cannot do art or are not good at art) and lead them to an understanding that vulnerability itself can be beneficial?

Perhaps, the most basic answer came by asking ourselves, are we, as academics, scared of implementing creative pedagogies because we are scared of showing our own vulnerabilities? What if we as educators fail at a task and our students see? What would happen if we became vulnerable alongside our students? Jordan (2010) argues that when vulnerability is met with criticism, we disengage as a self-preservation tactic. For Brown, acknowledging our insecurities offers a means of understanding ourselves, developing shame resilience and acting authentically. In our session, our vulnerability as lecturers was tested when engaging with textile art, specifically a battle with crochet. Our students saw educators who were not secure or competent in a task. This resulted in a small amount of mockery, but also empathy and offers of support. By stepping out of our comfort zone and embracing a pedagogy of discomfort (Boler 1999), we encouraged our students to challenge themselves. Romney and Holland (2023) refer to this as a ‘paradox of vulnerability’: by overcoming our own reluctance to be vulnerable with our learners we create connections and a sense of trust. We should add that the session explored women’s textile art as activism and the outcome, a piece of textile art, symbolically woven together by students and staff—all female.

Collective textile piece

Importance of community and connection

Once we examined theoretical and personal aspects of discomfort and vulnerability, to support and enhance our focus on creative practice, we drew on local cultural partnerships. The incorporation of cultural visits, mentorship from resident artists, and creative exercises enriched our subject teaching while simultaneously encouraging students to think more deeply about their own practice (Fleming, 2012). It also built an alliance between social scientists and colleagues in arts and humanities disciplines, capitalising on their expertise and years of honing ABP. Nottingham is a city where the legend of Robin Hood, outlaws, and rebellion intersect with vibrant cultural community. But many of our students do not engage with cultural spaces, leading to double disconnect, first from their own creative practice and second from the cultural sector altogether. Our students expressed their disconnect from the cultural heart of Nottingham was due to the spaces being ‘not for them’ or a worry that they would not ‘understand’ the art. By exploring the city centre as a group, walking from one site to another, we broke down barriers around these prohibited spaces.

Engagement with Nottingham by Alisha Begum

Once inside the Nottingham Contemporary, the resident artists told their own stories of fear, worries of judgement, and expressed anxieties of creative practice, thus setting our students free from the myth of the genius artist – untouchable by self-doubt. This realisation allowed our students to relax and engage worry-free into the creative tasks.

Found poem by Alisha Begum

‘I object’ by Nicole Robinson

By joining in with these activities, lecturers and students learned alongside each other, tackling our insecurities regarding our creative abilities together as a learning community. Perhaps community was the most important outcome in the project as connection was central. Exposure to the cultural sites created a feeling of connection with the cultural heart of the city. Students also, perhaps more importantly, reported that they became more connected to an understanding of themselves as creatives, becoming more autonomous and engaged in their own learning.

Digital storytelling: Identity Crisis by Shahnaz Begum

Perhaps it is most appropriate to end this post with the voice of one of our year-two students—the transcript from a podcast created as part of her larger portfolio. She asserts:

Art in education is a goldmine of untouched opportunities [and can be] used to foster students’ holistic development, stimulate creative thinking and engagement with social justice. … and to my fellow Artivists, embrace creativity one canvas at a time.

Katherine Friend is an Associate Professor of Higher Education at Nottingham Trent University. Her work focuses on three themes: the underrepresented student experience on university campuses, the importance of undergraduate engagement in the cultural sector, and reconciling international and academic identities. Threading all three themes together are discussions of one’s ‘place’ and/or ‘space’ in HE and how social and cultural hierarchies contribute to identity, representation, and belonging.

Aisling Walters is a Senior Lecturer in Secondary Education at Nottingham Trent University whose research focuses on the development of writer identity in trainee English teachers, preservice teachers’ experiences of prescriptive schemes of learning, arts-based pedagogies, and students as writers.

Like this:

Like Loading…

Categories: Teaching Learning & Assessment | Tags: art and design, artist, arts-based research, autonomy, creative activity, creative methods, creative spaces, pedagogy | Permalink.

Author: SRHE News Blog

An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

Source link

March 7, 2025

Previous Page
1 2 3 4 5
Next Page

Blog
About
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions

copyright 2025

Signup

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Email

Password