Tag: Faculty

Conversation and Coursework: Strategies to Engage Undergraduate Students with Course Content – Faculty Focus
Peer-to-peer conversations can help students to make connections with each other and course content. In a course that requires out-of-class reading, that conversation is highly reliant on students doing their part and completing the assigned reading. However, in recent semesters, students engaging in focused reading in which they annotate text is dwindling. There has been a noticeable decline in students’ engagement with course materials, evidenced by reduced annotations and superficial reading habits (Deale & Hyun, 2021; Mizrachi & Salaz, 2022). It seems as if a quick scan of one of the assigned pages is the best effort. Without adequate reading, students will be reluctant, or unable, to participate in class discussions and conversations for lack of understanding and fear of not ‘measuring-up’ to peers (Severe, E., Stalnaker, J., Hubbard, A., Hafen, C. H., & Bailey, E. G., 2024). Subsequently, instructor facilitated classroom conversations intended to enhance understanding of course content may stagnate and falter. Naturally, to maximize student engagement with course content, students must have a degree of self-awareness and desire to do the work assigned to meet the goal of understanding, and mastering, course content.

The frame of content engagement can look different based on course, instructor and level of student. In this case, engagement is on the ‘micro’ level as it offers ideas on what can happen before, during, and after class (Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, 2005). While engagement can be observed in many forms, this piece focuses on transactional engagement in which students interact with each other and with the instructor (Zepke & Leach, 2010). As instructors, we can provide the tools to help students engage with content and meaningfully participate in conversation to develop a more robust understanding of coursework.

Course Context

I teach a required, writing-intensive course for students in their junior year of their undergraduate studies. In addition to a heavy writing component, there is also a heavy reading component. While students enjoy the subject matter, they are not terribly thrilled by the amount of reading they are expected to complete. Generally, students start the semester strong, by keeping up with reading, sharing key points and participating in organic content-based conversations. By week four, they hit a wall. There is a notable drop off in the reading and conversations. In an ongoing effort to support students, I altered the clarified expectations and gave more support to students, both in class and beyond.

Choices

Students are busy with layers of competing obligations including classes, work, university organizations and athletics that may impact their time to prepare for class. They may also feel underprepared for reading focused non-fiction, informational texts that require more attention than a casual fiction novel. Being mindful of some students’ sensitivity to what they perceive as inadequate skills, the strategies listed below were shared in class. The whole group presentation and in-class practice encouraged students to try all the tools and self-determine which was most helpful for the time and abilities.

Before Class

Students were introduced to three strategies to use to capture the key points of the assigned reading. The activities provide multiple entry points that allow students to utilize the tool right away.
1. SQ3R. Although this is not a new strategy, I was surprised at how few students had experience working with it. Preparing to join classroom discussions requires intentional preparation. Some students may feel underprepared and think a simple scan of the assigned readings will enable them to join a conversation. While that may work on a superficial level, robust, and meaningful conversation requires proactive work. For students unsure of how to read for maximum understanding a review of the SQ3R strategy is helpful. After a class introduction to the strategy, all students are given a handout with the students so they can utilize as they see fit.
SQ3R
1. Launchpad. For some students, the formulaic nature of a guided strategy, like the SQ3R, may be too limiting. For the student that wants to prepare for in-class conversation, preparing and providing a few open-ended reading reflection questions (launchpad ideas) may be useful. The questions are intentional few in nature so students can focus on responding to one or two and reading to find solid text evidence to support responses.
Launchpad Example 1

Launchpad Example 2
1. Sketchnoting. For students that best express their understanding visually, sketchnoting is a wonderful tool (Parks, 2022). Sketchnoting involves using images, words, and colors to make thinking visible on paper (or a device). When introduced in class as a worthwhile way to capture understating, students may be more likely to try the method rather than just trying to remember what they read.
Sketchnote

The First 10 Minutes of Class

Even with adequate preparation and readings, students get busy with other obligations between assigned coursework and class time. To help students feel prepared, the first 10 minutes (no more) of class is provided as a focused reflection.
1. Focused Reflection. During the 10-minute reflection, students may review their SQ3R notes, add to their reading reflections or sketchnotes. Students may also reread (or, for some, read) the assigned pages. For students that have done it all, they are tasked with doodle time. It’s not as unstructured as it seems.
1. Doodle Time. If a student is reluctant to participate in any of the focused reflections, they are given a doodle paper and three colored pencils. The expectation is to keep the pencils moving during the entire 10-minute period. Some students may start by drawing squiggles or lines, but they do transition into drawing sketches of things they’ve read. Once students believe there is no judgment on their artistic ability and that the focus time is really intended to help them think about the course content, they respond positively to the task. Some have even transitioned from doodling to sketchnoting because, as shared by one student, “it matches the way I think.”
By allowing this 10-minute period to capture thoughts, students have to ability to organize their thoughts and feel confident in their classroom conversation contributions. While it doesn’t level the field completely, and there are still students that do not read, those that do have shared they appreciate the time to refocus their attention on the coursework.

There are only two rules for focused reflection time. The rules are aimed at keeping the classroom distraction free.
1. No talking (to me or each other). The quiet period allows think-time for all students.
1. No devices. The device free period encourages students to independently think about the assigned readings without supporting- or competing- interests. Students are told candidly, I care about their input, not a generative AI summary of the reading.
Building a Safe Space for Conversations

Even with adequate preparation, sharing connections to coursework can be daunting. To support students in the process, a small to big approach is beneficial. First, students are assigned, by the instructor, into conversation corner groups. These groups are intentionally small to promote equitable opportunities to speak. With small classes, I create the groups and intentionally separate any groups of friends to provide opportunities for students to interact with others that may bring new perspectives to the conversation. For larger groups, a random group generator such as https://www.randomlists.com/team-generator can be used. After allowing small group conversation, the students are transitioned into whole group discussions in which they share understanding or respond to instructor posed questions as a group.

Getting the Conversation Going

Students may need help starting content-based conversations. Using a ‘fun’ tool engages students and allows all to have a chance to contribute.
1. Spinning Questions. Pickerwheel (https://pickerwheel.com) or Spin the Wheel (https://spinthewheel.io/#google_vignette) are sites that allow the instructor to enter questions into a spinning wheel. Students spin the wheel and respond to questions in small groups. Students can also create a discussion wheel in their instructor assigned small groups using the questions they created for their SQ3R notes.
1. Conversation Cards. The use of Conversation Cards can help students engage in focused conversation about course content. Students can either draw random card or review all cards and choose the one that is most appealing to them.
Conversation Card Example 1

Conversation Card Example 2

Conversation Card Example 3

Conversation Card Example 4

Conversation Card Example 5

Ending Class

Ending class with an individual account of progress toward mastering course content helps students self-determine their next steps.
1. Accountability Audits. As a ticket out the door, students can complete an exit slip capturing their efforts for the day. Instructors may use the exit tickets as participation grades or as formative assessments to determine how students are understanding content. With larger courses, the instructor may elect to review a random sample of the work, telling students the work is about personal reflection and accountability. Exit slips may be handwritten or they may be done electronically.
Accountability Audit
1. One Last Word. Sometimes extra paper and written work just won’t work. An alternative is to ask individuals, or small groups of students, to suggest one word that sums up the main points of class. The main caveat is no word may be repeated. This one is fun, quick and pushes students to categorize their learning. Please consider a note of caution—this one can quickly turn into a small competition with individuals or groups trying to go first so “their” word is not shared by another group. Don’t worry—it’s all in good fun.
While engaging with content cannot be forced, finding tools that are interesting for students, focused enough for instructors to feel confident valuable class time is used productively and reinforces key points can make learning accessible to all.

Melissa Parks, PhD, is an associate professor of education at Stetson University in Deland, FL. Dr. Parks is an active member of the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) and is currently a member of the NSTA Early Childhood- Elementary Science Teaching Committee. Her research interests include elementary pedagogies and environmental stewardship.

References

Deale, C. S., & Lee, S. H. (2021). To read or not to read? Exploring the reading habits of hospitality management students. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 34(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2020.1868317

Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192

Mizrachi, D., & Salaz, A. M. (2022). Reading format attitudes in the time of COVID. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 48(4), 102552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102552

Parks, M. (2022). Drawing in college: Using sketchnoting to support student engagement. Faculty Focus. Magna Publications.

Severe, E., Stalnaker, J., Hubbard, A., Hafen, C. H., & Bailey, E. G. (2024). To participate or not to participate? A qualitative investigation of students’ complex motivations for verbal classroom participation. PloS one, 19(2), e0297771. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297771

Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11, 167-177. doi:10.1177/1469787410379680
Source link
May 21, 2025
New Report From CUPA-HR Explores Changes in Faculty Size, Pay and Tenure Status Over the Past 20 Years – CUPA-HR
by CUPA-HR | May 20, 2025

How has the higher education faculty workforce changed over the past 20 years? What disciplines have emerged as frontrunners in hiring? What disciplines pay the most? What disciplines pay the least?

In the new research report, Two Decades of Change: Faculty Discipline Trends in Higher Education, CUPA-HR presents findings from an analysis of data from its Faculty in Higher Education Survey from 2003-04 to 2023-24.

Some key findings highlighted in the report:

The disciplines of Health Professions and Business have experienced the most growth in number of faculty over the past 20 years. The number of faculty in Health Professions more than doubled from 2003-04 to 2023-24, and the number of Business faculty grew by 20.8% over the same period.

The disciplines of Theology, Liberal Arts and Humanities, and English Language/Literature are experiencing very little growth in terms of hiring new faculty. These disciplines also have high numbers of non-tenure-track faculty and are among the lowest-paying disciplines — all of which point to institutions’ divestment in these disciplines.

Business ranked among the top four highest-paid disciplines every year from 2003-04 to 2023-24 and has been the highest-paid discipline for the past nine years. In addition, Business saw the largest percentage increase in median salary across all disciplines, with an increase of 66.2% since 2003-04.

No discipline’s pay increases beat inflation. Although many disciplines appeared strong based on changes in size and salary over time, all disciplines reported median salaries in 2023-24 that were lower than inflation-adjusted salaries based on 2003-04 salary data. Overall, faculty in all disciplines have less purchasing power with their salaries in 2023-24 than they did in 2003-04.

Read the full report and explore the data with interactive graphics.

Share This Article:
Source link
May 20, 2025
Steps Toward Creating a More Accessible and Inclusive College Classroom – Faculty Focus
Preparing the next generation of graduates in a 21st-century, diverse, and international classroom requires a pedagogical shift to recalibrate one’s practice. A faculty vision of inclusive pedagogy informed by equity and social justice transcends bias and makes diversity functional and beneficial to all students. Creating a classroom in the service of social justice (The Metropolitan Center for Urban Education, 2008) requires a profound understanding of the impact of human diversity on teaching and learning (Cushner et al., 2024). Enacting equity pedagogy as an essential component of multicultural education (Banks & Banks, 1995) requires instructors to become change agents. It is important to understand inclusive pedagogies as practices where we discern the nuance between general multicultural education or culturally responsive pedagogy and inclusive practices that specifically address the ability/disability continuum and the health dimension. In this article, we will examine ability/disability as a characteristic of human diversity in education as illustrated by Cushner et al. (2024) in their diversity framework. Approaches to creating an inclusive classroom are presented.

Start here…
- Adopt an asset-based approach for all students.
- Recognize that disability is often defined by the environment in which an individual exists.
- Ensure you are not making ableist statements that reinforce stereotypes (ex: “turn a blind eye,” “fall on deaf ears;” using phobia to mean discrimination, ie “transphobia”).
- Avoid negative descriptions of disability (ex: “suffers from a condition,” “confined/bound to a wheelchair”).
- Use person-first language rather than deficit-first language (ex: “student with a learning disability,” not “learning disabled student”), unless an individual discloses that they prefer to use identity-first language (for example: some individuals on the autism spectrum may prefer to call themselves “autistic” rather than “a person with autism”; someone may identify as part of the Deaf community). Refer to people how they refer to themselves.
- Realize that impact matters, regardless of intention.
- Assume that students are capable and possess knowledge and skills.
- Support colleagues with disabilities.
- Tell a colleague that you are committing to the work of becoming a more inclusive educator. When they ask what this means, share these suggestions!
Beginning
- Add literature/resources from neurodivergent, disabled, and diverse authors to assigned course readings and class activities.
- Replace and/or supplement outdated readings.
- Provide electronic files of reading, resources, presentations, and other materials.
- Provide multiple sources and access points for assignment requirements and expectations (written descriptions, presentations, instructional videos, examples, rubrics).
- Be open and welcome student questions.
- Understand that all behavior is a function or indicative of something else; ask if students need support rather than punish them.
- Update course syllabi to include statements from the campus disability/accommodations resource office, a statement on academic diversity, religious observant policies, and campus mental health resources.
- Create community guidelines for discussions that include intention and impact/anti-bias language.
- Immediately address ableist/biased remarks in the classroom through discussion.
- Update course syllabi to include a statement of classroom environment that encourages regard for others and respects free speech while not tolerating hate speech.
- When presenting a visual/image, also provide a description of the image (alt text).
- Provide Closed Captioning on posted videos (lectures, resources, etc.).
- Incorporate the impact of and perspectives of groups of diverse abilities in policies of the past and present.
- Encourage students (and ourselves as faculty) to analyze research and articles to ensure they represent the perspectives of marginalized groups; follow up with questioning why and providing additional resources to promote self-advocacy.
- Revise course syllabi to include Student Learning Objectives, Essential Questions, and Course Descriptions related to self-reflection/advocacy/inclusion/preparing students to be agents of change.
- Examine course syllabi to make sure policies (late work, absence, participation grades, etc.) do not indirectly or directly target students with disabilities OR demonstrate bias toward neurotypical students (for example: a “cameras on” video policy in an online course may disproportionately punish students who require accommodations or have diverse learning needs; deductions for late work may punish students who need flexibility due to medical or mental health needs; requiring students to disclose personal details in order to receive extensions or incompletes disrespects students’ privacy of health and disability needs)
- Be willing to adjust your expectations through flexibility.
- Re-examine assignments and assessments for bias and exclusionary practices.
- Consider changing assessments from high-stakes timed tests to projects, homework, open-note/open-book take-home tests.
- Ask a colleague to audit your syllabi for readings/topics/policies as listed here.
- Collaborate with colleagues in accessibility services to better understand and integrate the services and supports available.
- Discuss the need to broaden participation and opportunities for people with disabilities in your department/college.
- Examine courses to make sure provided resources are organized and labeled clearly.
Advanced, all the previous steps plus…
- Advocate for (or lead!) professional development opportunities on inclusion.
- Participate in on- and off-campus events that promote disability acceptance and inclusive practices.
- Inform students of community opportunities they can take part in promoting disability acceptance or inclusive practices.
- Model examination/reflection on your own privilege (if neurotypical and able-bodied) or experience as a person with(out) a disability.
- Consider multimodal access to course participation (for example, HyFlex courses have in-person, video and asynchronous options for all students).
- Ask a colleague to informally observe your teaching and provide constructive feedback on your work of being an inclusive teacher.
- Invite guest speakers with disabilities to speak with your students about their experiences.
- Collaborate with an ADA coordinator to educate students and colleagues about accessibility on your campus.
- Collaborate with administrators and faculty who may be working toward DEI or inclusion initiatives on your campus.
- Seek input from resources such as the Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD) and Think College for postsecondary education program guidance for individuals with disabilities.
We believe that the responsibility of anti-oppressive work in higher education belongs to all and that making education accessible for individuals with disabilities advances freedom for all groups of people. These universally designed teaching practices, while necessary to increase access for individuals with disabilities, are beneficial for all individuals, regardless of identity status. Thank you for your work towards broadening access to higher education!

Laura N. Sarchet is an autistic self-advocate and Assistant Professor of Special Education at Niagara University who uses her experience as a neurodivergent person to raise awareness about autism and disability through research and practice.

Haoua M. Hamza is an associate professor in the Middle and Adolescence Education Department in the College of Education.

Rachel Bailey Jones, Professor of Education at Nazareth University, focuses their research and teaching on working for educational justice for LGBTQ+ students through an intersectional lens.

Jennifer E. Hartman is an Instructor-ABD in the Special Education Department at Niagara University.

Dennis P. Garland, Ph. D. is Associate Professor and Chair of the Special Education Department at Niagara University.

Maria R. Nader is passionate about providing equitable education for all students and supporting educators to achieve this goal. She serves as a Faculty Fellow in the Special Education Department at Niagara University and has held teaching and administrative roles at the local, state, and university levels in New York, Ohio, and Hawai’i.

References

Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education. 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass.

Coughlin, M. (2021). 10 things faculty need to understand about autism. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/10/20/lessons-teaching-students-autism-spectrum-opinion

Cushner, K., McClelland, A., Safford P., & Cushner, H. (2024). Human diversity in education. McGraw Hill.

The Metropolitan Center for Urban Education. (2008). Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Framework. New York State Education Department.

Sarchet, L. N. (2021). Faculty and staff: Training and outreach. University of Rochester Office of Disability Resources, adapted with permissions. https://www.rochester.edu/college/disability/assets/pdf/more-accessible-classroom.pdf

Waitoller, F. R., & King Thorius, K. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-86.3.366
Source link
May 19, 2025
Steps Toward Creating a More Accessible and Inclusive College Classroom – Faculty Focus
Preparing the next generation of graduates in a 21st-century, diverse, and international classroom requires a pedagogical shift to recalibrate one’s practice. A faculty vision of inclusive pedagogy informed by equity and social justice transcends bias and makes diversity functional and beneficial to all students. Creating a classroom in the service of social justice (The Metropolitan Center for Urban Education, 2008) requires a profound understanding of the impact of human diversity on teaching and learning (Cushner et al., 2024). Enacting equity pedagogy as an essential component of multicultural education (Banks & Banks, 1995) requires instructors to become change agents. It is important to understand inclusive pedagogies as practices where we discern the nuance between general multicultural education or culturally responsive pedagogy and inclusive practices that specifically address the ability/disability continuum and the health dimension. In this article, we will examine ability/disability as a characteristic of human diversity in education as illustrated by Cushner et al. (2024) in their diversity framework. Approaches to creating an inclusive classroom are presented.

Start here…
- Adopt an asset-based approach for all students.
- Recognize that disability is often defined by the environment in which an individual exists.
- Ensure you are not making ableist statements that reinforce stereotypes (ex: “turn a blind eye,” “fall on deaf ears;” using phobia to mean discrimination, ie “transphobia”).
- Avoid negative descriptions of disability (ex: “suffers from a condition,” “confined/bound to a wheelchair”).
- Use person-first language rather than deficit-first language (ex: “student with a learning disability,” not “learning disabled student”), unless an individual discloses that they prefer to use identity-first language (for example: some individuals on the autism spectrum may prefer to call themselves “autistic” rather than “a person with autism”; someone may identify as part of the Deaf community). Refer to people how they refer to themselves.
- Realize that impact matters, regardless of intention.
- Assume that students are capable and possess knowledge and skills.
- Support colleagues with disabilities.
- Tell a colleague that you are committing to the work of becoming a more inclusive educator. When they ask what this means, share these suggestions!
Beginning
- Add literature/resources from neurodivergent, disabled, and diverse authors to assigned course readings and class activities.
- Replace and/or supplement outdated readings.
- Provide electronic files of reading, resources, presentations, and other materials.
- Provide multiple sources and access points for assignment requirements and expectations (written descriptions, presentations, instructional videos, examples, rubrics).
- Be open and welcome student questions.
- Understand that all behavior is a function or indicative of something else; ask if students need support rather than punish them.
- Update course syllabi to include statements from the campus disability/accommodations resource office, a statement on academic diversity, religious observant policies, and campus mental health resources.
- Create community guidelines for discussions that include intention and impact/anti-bias language.
- Immediately address ableist/biased remarks in the classroom through discussion.
- Update course syllabi to include a statement of classroom environment that encourages regard for others and respects free speech while not tolerating hate speech.
- When presenting a visual/image, also provide a description of the image (alt text).
- Provide Closed Captioning on posted videos (lectures, resources, etc.).
- Incorporate the impact of and perspectives of groups of diverse abilities in policies of the past and present.
- Encourage students (and ourselves as faculty) to analyze research and articles to ensure they represent the perspectives of marginalized groups; follow up with questioning why and providing additional resources to promote self-advocacy.
- Revise course syllabi to include Student Learning Objectives, Essential Questions, and Course Descriptions related to self-reflection/advocacy/inclusion/preparing students to be agents of change.
- Examine course syllabi to make sure policies (late work, absence, participation grades, etc.) do not indirectly or directly target students with disabilities OR demonstrate bias toward neurotypical students (for example: a “cameras on” video policy in an online course may disproportionately punish students who require accommodations or have diverse learning needs; deductions for late work may punish students who need flexibility due to medical or mental health needs; requiring students to disclose personal details in order to receive extensions or incompletes disrespects students’ privacy of health and disability needs)
- Be willing to adjust your expectations through flexibility.
- Re-examine assignments and assessments for bias and exclusionary practices.
- Consider changing assessments from high-stakes timed tests to projects, homework, open-note/open-book take-home tests.
- Ask a colleague to audit your syllabi for readings/topics/policies as listed here.
- Collaborate with colleagues in accessibility services to better understand and integrate the services and supports available.
- Discuss the need to broaden participation and opportunities for people with disabilities in your department/college.
- Examine courses to make sure provided resources are organized and labeled clearly.
Advanced, all the previous steps plus…
- Advocate for (or lead!) professional development opportunities on inclusion.
- Participate in on- and off-campus events that promote disability acceptance and inclusive practices.
- Inform students of community opportunities they can take part in promoting disability acceptance or inclusive practices.
- Model examination/reflection on your own privilege (if neurotypical and able-bodied) or experience as a person with(out) a disability.
- Consider multimodal access to course participation (for example, HyFlex courses have in-person, video and asynchronous options for all students).
- Ask a colleague to informally observe your teaching and provide constructive feedback on your work of being an inclusive teacher.
- Invite guest speakers with disabilities to speak with your students about their experiences.
- Collaborate with an ADA coordinator to educate students and colleagues about accessibility on your campus.
- Collaborate with administrators and faculty who may be working toward DEI or inclusion initiatives on your campus.
- Seek input from resources such as the Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD) and Think College for postsecondary education program guidance for individuals with disabilities.
We believe that the responsibility of anti-oppressive work in higher education belongs to all and that making education accessible for individuals with disabilities advances freedom for all groups of people. These universally designed teaching practices, while necessary to increase access for individuals with disabilities, are beneficial for all individuals, regardless of identity status. Thank you for your work towards broadening access to higher education!

Laura N. Sarchet is an autistic self-advocate and Assistant Professor of Special Education at Niagara University who uses her experience as a neurodivergent person to raise awareness about autism and disability through research and practice.

Haoua M. Hamza is an associate professor in the Middle and Adolescence Education Department in the College of Education.

Rachel Bailey Jones, Professor of Education at Nazareth University, focuses their research and teaching on working for educational justice for LGBTQ+ students through an intersectional lens.

Jennifer E. Hartman is an Instructor-ABD in the Special Education Department at Niagara University.

Dennis P. Garland, Ph. D. is Associate Professor and Chair of the Special Education Department at Niagara University.

Maria R. Nader is passionate about providing equitable education for all students and supporting educators to achieve this goal. She serves as a Faculty Fellow in the Special Education Department at Niagara University and has held teaching and administrative roles at the local, state, and university levels in New York, Ohio, and Hawai’i.

References

Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education. 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass.

Coughlin, M. (2021). 10 things faculty need to understand about autism. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/10/20/lessons-teaching-students-autism-spectrum-opinion

Cushner, K., McClelland, A., Safford P., & Cushner, H. (2024). Human diversity in education. McGraw Hill.

The Metropolitan Center for Urban Education. (2008). Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Framework. New York State Education Department.

Sarchet, L. N. (2021). Faculty and staff: Training and outreach. University of Rochester Office of Disability Resources, adapted with permissions. https://www.rochester.edu/college/disability/assets/pdf/more-accessible-classroom.pdf

Waitoller, F. R., & King Thorius, K. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-86.3.366
Source link
May 19, 2025
What Your Students Aren’t Telling You: Listening, Learning, and Leading with Empathy – Faculty Focus
This article includes a free, open-access resource for educators: What Your Students Aren’t Telling You: Listening, Learning, and Leading with Empathy. The book, co-authored with students, offers actionable strategies and insights to help create more inclusive and humane learning environments. Download it here: https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/

In higher education, we often track student success through grades, credit hours, and retention rates. But behind those metrics are untold stories—narratives of resilience, confusion, silence, and strength. This project started with a deceptively simple question: What aren’t our students telling us?

After years of teaching, I noticed how often students carried academic, emotional, and personal burdens without sharing them. Not because they lacked courage, but because they didn’t feel invited to speak. Their stories, while occasionally requested, were rarely acted upon. I wanted to change that—not just by asking better questions, but by building an open-access platform that would amplify student voices and inform actionable change.

From Curiosity to Campuswide Inquiry

The project began in two large general education courses I teach at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign: FSHN 101: The Science of Food and FSHN 120: Contemporary Nutrition. These courses enroll a diverse cross-section of the student body, creating the perfect environment to listen broadly and learn deeply.

Over multiple semesters, more than 2,000 students voluntarily participated in IRB-approved surveys and follow-up interviews. These were not standard end-of-semester evaluations. The surveys included over 20 demographic questions—covering areas like housing, food security, disability status, and employment—followed by 15–40 experience-based questions exploring academic confidence, mental health, study habits, and perceptions of inclusion.

To capture both breadth and nuance, the surveys incorporated multiple question formats, such as Likert scales, rankings, multiple select, and open-ended prompts. Each semester, the surveys were refined based on student feedback and changing classroom dynamics.

We also conducted one-on-one interviews with select students, allowing them to share the context behind the data—what it feels like to study while housing-insecure, to navigate a disability without accommodations, or to sit in a classroom where your identity is invisible.

Building a Cross-Disciplinary Team

To guide this growing body of student insight into something useful for faculty, I turned to trusted collaborators with expertise across student development, pedagogy, and educational innovation.

Bonnie Hemrick, Director of Mental Health Promotion at Oregon State University, helped frame issues of student well-being and resilience. Dr. Emily Tarconish, a teaching professor in the College of Education, contributed her deep knowledge of Universal Design for Learning and accessible course design. Amy Leman, professor in Human Development and Family Studies, helped navigate the IRB process providing insight and guidance. Dr. Tony Zhang from Gies College of Business offered perspective on AI, ChatBot technology, and ethical academic support tools. Ann Fredricksen, a dedicated advocate with Disability Resources and Educational Services, kept disability at the center of our equity framework—not as an afterthought, but as a foundation.

Together, we weren’t just evaluating survey results. We were reframing how we think about student-centered learning.

Empowering Students as Authors and Analysts

One of the most powerful dimensions of this work was who got to tell the story. From the beginning, students weren’t just research subjects—they were research partners. Many were enrolled in leadership-focused sections of FSHN 101 and 120 and took on active roles in the analysis, writing, and design of the final open-access book: What Your Students Aren’t Telling You.

Their contributions weren’t theoretical. They were rooted in lived experience. Alysha Haverkos grounded our understanding of food insecurity and student basic needs. Ananya Mani shared honest, often-overlooked realities of international student life. Samarth Jain brought data visualization to life, uncovering trends and turning them into stories. Sheza Shaikh centered mental health and belonging in her writing. Tessa Wolf strengthened our commitment to inclusive course design.

These students didn’t just support the work—they shaped its voice. Each of them served as a reminder that students are not passive recipients of education. They are co-creators of it.

Key Takeaways That Changed Our Classrooms

Through data analysis, interviews, and student authorship, a set of clear—and deeply human—patterns emerged:
- Timed, high-stakes assessments caused the highest levels of stress, especially for students managing disabilities or mental health concerns.
- Flexibility in format and modality—such as recorded lectures, alternative assignments, or extended deadlines—made students feel supported, capable, and seen.
- Textbook format and cost mattered. Students appreciated transparency and choice when it came to required materials.
- Inclusive language, representation, and proactive instructor support all contributed to students’ sense of belonging and trust.
These findings don’t argue against academic rigor. Rather, they ask us to pair rigor with relevance and compassion. Many of the most impactful changes were not labor-intensive. A reworded syllabus, an anonymous feedback survey, or a mid-semester check-in can shift a student’s entire trajectory.

A Free, Open-Access Resource for Faculty

The insights we gathered are now published in What Your Students Aren’t Telling You, a free and open-access resource designed to support faculty, advisors, instructional designers, and anyone working to make higher education more humane and inclusive.

The book is both research-informed and experience-driven. Each chapter is co-authored with students who lived the realities we discuss. Their stories—of being brilliant but burned out, passionate but unheard, capable but unseen—bring the data to life.

You’ll find practical strategies, institutional recommendations, and reflective questions to help you translate student voices into action.

You can download it here:
👉 https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/

Why This Work Matters Now

We are teaching in a time of complexity—rising mental health challenges, widening equity gaps, and ongoing uncertainty in higher education. But we’re also teaching in a time of possibility.

Students are more willing than ever to share what they need—if we create the space to listen. They’re asking us not to fix everything, but to see them, to ask good questions, and to respond with care.

This project reinforced what many of us already know: better is possible. But it takes intentionality. It takes listening. And it takes the courage to rethink not just what we teach, but how we teach and why.

Final Thoughts: A Call to Listen and Lead

The most transformative teaching moments rarely come from perfectly delivered lectures. They come from real connection—from the moments we pause, ask, and truly hear our students.

The students in this project didn’t ask for perfection from faculty. They asked to be heard. And in return, they gave us tools, stories, and solutions that can reshape the future of our classrooms.

Let this be your starting point.

Explore the book. Share it with a colleague. Invite conversation in your next department meeting. And if it resonates with you, I welcome you to reach out. Let’s talk, collaborate, and keep learning from the people who know our classrooms best—our students.

Toni Gist is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Download the book at https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/
Source link
May 16, 2025
What Your Students Aren’t Telling You: Listening, Learning, and Leading with Empathy – Faculty Focus
This article includes a free, open-access resource for educators: What Your Students Aren’t Telling You: Listening, Learning, and Leading with Empathy. The book, co-authored with students, offers actionable strategies and insights to help create more inclusive and humane learning environments. Download it here: https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/

In higher education, we often track student success through grades, credit hours, and retention rates. But behind those metrics are untold stories—narratives of resilience, confusion, silence, and strength. This project started with a deceptively simple question: What aren’t our students telling us?

After years of teaching, I noticed how often students carried academic, emotional, and personal burdens without sharing them. Not because they lacked courage, but because they didn’t feel invited to speak. Their stories, while occasionally requested, were rarely acted upon. I wanted to change that—not just by asking better questions, but by building an open-access platform that would amplify student voices and inform actionable change.

From Curiosity to Campuswide Inquiry

The project began in two large general education courses I teach at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign: FSHN 101: The Science of Food and FSHN 120: Contemporary Nutrition. These courses enroll a diverse cross-section of the student body, creating the perfect environment to listen broadly and learn deeply.

Over multiple semesters, more than 2,000 students voluntarily participated in IRB-approved surveys and follow-up interviews. These were not standard end-of-semester evaluations. The surveys included over 20 demographic questions—covering areas like housing, food security, disability status, and employment—followed by 15–40 experience-based questions exploring academic confidence, mental health, study habits, and perceptions of inclusion.

To capture both breadth and nuance, the surveys incorporated multiple question formats, such as Likert scales, rankings, multiple select, and open-ended prompts. Each semester, the surveys were refined based on student feedback and changing classroom dynamics.

We also conducted one-on-one interviews with select students, allowing them to share the context behind the data—what it feels like to study while housing-insecure, to navigate a disability without accommodations, or to sit in a classroom where your identity is invisible.

Building a Cross-Disciplinary Team

To guide this growing body of student insight into something useful for faculty, I turned to trusted collaborators with expertise across student development, pedagogy, and educational innovation.

Bonnie Hemrick, Director of Mental Health Promotion at Oregon State University, helped frame issues of student well-being and resilience. Dr. Emily Tarconish, a teaching professor in the College of Education, contributed her deep knowledge of Universal Design for Learning and accessible course design. Amy Leman, professor in Human Development and Family Studies, helped navigate the IRB process providing insight and guidance. Dr. Tony Zhang from Gies College of Business offered perspective on AI, ChatBot technology, and ethical academic support tools. Ann Fredricksen, a dedicated advocate with Disability Resources and Educational Services, kept disability at the center of our equity framework—not as an afterthought, but as a foundation.

Together, we weren’t just evaluating survey results. We were reframing how we think about student-centered learning.

Empowering Students as Authors and Analysts

One of the most powerful dimensions of this work was who got to tell the story. From the beginning, students weren’t just research subjects—they were research partners. Many were enrolled in leadership-focused sections of FSHN 101 and 120 and took on active roles in the analysis, writing, and design of the final open-access book: What Your Students Aren’t Telling You.

Their contributions weren’t theoretical. They were rooted in lived experience. Alysha Haverkos grounded our understanding of food insecurity and student basic needs. Ananya Mani shared honest, often-overlooked realities of international student life. Samarth Jain brought data visualization to life, uncovering trends and turning them into stories. Sheza Shaikh centered mental health and belonging in her writing. Tessa Wolf strengthened our commitment to inclusive course design.

These students didn’t just support the work—they shaped its voice. Each of them served as a reminder that students are not passive recipients of education. They are co-creators of it.

Key Takeaways That Changed Our Classrooms

Through data analysis, interviews, and student authorship, a set of clear—and deeply human—patterns emerged:
- Timed, high-stakes assessments caused the highest levels of stress, especially for students managing disabilities or mental health concerns.
- Flexibility in format and modality—such as recorded lectures, alternative assignments, or extended deadlines—made students feel supported, capable, and seen.
- Textbook format and cost mattered. Students appreciated transparency and choice when it came to required materials.
- Inclusive language, representation, and proactive instructor support all contributed to students’ sense of belonging and trust.
These findings don’t argue against academic rigor. Rather, they ask us to pair rigor with relevance and compassion. Many of the most impactful changes were not labor-intensive. A reworded syllabus, an anonymous feedback survey, or a mid-semester check-in can shift a student’s entire trajectory.

A Free, Open-Access Resource for Faculty

The insights we gathered are now published in What Your Students Aren’t Telling You, a free and open-access resource designed to support faculty, advisors, instructional designers, and anyone working to make higher education more humane and inclusive.

The book is both research-informed and experience-driven. Each chapter is co-authored with students who lived the realities we discuss. Their stories—of being brilliant but burned out, passionate but unheard, capable but unseen—bring the data to life.

You’ll find practical strategies, institutional recommendations, and reflective questions to help you translate student voices into action.

You can download it here:
👉 https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/

Why This Work Matters Now

We are teaching in a time of complexity—rising mental health challenges, widening equity gaps, and ongoing uncertainty in higher education. But we’re also teaching in a time of possibility.

Students are more willing than ever to share what they need—if we create the space to listen. They’re asking us not to fix everything, but to see them, to ask good questions, and to respond with care.

This project reinforced what many of us already know: better is possible. But it takes intentionality. It takes listening. And it takes the courage to rethink not just what we teach, but how we teach and why.

Final Thoughts: A Call to Listen and Lead

The most transformative teaching moments rarely come from perfectly delivered lectures. They come from real connection—from the moments we pause, ask, and truly hear our students.

The students in this project didn’t ask for perfection from faculty. They asked to be heard. And in return, they gave us tools, stories, and solutions that can reshape the future of our classrooms.

Let this be your starting point.

Explore the book. Share it with a colleague. Invite conversation in your next department meeting. And if it resonates with you, I welcome you to reach out. Let’s talk, collaborate, and keep learning from the people who know our classrooms best—our students.

Toni Gist is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Download the book at https://publish.illinois.edu/gist-partnerships/what-your-students-arent-telling-you/
Source link
May 16, 2025
Faculty Survey Shows Need for Digital Accessibility Support
The U.S. Department of Justice introduced the Americans With Disabilities Act final rule for digital accessibility in 2024, requiring public colleges and universities to follow Web Content Accessibility Guidelines for ensuring that online programs, services and activities are accessible. These laws require institutions to update inaccessible documents and ensure new content follows accessibility requirements.

A recent survey by Anthology found that faculty members feel they lack sufficient support and access to resources to create an accessible online classroom environment, and they have a general lack of awareness of new ADA requirements.

Anthology’s survey—which included responses from 2,058 instructors at two- and four-year colleges and universities across the U.S.—highlights a need for professional development and institutional resources to help faculty meet students’ needs.

Supporting student success: Expanding accessibility isn’t just mandated by law; it has powerful implications for student retention and graduation outcomes.

Approximately one in five college students has a disability, up 10 percentage points from the previous decade, according to 2024 data from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. A majority of those students have a behavioral or emotional disability, such as attention deficit disorder, or a mental, emotional or psychiatric condition.

While a growing number of students with disabilities are enrolling in higher education, they are less likely than their peers without a disability to earn a degree or credential, due in part to the lack of accessibility or accommodations on campus.

Survey says: Only 10 percent of faculty believe their institution provides “absolutely adequate” tools to support students with disabilities, and 22 percent say they consider accessibility when designing course materials.

Instructors are largely unaware of the ADA’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines; one-third of survey respondents said they are “not at all” aware of the requirements, and 45 percent said they were aware but “unclear on the details.”

When asked about the barriers to making course content accessible, faculty members pointed to a lack of training (29 percent), lack of time (28 percent) and limited knowledge of available tools (27 percent) as the primary obstacles.

A lack of awareness among faculty members can hinder student use of supports as well. A 2023 survey found that only about half of college students are aware of accessibility and disability services, though 96 percent of college staff members said the resources are available.

In Anthology’s survey, 17 percent of instructors said they were unaware of what tools their institution provides to help students access coursework in different formats, and 30 percent said they were aware but didn’t share information with students.

Less experienced faculty members were more likely to say they haven’t considered accessibility or were unaware of ADA requirements; one-third of respondents with fewer than two years of teaching experience indicated they rarely or never consider accessibility when creating materials.

One in four faculty members indicated more training on best practices would help them make their digital content more accessible, as would having the time to update and review course materials.

Improving accessibility: Some colleges and universities are taking action to empower faculty members to increase accessibility in the classroom and beyond.
- The University of North Dakota in spring 2023 created an assistive technology lab, which trains faculty and staff members to make course resources accessible. The lab, led by the university’s Teaching Transformation and Development Academy, offers access to tech tools such as Adobe Acrobat Pro and the screen-reader software Job Access with Speech, for course content development. Lab staff also teach universal design principles and conduct course reviews, as needed.
- The State University of New York system created the SUNY Accessibility Advocates and Allies Faculty Fellowship program in January, designating 11 fellows from across the system to expand digital accessibility and universal design for learning practices at system colleges. Fellows will explore strategies to build a culture of access, share expertise and experience, connect with communities of practice, and design a plan to engage their campus community, among other responsibilities.
- The University of Iowa built a new digital hub for accessibility-related resources and information, providing a one-stop shop for campus members looking for support. The university is also soliciting questions from users to build out a regularly updated FAQ section of the website. Iowa has a designated Accessibility Task Force with 10 subcommittees that address various applications of accessibility needs, including within athletics, communication, health care, student life and teaching.
- Colorado State University has taken several steps to improve community compliance for accessibility, including offering free access to Siteimprove, a web-accessibility assessment tool that helps website developers and content managers meet accessibility standards and improve digital user experience. Siteimprove offers training resources to keep users engaged in best practices, as well as templates for creating content, according to CSU’s website. The university also has an accessibility framework to help faculty members bring electronic materials into compliance.
Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.
Source link
May 15, 2025
Why Faculty Buy-In Is the Key to Scale
Developmental edu ca tion reform has made significant strides in the past two decades, however, if the goal is equity, completion and lasting change in gateway courses, the work to reform developmental education isn’t done—not even close. Nationally, states have passed laws and higher education systems have issued mandates requiring the use of specific high-impact practices and restricting the offering of standalone remedial courses.

Institutions have redesigned placement systems to incorporate multiple measures and, with growing popularity, have begun using self-directed placement. Corequisite models, where students receive concurrent support for a gateway math or English course, have received increased attention and expansion. Using just-in-time content support and devoting time to student success techniques, corequisite courses have proven to support students’ retention rates.

While we know which practices are impactful, it is still common for them to be used alongside traditional approaches, such as stand-alone developmental courses and high-stakes placement tests. That is, these practices are not the default means of how students interact with gateway courses; they are an option. There are many reasons for this lack of scale, with skepticism from faculty being a common refrain from those in academic leadership.

Recent research reinforces what many of us in the trenches already know: Corequisite support is a powerful tool, but it is not the only solution to gateway course reform; it was never going to be. Without scaled and nuanced implementations, corequisite models are not enough on their own. Too often, states and institutions have pursued top-down solutions without sufficient attention to the people who impact scaled implementation the most: faculty.

In fact, reformers and leaders in higher education spaces may have overlooked the hardest and arguably most important part: the classroom. If gateway course reform is the goal, we have to shift from a mainly structural reform emphasis (e.g., pathways, corequisites and placement) to incorporating classroom reforms that impact curriculum, instruction and assessment. These changes are some of the most difficult ones to make but are also the ones that have shown to matter the most. Structural reform is essential, but so is reform in the space where learning occurs.

Why Early Reforms Didn’t Get Higher Education to a New Normal of Scale

Early corequisite reform efforts found initial momentum by engaging supportive policymakers and system leaders and by using clear levers for change such as legislation or funding changes. However, even where reforms have been adopted, outcomes have been mixed. Completion rates have increased in some states but remain below expectations set in goal initiatives, such as Illinois’s 60 by 25 and Tennessee’s Drive to 55. Despite a broad commitment to increasing equity in higher education, equity gaps by race, income and age persist. In states with strong shared governance structures or influential faculty unions, the pace of reform has been slower and more complex.

The common thread I’ve come to realize is this: Significant faculty cooperation and intentional faculty involvement are key to successful reforms at scale. I’ve seen this firsthand during my career in Illinois as a tenured math professor for many years who was also a union member and went on strike in 2015. Faculty have an incredible impact on students’ learning experience and outcomes; as such, faculty should be involved in the decision making that impacts them directly. However, in faculty-driven systems, the reality is that change is harder and takes longer. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible.

My company, Almy Education, has worked with dozens of institutions across governance models and states. We have learned that scaled reform comes from meaningfully working with faculty. While that work may be more challenging than going around faculty, it will allow an institution to get the roots of what can hold back a scaled implementation. We’ve found when we intentionally integrate faculty as part of the institutional conversation, we can achieve the following:
- Decide what courses and materials to remove or shift away from, not only add new ones.
- Choose how many courses and sections of stand-alone developmental courses will be retained, even if that may mean someone’s position at the institution changes.
- Determine how the class schedule needs to evolve to better support student needs and outcomes.
- Adjust student intake practices to the institution that have the greatest impact on outcomes, even if it means a shift in human and financial resources.
- Prioritize use and maintenance of data tools so that ongoing decision making is well informed.
- Set the expectation that academic and student affairs will continually work together to improve gateway course success, not in silos or temporarily during an initiative.
To reach scale, administrators, staff and faculty have to work together in an ongoing fashion as well as compromise for the greater good of student outcomes. We all have to own our roles in contributing to the aforementioned bulleted barriers when it comes to higher education reform. While usually unintended, they are barriers nonetheless. Reducing and removing these barriers to change often requires having hard conversations. The conversations are not always comfortable, but the results for students are worth it.

More students complete gateway math and English courses and establish course momentum when developmental education reform is implemented at scale and improved upon over time. Scaled reform allows for more students to complete two-year degrees and certificates and/or transfer to complete a four-year degree. Increased student completion results in well-prepared adults in the workforce, the outcome nearly everyone in higher education is working toward.

How to Effectively Integrate Faculty Into Your Reform Initiatives to Achieve Success at Scale

So how do administrators, staff and faculty work together on scaling gateway course reform, especially when resistance occurs? Many faculty are not resistant to reform; they are resistant to being handed a one-size-fits-all solution from someone who doesn’t understand their students, classrooms or institutional realities. Research has shown that there isn’t one particular way to implement reforms like corequisites that work the best; finding the best solution is a process that must include faculty in deliberate ways.

Faculty are also exhausted. The post-pandemic classroom is more demanding than ever, with student engagement seeming to be at an all-time low. Asking faculty to make massive changes without the support to do so can bring a reaction of resistance. Similarly, student affairs staff are also stretched thin with insufficient staffing and higher demands from students. They, too, need resources to make adjustments at scale that impact gateway course outcomes.

To minimize resistance and thoughtfully add support where it can have the most impact, there are tangible ways to assist faculty and staff with scaling implementation of gateway course reform at the institutional and classroom levels. In our work across two-year and four-year institutions, we’ve observed what works:
- Custom strategies tailored to each institution’s context, culture and capacity based on best practice and its own data.
- Embedded professional learning that supports both pedagogy and content that’s ongoing, not one-and-done.
- Support for using backward design strategies with gateway curriculum and instruction from the perspective of student needs, career pathways and transfer goals.
- Staffing and funding so that corequisites are paired with intentional support, providing not just more time, but better use of time.
- Deliberate use of corequisites where they make sense, alongside better-designed stand-alone options for a small number of students who may need them.
- Pathways that provide clarity to connect math courses to students’ actual goals and are implemented purposefully, not as an option.
- Focus on throughput, not just pass rates, and disaggregated outcomes that can support equity work.
This next phase of gateway course reform requires the higher education industry to go deeper. We will have to face the structural barriers and the pedagogical ones. We must be willing to say the quiet parts out loud and have difficult conversations. We must be brave enough to make decisions and ultimately changes that work for the good of the students. Those changes should have broad support, but they may not make each individual at an institution content 100 percent of the time. Doing this work is not simple or easy. But it is necessary if we want real reform at scale that lasts.

Kathleen Almy is the CEO and founder of Almy Education, specializing in gateway course reform at scale.
Source link
May 15, 2025
What Can College Instructors Offer Their Students in the Age of AI? – Faculty Focus

The Age of AI is Upon Us.

Generative AI is changing the landscape of higher education, in both good and bad ways (Balch, 2023). In a world where AI skills and fluency will be necessary and marketable, colleges and universities have made efforts to embrace AI in the classroom (e.g., Balch & Blanck, 2025; Butulis, 2023; Parks & Oslick, 2024) and to provide their students with instruction and practice in using AI in productive and ethical ways (e.g., Schoeder, 2024). As the capacity of AI grows to complete increasingly complex tasks, we (as college instructors) may wonder what we can offer our students in the age of AI. Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates recently stated in an interview that advances in AI will mean the humans will no longer be needed “for most things,” and stated that doctors and teachers in particular could be replaced by AI (CNBC, 2025). Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman stated the AI, because it will have the ability to complete tasks faster and more reliably than human workers, will change occupations broadly and will have a “hugely destabilizing” impact on the occupational landscape. Suleyman further stated that the fundamental purpose of AI is to be labor replacing (CNBC, 2025).

In higher education, we see our students use AI in many ways, to provide both authorized and unauthorized aid in their completion of assignments. We have crafted AI policies to help our students understand how AI is and is not permitted in our classes, and some of us have devoted energy to try to detect and police AI use in our classes. Given this reality in which AI can provide and synthesize information for and to our students at their requests in seconds, it is not completely paranoid to ask the question, “What can we, as college instructors, offer our students in the age of AI?”

Why College Instructors Matter: A Student’s Perspective

I had a conversation with one of my students recently about this exact question. He visited my office and in the course of our conversation he asked me how I thought I would use AI as a college instructor moving forward. I admit that I did not have the most thoughtful or eloquent answer as I discussed trying to keep up with advances, to recognize the utility of AI, but also to continue to foster critical thinking skills in my students. He told me that he uses ChatGPT all the time (and he is not alone among students in doing so; Kichizo Terry, 2023). He told me how quick and convenient it is. He surprised me, though, by telling me that he uses ChatGPT despite thinking that it would create “brain rot” in him and other students because it was doing their thinking for them. He then gave me the answer about what we can offer our students. He said that college instructors are not needed to give information to their students, at least not the foundations, definitions, etc., that comprise of a lot of traditional lecturing. He said that students could read much of the content off our PowerPoint slides and in the assigned readings without AI. What college instructors are needed for, he said, is to motivate our students to learn. We are needed to inspire students to come to class, to ask questions, to work out the answers with them. We are needed to engage them and to help them develop curiosity and critical thinking skills to offset their potential AI-induced brain rot. He said that students have had access to the information we teach prior to AI. They could always find and read the content on their own. What we can do as instructors is inspire them to learn the content, to ask their own questions, and to perhaps motivate their AI use to serve their own curiosity beyond the conversations in our classes.

Our Role as Instructors in the Age of AI

This is our role as instructors in the age of AI. This was our role as instructors prior to the advent of AI. As instructors, our role is not just to provide access to content. We cannot compete with the other resources available to our students in our fundamental content knowledge. Our role is to excite our students about the content. Our role is to inspire our students to learn that content. Our role is to bring PEACE to our classes so that our students will see the value in our classes and will engage in our classes to deepen their curiosity and their learning. PEACE is an acronym that stands for Preparation, Expertise, Authenticity, Caring, and Engagement (Saucier, 2019; Saucier, 2022; Saucier, Jones, Schiffer, & Renken, 2022). Beginning on the first days of our classes (Saucier, 2020; Saucier, Renken, Fulton, & Schiffer, 2024), we can demonstrate to our students that we have a plan, that we have content knowledge, that we are real living human beings with relatable thoughts and emotions, that we care about our students and their learning, and that we are enthusiastic and invested in the content we will learn with them. We can nurture our students’ intrinsic motivation to learn the content through demonstrations of our own engagement, activating the process of trickle-down engagement by which our own engagement as instructors promotes our students’ engagement and their subsequent learning (Saucier, Miller, Martens, & Jones, 2022). We can cue our engagement in the content by intentionally and explicitly sharing our own enthusiasm about the content and its value and importance (Saucier, Jones, Miller, Schiffer, Mills, & Renken, 2025).

AI is here. It is here to stay. It is a valuable tool that can accomplish important tasks quickly. Our students recognize its value and are already using it in many ways, both in and out of our classes. As college instructors, we are best served in providing our students with something that AI is not yet able to – our authentic investment in the learning, experiences, and success of our students. We have the ability to inspire our students’ wonder and curiosity in ways that will inspire them to be intrinsically motivated to learn and to keep learning. We should embrace this role as we teach in the age of AI.

Donald A. Saucier, Ph.D. (2001, University of Vermont) is a University Distinguished Teaching Scholar and Professor of Psychological Sciences at Kansas State University. Saucier has published more than 100 peer-reviewed journal articles and is a Fellow of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, and the Midwestern Psychological Association. His awards and honors include the University Distinguished Faculty Award for Mentoring of Undergraduate Students in Research, the Presidential Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching, and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues Teaching Resource Prize. Saucier is also the Faculty Associate Director of the Teaching and Learning Center at Kansas State University and offers a YouTube channel called “Engage the Sage” that describes his teaching philosophy, practices, and experiences.

References

Balch, D. E. (2023, August 25^th). Artificial intelligence: The rise of ChatGPT and its implications. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-with-technology-articles/artificial-intelligence-the-rise-of-chatgpt-and-its-implications/

Balch, D. E., & Blanck, R. (2025, March 31^st). AI-powered teaching: Practical tools for community college faculty. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-with-technology-articles/ai-powered-teaching-practical-tools-for-community-college-faculty/

Butulis, M. (2023, December 6^th). Embracing artificial intelligence in the classroom. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-with-technology-articles/embracing-artificial-intelligence-in-the-classroom/

CNBC (2025). “Bill Gates: Within 10 years, AI will replace many doctors and teachers—humans won’t be needed ‘for most things’.” Published March 26, 2025.

Kichizio Terry, O. (2023, May 12^th). I’m a student. You have no idea how much we’re using ChatGPT. Chronicles of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/im-a-student-you-have-no-idea-how-much-were-using-chatgpt

Parks, M., & Oslick, M. E. (2024, May 22^nd). Empowering student learning: Navigating artificial intelligence in the college classroom. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-with-technology-articles/empowering-student-learning-navigating-artificial-intelligence-in-the-college-classroom/

Saucier, D. A. (2019, September 9^th). Bringing PEACE to the classroom. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/philosophy-of-teaching/bringing-peace-to-the-classroom/

Saucier, D. A. (2020). Rocking your first day of class (and beyond!). E-xcellence in Teaching, Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Retrieved from: https://teachpsych.org/E-xcellence-in-Teaching-Blog/8454525

Saucier, D. A. (2022, February 23^rd). Bringing PEACE to support all students. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2022/02/23/professors-should-learn-about-respond-students-unique-experiences-opinion

Saucier, D. A., Jones, T. L., Miller, S. S., Schiffer, A. A., Mills, H. D., & Renken, N. D. (2025). Cueing engagement: Applying the trickle-down engagement model to instructors’ in-class behaviors. Teaching of Psychology, 52(1), 45-52.

Saucier, D. A., Jones, T. L., Schiffer, A. A., & Renken, N. D. (2022). The empathetic course design perspective. Applied Economics Teaching Resources, 4(4), 101-111.

Saucier, D. A., Miller, S. S., Martens, A. L., & Jones, T. L. (2022). Trickle down engagement: Effects of perceived teacher and student engagement on learning outcomes. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 33(2), 168-179.

Saucier, D. A., Renken, N. D., Fulton, C. E., & Schiffer, A. A. (2024, August 26^th). Making memories on the first day of class. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/teaching-strategies/making-memories-on-the-first-day-of-class/

Schoeder, R. (2024, July 31^st). Our responsibility to teach AI to students. Insider Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/blogs/online-trending-now/2024/07/31/our-responsibility-teach-ai-students

Source link

May 12, 2025
Understanding the Impact of Workplace Incivility in Higher Education – Faculty Focus
“Did you hear that another team member, someone we all knew and worked with, quit today?” said a colleague. “Isn’t this the third one since last month? What is happening in that department?” was my counter question, echoing the concerns of many in the office. Have you ever experienced a similar situation at your workplace and wondered what caused this sudden voluntary attrition? Was it a competitor higher education institution stealing trained resources, or was there a sudden need for higher salaries due to the current economic factors, etc.? After a week, a LinkedIn post mentioned, “… it was time to move forward, as I had hit a breaking point. Quitting is the first step towards finding a healthy workplace!”

Research has consistently shown that women are more susceptible to workplace incivility than men. However, this trend can be mitigated when the direct supervisor demonstrates ethical leadership (Young et al., 2021). This finding offers a glimmer of hope, suggesting that a change in leadership could significantly influence employee morale. Is the stress of adapting to a new management at work a contributing factor? Or is it a case of leadership failing to adjust to the existing culture? Or is it due to incivility in the workplace? These are the questions that keep on occurring.

My experience working at an institution primarily for women has sparked my curiosity and deepened my concern. I often pondered whether these departures were triggered by a sudden event or a long-standing issue that had been suppressed. This connection to the topic has driven me to delve into the reasons behind abrupt job resignations among women in public organizations and the need to understand their impact on resources, policies, etc., in higher education.

What is Workplace Incivility?

According to the research of Tolkerson, Holm, Bäckström, and Schad, numerous factors contribute to the perpetuation of workplace incivility, including the importance of organizational aspects and experiencing incivility from others. Workplace incivility has been defined as “…low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target, in violation of workplace norms for mutual respect. Uncivil behaviors are characteristically rude and discourteous, displaying a lack of regard for others” (Torkelson et al., 2016).

In her Harvard Business Review article, Christine Porath, professor of management at Georgetown University, wrote that most leaders need to recognize tangible costs. “Through a poll of 800 managers and employees in 17 industries, we learned how people’s reactions play out.” Among workers who have been on the receiving end of incivility:
- 48% intentionally decreased their work effort.
- 47% intentionally decreased the time spent at work.
- 38% intentionally decreased the quality of their work.
- 80% lost work time worrying about the incident.
- 63% lost work time avoiding the offender.
- 66% said that their performance declined.
- 78% said that their commitment to the organization declined.
- 12% said they left their job because of the uncivil treatment.
- 25% admitted to taking their frustration out on customers.” (Porath & Pearson, 2013)
In a webinar on AACN, Addressing the Harmful Effects of Gaslighting in Academic Nursing, Cynthia Clark, founder of Civility Matters, Professor Emeritus at Boise State University, and award-winning professor, scholar, and author who has done extensive research on workplace incivility, discussed “Gaslighting in Academia” (Profile of Dr. Cynthia Clark). This intrigued my curiosity and inspired me to explore this topic.

What is Gaslighting?

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation that involves making someone doubt their reality, memory, or perception. It can occur in various contexts, such as interpersonal relationships, politics, media, and workplaces. Gaslighting can have serious adverse effects on the mental health and well-being of the victims, such as anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, confusion, and loss of trust (Sarkis, 2018).

Gaslighting and Workplace Incivility in Higher Education

While workplace incivility is a broader term that refers to any rude, disrespectful, or aggressive behavior that violates the norms of mutual respect and professionalism, Gaslighting can be considered a specific and extreme form of workplace incivility that involves not only disrespecting or harming the target but also manipulating their sense of reality and identity (Clark, 2024). Individuals or groups can perpetrate gaslighting, which can be intentional or unintentional, depending on the motives, awareness, and power dynamics of the actors involved. Gaslighting can be manifested in various ways, such as lying, denying, withholding, trivializing, blaming, or gaslighting by proxy (Sarkis, 2018). Gaslighting can occur in multiple contexts, but it is especially harmful in the workplace, undermining employees’ trust, confidence, and performance (Clark, 2024).

In higher education, gaslighting can occur when faculty, staff, or students are subjected to subtle or overt harassment, discrimination, bullying, or abuse by their colleagues, supervisors, or peers. For example, a faculty member may be gaslighted by their administrators who constantly undermine their achievements, question their competence, or deny them opportunities for promotion or recognition. A staff member may be gaslighted by their co-workers who spread rumors, exclude them from social events, or sabotage their work. A student may be gaslighted by their instructor who belittles their contributions, ignores their requests, or grades them unfairly. These examples illustrate how gaslighting can create a hostile, toxic, and unhealthy work environment in higher education institutions (Clark, 2024).

Inefficient Workplaces

Incivility adds to faculty/administrator stress levels, erodes self-esteem, damages relationships, threatens workplace safety and quality of life, and negatively impacts faculty recruitment, retention, and job satisfaction. Therefore, creating and sustaining communities of civility is imperative for all academic work environments (Clark et al., 2021). Gaslighting can have severe and lasting effects on the psychological, emotional, and physical health of the targets, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), dissociation, chronic pain, and suicidal ideation (Stern, 2018).

Nation’s Current Workplace Landscape

According to the Surgeon General’s Framework for Workplace Mental Health and Well-Being, one of the Current Priorities of the U.S. Surgeon General is “Workplace Well-Being.” The survey suggested that 76% of U.S. workers reported at least one symptom of a mental health condition, 84% of respondents said their workplace conditions had contributed to at least one mental health challenge, and 81% of workers reported that they would be looking for workplaces that support mental health in the future (Written Document on Workplace WellBeing.2022). To support workplace wellbeing, creating a plan with the following five essential components can help reimagine workplaces as engines of wellbeing.

The five essentials of the framework are:
- Connection and Community
- Opportunities for Growth (Written Document on Workplace WellBeing.2022)
Recommendations

Regular assessments are needed, and the data needs to be studied at higher educational institutions. HR, Compliance, and Ethics Policies should include examples to increase awareness of various levels of incivility. Before quitting, employees should be aware of the available options and use forums to discuss examples to be self-aware. Providing periodic surveys and reviews, updating training based on feedback and current issues for employees at higher education on HR policies, the Code of Ethics, and faculty ombudsmen can help prevent and address gaslighting and other workplace incivility.

When employees quit, it is no longer uncommon to suddenly walk out of the door without a courtesy notice period or transition report of their current responsibilities. While employers are concerned about employee performance and evaluations for merit raises, retention, etc., they should be publicly ranked based on their performance towards employees working in government and non-profit organizations. We have all heard the phrase “Treat others just as you want to be treated!”, but are we all implementing it at our workplaces?

Ranjitha Rao is the Budget/Financial Analyst Manager at the College of Nursing at Texas Woman’s University. She is dedicated to supporting academic and administrative goals through financial oversight. As an active member of the TWU Staff Council, she fosters a spirit of unified community among staff members and provides opportunities for their democratic representation. Through her involvement in the Staff Council, she promotes a positive and collaborative work environment and serves as a representative advisory member, presenting recommendations to university leadership. Ranjitha is also committed to fostering healthy workspaces, ensuring faculty, staff, and students thrive in a supportive and productive environment. Ranjitha holds a background in engineering and is currently a Ph.D. student focusing on leadership in higher education. She also holds a Master’s in Business Administration, with an emphasis in Accounting and Management. Additionally, as an adjunct, Ranjitha has taught first-year incoming classes, focusing on curriculum and strategic success, to help students transition smoothly into their academic journeys, along with accounting and healthcare administration classes for undergraduates. Ranjitha’s research interests include competency-based education, workforce development, leadership, management, and financial well-being in higher education. In her free time, Ranjitha enjoys exploring financial trends, participating in community events, and contributing to initiatives that promote financial literacy and education.

References

Anderson, J. (2023, August 2,). Five Essentials for Workplace Well-Being. https://blogs.ifas.ufl.edu/orangeco/2023/08/02/five-essentials-for-workplace-well-being/

Clark, C. M., & Fey, M. K. (2019). Fostering Civility in Learning Conversations: Introducing the PAAIL Communication Strategy.10.1097/NNE.0000000000000731

Clark, C. (2019). Combining Cognitive Rehearsal, Simulation, and Evidence-Based Scripting to Address Incivility.10.1097/NNE.0000000000000563

Clark, C. , Landis, T. & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2021). National Study on Faculty and Administrators’ Perceptions of Civility and Incivility in Nursing Education. Nurse Educator, 46 (5), 276-283. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000948

Porath, C., & Pearson, C.The Price of Incivility. January – February 2013, https://hbr.org/2013/01/the-price-of-incivility

Torkelson, E., Holm, K., Bäckström, M., & Schad, E. (2016). Factors contributing to the perpetration of workplace incivility: the importance of organizational aspects and experiencing incivility from others. Work & Stress, 30(2), 115-131. 10.1080/02678373.2016.1175524

Young, K. A., Hassan, S., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2021). Towards understanding workplace incivility: gender, ethical leadership and personal control. Public Management Review, 23(1), 31-52. 10.1080/14719037.2019.1665701
Source link
May 9, 2025