Tag: Focus

A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus
In online nursing education, a “nest” is more than a metaphor—it is a learning environment where students feel safe, supported, and guided as they prepare to enter professional practice. Drawing on my experience as a nursing educator, I developed the NEST framework—Nurturing, Esteeming and Encouraging, Supporting with Sensitive Listening, and Trust-building—to help faculty of any discipline create virtual classrooms where can students thrive. This framework provides actionable strategies that foster engagement, confidence, and professional growth, ensuring students succeed academically while cultivating the values and skills essential not only for nursing but for any profession they pursue.

Nurturing: Creating Safety and Connection in Virtual Classrooms

Nurturing in online education involves creating conditions where students feel seen, valued, and supported. Practical strategies include:
- Personalized reminders about assignments and deadlines
- Recognition of standout work or consistent effort
- Targeted assistance during challenging weeks
- Mid-week check-ins at key points (weeks 3, 6, and near the end of the course)
- Weekly announcements that reassure students they are not navigating the course alone and invite collaboration
These intentional acts convey: you matter, I care about you and your growth, and I am here to support you. By nurturing students online, faculty shift from simply delivering content to facilitating discovery and meaningful learning, helping students internalize that professional values—like compassion, competence, collaboration, and understanding—are essential in nursing and in any career they pursue.

Esteeming and Encouraging: Recognizing Strengths Online

Esteeming affirms each student’s value, while encouragement supports their belief in their ability to meet challenges. In virtual classrooms, this can include:
- Highlighting thoughtful discussion board posts
- Sending brief messages to recognize consistent effort
- Acknowledging creative approaches to assignments
- Reframing mistakes as opportunities for growth
Esteeming and encouraging students create a learning environment that feels less like a points-based performance and more like a journey of discovery. Students flourish when they feel recognized and supported—lessons they carry into professional nursing practice and other careers, where acknowledging the efforts of colleagues and clients enhances collaboration, engagement, and overall effectiveness.

Supporting and Listening: Meeting Students Where They Are

Support in online education involves being present and responsive. Sensitive listening attends to both spoken and unspoken concerns. Many nursing students balance coursework, clinical hours, employment, and family responsibilities. Practical strategies include:
- Timely, compassionate responses to emails
- Flexibility with deadlines when life circumstances intervene
- Online opportunities for students to share experiences and reflect
- Structured activities like mid-week check-ins, collaborative discussions, and reflective journaling
These strategies model sensitive listening and support—skills students carry into nursing and other professional settings, fostering trust, collaboration, and meaningful connections with colleagues, clients, and communities.

Trust-Building: The Cornerstone of Engagement in Online Learning

Trust is essential for engagement in online learning. Students participate fully when they believe instructors are fair, consistent, and invested in their success. Trust is fostered online through:
- Clear, consistent communication
- Well-structured, predictable course design
- Timely feedback that reassures students they are supported
- Avoiding inconsistencies in messaging or directions, which can undermine trust
By demonstrating reliability and responsiveness, faculty model behaviors students can emulate in professional practice, strengthening relationships with patients and colleagues.

Carrying the NEST Forward: From Online Classroom to Professional Practice

The NEST framework extends beyond online classrooms. Students carry lessons of being nurtured, esteemed, supported, listened to, and trusted into every professional interaction. Faculty who model NEST help students internalize not just knowledge and skills, but the values that define my field of nursing practice—such as compassionate care, encouragement, support, sensitive listening, and trust—valuable principles that apply across any discipline and profession.

Students may leave the online course, but they take with them habits of mind and heart cultivated in the nest: confidence from nurturing, resilience from encouragement, empathy shaped by listening, and integrity rooted in trust. By creating an online nest where learning flourishes, faculty prepare students not only to succeed academically but to enrich the lives of those they serve—whether colleagues, clients, or communities in any professional field.

Sandra L. Daisley, MSN, RN, is a nursing educator with extensive experience in online pre-licensure programs. She is passionate about creating student-centered learning environments that foster engagement, professional growth, and the development of compassionate, competent nurses. Sandy is the creator of the NEST framework, a practical model for supporting students in virtual classrooms.
Source link
November 21, 2025
A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus
In online nursing education, a “nest” is more than a metaphor—it is a learning environment where students feel safe, supported, and guided as they prepare to enter professional practice. Drawing on my experience as a nursing educator, I developed the NEST framework—Nurturing, Esteeming and Encouraging, Supporting with Sensitive Listening, and Trust-building—to help faculty of any discipline create virtual classrooms where can students thrive. This framework provides actionable strategies that foster engagement, confidence, and professional growth, ensuring students succeed academically while cultivating the values and skills essential not only for nursing but for any profession they pursue.

Nurturing: Creating Safety and Connection in Virtual Classrooms

Nurturing in online education involves creating conditions where students feel seen, valued, and supported. Practical strategies include:
- Personalized reminders about assignments and deadlines
- Recognition of standout work or consistent effort
- Targeted assistance during challenging weeks
- Mid-week check-ins at key points (weeks 3, 6, and near the end of the course)
- Weekly announcements that reassure students they are not navigating the course alone and invite collaboration
These intentional acts convey: you matter, I care about you and your growth, and I am here to support you. By nurturing students online, faculty shift from simply delivering content to facilitating discovery and meaningful learning, helping students internalize that professional values—like compassion, competence, collaboration, and understanding—are essential in nursing and in any career they pursue.

Esteeming and Encouraging: Recognizing Strengths Online

Esteeming affirms each student’s value, while encouragement supports their belief in their ability to meet challenges. In virtual classrooms, this can include:
- Highlighting thoughtful discussion board posts
- Sending brief messages to recognize consistent effort
- Acknowledging creative approaches to assignments
- Reframing mistakes as opportunities for growth
Esteeming and encouraging students create a learning environment that feels less like a points-based performance and more like a journey of discovery. Students flourish when they feel recognized and supported—lessons they carry into professional nursing practice and other careers, where acknowledging the efforts of colleagues and clients enhances collaboration, engagement, and overall effectiveness.

Supporting and Listening: Meeting Students Where They Are

Support in online education involves being present and responsive. Sensitive listening attends to both spoken and unspoken concerns. Many nursing students balance coursework, clinical hours, employment, and family responsibilities. Practical strategies include:
- Timely, compassionate responses to emails
- Flexibility with deadlines when life circumstances intervene
- Online opportunities for students to share experiences and reflect
- Structured activities like mid-week check-ins, collaborative discussions, and reflective journaling
These strategies model sensitive listening and support—skills students carry into nursing and other professional settings, fostering trust, collaboration, and meaningful connections with colleagues, clients, and communities.

Trust-Building: The Cornerstone of Engagement in Online Learning

Trust is essential for engagement in online learning. Students participate fully when they believe instructors are fair, consistent, and invested in their success. Trust is fostered online through:
- Clear, consistent communication
- Well-structured, predictable course design
- Timely feedback that reassures students they are supported
- Avoiding inconsistencies in messaging or directions, which can undermine trust
By demonstrating reliability and responsiveness, faculty model behaviors students can emulate in professional practice, strengthening relationships with patients and colleagues.

Carrying the NEST Forward: From Online Classroom to Professional Practice

The NEST framework extends beyond online classrooms. Students carry lessons of being nurtured, esteemed, supported, listened to, and trusted into every professional interaction. Faculty who model NEST help students internalize not just knowledge and skills, but the values that define my field of nursing practice—such as compassionate care, encouragement, support, sensitive listening, and trust—valuable principles that apply across any discipline and profession.

Students may leave the online course, but they take with them habits of mind and heart cultivated in the nest: confidence from nurturing, resilience from encouragement, empathy shaped by listening, and integrity rooted in trust. By creating an online nest where learning flourishes, faculty prepare students not only to succeed academically but to enrich the lives of those they serve—whether colleagues, clients, or communities in any professional field.

Sandra L. Daisley, MSN, RN, is a nursing educator with extensive experience in online pre-licensure programs. She is passionate about creating student-centered learning environments that foster engagement, professional growth, and the development of compassionate, competent nurses. Sandy is the creator of the NEST framework, a practical model for supporting students in virtual classrooms.
Source link
November 21, 2025
6 Effective Ways to Build Attention and Boost Student Participation – Faculty Focus
Any educator can attest to the mounting challenge of maintaining student attention in the classroom. Students’ exposure to digital media from a very young age has both diminished their capacity to pay attention and led them to crave interactions with devices during times when their use is not essential.

Yet, engagement matters. Students’ capacity to participate in activities and “be present” serves as a powerful indicator of how they will fare in engagement with people and academics. Here are a few ways to foster that engagement, despite the challenges:
Source link
November 19, 2025
The AI Teammate: Three Roles to Build Student AI Fluency – Faculty Focus
AI is now embedded in teaching and learning. As educators, how do we help students benefit from AI without slipping into dependency, surface-level work, or ethical misconduct? I’ve found a helpful way to clarify conversations with students (and with myself) by thinking of AI as a teammate (or teammates) with clearly defined roles: the Tasker, the Draftsmith, and the Facilitator.

Imagine a meeting of a team of people: someone handles logistics, someone sketches ideas, someone pushes discussion. Framing AI this way has made it easier to talk about students remaining responsible for how and to what purposes they use AI. My approach draws on recent scholarship about AI reshaping how teams work (Dell’Acqua et al., 2025).

The AI Teammates

The Tasker

The Tasker deals with repetitive or procedural work such as managing our calendars, formatting citations, or cleaning datasets. These tasks often are tedious but essential and using AI frees time that can be focused on deeper thinking. To use a Tasker, we can set up a Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with AI, use embedded AI tools such as Copilot in MS:Word or Claude in MS:Excel or Google sheets, or create what is currently referred to as an LLM “Agent.” As Farri & Rosani (2025) describe in their HBR guide to generative AI for managers, we can use AI to lighten the load on procedural chores, affording us the time and energy to engage more with deeper thinking and learning.

Because AI output may contain mistakes, students must learn to identify the levels of risks they believe are acceptable for the given task before turning to AI and must validate its output. The level of validation required may depend on the risk level, needed accuracy and quality, and current knowledge of the tool’s metrics.

We approach the Tasker differently than we do the Draftsmith and Facilitator: we can set our RPA or Agent up to run and only involve ourselves in its applications until we’re sure it can work independently and accurately, or we can trigger the Tasker each time we need it. Students must learn to set aside sufficient validation time before designing a Tasker.

The Draftsmith

The Draftsmith can spot passive voice in students’ writing and explain why it’s problematic, convert an outline into a draft of a PowerPoint, and produce study tools such as multiple choice or essay questions, podcasts, and videos from their course notes. My engineering students have prompted their Draftsmiths using a prompt library I created specifically for them to help them convert their design clients’ stated needs into project requirements. Bussgang (2025) has pointed out how small steps like these can dramatically boost productivity without sacrificing learning.

While AI may generate text or ideas, the final product must be the student’s own (Duffy, 2025). I teach my students that, much to their dismay, they must develop their own writers’ voice before using AI and that this process can take years and many writing efforts! Our writer’s voice presents us to our bosses, colleagues, and clients given that much of our communication at work is through emails. College is the best time to invest in this effort because it’s rare to get opportunities later to do so.

From students’ comments, I believe they use AI in the Draftsmith role more frequently than the other two roles. Few realize the Draftsmith increases cognitive load when they use it correctly and decreases their learning when they use it incorrectly!

It increases the load because they must provide the AI with significant context for it to provide anything other than banal, common prose that flattens their own voice (Purohit, 2025) or “creative” prose that is meaningless. AI use decreases their learning when they use it to write first and second drafts because writing sharpens our thinking and embeds learned concepts into our long-term memory.

The Facilitator

Instead of using AI to generate content (the Draftsmith), the Facilitator is a use of AI as a thinking partner (Solis, 2024 and HBSP’s ManageMentor course 2025). A student might ask AI to play devil’s advocate, suggest counterarguments, or pose probing questions when their paper’s argument needs strengthening. AI might help simulate a stakeholder’s perspective with whom the student role plays to prepare for a meeting or consider how their ideas might land with their student group peers. My students have used AI in the Facilitator role to pressure test their design ideas, review their research plans, and prepare to give presentations. When students use the Facilitator, they’re reflecting (Harbridge, 2025) and thereby deepening their learning.

To get the best value from AI as a Facilitator, the student must approach it with the expectation that it will take considerable time. The Facilitator provides meaningful interaction only when the student gives it their full attention, asks probing questions, provides significant context, and is patient. They may need to iterate, restating their prompts or providing more information, and to ask the LLM to be candid and critical. They may need to step away from the LLM, perhaps try a different one or come back on another day, when it goes off in the wrong direction.

We have become too used to scanning an LLM’s output. Just as I would not expect a student who came to me for career advice to start scrolling on their phone while I’m talking, I must teach them to give their full attention to the Facilitator.

What I’m suggesting here is not a list of use cases. Instead, I’m providing students with an approach to using AI where they plan before typing into the chat box, see its best use as a Facilitator that partners with them in learning and development, and recognize that validation and reading output will be time and cognitively intensive.

What This Means for Teaching

I’ve found that when I teach these roles to students before assigning homework, they make better choices regarding when and how to use AI. Here are some tactics I’ve tried that have netted positive results:
- Design assignments that invite different roles. For example, ask students to begin with AI as a Tasker (perhaps organizing sources or cleaning a dataset), then shift to using the Draftsmith to help them find passive voice or other syntax issues in a paper, and finally draw on the Facilitator to find the holes in their arguments before submitting a final paper. Intentionally stating the role each assignment calls for and requiring them to state when they’re using the Tasker, Draftsmith, or Facilitator solidifies their understanding that their approach to AI differs by role.
- Be clear about where AI helps and where it doesn’t. AI can help with structure, suggestions, and ideation, but it cannot replace revision, critical thinking, or the development of one’s own voice. This must be intentionally taught by including questions requiring students to reflect on what worked and where the AI led them astray in any assignments allowing AI use.
- Encourage disclosure. I talk extensively about “Total AI Transparency”, ensuring students that I will note any use of AI in my communications with them and I expect the same from them. Trust has broken down as both students and instructors believe the other is using AI when they’re not and failing to recognize when they are. Owning up to my own use and being clear on why I used AI for that task encourages students to do the same.
Closing Thoughts

We need to steer students away from extremes of either refusing to use AI at all or letting it rob them of learning. By distinguishing the roles of Tasker, Draftsmith, and Facilitator, we clarify our expectations of students. More importantly, we help them become more deliberate in their approach, preparing them to be AI-fluent.

Illysa Izenberg is an Associate Teaching Professor for the Center for Leadership Education in the Whiting School of Engineering at The Johns Hopkins University. She has been teaching management and business ethics to graduate and undergraduate students via Face-to-Face, online, and blended courses since 2006. Izenberg earned her MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business and is the winner of both the Alumni and Pond Excellence in Teaching Awards (2016 and 2020 respectively).

References

Bussgang, J. (2025, May 20). 3 small steps to 10x your productivity with AI this week. The Experimentation Machine. https://experimentationmachine.com/p/10x-this-week

Duffy, A. (2025, April 11). Your CEO just said ‘Use AI or else.’ Here’s what to do next. Every. https://every.to/p/your-ceo-just-said-use-ai-or-else-here-s-what-to-do-next

Farri, E., & Rosani, G. (2025). HBR guide to generative AI for managers. Harvard Business Review Press.

Gross, A. (2025). AI Crash Course [Online course]. SectionAI. https://www.sectionschool.com/courses/ai-crash-course-workshop

Harbridge, R. (2025). AI for Team Leaders [Online course]. SectionAI.

Harvard Business Publishing. (2025). Help your team harness generative AI (Lesson 1). In Leading with generative AI [Online course]. Harvard ManageMentor.

Purohit, R. (Host). (2025, June 18). The man inside the minds of the people building AGI [Audio podcast episode]. In AI & I. Every.

Solis, B. (2024, November). Train your brain to work creatively with Gen AI. Harvard Business School Publishing.
Source link
November 17, 2025
The AI Teammate: Three Roles to Build Student AI Fluency – Faculty Focus
AI is now embedded in teaching and learning. As educators, how do we help students benefit from AI without slipping into dependency, surface-level work, or ethical misconduct? I’ve found a helpful way to clarify conversations with students (and with myself) by thinking of AI as a teammate (or teammates) with clearly defined roles: the Tasker, the Draftsmith, and the Facilitator.

Imagine a meeting of a team of people: someone handles logistics, someone sketches ideas, someone pushes discussion. Framing AI this way has made it easier to talk about students remaining responsible for how and to what purposes they use AI. My approach draws on recent scholarship about AI reshaping how teams work (Dell’Acqua et al., 2025).

The AI Teammates

The Tasker

The Tasker deals with repetitive or procedural work such as managing our calendars, formatting citations, or cleaning datasets. These tasks often are tedious but essential and using AI frees time that can be focused on deeper thinking. To use a Tasker, we can set up a Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with AI, use embedded AI tools such as Copilot in MS:Word or Claude in MS:Excel or Google sheets, or create what is currently referred to as an LLM “Agent.” As Farri & Rosani (2025) describe in their HBR guide to generative AI for managers, we can use AI to lighten the load on procedural chores, affording us the time and energy to engage more with deeper thinking and learning.

Because AI output may contain mistakes, students must learn to identify the levels of risks they believe are acceptable for the given task before turning to AI and must validate its output. The level of validation required may depend on the risk level, needed accuracy and quality, and current knowledge of the tool’s metrics.

We approach the Tasker differently than we do the Draftsmith and Facilitator: we can set our RPA or Agent up to run and only involve ourselves in its applications until we’re sure it can work independently and accurately, or we can trigger the Tasker each time we need it. Students must learn to set aside sufficient validation time before designing a Tasker.

The Draftsmith

The Draftsmith can spot passive voice in students’ writing and explain why it’s problematic, convert an outline into a draft of a PowerPoint, and produce study tools such as multiple choice or essay questions, podcasts, and videos from their course notes. My engineering students have prompted their Draftsmiths using a prompt library I created specifically for them to help them convert their design clients’ stated needs into project requirements. Bussgang (2025) has pointed out how small steps like these can dramatically boost productivity without sacrificing learning.

While AI may generate text or ideas, the final product must be the student’s own (Duffy, 2025). I teach my students that, much to their dismay, they must develop their own writers’ voice before using AI and that this process can take years and many writing efforts! Our writer’s voice presents us to our bosses, colleagues, and clients given that much of our communication at work is through emails. College is the best time to invest in this effort because it’s rare to get opportunities later to do so.

From students’ comments, I believe they use AI in the Draftsmith role more frequently than the other two roles. Few realize the Draftsmith increases cognitive load when they use it correctly and decreases their learning when they use it incorrectly!

It increases the load because they must provide the AI with significant context for it to provide anything other than banal, common prose that flattens their own voice (Purohit, 2025) or “creative” prose that is meaningless. AI use decreases their learning when they use it to write first and second drafts because writing sharpens our thinking and embeds learned concepts into our long-term memory.

The Facilitator

Instead of using AI to generate content (the Draftsmith), the Facilitator is a use of AI as a thinking partner (Solis, 2024 and HBSP’s ManageMentor course 2025). A student might ask AI to play devil’s advocate, suggest counterarguments, or pose probing questions when their paper’s argument needs strengthening. AI might help simulate a stakeholder’s perspective with whom the student role plays to prepare for a meeting or consider how their ideas might land with their student group peers. My students have used AI in the Facilitator role to pressure test their design ideas, review their research plans, and prepare to give presentations. When students use the Facilitator, they’re reflecting (Harbridge, 2025) and thereby deepening their learning.

To get the best value from AI as a Facilitator, the student must approach it with the expectation that it will take considerable time. The Facilitator provides meaningful interaction only when the student gives it their full attention, asks probing questions, provides significant context, and is patient. They may need to iterate, restating their prompts or providing more information, and to ask the LLM to be candid and critical. They may need to step away from the LLM, perhaps try a different one or come back on another day, when it goes off in the wrong direction.

We have become too used to scanning an LLM’s output. Just as I would not expect a student who came to me for career advice to start scrolling on their phone while I’m talking, I must teach them to give their full attention to the Facilitator.

What I’m suggesting here is not a list of use cases. Instead, I’m providing students with an approach to using AI where they plan before typing into the chat box, see its best use as a Facilitator that partners with them in learning and development, and recognize that validation and reading output will be time and cognitively intensive.

What This Means for Teaching

I’ve found that when I teach these roles to students before assigning homework, they make better choices regarding when and how to use AI. Here are some tactics I’ve tried that have netted positive results:
- Design assignments that invite different roles. For example, ask students to begin with AI as a Tasker (perhaps organizing sources or cleaning a dataset), then shift to using the Draftsmith to help them find passive voice or other syntax issues in a paper, and finally draw on the Facilitator to find the holes in their arguments before submitting a final paper. Intentionally stating the role each assignment calls for and requiring them to state when they’re using the Tasker, Draftsmith, or Facilitator solidifies their understanding that their approach to AI differs by role.
- Be clear about where AI helps and where it doesn’t. AI can help with structure, suggestions, and ideation, but it cannot replace revision, critical thinking, or the development of one’s own voice. This must be intentionally taught by including questions requiring students to reflect on what worked and where the AI led them astray in any assignments allowing AI use.
- Encourage disclosure. I talk extensively about “Total AI Transparency”, ensuring students that I will note any use of AI in my communications with them and I expect the same from them. Trust has broken down as both students and instructors believe the other is using AI when they’re not and failing to recognize when they are. Owning up to my own use and being clear on why I used AI for that task encourages students to do the same.
Closing Thoughts

We need to steer students away from extremes of either refusing to use AI at all or letting it rob them of learning. By distinguishing the roles of Tasker, Draftsmith, and Facilitator, we clarify our expectations of students. More importantly, we help them become more deliberate in their approach, preparing them to be AI-fluent.

Illysa Izenberg is an Associate Teaching Professor for the Center for Leadership Education in the Whiting School of Engineering at The Johns Hopkins University. She has been teaching management and business ethics to graduate and undergraduate students via Face-to-Face, online, and blended courses since 2006. Izenberg earned her MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business and is the winner of both the Alumni and Pond Excellence in Teaching Awards (2016 and 2020 respectively).

References

Bussgang, J. (2025, May 20). 3 small steps to 10x your productivity with AI this week. The Experimentation Machine. https://experimentationmachine.com/p/10x-this-week

Duffy, A. (2025, April 11). Your CEO just said ‘Use AI or else.’ Here’s what to do next. Every. https://every.to/p/your-ceo-just-said-use-ai-or-else-here-s-what-to-do-next

Farri, E., & Rosani, G. (2025). HBR guide to generative AI for managers. Harvard Business Review Press.

Gross, A. (2025). AI Crash Course [Online course]. SectionAI. https://www.sectionschool.com/courses/ai-crash-course-workshop

Harbridge, R. (2025). AI for Team Leaders [Online course]. SectionAI.

Harvard Business Publishing. (2025). Help your team harness generative AI (Lesson 1). In Leading with generative AI [Online course]. Harvard ManageMentor.

Purohit, R. (Host). (2025, June 18). The man inside the minds of the people building AGI [Audio podcast episode]. In AI & I. Every.

Solis, B. (2024, November). Train your brain to work creatively with Gen AI. Harvard Business School Publishing.
Source link
November 17, 2025
Measuring What Matters: A Faculty Development System That Improves Teaching Quality – Faculty Focus

If you’ve ever organized faculty development, you know the usual routine: run workshops, get sign-in sheets, and maybe send a feedback survey. While useful, these activities don’t always tell us the real story—are faculty actually applying what they learn, and is it improving the student experience?  At Amity University Dubai (AMUD), we decided to find out. In 2021, our Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) created something new: the Faculty Development Index (FDI). It’s a simple points-based system that encourages, tracks, and rewards professional growth, not just attendance at events. Over time, it’s transformed the way our faculty approach teaching.

Here’s how it works, and how you can adapt it for your institution.

Why We Needed a Change

Before the FDI, our professional development (PD) efforts were mostly measured by how many sessions we ran and how many people showed up. We had no easy way to know whether faculty applied what they learned, which activities had the most impact, or how to encourage consistent growth. We wanted a system that did three things: measured the right things, not just attendance, motivated faculty to go beyond the “minimum” in PD, and promoted a culture of sharing, collaboration, and innovation.

The Faculty Development Index at a Glance

The FDI rewards faculty for a variety of activities. While participation in or leading workshops is included, it earns the lowest points to encourage faculty to go beyond traditional PD. Completing online courses like MOOCs is valued more highly, as is applying new skills in the classroom and sharing examples with colleagues. We also award points for collaboration across disciplines, for partnering with industry to create authentic learning opportunities, and for completing advanced training such as our “Train the Trainer” program. Each year, points add up, and the highest scorers receive Teaching Innovation Awards.

Step-by-Step: How We Built It

In the first phase, we started small by tracking workshop participation. This provided a baseline and gave everyone time to get used to the idea of a points system. However, we were clear that attending workshops alone wouldn’t be enough to score well.

The second phase added a focus on applying skills. Faculty were encouraged to share evidence—such as photos or short write-ups—on a dedicated WhatsApp group called *Sharing Best Practices*. This real-time, peer-to-peer sharing helped spread good ideas quickly and made it easy for colleagues to adopt them.

The third phase introduced points for interdisciplinary and industry-linked projects. This encouraged faculty to co-teach modules, develop cross-program assignments, and partner with companies for real-world student projects. To make this practical, we provided examples of what counted as qualifying projects so faculty could see tangible ways to participate. Finally, in the fourth phase, we added MOOCs and our “Train the Trainer” program. We curated a list of high-quality MOOCs and developed a 12-hour blended learning course covering lesson planning, active learning, motivation, and assessment. To ensure relevance, we established a review process for MOOCs and scheduled “Train the Trainer” sessions during times that suited participants.

Practical Benefits for Teaching

The FDI isn’t just about points—it’s designed to improve everyday teaching. Faculty began to design courses with clearer learning outcomes, more authentic assessments, and stronger connections between theory and practice. In the classroom, active learning became more common, with examples ranging from case-based debates in business programs to hands-on prototype building in engineering courses. Class participation grew as faculty introduced strategies like “minute papers,” think-pair-share exercises, and role plays.

Assignments shifted towards more collaborative, project-based formats, often linked to industry input. Online teaching practices improved too; faculty became more confident in using breakout rooms, polls, and flipped classroom videos. Grading and feedback evolved with greater use of rubrics, audio comments, and peer review tools, making assessments more transparent and constructive. Teaching with technology expanded as faculty explored interactive whiteboards, quiz apps, and other digital tools.

Results We’ve Seen

The results have been encouraging. Student satisfaction with teaching quality increased notably in the past two years, which had a noticeable impact on student attrition and complaints. Faculty engagement in professional development grew, with more examples of sharing and collaboration visible in our community. We also noticed improved retention of faculty, suggesting higher job satisfaction and a stronger commitment to the institution.

Challenges and How We Solved Them

Of course, there were challenges. Some faculty were initially resistant, seeing the FDI as added administrative work. We addressed this by keeping reporting requirements light and highlighting early success stories. Industry engagement posed another hurdle; many faculty lacked local contacts, so we ran orientation sessions with our Job Placement Office to help them connect with potential partners. Scheduling conflicts were also a problem for the “Train the Trainer” program, which we resolved by building workshop time into participants’ timetables.

How You Can Adapt the FDI

If you want to create something similar, start by identifying the teaching behaviors you most want to encourage. Build a points system that rewards those activities more generously than routine ones. Provide a platform where faculty can easily share successes, whether that’s a chat group, internal blog, or quick video channel. Recognize and celebrate achievements publicly, and review your system regularly to keep it relevant and motivating.

Final Thoughts

The FDI has proven to be more than a tracking tool—it’s a shift in mindset. Faculty now view professional development as an ongoing, collaborative process that directly benefits their students. If you’re looking to refresh your approach to faculty development, start small, keep it practical, and make it rewarding. The results—both in faculty engagement and student learning—are well worth the effort.

References

Adams, S. R., and E. K. Mix. 2014. “Taking the Lead in Faculty Development: Teacher Educators Changing the Culture of University Faculty Development through Collaboration.” *AILACTE Journal*, 37–56.

Brouwer, N., G. Fleerackers, I. Maciejowska, C. McDonnell, and M. Mocerino. 2022. “The Impact of a Professional Development MOOC on the Teaching Beliefs of University Science Laboratory Teachers.” *Chemistry Teacher International*, 355–376.

Guskey, T. R. 1986. “Staff Development and the Process of Teacher Change.” *Educational Researcher*, 5–12.

McCrickerd, J. 2012. “Understanding and Reducing Faculty Reluctance to Improve Teaching.” *College Teaching*, 56–64.

Source link

November 14, 2025
Measuring What Matters: A Faculty Development System That Improves Teaching Quality – Faculty Focus

If you’ve ever organized faculty development, you know the usual routine: run workshops, get sign-in sheets, and maybe send a feedback survey. While useful, these activities don’t always tell us the real story—are faculty actually applying what they learn, and is it improving the student experience?  At Amity University Dubai (AMUD), we decided to find out. In 2021, our Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) created something new: the Faculty Development Index (FDI). It’s a simple points-based system that encourages, tracks, and rewards professional growth, not just attendance at events. Over time, it’s transformed the way our faculty approach teaching.

Here’s how it works, and how you can adapt it for your institution.

Why We Needed a Change

Before the FDI, our professional development (PD) efforts were mostly measured by how many sessions we ran and how many people showed up. We had no easy way to know whether faculty applied what they learned, which activities had the most impact, or how to encourage consistent growth. We wanted a system that did three things: measured the right things, not just attendance, motivated faculty to go beyond the “minimum” in PD, and promoted a culture of sharing, collaboration, and innovation.

The Faculty Development Index at a Glance

The FDI rewards faculty for a variety of activities. While participation in or leading workshops is included, it earns the lowest points to encourage faculty to go beyond traditional PD. Completing online courses like MOOCs is valued more highly, as is applying new skills in the classroom and sharing examples with colleagues. We also award points for collaboration across disciplines, for partnering with industry to create authentic learning opportunities, and for completing advanced training such as our “Train the Trainer” program. Each year, points add up, and the highest scorers receive Teaching Innovation Awards.

Step-by-Step: How We Built It

In the first phase, we started small by tracking workshop participation. This provided a baseline and gave everyone time to get used to the idea of a points system. However, we were clear that attending workshops alone wouldn’t be enough to score well.

The second phase added a focus on applying skills. Faculty were encouraged to share evidence—such as photos or short write-ups—on a dedicated WhatsApp group called *Sharing Best Practices*. This real-time, peer-to-peer sharing helped spread good ideas quickly and made it easy for colleagues to adopt them.

The third phase introduced points for interdisciplinary and industry-linked projects. This encouraged faculty to co-teach modules, develop cross-program assignments, and partner with companies for real-world student projects. To make this practical, we provided examples of what counted as qualifying projects so faculty could see tangible ways to participate. Finally, in the fourth phase, we added MOOCs and our “Train the Trainer” program. We curated a list of high-quality MOOCs and developed a 12-hour blended learning course covering lesson planning, active learning, motivation, and assessment. To ensure relevance, we established a review process for MOOCs and scheduled “Train the Trainer” sessions during times that suited participants.

Practical Benefits for Teaching

The FDI isn’t just about points—it’s designed to improve everyday teaching. Faculty began to design courses with clearer learning outcomes, more authentic assessments, and stronger connections between theory and practice. In the classroom, active learning became more common, with examples ranging from case-based debates in business programs to hands-on prototype building in engineering courses. Class participation grew as faculty introduced strategies like “minute papers,” think-pair-share exercises, and role plays.

Assignments shifted towards more collaborative, project-based formats, often linked to industry input. Online teaching practices improved too; faculty became more confident in using breakout rooms, polls, and flipped classroom videos. Grading and feedback evolved with greater use of rubrics, audio comments, and peer review tools, making assessments more transparent and constructive. Teaching with technology expanded as faculty explored interactive whiteboards, quiz apps, and other digital tools.

Results We’ve Seen

The results have been encouraging. Student satisfaction with teaching quality increased notably in the past two years, which had a noticeable impact on student attrition and complaints. Faculty engagement in professional development grew, with more examples of sharing and collaboration visible in our community. We also noticed improved retention of faculty, suggesting higher job satisfaction and a stronger commitment to the institution.

Challenges and How We Solved Them

Of course, there were challenges. Some faculty were initially resistant, seeing the FDI as added administrative work. We addressed this by keeping reporting requirements light and highlighting early success stories. Industry engagement posed another hurdle; many faculty lacked local contacts, so we ran orientation sessions with our Job Placement Office to help them connect with potential partners. Scheduling conflicts were also a problem for the “Train the Trainer” program, which we resolved by building workshop time into participants’ timetables.

How You Can Adapt the FDI

If you want to create something similar, start by identifying the teaching behaviors you most want to encourage. Build a points system that rewards those activities more generously than routine ones. Provide a platform where faculty can easily share successes, whether that’s a chat group, internal blog, or quick video channel. Recognize and celebrate achievements publicly, and review your system regularly to keep it relevant and motivating.

Final Thoughts

The FDI has proven to be more than a tracking tool—it’s a shift in mindset. Faculty now view professional development as an ongoing, collaborative process that directly benefits their students. If you’re looking to refresh your approach to faculty development, start small, keep it practical, and make it rewarding. The results—both in faculty engagement and student learning—are well worth the effort.

References

Adams, S. R., and E. K. Mix. 2014. “Taking the Lead in Faculty Development: Teacher Educators Changing the Culture of University Faculty Development through Collaboration.” *AILACTE Journal*, 37–56.

Brouwer, N., G. Fleerackers, I. Maciejowska, C. McDonnell, and M. Mocerino. 2022. “The Impact of a Professional Development MOOC on the Teaching Beliefs of University Science Laboratory Teachers.” *Chemistry Teacher International*, 355–376.

Guskey, T. R. 1986. “Staff Development and the Process of Teacher Change.” *Educational Researcher*, 5–12.

McCrickerd, J. 2012. “Understanding and Reducing Faculty Reluctance to Improve Teaching.” *College Teaching*, 56–64.

Source link

November 14, 2025
Beyond Breakout Rooms: Deepening Learning with Collaborative Whiteboards – Faculty Focus
Distance learning is here to stay. Both students and educators were required to quickly pivot to distance platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic without adequate preparation or training (Basilotta-Gomez-Pablos et al. 2022). Many programs elected to keep distance and hybrid learning options for students, with excellent reason. These platforms improve convenience, access, and inclusivity, gaining fast traction. Now, many institutions have an opportunity, or arguably a responsibility, to provide educators with the support needed to be successful while teaching in distance modalities; concurrently, educators are responsible for seeking resources and training to help them leverage technologies to thrive in this distance space (Crompton and Sykora 2021).

The use of technology in distance platforms is important; educators need to navigate a learning platform but don’t necessarily need to become digital technology experts (Crompton and Sykora 2021). So, what is possibly most important? Finding tools that are simple to use and have a high impact. Many educators still report that they do not feel equipped to apply new technologies, although today’s adult learners prefer novel and engaging technology tools (Borte, Nesje, and Lillejord 2023). Therefore, us educators should discuss, introduce, and share these technologies as we discover them to figure this out as a team.

In this article, we will explore how collaborative technologies, specifically collaborative whiteboards, can help bring life to adult learning theories in synchronous learning classrooms.

Students in distance learning platforms often have fewer opportunities to work collaboratively, outside of a break-out-room model, providing challenges for meaningfully applying adult learning theories. Theoretically speaking, collaboration and social engagement are essential components of adult learning, specifically to create a sense of community with learners, which can be more challenging in distance learning classes (Barbetta 2023; Shea, Richardson, and Swan 2022). Additionally, engaging students in more cognitively demanding ways, such as creating, analyzing, or developing information, is especially important to achieve higher-level learning outcomes (Vargas et al. 2024). Therefore, if we can strategically find ways to use digital technologies grounded in adult learning theory, we can strengthen the learning experience, enhance learning outcomes, and bridge the gap between theory and content delivery.

Many digital technologies and platforms exist and are met with opportunities and challenges. Time constraints and cost are common barriers (Borte, Nesje, and Lillejord 2023); therefore, free tools with relatively low preparation are prioritized. The Microsoft Collaborative Whiteboard app, which can be integrated within a Microsoft Teams Meeting space as a screen share, allows students to edit a document or template for more naturalistic collaborations simultaneously. Because it can be integrated into the meeting space, students do not need to download an app, leave the meeting, or switch to a new browser to participate. The form can be prepared before a lesson to allow instructors flexibility in their role and level of scaffolding.

Real-World Examples

A collaborative whiteboard can be applied to various programs, topic areas, or overall aims, and it may also be used as a formative assessment of content delivery. The examples included in this article were used in two separate synchronous occupational therapy courses, one focused on a neuroscience recap of the cranial nerves and one on adapting a therapeutic activity for different levels of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Pay special attention to the variance between the levels of learning targeted and how this is reflected in the collaborative efforts of the students.

Basic-level Whiteboard

This synchronous whiteboard was used at the beginning of the class session to serve as a formative assessment of the understanding of basic concepts of content. The 24 students were asked to match the function’s cranial nerve name, number, and a representative emoji. This was a more simplistic board that allowed students to reorganize the information presented at a basic knowledge-attainment level collaboratively. It was helpful as a formative assessment to adapt the rest of the lesson according to the students’ level of understanding, and their pace and accuracy of completion. In this case, the students moved their pointers to arrange the information simultaneously, with only a few attempts to collaborate verbally. This activity provided a collaborative effort to complete a joint, goal-oriented task.

Before

After

Advanced-level Whiteboard

The synchronous whiteboard in this example was created for a higher level of application-based learning, where 11 students were asked to alter components of an occupation and treatment modality, baking cookies, to apply to each unique level of traumatic brain injury recovery. This activity demanded greater levels of problem-solving and, therefore, greater levels of collaboration within the class. Many discussions and opportunities for problem-solving and aims for collective approval arose. To close the learning activity, I led a group debrief to discuss each level, provided immediate feedback, and facilitated discussions transferable to other real-world applications. In this example, the directions are in the middle, and the students filled in the sticky notes around the perimeter.

Make it Meaningful

We need buy-in and motivation in higher education. This begins with identifying real-world challenges and ends with reflection. The strategic use of digital technologies, specifically when combined with theoretical reasoning and adult learning principles, can improve classroom experiences through a greater sense of community while targeting higher levels of learning. If we are intentional with this design, educators can increase student engagement and facilitate higher levels of learning in synchronous online classrooms. Sprinkle goal-oriented and real-world relevant material on top, and you have a recipe for a meaningful outcome.

Looking Ahead

With institutions more widely embracing long-term implementation of distance education programs, faculty require ongoing support, training, and access to resources for sustained confidence and success. Dissemination of practical examples of use by peer educators and texts outlining an approach to identify and develop materials will benefit ongoing efforts to increase competency. In other words, we must keep each other informed on educational tech-gems we find to collectively improve our system.

How to Whiteboard: Quick Start Guide
1. Open Microsoft Teams
1. Click on the Whiteboard tab in your meeting space
1. Upload an editable template or create a blank canvas
1. Once in your meeting, share your screen and select the whiteboard app
1. Scaffold your task with prompts and questions
Jaimee Fielder, OTD, OTR is an Assistant Professor of Occupational Therapy at the University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences. She earned her Master of Science in Occupational Therapy from Touro University Nevada, Post-Professional Doctorate in Occupational Therapy from Texas Woman’s University, and is now pursuing a Doctorate in Education from the University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences, with a dissertation focused on educational technology and active learning in higher education classrooms.

References

Barbetta, Patricia M. 2023. “Technologies as Tools to Increase Active Learning During Online Higher-Education Instruction.” Journal of Educational Technology Systems 51(3): 317–339.

Basilotta-Gomez-Pablos, Verónica, Matarranz, María, Casado-Aranda, Luis A., and Otto, Andreas. 2022. “Teachers’ Digital Competencies in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 19(8).

Børte, Kristi, Nesje, Kjersti, and Lillejord, Sølvi. 2023. “Barriers to Student Active Learning in Higher Education.” Teaching in Higher Education 28(3): 597–615.

Crompton, Helen, and Sykora, Christopher. 2021. “Developing Instructional Technology Standards for Educators: A Design-Based Research Study.” Computers and Education Open 2: 100044.

Shea, Peter, Richardson, Jennifer, and Swan, Karen. 2022. “Building Bridges to Advance the Community of Inquiry Framework for Online Learning.” Educational Psychologist 57(3): 148–161.

Vargas, Jesús H., Ojeda, Edison C. C., Zapata, Carlos A. C., Flores, Karen A. A., Vela, Juan A. H., and Espinoza, Yessenia E. D. 2024. “Analysis of Significant Learning in Higher Education: Usefulness of Fink’s Taxonomy: A Systematic Review.” Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research 7(S7): 1341.
Source link
November 12, 2025
How Building Rapport Helped My Students Take Risks – Faculty Focus
One of my quietest students once came up to me after class and said, “I’ve never felt comfortable speaking in English before this course.” That single sentence reminded me that what we build in the classroom goes far beyond lectures or grading. It’s the atmosphere we create that allows learning to happen. For this student, the turning point wasn’t grammar drills or vocabulary tests. It was trust.

As educators, we often focus on the what and how of teaching. But who the student in front of us matters just as much. In my experience, building genuine rapport is one of the most overlooked yet powerful strategies for helping students feel safe enough to participate, take risks, and grow.

What Rapport Really Means

Rapport is not about being the “fun” professor or trying to be everyone’s favorite. It’s about creating a space where students feel respected, seen, and supported not just academically, but as people.

In my classrooms, especially with my work with adult ESL learners in Kuwait, rapport means:
- Greeting students by name and with warmth
- Encouraging participation without pressure
- Acknowledging their challenges as second-language users
- Listening actively to their concerns and ideas
When students feel this kind of connection, they are far more willing to ask questions, attempt difficult tasks, and take ownership of their learning.

How I Build Rapport (and How You Can Too)

Here are five practical habits I’ve developed that have made a noticeable difference in student engagement and classroom climate.

1. Be Present Beyond the Podium

I make time before and after class for informal conversations, even brief ones. A simple, “How’s your week going?” can open doors. Students need to know we are not just grading machines. We are humans too.

2. Learn Names Quickly

It seems like a small detail, but using students’ names early in the semester changes everything. When I call on “Fatima” instead of “you in the third row,” I signal that her presence matters.

3. Use Encouragement Thoughtfully

When a student takes a risk, especially with speaking, I make sure to acknowledge the effort. Saying, “That was a great attempt,” helps build confidence and normalizes the learning process.

4. Normalize Mistakes

Learning is full of errors. I often point out my own slips and laugh with the class. This sets the tone that mistakes are part of the process, not something to fear.

5. Ask for Feedback and Act on It

I regularly ask students what’s helping and what’s not. If I change something based on their feedback, I let them know. This builds trust and shows them that their voices shape the learning experience too.

A Moment I’ll Never Forget

I remember one student, Yousef, who barely spoke during the first few weeks of class. He sat near the back, avoided eye contact, and never volunteered. I made a point to greet him by name each class, ask simple follow-up questions, and check in privately after group work. Slowly, he started opening up. First, he answered yes-no questions. Then, short phrases. By the end of the semester, he stood up and gave a short presentation in English. It wasn’t perfect, but it was powerful. Afterward, he told me, “You made me feel like I could do it.” That comment stays with me to this day.

How Rapport Transforms Feedback

One area where rapport makes a real difference is in how students receive feedback. Constructive feedback is essential for improvement, but it only works if students feel it comes from a place of support.

Once, I had to correct a student’s repeated grammatical mistake. It could have felt embarrassing, but because we had already built trust, she laughed and said, “I knew you would catch that.” She didn’t feel attacked. She knew the correction was about helping her grow.

This kind of response isn’t automatic. It comes from creating a consistent environment where feedback is expected, respected, and grounded in care.

The Ripple Effect of Strong Rapport

The impact of strong rapport is not limited to one assignment or one semester. I have seen students who once hesitated to speak now take initiative in group discussions, volunteer for peer mentoring, or continue English practice long after the course ends.

Rapport also builds community. When students see the teacher modeling kindness, encouragement, and open communication, they begin to do the same with each other. This shifts the classroom from a silent space to one that is collaborative and supportive.

What You Can Try This Week

If you’re looking to build rapport in your own classroom, here are three simple practices you can try immediately:
- Learn and use student names within the first two weeks. Use name tents if needed. If you’re at mid-semester, consistent use of student names shows you care and value their presence which helps strengthen classroom connections.
- Ask for anonymous feedback midway through the term. Just two questions: “What’s helping you learn?” and “What would you change?”
- Set aside two minutes at the end of class to praise a risk taken, a great question asked, or a quiet win. This reinforces the kind of behavior you want to see more of.
These small actions compound over time. They send a clear message to students that they matter and that their growth is the shared goal of the classroom.

Final Thoughts: What They’ll Remember

As educators, we hope students walk away from our courses remembering the material. But what they often remember most is how we made them feel. Did they feel respected? Encouraged? Safe enough to take a risk?

If the answer is yes, then we have done more than teach. We have helped them build confidence, resilience, and the courage to use their voice.

That is the kind of learning that stays with them long after the final exam.

Fahad Ameen is a PhD researcher in Applied Linguistics at the University of Nottingham and an English language instructor at Kuwait University’s College of Education. His work focuses on student motivation, gamified learning, and building meaningful teacher–student relationships in Arab ESL contexts.
Source link
November 10, 2025
How Building Rapport Helped My Students Take Risks – Faculty Focus
One of my quietest students once came up to me after class and said, “I’ve never felt comfortable speaking in English before this course.” That single sentence reminded me that what we build in the classroom goes far beyond lectures or grading. It’s the atmosphere we create that allows learning to happen. For this student, the turning point wasn’t grammar drills or vocabulary tests. It was trust.

As educators, we often focus on the what and how of teaching. But who the student in front of us matters just as much. In my experience, building genuine rapport is one of the most overlooked yet powerful strategies for helping students feel safe enough to participate, take risks, and grow.

What Rapport Really Means

Rapport is not about being the “fun” professor or trying to be everyone’s favorite. It’s about creating a space where students feel respected, seen, and supported not just academically, but as people.

In my classrooms, especially with my work with adult ESL learners in Kuwait, rapport means:
- Greeting students by name and with warmth
- Encouraging participation without pressure
- Acknowledging their challenges as second-language users
- Listening actively to their concerns and ideas
When students feel this kind of connection, they are far more willing to ask questions, attempt difficult tasks, and take ownership of their learning.

How I Build Rapport (and How You Can Too)

Here are five practical habits I’ve developed that have made a noticeable difference in student engagement and classroom climate.

1. Be Present Beyond the Podium

I make time before and after class for informal conversations, even brief ones. A simple, “How’s your week going?” can open doors. Students need to know we are not just grading machines. We are humans too.

2. Learn Names Quickly

It seems like a small detail, but using students’ names early in the semester changes everything. When I call on “Fatima” instead of “you in the third row,” I signal that her presence matters.

3. Use Encouragement Thoughtfully

When a student takes a risk, especially with speaking, I make sure to acknowledge the effort. Saying, “That was a great attempt,” helps build confidence and normalizes the learning process.

4. Normalize Mistakes

Learning is full of errors. I often point out my own slips and laugh with the class. This sets the tone that mistakes are part of the process, not something to fear.

5. Ask for Feedback and Act on It

I regularly ask students what’s helping and what’s not. If I change something based on their feedback, I let them know. This builds trust and shows them that their voices shape the learning experience too.

A Moment I’ll Never Forget

I remember one student, Yousef, who barely spoke during the first few weeks of class. He sat near the back, avoided eye contact, and never volunteered. I made a point to greet him by name each class, ask simple follow-up questions, and check in privately after group work. Slowly, he started opening up. First, he answered yes-no questions. Then, short phrases. By the end of the semester, he stood up and gave a short presentation in English. It wasn’t perfect, but it was powerful. Afterward, he told me, “You made me feel like I could do it.” That comment stays with me to this day.

How Rapport Transforms Feedback

One area where rapport makes a real difference is in how students receive feedback. Constructive feedback is essential for improvement, but it only works if students feel it comes from a place of support.

Once, I had to correct a student’s repeated grammatical mistake. It could have felt embarrassing, but because we had already built trust, she laughed and said, “I knew you would catch that.” She didn’t feel attacked. She knew the correction was about helping her grow.

This kind of response isn’t automatic. It comes from creating a consistent environment where feedback is expected, respected, and grounded in care.

The Ripple Effect of Strong Rapport

The impact of strong rapport is not limited to one assignment or one semester. I have seen students who once hesitated to speak now take initiative in group discussions, volunteer for peer mentoring, or continue English practice long after the course ends.

Rapport also builds community. When students see the teacher modeling kindness, encouragement, and open communication, they begin to do the same with each other. This shifts the classroom from a silent space to one that is collaborative and supportive.

What You Can Try This Week

If you’re looking to build rapport in your own classroom, here are three simple practices you can try immediately:
- Learn and use student names within the first two weeks. Use name tents if needed. If you’re at mid-semester, consistent use of student names shows you care and value their presence which helps strengthen classroom connections.
- Ask for anonymous feedback midway through the term. Just two questions: “What’s helping you learn?” and “What would you change?”
- Set aside two minutes at the end of class to praise a risk taken, a great question asked, or a quiet win. This reinforces the kind of behavior you want to see more of.
These small actions compound over time. They send a clear message to students that they matter and that their growth is the shared goal of the classroom.

Final Thoughts: What They’ll Remember

As educators, we hope students walk away from our courses remembering the material. But what they often remember most is how we made them feel. Did they feel respected? Encouraged? Safe enough to take a risk?

If the answer is yes, then we have done more than teach. We have helped them build confidence, resilience, and the courage to use their voice.

That is the kind of learning that stays with them long after the final exam.

Fahad Ameen is a PhD researcher in Applied Linguistics at the University of Nottingham and an English language instructor at Kuwait University’s College of Education. His work focuses on student motivation, gamified learning, and building meaningful teacher–student relationships in Arab ESL contexts.
Source link
November 10, 2025