• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning

University of Mississippi

Hide Search
  • About
    • Mission and Purpose
    • History
    • Meet Our Team
    • Location & Hours
  • Services
  • Programs
    • Faculty
      • Faculty Reading Group
      • Inclusive Teaching Learning Community
      • Teaching Development Grants
    • Graduate Students
      • Graduate Teaching Orientation
      • Fundamentals of Teaching
      • Graduate Reading Group
      • Graduate Teaching Credentials
      • Graduate Excellence in Teaching Awards
      • Graduate Consultant Program
      • Graduate Teaching Resources
    • Supplemental Instruction
      • Student Information
      • SI Schedule Fall 2023
  • Events
  • Resources
    • Teaching Resources
    • Teaching Awards
      • University Teaching Awards
      • Graduate Excellence in Teaching Awards
  • Blog
  • Thank an Instructor
  • Show Search

Blog

Generative AI on the Syllabus, August 11th

· Aug 2, 2023 ·

A robot writing on a sheet of paper on a cluttered desk, as imagined by Midjourney“Generative AI on the Syllabus” is a just-in-time-for-fall workshop sponsored by the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning and the Academic Innovations Group.

What policies on using ChatGPT and other generative AI tools should you have in your fall courses? Should you attempt to ban them? Embrace them? Explore them with your students? And how will you talk with your students about AI tools through your syllabus and class conversations? In an interactive Zoom workshop on Friday, August 11th, facilitators Derek Bruff (CETL) and Robert Cummings (AIG) will explore these questions and suggest policy options and potential syllabus language for instructors to use.

Date: Friday, August 11th
Time: 
10:00 am to 11:00 am
Location: 
Zoom
Facilitators: 
Derek Bruff, visiting associate director, CETL, and Robert Cummings, executive director, Academic Innovations Group

Click here to register for this event. A Zoom link will be sent in advance to registrants.

For something of a preview of this workshop, see page 8 of the new CETL Syllabus Template, which offers suggested language about generative AI you can use on your fall course syllabus.


Sign up to get an email whenever we post something new on the blog

CETL’s Donahoe featured in the Chronicle’s Teaching newsletter

· Jul 26, 2023 ·

by Liz Norell, associate director of instructional support

In late June, the Chronicle of Higher Education’s newsletter on teaching featured Emily Donahoe, associate director of instructional support at CETL, and her experiments with alternative assessment.

In her spring first-year writing course, taught in the Department of Writing and Rhetoric, Emily kept a weekly journal to reflect on her ungrading experiments. She writes that she was inspired to do so by Robert Talbert’s December 2022 blog post challenging other faculty members exploring ungrading methods to do just this.

Talbert argued that so much of the work of retooling assessment practices happens in the dark, which prevents the larger faculty community from benefitting from the quotidian details that the work of teaching and assessing requires. “You have more than enough material for a weekly update. Keep it short, unpolished, relatively unfiltered, and real. That’s what the rest of the world is all waiting for,” Talbert wrote.

To this challenge, Emily said, “I’m in!”

Each week this spring, Emily wrote a journal entry about her course and how she and her students were experiencing her ungrading practices. Emily shared with her students that she would be blogging about the course. To allay any concerns they might have around real-time blog posts about their class meetings, though, she thought it was important to embargo her thoughts until the class ended.

That means the rest of us are watching a semester-long course unfold four months delayed on Emily’s Substack, Unmaking the Grade. By no means, though, does this diminish the gripping nature of Emily’s students’ experiences.

What’s perhaps most refreshing—and most unusual in academia—is Emily’s willingness to be transparent about her own odyssey of reactions and emotions throughout the process. For example, in week four the students co-created assessment rubrics for the two options she’d given them for their first writing assignment. The iterative class dialogue yielded two rubrics that Emily distilled from class discussions. Emily confesses: “I’m going to be totally, completely honest with y’all right out here on Al Gore’s internet: I hate these things.” She explains that it’s not the idea of a rubric that bothers her:

So, really, we’re back to the tension that gives rise to my ambivalence about rubrics: how can we create clear, specific, and measurable assessment criteria without hampering student creativity, independence, and learning? Still haven’t hit on an approach to this problem that satisfies me.

As I write this, Emily’s series is hitting its midterm stride. Her July 14 post reflects on her experiences so far while her students enjoy their spring breaks. Many of us who have experimented with alternative assessment will find her poignant reflection resonant:

The first is simply a realization about how ungrading is benefiting my students beyond their actual learning. I was thinking about the kinds of grading policies I used in previous writing courses and how my current students would have fared in those courses. It struck me that several of my students, who I know to be capable of doing good work, would have already flunked out of the courses I taught pre-pandemic—some because of absences or late work and some due to the fact that they didn’t fully understand the major assignment guidelines on their first attempt.

…

The notion that struggling students now have a better chance of passing my class is, in many ways, heartening. But it also really bums me out to think about all the students who have lost points, letter grades, or entire semesters of their lives to absences, late work, and a failure to understand assignment requirements. Students who are, in many cases, average or even strong writers! Who can do the work! But who missed an opportunity because of a failure to comply with one course policy or another.

Emily’s reflections are gaining traction in the ungrading community—thanks, in part, to the Chronicle’s newsletter. For instance, her blog got an enthusiastic recommendation from a colleague at the College of DuPage on the Ungrading Hub, a Discord community of alternative assessment-curious faculty hosted by David Buck, professor of English at Howard Community College in Maryland.

Emily credits the strong and supportive teaching culture in the Writing & Rhetoric department for the work she did during the spring semester. Several instructors in the department have used different assessment methods beyond traditional grading systems. The department’s openness to innovation is what Emily says gave her the runway to experiment with, and publicly speak about, alternative grading practices in her own classroom.

For those interested in exploring alternative assessments or other innovations in their UM classes, we invite you to reach out to us to discover how CETL can support your work.


Sign up to get an email whenever we post something new on the blog

A reading list on active learning in STEM courses

· May 5, 2023 ·

by Derek Bruff, visiting associate director

This spring CETL hosted a faculty learning community on the topic of active learning in large STEM courses. Over a dozen faculty from biology, chemistry, mathematics, physics, and other departments met every other week, mostly on Zoom, to share and discuss shared challenges teaching large courses, particularly introductory courses. I organized and facilitated the learning community, and one of the fun parts of that work was selecting the readings for each of our meetings. I thought I would share the reading list here on the new CETL blog, in case its useful to other educators or educational developers.

Session 1: Introductions

For our first meeting, we shared introductions and challenges and discussed a couple of modern classics of the STEM education research literature:

  • “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” Freeman et al (2014), https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
  • “Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math,” Theobald et al. (2020), https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1916903117

Session 2: The Coverage Challenge

By far, the most common challenges shared by learning community members was the need to cover a lot of content in these large courses. We tackled that challenge head on in our second meeting using these readings:

  • “The tyranny of content: ‘Content coverage’ as a barrier to evidence-based teaching approaches and ways to overcome it,” Peterson et al. (2020), https://www.lifescied.org/doi/10.1187/cbe.19-04-0079
  • “Worried about cutting content? This study suggests it’s OK,” Supiano (2022), https://www.chronicle.com/newsletter/teaching/2022-07-07
  • “Inclusive and active pedagogies reduce academic outcome gaps and improve long-term performance,” Dewsbury et al. (2022), https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268620

Session 3: The Flipped Classroom

One response to the coverage challenge is to shift some of the learning outside of the rather limited class time we have with students. The flipped classroom was thus the topic of our third discussion, using these readings:

  • Flipped Learning: A Guide for Higher Education Faculty, Talbert (2017). You can read most of the first chapter online. See also his final definition of flipped learning.
  • “114 studies on flipped classrooms show small payoff for big effort,” Barshay (2020), https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-114-studies-on-flipped-classrooms-show-small-payoff-for-big-effort/
  • “The impact of a flipped classroom model of learning on a large undergraduate statistics class,” Nielson et al. (2018), https://iase-web.org/ojs/SERJ/article/view/179.

Session 4: Student Reactions

How do students respond to active learning instruction? It’s a mixed bag. See these readings:

  • “Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom,” Deslauriers et al. (2019), https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1821936116
  • “What I wish my instructor knew: How active learning influences the classroom experiences and self-advocacy of STEM majors with ADHD and specific learning disabilities,” Pfeifer et al. (2022), https://www.lifescied.org/doi/10.1187/cbe.21-12-0329

Session 5: Active Learning Classrooms

One reason for hosting this faculty learning community is the new science building on campus set to open in fall 2024. It’s full of active learning classrooms!

  • “Separated by spaces: Undergraduate students re-sort along attitude divides when choosing whether to learn in spaces designed for active learning,” Ralph et al. (2022), https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14697874221118866 or https://libkey.io/libraries/1153/articles/533235795/full-text-file?utm_source=api_597
  • “Transformation of classroom spaces: traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges,” Park & Choi (2014), https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0

Session 6: Show and Tell

We didn’t have any readings for our sixth meeting. Instead, participants were invited to share a lesson plan or activity they had used in their courses.

Session 7: Group Work

Since active learning often involves group work, we took a deep dive into organizing and facilitating groups in our seventh session.

  • “Evidence-based teaching guide: Group work,” Wilson, Brickman, & Brame (2017), http://lse.ascb.org/evidence-based-teaching-guides/group-work/

Session 8: Exams and Evaluation

Our final meeting fell on the last week of classes, which made it an appropriate time to talk about evalution.

  • “Science exams don’t have to be demoralizing,” Clements & Brame, https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/science-exams/

We will continue the faculty learning community in some form in the fall. If you’re a STEM instructor at the University of Mississippi and are interested in participating, please let me know!


Sign up to get an email whenever we post something new on the blog

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
The University of Mississippi logo
EEO Statement Give Us Your Feedback Accessibility Ethics Line UM Creed
Copyright © 2025 The University of Mississippi. All Rights Reserved.