389. Inclusive Math Instruction

Undergraduate math courses, as traditionally taught, often serve as barriers to entry into many STEM disciplines. In this episode, Aris Winger joins us to discuss strategies that can increase student success and reduce equity gaps in student outcomes in these classes.

Aris is an Associate Professor of Mathematics at Georgia Gwinnett College. His current areas of interest include equity in mathematics education, culturally responsive teaching, and social justice mathematics. He is a co-author of the book series Advocating for Students of Color in Mathematics and is the Executive Director of the National Association of Mathematicians.

Transcript

John: Undergraduate math courses, as traditionally taught, often serve as barriers to entry into many STEM disciplines. In this episode, we explore strategies that can increase student success and reduce equity gaps in student outcomes in these classes.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

Rebecca: Our guest today is Aris Winger. Aris is an Associate Professor of Mathematics at Georgia Gwinnett College. His current areas of interest include equity in mathematics education, culturally responsive teaching, and social justice mathematics. He is a co-author of the book series Advocating for Students of Color in Mathematics and is the Executive Director of the National Association of Mathematicians. Welcome Aris.

Aris: Thank you for having me.

John: It’s great to see you again. You were here not too long ago to do some workshops on our campus. Today’s teas are:… Aris, are you drinking any tea?

Aris: Oh, I am not drinking tea. I’m drinking water. Yeah, my family is a big tea drinking family, but I’m just a water drinker.

Rebecca: That’s okay, water is the foundation of tea.

Aris: Yeah, that’s right. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: I’m drinking Blue Sapphire today, John.

John: Back to an old favorite.

Rebecca: It is, yeah.

John: And I am drinking Lady Grey.

Rebecca: Oh, nice, I had that not too long ago.

Aris: Excellent.

Rebecca: So in most colleges and universities, passing rates in math classes are lower than most other disciplines, and we’ve invited you here today to discuss strategies that would allow more students to be successful in the study of math. First, though, can you tell us a little bit about your own educational journey?

Aris: So yes, I was valued in math from my earliest mathematical memory, and so my earliest mathematical memory was with my mother, who was showing me the future. I remember going up to her and, like, “Mom, look, two plus three is five.” She was like, “soon you’ll notice that two and she put an x 3 is six.” I was like, “What’s that?” She’s like, “You’ll see.” And then from there, like, early on, I was doing two-digit multiplications faster than other people. And then the teachers around me were like, “Oh, you’re good, you’re fast, you can do this.” And so I say, “Oh, I guess I can.” And so I started to develop sort of a math identity. That is to say that it became part of me to be, quote, good at math. And I kept that for a long time. And when life got rough for me, when I was younger, I could always go to math and be safe at math, because I felt an identity. I felt good there, I felt valuable in mathematics. And so it just became a deep part of my identity. So that meant that I was going to major in math. That meant that I was going to be a mathematics professor the whole nine. So I continue to go back and look at that story to see my through line. And I’ve had to change the story, by the way. It used to be, in this journey that I’ve had, I’ve had to change the story also, because the story used to be, “Oh, I’m just smarter than other people,” when, in fact, the story really was that I’ve been trained. And really making this understanding that not that drinking the Kool Aid, that somehow I’m ordained to have a mathematical brain, I’ve been trained, and I deserve to say that I was trained, because I put in a lot of work. And so if a surgeon can say they were trained, a mathematician can say that they were trained also, and so for 10 years, from 1995 to 2005 I got a bachelor’s, master’s and PhD in mathematics. That 10 years was training.

John: A very large share of students that we see in college say “I’ve never been good at math”. Why do so many students come in struggling with math or believing that they’re not capable of being successful in math?

Aris: Yeah, well, it’s because they’ve had mathematical experiences that weren’t optimal for them. And so there’s a narrative that I want to interrogate, and I’m thankful for this opportunity to speak out, an interrogation of a narrative that we have to call into question. And so it is this notion that somehow math has done something to us and math has done nothing to us. So when someone says that they hate math, they’re not talking about the body of knowledge that’s the greatest body of knowledge in history of the human experience. They’re not talking about that. They’re talking about a human relational experience they’ve had in the culture of mathematics that humans have built about how we do math, particularly in the western context. And so whenever someone today says, “Oh, I hate math,” then I just say, lots of my colleagues say, “Oh, I’m sorry that happened to you.” I just say, “Who was it? What grade? Tell me what happened.” And then often they will say, “Oh, it’s this person, here’s what they said to me,” or “here’s why I didn’t like this class.” Lots of times they also say it was when the letter showed up. And so for me, what helps me is that I try to return to the innocence of the person that is talking to me. So when someone says that, I’m thinking about a kid sitting in the chair and then all of a sudden, they’ve been doing percentages, they’ve been doing proportions, and then all of a sudden someone writes an X up on the board and says, I want to know what X is. And for some reason, it blows this person away, like I have no idea what’s going on. And that person starts to, maybe for the first time, feel unsure, feel like they don’t belong. Now, there are all these feelings that are showing up that never got attended to. And we know in this discipline, the way that it is taught, that that cascades, because then this builds on the next thing, which builds on the next thing, and then all of a sudden you find yourself, “Whoa, I gotta get out of this thing.” Now, the tragedy that we have in our society is that we have lots and lots of our young people who are getting out of the discipline of mathematics, and it’s the most important, [LAUGHTER] right? And so that’s the tragedy, that’s the crisis, that we have so many people leaving our discipline. And so I want to be clear, that doesn’t mean that everyone needs to be a math major. That means that the world that I dream of is one in which we’re all connected and thriving quantitatively. What does that mean? That means that we are allowing ourselves, or we have the permission, to ask quantitative questions like, “Why does that cost that much?” and “is that the right percentage rate for my mortgage?” and “why don’t I want that payday loan?” Right now we have so many silent people quantitatively, because the predominant space in which we think quantitatively is in school, and so in school, school mathematics, systematically, is about some other narratives that we continue to uphold, like speed and correctness, and it doesn’t allow for the imagination to grow. So the answer to your question is that these experiences, when we see the people today in our colleges, they are, in terms of math, they are an extension of a past experience that is over a decade long. And so I want to return all of our kids back to that, in a sense, to “Wait, you know, you’ve had a math experience that has been difficult.” And for me, one of my goals is to create a new narrative for those people who come into my class, and not just for them. And so if I can get a young person or old person, whoever’s in my class, to think differently about math, then maybe they get their cousin to think differently about math and their little sister. And because, again, you never know who’s watching and who’s going to see how you interact and how that impacts them.

Rebecca: You’ve talked about our individual experiences with math and how much they vary, and they vary across elementary and secondary school districts as well. What can college math instructors do to help address these inequities in prior knowledge?

Aris: The first thing I would think of is that each college instructor needs to look at each of their people as an individual. And so for me, for so long, I would go to my pre-calculus class or college algebra and say, “Okay, I’m teaching that group,” and that was 11 years ago. And today I go in and I’m saying, “Oh, I’ve got Sammy, I’ve got Mark, I’ve got Jamal, I’ve got Lisa, I’ve got Tiana, right? I’ve got this group of people, and I’m teaching this subject today. Given who I have in my class, what should I be doing today? And how should I do it today?” And so there is a returning, or perhaps introducing, for the first time, a humanity of the people who are in my class. And so that’s the first thing. Just acknowledge that you’re teaching a group of human individuals Now, from there, there’s an acknowledgement that you yourself come from a culture, come from an experience, and that that’s going to impact the way that you teach. And so then, now, at this point, how is it that we can develop a good relationship between yourself and the people who you’re going to be engaging with for the next 14, 15, 16, weeks in this discipline, and then thinking about also this balance between your relationship with those people and the content, and which one comes first. And so for so long, it’s like, “Oh, I gotta get through this. I gotta get through this. I gotta get through this topic, this topic, this topic, this topic.” And the thing that keeps me up at night is that, in our discipline, there’s a crucial question that’s lacking in our discipline still, and it is the question I think we have to ask ourselves, is, “How do my students feel?” Somehow, the question of how my students feel when I give back assignment and it’s marked up with red, or if Pearson MyMathLab says that, “No, that’s incorrect,” and they’ve been working on it, or if they’re in ALEKS and they’ve been working on a topic for 35 minutes, and ALEKS says, “You know what, I think you should move on.” How that makes them feel? Or maybe a policy that I have of no late homework, even though they have two jobs, all of that. How is it that what I do in a space where I have all the control, how does it make my students feel? And then to rectify that with how I want them to feel learning the greatest discipline in the history. Now we know how I want them to feel. I want them to feel curious. I want them to feel empowered. I hold knowledge that I’m trying to convey and explore, for them to be super powerful, super engaged and literate quantitatively. And so I want all these positive emotions, and yet all these negative emotions are happening. And so part of my job as a professional, I see, is to try and ease that tension, to have them try and learn it, but also for them to feel joy, to feel curiosity, to feel great about themselves, right? And so I was at the joint math meetings, and I was giving a talk, and at the end, I was talking about feedback forms, that you’ve got to get feedback from your students in order to understand what’s going on with them, because you don’t understand what’s going down, that was the bold claim I was making as a teacher. A person in the audience at the end said “I wanted to push back.” Now I love pushback, because lots of great things come out of pushback, just like I want to push back. And I was like, “Okay, great.” And then he says, well, sometimes you shouldn’t listen to their feedback, because I had a student, and we were in class, it was a class of five, and we went through the whole semester, and I could tell they hated the entire experience, but then they came up to me a semester after this semester, came up to me and said, “I hated every moment of your class, but I learned all the material.” And then he said, “that’s the reason why we should ignore our students’ feedback.” And then I responded to him. But then afterwards, after the talk was over, I went out, and he pulled me aside. It’s like, “See I did my job.” And I said, “But wait, so this person got all the content from you, but this person hated every moment in this class, and you think you did your job,” and to anybody who’s listening, that if students got all the content but hated every moment of it, then we haven’t done our job. And that, I want to imagine us doing mathematics and them getting content in connection to the greatest discipline and being who they are, loving every moment. And that’s the dream, and that’s hard, because when you get back a C minus, how can we have someone have joy and get a C minus? And these are hard questions. I don’t claim to have the answers to these, but again, this is tension, but we have to continue to dream, because we have in our hands, we have in our expertise, this great discipline that we have to continue to pass on to people, but pass on to people in joyous ways.

John: Given the diversity in what students come into our class knowing, though, it’s hard to come up with a method of instruction that provides sufficient support for all students while still helping them learn more. How can you build that…

Aris: No, no, what you just said is false. Now, it might be true that we have not been able to do it yet. So what you just said, I respectfully disagree. I think that what you said is true if we continue to do what we’ve been doing, there’s no doubt about that. And so that’s what I mean about dreaming. And so I’ve come on to this podcast to dream with you. And so when you dream, you can’t say stuff like that, because then there’s no openness to be like, “Okay, wait, how can we do something else?” I agree with you that if we keep doing what we’re doing, then… and so let’s unpack that. That means that I go in front of somebody, I go in front of a class, and this happens to all of us. It’s a great problem. You go in front of the class and mathematics, the way it is built now, says that, “Oh, you must have prerequisite knowledge.” And so that means that we think of math in school as a body of knowledge, more than a natural human activity. And this tension, we have to make sure we elucidate and make clear that we can think of math as a body of knowledge, or we can think of it as a place where people get to play. Now, in one of those with the natural human activity, everybody just needs to come, explore, think about mathematic questions. This is the math circles space where you just play. You make it an introductory question, and it’s set up so that there are multiple entry points, and you just go after it, and then you have someone who’s facilitating, who’s valuing every single contribution. Notice I didn’t say answer, every single contribution. Or you can think of our discipline as this compendium of knowledge, where, over the last, however, many centuries since the dawn of humanity, we’ve been collecting all of these mathematical facts into one big thing that, again, is the biggest dossier of human knowledge that humans have. But if you think about it that way, exclusively, then when you come into pre-calculus, then when I look at you, then I’m thinking, “Do you know enough college algebra?” And if I do that, then I’m being exclusionary from the jump. The first day of class, we’re being exclusionary subconsciously, to all of our students, to some of them, right?

John: You interrupted me in the middle of the question. The next part I was going to ask, I think, would get to the points that you’re making, that we want all of our students to be successful in developing their knowledge, but given their differences in backgrounds, what are some strategies we can use, perhaps to leverage peers in class, or in other ways, to help provide that sort of support for all of our students, no matter where their starting point is?

Aris: I think that’s a great question, and it’s true that given if–then statement, if the if I call in the question, I will not hear the then. So yeah, that’s why I interrupted you. So what we have to do is, again, we have to change the narrative of what a teacher thinks. And so now, and I’m about to get into trouble, stepping all the way back, the challenge with our students in mathematics is really a challenge with our professors. And so this means that there are lots of us who are superbly comfortable, who have lifetime jobs with tenure, who have been successful in quotes. What does that mean? That the way they think about success has been, “Oh, I’ve had five to 10 students come back and say, ‘That was a great experience. I have students who are going to graduate school. I have students who are doing research.’” And so the revelation for me was, wait, I’ve had hundreds of students, and I’ve gotten dozens of feedback, [LAUGHTER] and I’m using the dozens of people… like you only hear from the people who are doing great, because the people who don’t like you aren’t going to tell you to your face, right? And so I’ve had biased feedback and like, “Well, wait, what happened to this person, this person, this person, the person I don’t even remember, was I really serving them?” And I actually don’t know the answer to that. And so there’s something about each of us as professors completely being rigorous about how we teach and critical of the way we teach, so that we continue to use new methods. And so this is happening in our discipline, where lots and lots of people are now doing active learning, lots and lots of people are doing less lecture. And so this is not a critique on lecture. It might be a critique on lecture with five people, or it might be a critique on lecture with 300 people. But again, like if you’re lecturing to 300 people for however long, how do our students feel? Later today, I’m doing some stuff with Math for America, and last year, when I did some stuff with them, I had a person and I’m gonna ask whether this is similar for them tonight, who has 35 students in 45 minutes, Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. And that person has said, “Well, I can’t do anything but lecture, I’ve got to get the content out.” And this is in the context, of course, in K through 12, where you might have your state forcing you to make sure you do well in the course tests. And so they’re under so much pressure. But again, as we imagine, I’ve seen people do active learning with 35 people in 45 minutes, and so that’s something that you just have to try. So the first thing I want to say is that, what have you been doing? Have you gotten the feedback that it’s working? What are the grades look like in this system and continue to try new things. And so you’re not going to do stuff overnight. The thing that I don’t want to see is that you’re doing the same thing you’ve been doing the last 25 years. That we can’t have. And so I am making a call of action to our professoriate to try something new, be bold, and what better time to do it is when you can’t be fired. We have a lot of anti-tenured, tenured people, in the sense that a big part of the point of getting tenure is to then explore, say what you feel, to not be put in a box. And then that’s sometimes when we become the most conservative. I do want to shout out, though, our lecturers and vital faculty, the visiting, the instructors, the tenure track, the assistant professors, and so forth, that are also thinking about these things, who don’t have the job security, who may not have the ability to be creative in the classroom also, because then they might be judged for it, or say, you know, “You can’t do it that way and don’t have that job security, also.”

Rebecca: As someone outside of mathematics, it seems to me like there’s a role for faculty in other disciplines to play here as well, because there’s a lot of fear mongering around math, I think, from other disciplines and things, maybe from their own mathematical experiences. But I know, as a designer, I’m constantly helping students try to find some relevance to the math so they’re not so scared of it, because I think it’s really important for their work in just about every discipline.

Aris: Yeah, I think there’s a big disconnect between mathematics and all the other disciplines. And again, to your point, I think it’s because everyone has their own walk with mathematics, and oftentimes it’s not a positive. So that means sometimes we get advisors outside of math who are saying, “Oh no, no, don’t take that. You don’t need that extra math class.” Or we get people who are just like, “Well, let’s just get you through math as quickly as possible,” or whatever. For me, that just means we need to be having more conversations like, “What does it look like?” I’m dreaming again. What does it look like for a designer to sit down with a math professor, or the two departments to sit and talk together and say, “Okay, well, what do you want mathematically for our students? What do you want design-wise, for our students? How do these things intersect?” And so we’ve been in a silo, mathematicians for a while. People just leave us alone. And now we see what’s happening. Math departments are closing. People are losing majors because now we thought that we could just do our own thing, serve, have our majors, but now people are really starting to ask the question, “Well, wait, the way that you’re teaching. It doesn’t feel like it’s so relevant.” For too long, we’ve asked, “Well, how am I supposed to use the quadratic equation in real life?” And actually, I don’t think we properly responded to that, because I think the proper response is that, “Oh, solving the quadratic equation is useful in cognitive agility in this way, this way, this way. And in addition to that, you’re right, [LAUGHTER] right?” Yeah, that like “Doing this exercise is helpful in these ways, and you probably won’t see it in the future.” And so that’s why we made quantitative reasoning, that’s why we have these other courses. But that took us a very long time to do that, to actually respond to people, like my school didn’t even have a quantitative reasoning class until finally, we looked at all the DFW rates and it was just like, “Well, we have to do something else.” Now, what happened there was this movement from college algebra to college algebra and quantitative reasoning didn’t have to happen, but it was a “Wait, we’re not moving on college algebra. At some point we think college algebra has to be this. And therefore, if you want these people to succeed, then we have to create this whole other space for them.” Again, as I dream, I would imagine that mathematicians as teachers would say, “Well, wait, maybe we could teach it differently,” but we didn’t do that. But I think lots of times, mathematicians and math faculty are movable objects like “No, it has to be taught this way.” And then very few people outside the discipline can come up to it and say, “Well, no, can’t you change?” And them saying, “You can’t change, because it has to be like this. We’re the experts.” But when I also think about other disciplines, I get jealous. Yeah. I mean, because, like, other disciplines get to talk about the great ideas and the systems that I’m in that I see we don’t get to talk about the great ideas. The notion of infinity is one of the great ideas that mathematics brings to the world. And so when I think about Calculus II and sequences and series, and people are going to start to groan when they listen to this, that we fail to see that we’re talking about how infinity operates, one of the many ways that infinity operates, and it’s an absolutely brilliant idea that very few people talk about because we’re too busy talking about ratio tests, and then you just get bogged down in what tests are we using, or does this have a limit? And you just forget that the notion of adding up an infinite list and getting a finite number is like so unbelievably profound. But political science gets to talk about justice, U.S. history gets to talk about the Constitution, and philosophy gets to talk about God, and over here, we have just as deep things, but we’re so tied up in procedures and making sure that you have the right minus sign. Do you see the difference that I’m bringing up? That in literature, people get to read Toni Morrison, and I’m not saying that I’m jealous that they have better things. I’m saying we have just as good things. But why is it that we are bogged down in this minutia, but they’re not critiquing Toni Morrison’s grammar. They’re just reading Toni Morrison and becoming better humans. Where is the becoming better humans in Calc I, where’s the becoming better humans in algebra? And that’s the open space that I dream of in our classes.

John: I’m hoping going forward, that we will still see students studying the Constitution in history classes. [LAUGHTER]

Aris: That’s right.

John: That may be changing in the current environment. [LAUGHTER]

Aris: I shouldn;t be laughing.. I don’t want to laugh, but I also don’t want to cry. That’s right. [LAUGHTER]

John: Sometimes we have to.

Aris: That’s right.

John: But as you’ve noted, students often come in with this fixed mindset, and they often have not had that much success in their experiences before they get to us. Should there be, perhaps, more effort in society to transform K-12 math instruction so that we don’t lose so many people from a discipline that’s so important?

Aris: I agree with that, and I think we also have to be careful. So I have no time for figure pointing, because what I’ve seen when I do professional developments all the way K through 50, whatever it is, right? As I just go, yeah, that I always see the pointing back. And so when you go to the ninth grade, it’s like, well, eighth grade, and then eighth grade it’s like, well, it’s Elementary, and then Elementary, it’s like, well, it’s the parents, and then it’s like, it’s the reverse induction, right? You just go back, well, then maybe we shouldn’t have kids at all, right? …if you want to just keep doing that. And so I think we’re all in this. And so there are two things, you come to a young person, you come to a student who’s had a bad math experience, and they’re a sophomore, and it’s the first day of class, and so you know they’ve had a bad math experience, and so you can’t send them back into K-12. They can’t go back. And so we can say, “Oh, this might be… and I have said this earlier, that this is a response of a bad math experience they had earlier.” And yes, we need to fix that. But this person’s in front of me today, and so I don’t want us to be confused that, “Oh, that this person is a lost cause.” The responsibilities on me now to create a better mathematical experience for this person and to help them as much as reasonable, and we can need to, as we were saying earlier, have conversations with K through 12. So what are real, fundamental conversations between math faculty and K through 12 faculty. And so what’s nice particularly about Oswego is that you all have the opportunity to make real connections to the K through 12 places, to schools that may feed into Oswego, and sit down with the faculty and say, “Oh, what’s happening?” I’ve seen this happen out west at Sonoma State, where they have relationships with K through 12 schools, and they’re having those types of conversations. Now, those conversations aren’t easy, because there’s status that you have to disrupt about in the space and that you just have to deal with, but once you break that stuff down, become one in community, then you can start to have real conversations about, “Oh, wait, you’re teaching this, but we’re teaching this. And so when did they end up learning this? And oh, do you really have to teach that?” Yeah, and you just have good conversations.

Rebecca: As we’ve been talking today, was thinking about an early experience I had in my teaching career where my previous institution I was invited as the non-math faculty member to join an assessment retreat and spent an entire week out of town with the math faculty, who I really didn’t know very well, and we had a great time, and found all kinds of connections between our disciplines. And for me, I think that was a really important opportunity. So I thought it was a really wonderful opportunity to collaborate across disciplines and to get a better understanding of what the faculty in that department were doing, what some of their objectives were, but also I shared what some of the art and design students, some of the struggles that they have, and I thought it was a really rewarding opportunity, and I actually had forgotten about it until this conversation. [LAUGHTER]

Aris: That is fantastic. That’s fantastic.

Rebecca: But it sounds right along the lines of what you’re advocating for as a way to share and disrupt and move things forward.

Aris: Absolutely, absolutely.

John: From society’s perspective, the rate of return to higher education, despite the popular perception, is pretty much at the highest we’ve ever seen, and that’s especially true in STEM fields. And yet, students of color, though, have been seriously underrepresented in STEM fields, perhaps partly because of underrepresentation in faculty and in their prior interactions. What strategies could be used to help reduce some of those inequities in terms of the mix of students who are entering into STEM fields?

Aris: Yeah, I mean, there are a couple of things. So this is an individual and a systemic issue. So individually, I think you have to go all the way back and say, “Well, what does it mean to be of color? What does it mean to be a student of color? What does it mean to be a person of color?” And again, the challenge is that people don’t even want to ask that question. Like, student of color or person of color, came into the vernacular at some point, and we just didn’t stop and say, “Well, wait, what does that mean?” And so when I say that I am black in the United States of America, people who are listening, what does that mean to you? If you’re listening to this five weeks from when we record and I say that I’m black, what does that mean to you? What do you think that means to me? Now I want to be clear. The reason why I ask is because when Lakeisha comes to your class, and Lakeisha is a young black woman, and you haven’t even thought about what it means to be black, then are you going to try and convince me that you’re prepared to teach Lakeisha? Do I want my daughter in your class? And the reason why I bring this up is because it means everything to me to be black, it means everything to me, and you haven’t even thought about what it is. So now I’m coming to your classroom, and there’s something fundamentally important to me, and I look at you and I already know the signs that it doesn’t mean anything to you. And so then you are already positioned to me as someone who doesn’t even care about me. And now let me step all the way back. Everybody’s nice, everybody’s a good person. Everybody’s loves their family, loves the country. Everybody’s nice, nice, nice, nice. I’m not talking about nice. I’m talking about love, actually. I’m talking about realizing the nature of the place in which we live, the United States of America, which is again a place of ultimate brilliance, but a place that also has had significant struggles, tragedy and terrorism amongst people of color and black people in particular, right? We can be both, brilliant and have terroristic backgrounds. And so for me, that’s the first thing on an individual level when we think about again, when I said earlier that we have to think about our students individually, that is tied to, “Wait, that person is black in America, that might mean A, B, C, D, and E.” Now it could mean that. It might not mean that, but sociology is a thing. Sociology is real, and the studies show that, about marginalization, how people feel. Stereotype threat, microaggressions, those things are real things. And so that means, again, we need to be educated about what that might mean. But let me take 17 seconds… that for me to be black means two things at least. It means that, again, I come from a miraculous people. I come from a group of people who have been terrorized and stigmatized for centuries in this country, and somehow, our most profound voices, our most powerful voices, are ones that are trying to teach love and justice for everybody. That’s a miracle, like somehow, like in the face of all of that ugliness, our leaders come out talking about love and justice for every single individual. Being black also means that I’m part of a social constructed category where I am not getting things that other people are getting because of skin color, and that’s personally, and that means systemically. And so both of those things are happening, are a part of who you see in me. But what that means is, when you look at someone else who is of color, then you might say, “Oh, that person’s walking around in this society, and they might be experiencing stuff just because of the color of their skin.” And again, coming back to that fundamental question, “How might that make them feel? How might they be struggling today to learn some of the stuff that I’m saying.” And most importantly, how is it that in these four walls for this hour and 15 minutes, in a space that I fully control, how is it that I can make this space different, different from what the rest of the world has told them their whole life? So that’s the personal one. Now, systemically, I’ve been thinking a lot about mentorship, and so if we have 17 students of color, 17 marginalized students in whatever category, whether it’s women in STEM also, 17 students at my institution who are part of a category, a social category, they might be black, they might be whatever, then the question for me becomes, how is it that we get them the right mentors, and that means that focused attention by someone who is ahead of them on the road for their goals, someone who is going to sit with them and look in their eyes and have them convinced that, at least for that hour of that meeting, that no one else in the world as important as they are to that person, someone who is going to awaken something within them, all potential that they didn’t even realize they had. And so when you have good mentors, then you provide pathways for people that they didn’t even think were possible. Now, of course, the challenge is, how is it that we need to train good mentors? We need to get them out there. Right now, we are not trained to be good mentors, particularly across identities, particularly across racial identities and cultural backgrounds. And so my immediate hope is that we would get mentors to people about what it means to be a STEM professional, because what mentorship also does is it gives people who are trying to get into STEM, STEM identities. It opens the doors for them to be like, “Oh, I can do this.” For 25 years, I’ve heard young people say, I saw this person, I interacted with this person, and I realized that I can do this, particularly when Ketanji became a Supreme Court justice. I just remember the very next day, a 16-year old black girl said, “Now that this has happened, a whole world has opened up for me.” I just want that to sit with the listener, that this person will never meet Ketanji. They simply need to just see her become a Supreme Court justice, and now a whole world is opened up for them. Now that’s just from 1000s of miles away. If we can somehow get mentors to each of our young people who are trying to do this, then it gives them, like this personal connection too. It makes it even powerful.

Rebecca: Some of the change that you’re talking about, the dreams that we’re dreaming together, definitely are some of the long game… [LAUGHTER]

Aris: Yes, absolutely, absolutely. Yes, yes, yes.

Rebecca: What are some of the short game moves that we can make to get to that longer game?

Aris: Yeah, so then I think it depends on who I’m talking to. So then if I’m talking to someone who’s seasoned, who’s comfortable, who is going about their life, and it’s easy, again, as we said before, I want you to say, “Well, I want to do something bold and different.” And again, I guess the first thing I would say to you is, “I want you to send your students the feedback.” We can do this in multiple ways. I want you to have some real conversations with and get some real feedback from your students about how things are going with you and whether you are doing your due diligence and uplifting people in the discipline of math. If you are new or you have little power or you’re just moving up the ranks, there’s something about also looking at your practices, but being able to get a critical mass, like just joining other people. I think this is true for the older faculty too, but just joining communities and listening to how other people teach and how other people operate in their craft, they continue to just be educated. So again, that’s on the individual level. On the systemic level, I’m looking at our leaders. So then I’m talking to department heads. I’m talking to deans and to presidents and provosts about doing more than just not rocking the boat. And so when we have young people, when we have these disparities in STEM across racial lines, that’s on you, leader. So I’m really trying to push leaders to just say, “Okay, wait, not under my watch.” 17 years from now, I want you to be able to say, “Maybe things have not change, but here are the three things that I tried and they failed, and even in the failure here the 15 things we learned,” that the too many leaders who would just come into position and just try to keep things still and when in fact, your job may be to shake things up so that more people can thrive. So I just met so many leaders that have just been like, “Let me just come and steer the boat,” when, in fact, you may need a whole new boat. You may need to be on a new river. Yeah, so I’ll say that, in that delineation, I mean on the individual level, you’ve got younger faculty, older faculty, and then they might be doing things, but then at the systemic level, our leaders need more courage. They just need more courage. And so the challenge that I have, and it goes back to what we said earlier, is that in order to get courage, you have to be compelled. There has to be a compelling reason for a leader to say, “You know what, I’m going to do the thing, and y’all are not going to like me. We’re going to make classes unified at the 1000 level for math, because this is what our students deserve. And I don’t care what you think about, because the data says that having classes that are completely different from professor to professor makes students suffer, and therefore we must unify. Let’s get to work on it together. And if you don’t like it, okay, we can talk about that too, but this is what we’re doing.” And so that person who does that is compelled by the suffering of our students. The lack of access for our students is the driving factor. There must be something that compels leaders to change, otherwise they won’t.

Rebecca: I wanted to follow up on the feedback forms because you’ve mentioned that throughout our conversation today, and for someone who’s like, “Yes, I will do this,” what would be in said feedback form?

Aris: Oh, thank you for saying that. It would be questions that if they got the answers to, it would shake them and make them really uncomfortable. The thing that I want to say, that I should have said from the beginning, is that it’s comfortable or outstanding, you only get to be one. It’s comfortable or outstanding, you only get to be one of those. And so when I created my feedback forms, and I started filling them, and I started putting in the questions, like, oh, wait, if I actually heard the real answer to this, I’m not going to feel good. And then part of me said, Well, that means it needs to go on there. And so what does that look like? That means like, “Am I doing a good job? Am I giving you everything you need? What do you want me to change?” That one’s not so bad, but it’s just like, “Did I say anything that bothered you? How is my language?” It’s just stuff that like, are you having good time, right? So that’s about me, and so how can I just be better? But then the thing that was transformational for me is when you ask anonymously, people about their lives, and just say, “What’s your biggest challenge today? What are you going through right now? What excites you the most? What do you do when you’re not in school?” So feedback forms do so much if you are authentically digging into them and asking questions that might push you out of your comfort zone, because it’ll change you forever. Because when someone says that all your math problems are binary in terms of gender, and it leaves me out, then it changes the way that I teach forever. Forever. One sentence changes the way I teach forever. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. There’s tons of feedback forms out there, so you can go and investigate those. But for me, it’s “Okay. How am I doing?” And “Who are you as a person?” I have colleagues who give them out after tests also who have, like, logistical and utilitarian reasons for giving them out. But for me, as you might imagine from what I’ve said so far, I’m trying to figure out, am I doing a good job in humanizing you, and who are you as a human.

John: Is this something perhaps that people should do at the start of the semester, just to gather some information about who the students are in the class as well as during the class?

Aris: Yeah, you’re giving them out a lot. Yeah.

John: And you mentioned anonymity. I’ve gone back and forth on that in terms of gathering information about students. Students are likely to be more open when the forms are anonymous. On the other hand, if there’s specific concerns for specific students, there’s some benefit of knowing who the students are. And I’ve sometimes done a mix of those things, where I’ve had some things which were just anonymous and others where students let me know at the beginning of the term, in particular, if they have any special concerns or needs or any challenges they faced in classes in the past.

Aris: I appreciate that, yeah. And so I definitel moved the anonymous route. And then I will say that some of you wrote some things that I think you and I need to talk about personally, and I hope you know who you are, and say, yeah. And then I don’t know if I get any more specific than that, because of anonymity reasons, but yeah, so I try to open the door that way. But yeah, I like your idea of mixing them for sure.

Rebecca: So we always wrap up by asking, what’s next?

Aris: Oh, just the same old, same old. And that’s enough, [LAUGHTER] right? So, yeah, I wake up every morning with a mission, and I’m thankful for that. I’m overwhelmed by that, that I am trying to serve people. And first, it starts with my own daughter, my wife, and then I get to then interact with people who are trying to change their lives forever. When you’re in college, when you’re in the educational process, when I’m teaching in K through 12, those young people in particular don’t have the vision yet to understand the path that they’re on. But in particular college, even though some of those people have been forced to go to college, they are there and they’re trying to change the trajectory of their whole life, and to play a role in that is a gift, and I have to treat that with care. And so I wake up every morning just trying to figure out how in the world can I help that person on their educational journey. And that’s all I want to do. And so I’m in a sweet spot where I can do that every day and make a living. So I’m superbly thankful for that. So for me, in general, I’m always trying to make quantitative spaces better for everybody, because better quantitative spaces lead to better quality of lives. And so across so many different levels, if you see me, I’m either with my family, or I’m playing pickleball, or I’m trying to make quantitative spaces better for people for better quality of lives.

Rebecca: …sounds like a good balance.

Aris: Yeah, that’s right. [LAUGHTER] That’s right.

John: Well, thank you. It’s great talking to you again. And again, we really enjoyed your work here back in January during your visit.

Aris: It’s a pleasure. Thank you.

Rebecca: Thank you so much for your thought-provoking ideas.

Aris: Oh, you’re welcome. Thank you for having me.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

388. The Opposite of Cheating

Student use of generative AI tools as a substitute for learning has led to increased concerns about academic dishonesty. In this episode, Tricia Bertram Gallant and David A. Rettinger join us to discuss why students might use these tools and strategies instructors can use to encourage academic integrity.

Tricia is the Director of the Academic Integrity Office at UC San Diego and Board Emeritus for the International Center for Academic Integrity. David is an Applied Professor and Undergraduate Program Director in the Psychology Department at the University of Tulsa. He is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Mary Washington, where he directed Academic Integrity Programs and the Center for Honor, Leadership, and Service. David is also President Emeritus of the International Center for Academic Integrity. Tricia and David are the authors or co-authors of numerous articles, books, and book chapters on academic integrity. Their most recent book, The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in the Age of AI, was recently released as the 4th volume in the Teaching, Engaging, and Thriving in Higher Ed series at the University of Oklahoma Press, edited by James Lang and Michelle Miller.

Show Notes

Transcript

John: Student use of generative AI tools as a substitute for learning has led to increased concerns about academic dishonesty. In this episode, we discuss why students might use these tools and strategies instructors can use to encourage academic integrity.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

Rebecca: Our guests today are Tricia Bertram Gallant and David A. Rettinger. Tricia is the Director of the Academic Integrity Office at UC San Diego and Board Emeritus for the International Center for Academic Integrity. David is an Applied Professor and Undergraduate Program Director in the Psychology Department at the University of Tulsa. He is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Mary Washington, where he directed Academic Integrity Programs and the Center for Honor, Leadership, and Service. David is also President Emeritus of the International Center for Academic Integrity. Tricia and David are the authors or co-authors of numerous articles, books, and book chapters on academic integrity. Their most recent book, The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in the Age of AI, was recently released as the 4th volume in the Teaching, Engaging, and Thriving in Higher Ed series at the University of Oklahoma Press, edited by Jim Lang and Michelle Miller. Welcome, Tricia and David.

Tricia: Thank you.

David: Thank you.

John: Our teas today are;… Tricia, are your drinking tea?

Tricia: I am, my standard tea of peppermint after lunch.

John: Very good. It’s one of my favorites. And David?

David: I’m a coffee drinker, I have to admit. But it’s a really good Sumatran.

John: Excellent.

Rebecca: Good choice.

John: And Rebecca?

Rebecca: I have Lady Grey today, John.

John: And I have an Irish Breakfast tea today.

Rebecca: Nice. So, we invited you here today to discuss the Opposite of Cheating. Could you tell us a little bit about the origin story of the book?

David: Sure. Well, Trish and I have been doing this work for a long time, both separately and together, and so as AI has really started to become a big issue, but even before that, when the pandemic hit, a lot of our colleagues have been asking us, what should we do? Oh, my goodness, our students are cheating, and Trish and I both sort of smiled separately and said, “Yeah, they’ve kind of already been cheating. You’re just kind of deciding to worry about it now.” This has been an ongoing and persistent problem for probably as far back as Plato’s Academy, if not further, because people are people and it’s a fundamental problem. So when Jim and Michelle came to us and said, “Would you consider writing a book for faculty that’s practical, that’s positive, and that really takes a keen eye on academic integrity?” we said “We’d be happy to.” So we wrote this book. We were kind of proud of it, and it was ready to go to the publisher pretty much exactly the same week the ChatGPT came out.

John: Nicely timed.

Tricia: Yeah.

David: Yeah, couldn’t have done it better if we tried. So the result of which being, we sent it to the publishers and to the editors, and instead of a two-week turnaround, there was about a six-week turnaround. And Jim broke the news to us and said, “You know, you’re probably going to have to rewrite the book,” which is, I’m sure, his favorite sentence to tell an author. But we did. We wrote the book, and as we did, AI grew faster and better and more accessible, and we learned more and more about it, and now I think we’ve got a book that can really be useful in an evergreen sort of way, because the principles we’re applying are not based on the tools that you see today. They’re based on the people who are using those tools, and the people really haven’t changed at all. And so we really hope this book will be evergreen.

John: And as you noted, students have always cheated to some extent, but there was a bit of an increase in that during the pandemic based on self-reported results from students in terms of academic integrity issues. Why did it increase so much during the pandemic?

Tricia: A simple reason. As David said, students are humans, and so if you think about a couple of things that were going on during the pandemic, if you were a student. One is, like everybody else, you were operating at Maslow’s bottom hierarchy of needs: survival, safety, security, that’s all that mattered at that time. Like integrity would be way, way, way at the top of that pyramid, so that was the first thing that was going on. The second thing was increase in temptations and opportunities. All the assessments went remote, and where before, there were proctors walking around the room, maybe checking your ID, maybe checking the authorized age you brought in, seeing if you brought something else in, all of a sudden, there was none of that. If you take our traditional age college student of 17- to 21-year old, putting them in that kind of situation, or putting any of the younger kids in that kind of situation, of course they’re going to cheat. It’s a lot to ask a student to resist those temptations, especially under times of great stress and pressure. So two things created a perfect storm.

Rebecca: Can you talk a little bit about, you’ve hinted at this already, but why students cheat in the first place, or maybe why they act without the integrity that we’re hoping they would act with?

David: Well, it’s a how long have you got [LAUGHTER] sort of an answer? You can break it down into two parts, though, and Tricia, pretty much already did. It’s the situation that they find themselves in, and the individual differences are the nature of who we are as people, and those are going to interact to create the situation where students cheat. Well, I think to take a step backward. The first thing to say is that almost all students, just like almost all people, if you put them in the right circumstances, will make a decision that they’re not proud of later. So it’s not as if we can just weed out the few bad apples and solve the cheating problem. Having said that, there are a few bad apples, probably about eight or 10% who use what we would call cheating as a dominant strategy throughout their higher education and probably throughout their life. Those are students, yeah, we really do want to try to weed those out. But for the other 80%-ish, some percent, I’m going to guess 20%, would never do something dishonest knowingly. Some of them still will cheat because bringing us to reason one, which is they don’t really understand what we expect of them, and that’s a situation that’s growing more and more as higher education becomes more accessible to people who don’t have the same background, values, cultures and understanding. This is a good thing, that higher education is more plural and more diverse, but it does change what our strategies need to be in order to help everybody be successful. And then you have the other situational reasons, things like it’s a lot easier to cheat in a high-tech environment in a lot of cases, so students are more able to do it. They feel like they’re less likely to be caught in those situations. And then you get into the interpersonal ones that I think are the most interesting, but I’m a psychologist, so of course I do, these are things like number one on the hit parade is peer pressure. Students are very sensitive to peer pressure and to peer motivators. If students think that cheating is acceptable, they’ll be more likely to do it. If they think it’s unacceptable to their peers, they’ll be less likely to do it. If they think their peers are using it as a strategy, students don’t want to be left behind, and so they’ll be more likely to try to cheat to keep up with the Joneses. So peer pressure, peer motivation is a big deal. Then you can add in things like, how wrong do they think it is? And different kinds of behavior are quite varied. This is where AI comes into play, because we’re all in a new frontier, and none of us really understand what AI is doing. I shouldn’t say none of us, but most students don’t really understand how AI works, and so they don’t really understand whether using it is inappropriate, and almost none of our students understand why we’re asking them to do the assignments. If they knew at a deep and intuitive level why they are doing what they’re doing in the way that we do when we create the assignments, then they could make a better evaluation about whether the tools they’re using are appropriate or not, but because they don’t know, we haven’t told them, and not all students are coming from a context where it’s automatically expected that they know. We’re left in a situation where students sometimes don’t think what they’re doing is actually wrong, although as often as not they do and they’re doing it because of things like time pressure, stress, desire to be successful. And there is more, but that’s a lot.

Tricia: In other words, I’ll sum up what David just said. They cheat ‘cause they’re human. [LAUGHTER]

John: And there’s multiple reasons. And one of the things you stated in the book is that there isn’t one solution to addressing these academic integrity issues, but there’s a right approach. Could you provide just an overview of an approach to try to address this collection of challenges that may lead to academic integrity issues,

Tricia: I think we would call it a teaching and learning approach, rather than a crime and punishment approach. So a teaching and learning approach means that we’re centering the faculty and the students in the conversation, and we are centering learning and what we can do to best facilitate, which is one job of the educator, and assess learning, which is the second job of the educator. And we often forget that second part. We like to focus on helping students learn, and we forget that assessing learning is a huge reason why students come to us. They need that degree. That degree is supposed to be a culmination of the assessments of learning that represents what they now know and can do. And so the approach is: focus on teaching, focus on learning, and part of that is focusing on good assessment design. So that’s the right approach. It does a couple of things. One, it’s less emotionally draining for faculty when they feel like they have to be police officers to catch cheating and to report it. That doesn’t sound like fun, and it doesn’t sound like what they signed themselves up for. But if you have them focus on learning, that’s like, “Oh, well, yeah, that’s what I signed up for. “So it feels better for the faculty, and it’s also, of course, better for the students, because they do want to learn. Yes, there are some, as our colleagues in Australia call them, enrolled persons in our school that do not want to learn. Put them aside. Like David said for a second, the rest of the students do want to learn. We’re humans. We love learning. We loved learning as kids before we got into school. And it could be that school maybe dampened that [LAUGHTER] love of learning a little bit, but people love to learn, and so having that focus says we’re in this together. And you know what, I am going to closely observe you to make sure that you actually learned what I think you learned or what you were supposed to learn. But it’s not to catch and punish you, but it’s to validate your learning and to ensure that you are making progress that you want to make.

Rebecca: You hinted at this already a bit about a misalignment between faculty understanding of what acting with integrity might be versus what a student might think. There’s a discrepancy there. Can you talk a little bit about why there might be this discrepancy, and then also how we might address it?

David: So we’ve already talked a little bit about the discrepancy in knowledge between faculty and students, and that we are not teaching mini me’s. We are an unusual subset of university students who go on to be professors, and we sometimes forget that they are not us. It’s also the case that the student population has changed in the time that a lot of us have been doing this. So we shouldn’t teach the students we were nor the students we had. We need to teach the students who are in front of us, and sometimes that means matching our expectations to theirs. It doesn’t mean changing our expectations, but communicating what ours are in a way that they can understand. So some of it is knowledge, but some of it is also goals, as Tricia alluded to. They are there, and I’ve asked them, to get a degree, to get a diploma, to get a good job, to make money, to have a place in society, and learning is a path to do that. And so we need to leverage their desire to do these things in an authentic and meaningful way….and yes, they do have that desire, most of them… by communicating the value to them of the learning that we’re asking them to do and the assessments that we’re asking them to do. None of this involves watering them down or dumbing them down or simplifying nor justifying your existence to your students. It involves helping them bridge the gap between their experience and yours, which is, of course, learning, such that they’re doing these things in a way that will prepare them best to be successful in the future, whether as professionals or as humans or as family members or as voters, whatever. And if we can persuade them that what we’re doing is worth doing, we’re going to at least give them the opportunity to act in a way that’s in accordance with our expectations.

Rebecca: Sounds very aligned with the TILT or the transparency and learning and teaching approach.

David: We’re not inventing anything new with respect to pedagogy or teaching. And in fact, I think, going back to the origin story question, from my perspective, our first concern when we wrote this book is, is there any audience for it? Because we’re not writing anything new. But then it kind of occurred to me, and I think to Tricia as well, we’re writing about teaching and learning for academic integrity folks, and we’re writing about academic integrity for teaching and learning folks. And so we hope to introduce some of the core concepts in these fields that we bridge to folks who maybe haven’t had the opportunity to bridge it in the same way yet.

John: It sounds as if one of the strategies you’re recommending is to help students see that education is valuable because of the skills they’re developing, and that it’s more than just getting that certificate at the end that matters, that if they don’t acquire skills, they’re not going to really be all that more valuable after they graduate, and just helping to align their values with the values that we hold concerning education. Would that be part of the message we’re trying to get across to students?

Tricia: Yeah, I think so, as I’ve been telling students of late, look, no employer is going to want to hire you if the extent of your skills is you pushed a button on ChatGPT and it gave you output and you handed it in, they don’t need you for that. These things are becoming agentic, and they can operate without any human intervention. So you have to bring more value to the employer than that, and so that helps to explain to them, one the importance of developing skills, but also of why we don’t allow them to use AI for every single assignment or every single activity. We still teach students basic arithmetic, even though there’s calculators, because there’s a belief or knowledge that learning that is helpful in order to better understand more complicated math you’re doing later, or just [LAUGHTER] to understand math. And so we have to figure out the same thing for students. And then second, it’s related to one of the causes of cheating that we haven’t mentioned yet, which is the extrinsic motivation, right? If I’m only motivated by the grades and the degree, I’m more likely to cheat, and if I don’t see the point of the assignment in helping me get there. And so raising students’ intrinsic motivations means we’ve got to really seriously rethink what we do in college and university. Are these learning objectives still relevant in the age of AI, and if they’re not, what needs to be updated? Are my assessments still relevant? So many courses require students to demonstrate their knowledge in writing. Why? Is writing really something that every single class needs to use as an objective measure of a student’s knowledge and abilities? Probably not. And so we really need to rethink some of those things to make everything more authentic and meaningful to students’ lives today, which will increase their intrinsic motivation and help reduce the likelihood that they might cheat.

David: We want to make it clear that learning objectives are where things should begin. It’s that classic backwards-design approach, and so Tricia says we don’t want anyone to think that Tricia is saying that writing is not important. The question is not writing is not important, the question is, is writing important to what you do? And that’s what for instructors to determine. Sometimes it’s critically important. Sometimes it’s just really useful. But at any rate, if you design your courses from the objectives back, then you can be really thoughtful about what you’re asking your students to do in a way that can incorporate AI when it’s appropriate, ban it when it’s appropriate, and be agnostic when it’s appropriate. But to focus on the learning… It doesn’t matter what you’re doing, focusing on those learning goals and updating what you do is maybe the other key theme. It’s not all about student motivation. You can’t design cheating out of a class, as our friend Kath Ellis likes to say, you can only design it in, so that’s one, and very important component, is motivation. Another is assessment, as Tricia said, and communication.

Rebecca: This emphasis on learning is certainly aligned with one of the strategies that you suggest around growth mindset. Can you talk a little bit about how to help students develop that growth mindset in this kind of a context?

Tricia: Well, we mentioned that in the book because it’s one of the pieces, as David said, we’re not introducing anything new. And so our book really isn’t about so much of how do you create growth mindset is thinking about, if we have a growth mindset about our students, that will change the ways in which we tackle the problem of cheating, and if we have a growth mindset not just of students in my content that I’m trying to teach, but in their ethical decision making. So a lot of faculty may start off thinking, well, these students are already adults. They’re 18 years old. They should know better. My job is not to educate people on ethics and morals, and so they think of them as having fixed mindsets. If they cheat, that must mean they’re a cheater, and therefore they need to be punished. And our point about the growth mindset is, in both of those areas, consider that your student still has a lot of room to grow in making ethical decisions, especially when under stress and pressure, especially when given temptations and opportunities, and consider that they still have room to grow in skills and knowledge that is related to your classroom as well. So it’s not so much that we present strategies to help them do that as here’s another way of framing your approach to the cheating problem that you might find helpful and enlightening and empowering rather than depressing, I suppose.

Rebecca: Sometimes that seems tied to this idea of an assumption that students need to come in with certain skill sets, rather than meeting students where they’re at and recognizing where they might be at around this particular idea of academic integrity.

David: Growth mindset really is bound up with another really important psychological concept, which is self efficacy. Students are much less likely to cheat if they think they can do the assignment to their standard in an honest way. If they think it’s impossible or too time consuming or unlikely, then they’re more likely to take a risky or a dishonest approach. And of course, if they come into a class thinking they can’t do it, and they can’t ever do it, then you have low self efficacy and a fixed mindset. And those are students who are either going to fail or cheat because they don’t see any other choice.

Tricia: Fail, cheat, or drop out. We’re going to lose them one way or another.

David: So the question is, are we educators, or are we cops? And if we’re educators or are we gatekeepers? And if we’re educators, then our job is to figure out how to get them to at least engage with the material enough to have one success experience and hopefully let that build to a second success. So one might argue, yeah, our job is not to make our students feel good about themselves, and I would actually agree with that, both halves of it, but it is our job to give students tasks that they have a shot at completing, at least to start out. Because we’re not gatekeepers, at least not mostly, we’re educators,

Tricia: Because our book is focused on instructors, and when we talk about it, can sometimes feel like we’re piling on instructors, that we’re giving them all sorts of advice, and there’s so much on their shoulders. And I want to point out that in our book, we also make sure we say, “Hey, institutional leaders, if we’re going to expect faculty to do all this, to make these changes, to adapt their courses and assessments to the age of AI, they need to be given the time, training, and support to do so.” We were not taught in our PhDs how to teach. Like K through 12 teachers were taught how to teach. We were not taught how to design valid assessments. And yes, a lot of us will work at some place where there’ll be a teaching and learning center that will have maybe two instructional designers or maybe one person, and they’re often focused on helping faculty create online courses, as if teaching in person is easier and everybody just knows how to do it. So as we’re giving all this advice to instructors, we’re saying here’s a menu of things we want you to think about. Choose what gives you agency, what empowers you now to tackle this problem? Choose something that you might do next year after you do some more research and institutional leaders, you need to give your faculty, time, training, and support to deliver on this new teaching and learning imperative for the age of AI.

John: We’ve done several podcasts with Elizabeth Canning, and she’s done a fair amount of work on the importance of both instructors having a growth mindset and in building that growth mindset for students, not only does that tend to benefit all students, it tends to also reduce some of those equity gaps. So we’ll include a link to those podcasts and some of the resources there in the show notes as well. With the introduction of AI, a lot of faculty panicked, but I don’t think, from what I’ve seen of surveys, student cheating continued, but it didn’t seem to really increase. The surveys that I’ve seen have indicated that was mostly a shift in the type of cheating. Instead of subscribing to Chegg or other services, students were perhaps a little bit more likely to rely on AI to do some of that, and faculty, though, seemed to be much more concerned about this type of academic integrity issue than with previous ones. What can faculty do to address the issues with AI? You mentioned before that one issue is, some things can be done by AI. Some things can’t. What can we do to help faculty, perhaps, discourage inappropriate use of AI?

David: I think it’s all the things we’ve already talked about. Start by making sure you understand as a faculty member why you’re banning AI or what the rules of engagement are. Is it a knee-jerk reaction. Is it fear and ignorance, or is it a principled approach based on the learning goals of your class? Then, once you’ve done that, and if you’re confident that your approach to AI is based in the learning objectives of your course, make it clear… to start within the syllabus, but I would say with each assignment that you write create some sort of meaningful engagement with AI for your students. I don’t mean have them use it, but tell them what the rules of engagement are for every assessment and every activity in the course, and why it is what it is. And I don’t mean a defensive “why,” because we ban AI when we’re asking students to do fundamental skill-building tasks that will ultimately benefit them in the future, as they try to do more complex tasks, as a general rule, and we allow AI when that AI is enabling them to demonstrate the knowledge that they have in other ways more clearly. And so I think figuring out why you’re doing what you’re doing, telling students when it’s appropriate and when it’s not and when it is appropriate, I think it’s incumbent upon us to learn how to use these tools appropriately and teach our students how to use them appropriately as well. There’s a number of really useful research tools out there, for example, that I don’t think anyone would question the ethicality of using if you use a Google search, you would probably should also be okay with using an AI-aided Google search as an example. So we should start with thinking about it and then talking about it and then doing it, I would say.

Tricia: We encourage, really in the book, communicating with your students. So that means asking them, what tools are you using? How are you using them? How are you finding them helpful? How are you not finding them helpful? Hey, you know how faculty always complain that students don’t read the syllabus right? And they complain that they don’t look ahead, they don’t plan ahead for all the assessments in their class. So let’s look at the syllabus together. Here’s all the assessments or activities we’ve got coming up. When do you think it would be ethical to use AI or in what ways? And when would you think it not be ethical? When students hear each other talk about this, whether it’s asynchronously on a Google Doc or in class, again, pure norms… they start to say, “Oh, so I’ve got my peers saying I shouldn’t write my first draft of my paper with AI, interesting.” That lands different than it does when the professor just says, “Don’t do it.” And then the second thing is, if you’re going to say, don’t do it, you better secure that assessment. So if you are on a diet and you’re trying to not eat any sugar, you do not put sugar in your kitchen. You secure, you lock that baby down, right? And you say, like, that cupboard has no sugar in it. And yet again, we tell students not to use something. And then we say, now go take your exam unproctored at home on your computer [LAUGHTER], and it’s a dereliction of duty. And so we really do have to decide. If we’re going to ban it, it needs to be a secure assessment so we can actually enforce that, and so students don’t feel like you told us not to use it, but everybody’s doing it anyway. So this is not fair. So those are two things I would add to what David said.

Rebecca: One of the things that we often find students focusing on is grades and maybe not always learning. And obviously this conversation is focused a lot on the learning aspect, and even with the idea of assessments, kind of talking about some of the values of those assessments. Are there other approaches, like alternative grading, or other things that you might recommend that might help shift that perspective?

David: No… just kidding. I’ve tried them all. I haven’t tried ungrading, but I’ve done all of them, and I love some parts of all of the different alternative grading schemes, and really don’t like some other parts. So I’m loathe to recommend anything to anybody else beyond stay open-minded and then ask what grades are really for in your context and institution. At elite institutions, I think that they really do play a different role than they do at open admissions, broadly serving institutions. And so I’m not going to sit here in my office and tell anybody how to do anything in their classes, particularly grading, but I will suggest that you rethink how important grades are in your courses, and how important you communicate about grades in your courses. When students are pitted against each other for points, when faculty talk about the points and the grades and the numbers instead of the learning and the outcomes and the processes, students internalize that, they absolutely do. I for one, have shifted away from rigidity in my courses to flexibility with all sorts of things with respect to grades. So a simple example of this is the redo. I’d call it a mulligan, but I don’t think any of my students would really understand what that means. So in one of my project-based classes, they get two redos, plus they can earn one by actually reading the syllabus and responding to an Easter egg in it. So they get three to start. And then if I need to give extra credit, I can give an opportunity to earn more redos, rather than just giving away points. Those redos do a million different things, but one of them is they build in the possibility to fail. They allow students to try something they’re not sure they can do in a way that completely crashes and burns. And I tell them, please crash and burn at least once. It means you got out of your comfort zone, and it’s free, it costs you nothing. And that gives those students who maybe are concerned about engaging and concerned that they can’t be perfect to their own standard, a chance to give it a shot. And of course, more often than not, they’re better than they think they are, and they often don’t even need those redos by the end, but they took the chance. And you can also use a redo in my class, by the way, to get an auto extension so you don’t even need to ask for it. You just can use a redo for that. And then the flexibility means that you have that student who might be failing a class after the first assignment suddenly is still in a position to get an A as long as they don’t do it again, and it just opens up a world of learning opportunities for your students, and at the same time, reduces their desperation levels. And desperation levels are completely correlated cheating. Those kinds of flexibility, whether it be in the structure of assignments like redos, or whether it be something like specs grading, where you can take a look at bundles of points and give students the opportunity to demonstrate their learning in ways that make sense to them. Ungrading has its challenges as well as a wholesale change. And I say, go for it if you have the time and the motivation to do it. But whatever you do, think about flexibility and think about ways to lower that student desperation.

Tricia: And David’s answer there, just reminds me of something that might be important to say in terms of our book. This is what our book is. Our book presents you with multiple options. So as David said, we don’t tell you you must do ungrading and that will solve the cheating problem. We say, “Think about grading. Here’s all the options.” And we use a lot of storytelling from both of our experiences and the experiences of others in the book to illustrate, to provide that anecdotal data. And that’s what this whole teaching and engaging and thriving series in higher ed is about, is these practical books full of research-backed, theory backed-strategies, along with personal stories. And it really is just a menu of things. I think we’d be really firm on a couple of things, like you have to secure assessments if you’re going to ban AI and you really need to communicate with your students. I’ve talked to hundreds of students now about Gen AI misuse, and a lot of them just said, “I just wish our professors would be more clear on what’s allowed and what isn’t. I just wish they’d be more clear.” So those might be the two things that we’re really only very firm about that you really should do everything else is a menu of options.

John: You mentioned securing assessments. The share of students taking classes remotely has grown pretty rapidly since the pandemic, which raises a lot more concerns with this. And there’s also concerns about proctoring services in terms of Fourth Amendment issues and legal issues associated with that. What sort of advice would you provide for people teaching online classes in addressing the use of AI?

Tricia: Yeah, I’ve said a few times now on LinkedIn and social media, online learning can continue. I don’t know that online assessments can continue, at least not if they have to be secure. There’s those proctoring companies that have their own concerns. We’ve got deep fake. We used to say, “Oh, just have Avixa, have an oral meeting with the student where they tell you what they know” …they could deep fake it. Or Derek Newton just showed us at the International Center for Academic Integrity conference in his keynote that there’s just even software to make it look like I’m looking at you taking my test, but I’m really looking up here at my notes. And so even doing those kinds of checks on knowledge are going to be super difficult. One thing that we’re doing here in the University of California system is we’re looking at computer-based testing facilities. Now this is not our idea. University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign started this a while ago. Faculty created an assessment platform called Prairie Learn. So the great thing about Prairie Learn is it does allow mastery-based assessment because it helps you individualize the assessments, and so students can take them over and over again until they master the learning objectives to the level they hope or that we want them to. But also, in a computer-based testing facility, we take tests or assessment administration out of the hands of faculty and TAs who, frankly, their time could be better well spent engaging with students, teaching students, coaching students, tutoring students. And the students come in, we make sure it’s the student who is enrolled in the class is the person actually taking the test, and then they have no access to anything they’re not supposed to have access to. And we’re looking at building those out across the system, and then having an agreement with the Cal State system and the community college system so that any of our, at least California, students who are taking online classes could easily still accessibly transport themselves to a local in-person assessment. Now, the other thing we wanted to make sure when we talk about this is something that another Australian colleague, Phil Dawson, talks about, is probably not every assessment in every course needs to be secure. And we got to start maybe thinking at a programmatic basis, what do students need to know and be able to do by the time they finish this program? At what points do we need secure assessments to make sure they’re hitting those benchmarks? And then, if they’re not hitting those benchmarks, how can we help them catch up? And so I think we just need to rethink how we deliver [LAUGHTER] curriculum and how we assess whether students have met those learning objectives. Another Australian colleague…. we keep always citing our Australian colleagues because they’re brilliant… but Kane Murdoch says that’s like putting a bandaid on an amputated limb. It’s just not going to work if we just try and tinker around the edges.

David: To cite another one of our Australian colleagues, you want to take a Swiss cheese approach to academic integrity, because no one thing will work. So start by building a basis of integrity, by communicating integrity, building dynamic, interesting, and relevant courses for your students, just like we’ve been talking about. But then some assessments that you give them will need to be secured, as Trish said, not all of them do. You can think of it as sort of a division between formative and summative, but it doesn’t quite necessarily have to break down exactly that way. But when you’re getting to those big summative, high-stakes assessments where you’re making sure people can actually be effective doctors or engineers or even psychologists or teachers, it doesn’t really matter what it is, everybody should be able to demonstrate those skills and knowledge. That’s when you have to start using series of other options. So that might mean a technological option, especially in online courses, technology is going to have to play some sort of role, but today, you can probably secure an online assessment at the margins, but still, anybody really motivated can probably work around it. In five years, most elementary school students will be able to work around it. So yeah, I think even if we can secure online assessments today, and that’s an if, we will not be able to secure them long term, and not even the new, clever assessments that the technology allows for. Eventually, we’ll get to a point where AI is testing AI, and people won’t be in there at all, unless we choose to make it so that we’re in there. And that means more human time for us as instructors and assessment creators, and more human time for the students as well.

Tricia: And when we think about it, what do students need us for? They need us for human-to-human interaction. They need us to develop skills and knowledge experientially in solving problems. They do not need us to deliver information. And when you think about it, online learning was really a way to deliver knowledge to people. My master’s was in rural extension studies. How do we deliver knowledge out to everybody, whether they can come to campus or not, and we’re just not in the business of delivering knowledge anymore. We’re in the business of creating knowledge. We’re in the business of co-creating knowledge. We’re in the business of human-to-human interaction. So if we want students to give us money for something other than a piece of paper they get in four years or three years, then we need to provide them with something that AI can’t and what is that one thing? It’s interaction with other humans. It’s learning with other humans. And I thought maybe this is a good time. My tea is Yogi Tea. It comes with quotes, and I just think it’s so fitting that this is the one tea bag I just pulled today. And the quote is, “we can always start again.” And really, at a higher education college, we need to start again. And that sounds very painful, but we have to start again in thinking from scratch of what are we offering, what’s our value to students and to society in the age of AI.

Rebecca: Part of that seems like we all start again as instructors as well, and make sure that we’re familiar with how AI can help us and help our students, instead of constantly fighting it, like better understand what some of the possibilities are so that we can do that redesign work.

David: I don’t think anyone said yet in this podcast, rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but I think it might be time to say that. You should buy our book and you should use the techniques that we suggest, but unless post-secondary education makes some fundamental changes philosophically and practically, that’s what we’re doing. We need to recenter humans in what we do, and we need to offload the parts that we can offload. AI is going to be an incredibly powerful tool for us as teachers, just as it’s becoming for assessment takers and hopefully learners at some point as well. So we need to figure out how to deliver the value that Trish is talking about.

John: When I give workshops to faculty, I’ll often remind them that we need to teach students for their future, not for our past, things that worked for us in the past in the world before, AI may not work so well, and there are a lot of people out there trying to find ways to integrate AI into this, because students will be working with AI in the future, and they have to be able to add some value to that. And if we can somehow assess your ability to go beyond just AI, perhaps that might be a direction that’s worth exploring. And there’s a lot of people trying to work on that right now. Is that something that might be a way around some of these issues?

David: Yeah, I think it’s exactly what we’re advocating for, which is to build assessments that allow AI to be used in a way that is fair and equitable and clear and that allows us to see what students are bringing to the material over and above those same fairly used tools that everyone else. Having said that, there’s also going to be those assessments and those skills that you really need to be able to use without AI, because those are the bedrock, foundational skills, and also the things that you simply don’t want to trust AI for. Computers don’t, and probably won’t for a while, have the ability to do intentionality. They don’t understand that there’s a physical, real world out there. They are living in an electronic world, and so that means you can’t ultimately trust them with ethical choices. So that’s on us to make those ethical choices and to use machines in ways that are ethical, and that’s going to always be, at least for my lifetime, a big part of what we’re teaching our students to do.

Tricia: And I also think that when faculties play with the tools, they have to remember that they are experts in the discipline, probably in what they’re asking the AI tool to help them. And so the other thing I’ve heard, some mistaken conclusion is, “Oh well, I found it very useful for helping me write, so I’m going to let students use it to help them write.” They’re novices. They’re novice writers compared to faculty, they’re novice in your discipline, they’re novice in the content. They’re novice at a lot of skills that you may have been working on, and so how they should be using it, or how you need to scaffold or coach their use in it, is very different than how you would use it. It’s important for us to keep that in mind, that we have to think again, like you said, the future, right, for their future? Well, what does the future look like? Because right now, we only know how AI is beneficial to people with expertise who didn’t have it and developed all these knowledge and skills without it. How do we prepare them for that? If we just allow them to offload everything to AI, then will they be able to use it in any way that’s meaningful?

Rebecca: That seems like a really good note to get to our last question, which is we always end by asking: “What’s next?” [LAUGHTER]

Tricia: That’s a big question.

David: What’s next is change, that I can promise you. We’re at an inflection point, and this change has been coming for a while. COVID, we thought, was going to be the impetus for that change, and maybe it would have been without Gen AI, but there’s no doubt that Gen AI is going to be the impetus for a huge amount of change in almost any part of our lives. But I think that education is going to be the pointy end of the spear with respect to that, and you can think of it from just one little example, which is the intellectual power of writing. Writing, until now, or rhetoric, maybe more broadly, has been the way that we’ve honed our ideas as humans. It’s the way that the late, great Frank Yates, who taught me undergraduate psychology, said writing is nature’s way of telling you how unclear your ideas are. And that’s true of all rhetoric, and it’s actually a fundamental fact about our lives as intellectuals up until now, but suddenly it’s possible to create a coherently and sometimes even well written document without understanding what you’re writing. That’s what Gen AI does. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Well, hard to say, but it’s a new thing, and it is what’s next. And so the question is, what is the next generation of intellectuals look like when they don’t have to write to think? I don’t know what it’s going to be, but it’s going to be a bumpy ride getting there.

Rebecca: It’s a good thing. You said you were leaning into flexibility, huh? [LAUGHTER]

David: It’s really the only choice. It’s amazing what you can do when you have no choice. [LAUGHTER]

Tricia: I have nothing to add there. That’s a great answer, and I think I’m just gonna upvote what David said. [LAUGHTER]

John: Well, thank you for joining us. We strongly recommend that people take a look at your book, because everyone in higher ed is addressing these issues, and it’s a really nice resource that’s very timely. And thank you for joining us.

Rebecca: Yeah, thank you so much.

David: You’re welcome. Thanks for having us.

Tricia: Yeah, thank you.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

387. Picturing Plattsburgh

Primary sources can often feel irrelevant and difficult to navigate for students. In this episode, Jessamyn Neuhaus joins us to discuss how student-created photographs can provide a personalized learning experience and foster a deeper connection to history and the university archives. 

Jessamyn is the Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence and Professor in the School of Education at Syracuse University. Prior to this, she served as Director of the SUNY Plattsburgh Center for Teaching Excellence and was also a Professor in the History Department at SUNY Plattsburgh. Jessamyn is the author of Geeky Pedagogy: a Guide for Intellectuals, Introverts, and Nerds Who Want to be Effective Teachers and the editor of Picture a Professor: Interrupting Biases about Faculty and Increasing Student Learning. See is also the editor of Teaching History: A Journal of Methods. Jessamyn also regularly serves as keynote speaker and workshop facilitator.

Show Notes

  • Neuhaus, J. (2019). Geeky pedagogy: A guide for intellectuals, introverts, and nerds who want to be effective teachers. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press.
  • Neuhaus, J. (2022). Picture a professor: Interrupting biases about faculty and increasing student learning. West Virginia University Press.
  • Picturing Plattsburgh Project
  • Horii, Cassandra Volpe, and Martin Springborg. (2022). What Teaching Looks Like: Higher Education Through Photographs. Elon University Center for Engaged Learning.
  • Cassandra Volpe Hori and Martin Springborg (2022). What Teaching Looks Like. Tea forTeaching podcast. Episode 262. November 8.
  • Neuhaus, Jessamyn (2025). Snafu Edu: Teaching and Learning When Things Go Wrong in the College Classroom. The University of Oklahoma Press..
  • Teaching, Engaging, and Thriving in Higher Ed Series, The University of Oklahoma Press.
  • Laurel Willingham-McLain and Jacques Safari Mwayaona (2025). Students as Partners. Tea for Teaching Podcast. Episode 376. January 16. (the podcast that Jessamyn referred to with her colleagues at Syracuse University)

Transcript

John: Primary sources can often feel irrelevant and difficult to navigate for students. In this episode, we look at how using photographs provides a personalized learning experience and fosters a deeper connection to history and the university archives.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

John: Our guest today is Jessamyn Neuhaus. Jessamyn is the Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence and Professor in the School of Education at Syracuse University. Prior to this, she served as Director of the SUNY Plattsburgh Center for Teaching Excellence and was also a Professor in the History Department at SUNY Plattsburgh. Jessamyn is the author of Geeky Pedagogy: a Guide for Intellectuals, Introverts, and Nerds Who Want to be Effective Teachers and the editor of Picture a Professor: Interrupting Biases about Faculty and Increasing Student Learning. See is also the editor of Teaching History: A Journal of Methods. Jessamyn also regularly serves as keynote speaker and workshop facilitator. Welcome back, Jessamyn. It’s great to see you again..

Jessamyn: Thank you. It’s great to be here.

Rebecca: Today’s teas are:… Jessamyn, are you drinking any tea?

Jessamyn: I’m not drinking tea, but I am drinking some water out of my mug that, written on the side, it tells me you’re doing great, so I’m drinking positivity. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: Love it.

John: We could all use more positivity.

Rebecca: How about you, John?

John: Based on your recommendation quite a while ago, I am drinking Brodie’s Scottish afternoon tea today.

Rebecca: Oh, I’m so jealous. You know why I am jealous, John, because I have a cup of it sitting on my desk [LAUGHTER] because I accidentally grabbed my bottle of water instead. Oops. [LAUGHTER]

Jessamyn: Whoops.

John: So what are you drinking, Rebecca?

Rebecca: I’m drinking this bottle of water [LAUGHTER] that I brought because I forgot my tea on my desk.

John: We do have some teas here. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: So, I’ll have to have some later. I have failed as a host. [LAUGHTER] I’m sorry.

John: It’s your turn. [LAUGHTER]

John: So, we’ve invited you here to talk about the Picturing Plattsburgh project that you conducted in your history course at SUNY Plattsburgh during the spring 2024 semester. We saw you had posted about this on LinkedIn, I believe it was. Can you tell us a little bit about this project?

Jessamyn: Sure, this was for the intro history class, the U.S. history survey at Plattsburgh. It’s 1877 to the present, and for people who teach these history survey classes, there’s a lot of challenges in trying to cover a huge amount of just sort of content and material, helping to try to make it relevant to students, and also just things like materials, like textbooks and preconceptions that students bring in about what studying history means, most of them incorrect. So those were all kinds of challenges that were in my mind. I also was fortunate that semester it was going to be a small group, which was not usually the case for surveys. So I started thinking about what could I do in the way of assessing student learning while also encouraging relevance and meaning for the content? And I was interested, and very interested in the unessay projects and helping students demonstrate their learning and skills in a variety of ways. So all those factors led me to think about what kind of final project we could work on, what sort of research project. I came up with the Picturing Plattsburgh first thinking about when I was writing the little blurb for the catalog, thinking about how in any kind of textbook or any kind of lecture or any kind of material where students are looking up information about the past, they always look at the photographs first. Or really, everybody does that, not just students. People do that. They’re interesting. So they look at the photos first. And I had also started thinking about, what does it mean to teach history in our current historical moment when accessing even facts about the past can pose a real challenge, again, for students, but for everybody. And AI had just started to really make its way into higher education discourse, and I was thinking about, well, what about photographs that are generated by AI? How can I help students develop some of the skills they’re going to need out in the world to access reliable photographic evidence of events that have happened. So that was all my sort of background thinking that led me to the project.

Rebecca: You started talking a little bit about why you chose photos as a focus. Can you talk about how you use it as a primary source material in this class.

Jessamyn: Sure, I really wanted to give these students the opportunity to do the thing really that so many historians love, which is examine primary sources, look at the leftovers from the past and try to make sense and meaning out of the past. Photographs are not necessarily simple primary sources. There’s a lot of complexity to them, but it’s the kind of complexity that we in 2025 might be more equipped to grapple with: whe complexities of analyzing a snapshot moment in time visually requires different critical thinking skills than combing through a 19th-century document. And so I thought photographs would be a way to help students do this without overwhelming them with the kind of abilities that you would have to bring to try to understand… they say the past is a foreign country… like trying to navigate the foreign country of the past. I also thought there could be a real opportunity here for students to look at photographs of where they were right this minute, SUNY Plattsburgh. I had thought about ways to help students feel more connected to the university, that they belong there, and that the resources in the library where the Center for Teaching Excellence, where I was working, where it was situated, these resources, they are there for the students. The students’ tuition helps pay for them. And I wanted them to know and understand that the Special Collections in our Feinberg library are there for you to use. The resources are there for you to mine. So I decided I wanted to have students first go to the special collections. We would arrange ahead of time a visit to the special collections. The Special Collections librarian, an archivist, would collect photographs from the many, many collections of SUNY Plattsburgh life, things that had happened on campus, events, student life, speakers, meetings, things that had happened there on the campus. Debra Kimok was the librarian. She would prepare those ahead of time. I’d bring the students, and I gave them a sheet with some questions, and then they got to choose and look through some of these photographs. There were some of some early sporting events, really there were photographs covering the whole history of SUNY Plattsburgh. We spent a few classes there, and then their assignment was to take some photographs of SUNY Plattsburgh right now, their experience of SUNY Plattsburgh, trying to help them see the continuity and the differences between their own day-to-day experiences and what they had seen looking at photographs in the past. We decided together, as a class, that everybody did three photos, and we decided as a class which ones to select for permanent digital exhibit about their perspectives and experiences as students in 2024 at SUNY Plattsburgh.

Rebecca: That sounds really fun, Jessamyn.

Jessamyn: It was very, very fun. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: I did a project in our Special Collections using photographs too. And it was a really great experience for students, because most of them had never been to Special Collections before. I remember them getting excited about seeing like, “Oh, this is what snow looked like at this time,” versus like the fact that we had, in that year, no snow, barely at all. It was really fun to see them light up and understand the space that they were in a really different way.

Jessamyn: That’s absolutely right. I would say one of the things that it did really successfully was de-mystify what special collections are, what their function is. We went a couple times, and the first time we went, the students were pretty tentative. They came in slowly. They were really hesitant, but the second visit, they walked right in, they started looking through the photos. They asked the librarian for some more here and there. So it seemed to really empower them to do something that we in a U.S. History class would be uniquely qualified to help them, do not just U.S. history, but anybody interested in accessing these materials and really help them feel like they belonged there in the space doing that kind of work.

John: One of the things you mentioned in the write up of this is just how memorable historic photos are. I was thinking when I read that back to when I was studying history sometime in the last century and remembering things like the newspaper that Truman held up saying Dewey wins or similar, types of things. That lasts much longer than specific recollection of a lot of the content of the text that we read at the time. What makes these photos so memorable to students or to any of us?

Jessamyn: Well, I’m not an expert in the kind of visual knowledge and visual study of the past via images. That’s not necessarily my expertise and focus. I come at it from a little bit of a different angle. My sense was less trying to understand why certain photos become so etched in our memory. When I started, I thought that would be one of the things I was going to be looking at and having students discuss. But it quickly became more obvious to me that I wanted them to really explore the idea of the importance of documenting ordinary life, ordinary day-to-day life, and the way that photographs provide insight into that, that many other sources cannot. So I absolutely agree there’s ways that photographs capture major events, historical turning points, but they also, for those of us who really want to try to understand, what was it like to be alive at a certain time, looking at photographs is one way that we can try to get our heads around what was it like to walk down the street? What were people wearing? What was it like to walk into a house? And for the students, I really wanted them to think about what was it like to go to a basketball game at different points in time. What would have been like to live in a dorm and to translate that then into what they were doing, what they were able to do, because now everybody has a camera with them all the time, [LAUGHTER] and I’m old enough to remember that was not always the case, but now it is. So having them rethink some of the implications or possibilities of their own day-to-day life and the way it could be recorded in a photograph.

John: And I mentioned that photo of Truman, but I was also thinking of photos from the Great Depression, food lines, and people in poverty. It creates a much deeper sense of connection than just reading about it, I think.

Jessamyn: I think historical empathy is definitely a skill we would love for undergraduate students to be able to develop. And yes, definitely photos are one way to do that. It also had a lot of power, I thought, because as we were doing this project, we were also in the open source textbook that we were using, we also were focusing our discussions around the photographs and students. I found when we went to Special Collections, when we looked at the photos in the textbook, they were looking for photos that resonated for them in some way with their own experiences, their own identities or backgrounds, experiences, families, interests. So yes, historical empathy, anything to help them feel more connected to the material we were looking at and using.

Rebecca: Definitely sounds like a really empowering project, both as kind of creators, investigators, etc.

Jessamyn: Yeah, I think it was. I’ll add that it was interesting in the Special Collections and in what the students chose to take photographs of that the classroom did not appear very often, and it was interesting how something that really has a disproportionate impact on what students do and how they feel [LAUGHTER] and if they’re successful at the college and university, that there are so few photographs taken of it, really at any point in time.

John: Maybe that’s because they were so busy [LAUGHTER] focusing on their educational activities in the classroom…

Jessamyn: …maybe so…

John: …that they didn’t want to distract themselves with photographs. That would be nice to think.[LAUGHTER]

Jessamyn: Yeah, well, there were issues. We had to be cautious. We did not want any photograph of anyone who did not want their photograph to appear in a possible online exhibit. So that was another reason. Students wouldn’t just be snapping photos of their work in their classes, but they did include some photographs of like group projects outside of class, work they did outside of class, meeting up with people in the computer lab, and stuff like that.

Rebecca: So can you talk a little bit about what some of the learning outcomes for the project were? You’ve hinted at some of them. [LAUGHTER]

Jessamyn: Yeah, sure. So the class had standard learning outcomes for our general education requirements, and I connected work we were doing to those as well, but in addition, I had four learning outcomes specific to that section and our work together: use photographs, so by the end of our class, you will be able to use photographs as primary sources to increase your own understanding of life and events in the United States from 1877 to today; identify what information you need about a photograph and its historical context when you are using photos as primary sources; explain how photographs as primary sources document diverse American Identities, including how some groups experienced bias and discrimination, and work to create change from 1877 to today; and then finally, apply what you’ve learned about photographs as primary sources to document life on campus at SUNY Plattsburgh, particularly the diverse identities of our students, faculty, and staff.

John: So, could you talk about some of the projects that students did and how they realized those learning objectives?

Jessamyn: Well, the reading and reflection they did on each section in the textbook, they were choosing photographs from those sections and reflecting on them to make progress and student learning outcomes, one, two, and three. So they had a reflection journal. They talked and reflected on how the photographs documented diverse experiences, what they needed to know about the source of a photograph… in this open access textbook, you could trace it back to where did the editor access this photograph. How do we know that it is what it says it is? And also looking at the way photographs from the American past document a wide range and diversity of experiences and including people working to enact a social change. The final one was the one that they took photographs, discussed why they would be a good addition to our online exhibit. So we had a shared Google slides that everybody put at least three photographs that they had taken, and then we talked about them as a class and chose which ones we wanted to include for the final exhibit.

Rebecca: So how did students respond to this project?

Jessamyn: So I did a poster on this project for the American Historical Association annual meeting. And in addition to looking at their assignments, I did a post-project survey, and they were aware I might use their answers in this poster. There was some strong success. And then there was a couple things that it did not work as well as I wanted it to work. [LAUGHTER] So I’ll start with that one. The way that the project didn’t succeed as much as I wanted it to was the historical aspect of it. I asked students if, after the project, were they going to be more aware of how historians use photos to understand the past, and it was 10 students who completed the survey, and only three of them said it definitely would do that. However, there were some things and what I think is worth thinking across disciplines, and the takeaways for people in all kinds of classes doing all kinds of projects. The thing that they really responded most positively to was it was their term. I didn’t say it, it was their term that I saw repeatedly. They called it the hands-on aspect of the project. And I think what they were getting at there was that they felt like they were doing things even beyond just the fact we got out of the classroom to watch a special collections, and even beyond the fact that they were taking photos themselves, the overall project gave them a sense of doing something together and working towards this goal, this shared goal, and they responded very, very, very positively to that. And really, I think that’s a strong takeaway thinking about our course design and how we assess student learning and the ways a lot of us are really striving to help students build connections with each other while helping them build these academic skills. And so that idea of an active learning approach, a student-centered approach, they clearly responded to that. They also, in the post-program survey and in other kinds of discussions I had with them, they felt very positive or were interested in looking at photographs of their college campus from the past. They found that interesting. They definitely understand what Special Collections is now. [LAUGHTER] It’s not this weird term they’ve never heard of. And the other thing that it did really well was, I do think almost just in the process of doing it, even if some of them couldn’t quite articulate this, but their work showed that they understood that thing that I was saying I was really hoping they would get, which is that photographs of ordinary life are significant and important. And the other thing that worked really well, we talked about why they could trust that the photographs that were in the textbook were reliable, that they were what they said they were by tracing them back to often Library of Congress. And every time they did that, I would remind them we can trust that this photograph is what it says it is, because the actual real one that you hold in your hand that was taken is at the Library of Congress, like our Special Collections and the people who work there, it is their job to make sure it is what it says it is, and their job depends on it. If they misrepresent it, if they try to falsify something, they’ll get fired. And then we backed it up by then going to Special Collections. So students did actually experience, which so few, not just students, like so few people now, to have the experience of putting your hand on the thing instead of seeing it on the screen. So all those things together, I feel confident that many of the students left with a better understanding of what questions do we need to ask about a photograph to verify that it is what it says it is.

John: And this strikes me as being a type of authentic learning experience which is not vulnerable to AI. And you mentioned AI at the beginning as one of the factors in putting this together. Could you talk just a little bit about that aspect of the project?

Jessamyn:Yeah, I think the concept that I was thinking about, or I would say maybe the principle, the teaching practice, the principle that I was operating from, is that I always want to convey to students that their ideas matter. It’s my strength as an instructor. Dynamic lecturing is not my strength. Being a super lovey dovey is not my strength. [LAUGHTER] But what I’m really, really good at doing and students get right away from me, is that I’m very fascinated in their thinking, and I really value their ideas, and I want to empower them to be able to share their ideas and explain their ideas and write about their ideas in my class and beyond. So the starting point was that, to the student, your experience of being a student at SUNY Plattsburgh is important. It’s valuable. I value it. I want other people to value it. We’re going to put it in a archive. We’re going to put it in a digital collection that’s going to be there and available for anyone who goes to the SUNY Plattsburgh library digital collections forever. So all that is to say that it wasn’t taking an approach of, well, I know that AI is unlikely to generate a photograph of a student at the convenience store at SUNY Plattsburgh or a student’s my cat sitting in the dorm window, but more that students wouldn’t need or want to offload that work, because it matters to them. It was their experience. It was important to them. I mean, it’s not just students. Everybody looks for a shortcut. Our brains look for a shortcut, especially when we think it’s not worth our time. Nobody goes out of their way to spend more time doing things they think are unimportant. Our brains are too smart for that. They say “No, no, what’s the least amount of work I can do [LAUGHTER] to get this done?” So I think it makes total sense to ask students to do work that could help them achieve the learning outcomes, but gives them some choice and some way to make it meaningful for them. That was the other thing they said in the survey. They clearly said that they appreciated having some choice, so they got to choose what to take photos of, and then we worked together to choose the final ones.

Rebecca: That autonomy piece seems incredibly important, as does this idea of being a part of something bigger, because we’re working on like a collective collection and putting things together so they were depending on one another to be successful as well.

Jessamyn: Yeah, I know that, and some other things I did in class really emphasized that your colleagues need you to attend and participate. And I did hear from several students who said something along the lines of it had never occurred to me that my being in class would help another student. I think a lot about academic agency and the idea that as a student, I am an active participant in my education, my success is not dependent on other people, like mainly the professor. I have agency and power to do well. It’s hard to build those skills as a student, especially a newer student. It was an interesting class. There was one senior, and then there was a couple second-semester first-year students. And it was the kind of project where I could see some difference, as in a couple years of working on building that academic agency.

John: And one nice aspect of it is in, I believe it was the words of David Wiley, it’s not one of those disposable assignments [LAUGHTER] where students submit something and they never see it again after the end of the semester. It has a life that lasts beyond that, which gives it much more intrinsic value.

Jessamyn: I think so. Of course, I’m a big archive nerd, so I was, like, really hyped up on the fact it was going to be there forever. I don’t know that that necessarily registered with all the students. I have a feeling it might be one of those things that students do it and then it may take a while to kind of percolate and figure out, “Ph, it’s still there. Oh, look at that.’ [LAUGHTER] I certainly hope it’s around… I believe it should be there for a long time. And if they were to have their children thinking about college or going to college, and this is something that they could show their families, “This is a photograph I took of my dorm, of some friends of mine, of track practice,” [LAUGHTER] it would be very cool.

Rebecca: It’s fun to think about for sure. So one of the things that it sounds like it was important to this project is some of the aesthetic components, or the skill of taking photographs and things that are maybe outside of the historical discipline that you’re in and might take advantage of other skill sets that folks have, but others might feel like they have a deficit in that space. How did you negotiate that with students?

Jessamyn: I am lucky, either just by luck of the draw or the way I conveyed it, they were not worried about that, which was great. They were not worried about that. And maybe it kind of goes to the fact that they were really getting that intended point that just ordinary photographs of ordinary life can tell us so much. Because I will say, and I do write about this in the introduction to the exhibit, these are not highly artistic or professionally crafted photos, even not especially revealing journalistic photographs. They’re really casual and ordinary, even to the point students usually refer to them as pictures. They’re pictures they took. They were taken almost all… there was one person who took some photos with a camera, otherwise it was with their smartphones. None of them, except this semester, was the semester of the total solar eclipse. So with the exception of the total solar eclipse, none of the photos document any exceptionally rare or groundbreaking events. But when you look at them as a whole, they really reveal day-to-day details about life for undergraduate students at Plattsburgh in 2024: the way they socialized, the way they studied, the way they got food, the way they did laundry. And for me, looking at them as a professor, as a parent myself, they do reflect what I see as the hopes and the challenges, the bonds and the aims and desires of our students to do well and succeed and make progress in their life.

Rebecca: Reminds me a lot of some storytelling projects that I’ve heard of, even with kids, and things where you put cameras in the hands of kids to document their daily life to see what it’s like through their eyes, it has a feeling similar to that. And in that respect, I can understand how the aesthetic piece, like drops back as not being important.

Jessamyn: Yeah, they wrote descriptions of the photos, captions, and sort of summary from the photographer’s standpoint, of what’s going on in the photograph, thinking about that historical context piece again.

John: It sounds like a wonderful project, and for students who grew up using Instagram [LAUGHTER] as their primary social media, it seems like a very natural environment for them to be working in.

Jessamyn: Yeah, they did not worry about taking photographs with their phone, that’s for sure.

John: This discussion reminds me a little bit of a podcast we did with Martin Springborg and Cassandra Volpe Hori, who created a book called What Teaching Looks Like. It was, and we can include a link to the podcast we did with them as a link in our show notes. In their book, they captured pictures of day-to-day teaching interactions at many different institutions for much the same reason: to use imagery to represent the interactions that were occurring at that point in time in those specific places. One other thing we should ask about is that, when we last talked to you on the podcast, you were at SUNY Plattsburgh, now you’re at Syracuse. Could you talk a little bit about your new position there?

Jessamyn: Sure, and I’m so glad to have the opportunity to talk about Picturing Plattsburgh one more time, because this was the last class I taught at Plattsburgh after 19 years there, so it was a very bittersweet experience for me, doing the project and working with the students there for the last time. I so, so enjoyed working with SUNY Plattsburgh students, and like I say in the acknowledgement to my new book, sorry for all the mistakes I made, [LAUGHTER] and thank you for sharing your ideas with me, SUNY Plattsburgh students. I started the new role here at Syracuse University in August of 2024. I am the Director of their Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence. We’re a small but mighty center and doing a lot of collaborations with a lot of new people. You’ve actually had two of my colleagues on the Tea for Teaching podcast to talk about our Students Consulting on Teaching Program, which is one of our signature programs here at the CTLE.

Rebecca: So we always wrap up by asking, what’s next, Jessamyn?

Jessamyn: Well, I’m so glad you asked, because I’m hoping to come back pretty soon when my new book comes out. It’s called Snafu Edu: Teaching and Learning When Things Go Wrong in the College Classroom. It’s going to be published in the University of Oklahoma press series, Teaching, Engaging, and Thriving in Higher Ed, and I hope it will be available for pre-order very soon, March/April 2025.

John: We’re looking forward to that. We heard some of the earlier discussions about that on other podcasts, and we’re really glad to see it coming out. And I think we can learn a lot from [LAUGHTER] those experiences.

Rebecca: Well, it’s always a pleasure. Jessamyn, thanks for joining us. Thank you so much for having me,

John: …and we hope to be talking to you very soon [LAUGHTER] about Snafu Edu.

Jessamyn: I’ll be there.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

381. Transition to College

Many students experience challenges transitioning from high school to college. In this episode, Beckie Supiano joins us to discuss changes in the K-12 environment that impact student preparation for college. Beckie is a senior writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education. She began her work at The Chronicle as an intern in 2008 and is a co-author, with Beth McMurtrie of The Chronicle’s Teaching Newsletter.

Transcript

John: Many students experience challenges transitioning from high school to college. In this episode, we discuss changes in the K-12 environment that impact student preparation for college.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

John: Our guest today is Beckie Supiano, a senior writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education. She began her work at The Chronicle as an intern in 2008 and is a co-author, with Beth McMurtrie of The Chronicle’s Teaching Newsletter. Beckie’s insightful articles have been a regular source of inspiration for us as faculty and many of our past podcasts were the result of things we’ve read in your articles. Welcome.

Beckie: Thanks so much for having me.

Rebecca: Today’s teas are:… Beckie, are you drinking any tea with us today?

Beckie: You know, I’m not really a tea drinker. I have finished my morning pot of coffee, and I’ve switched over to sparkling water over here.

Rebecca: I would say probably many of our listeners are right on team Beckie. How about you, John?

John: I am drinking a ginger peach black tea today.

Rebecca: I’m back to drinking that candy cane tea that I’ve been drinking lately. It’s really a nice blend of black and herbal mint.

John: Interesting, although that may not work so well once we hit the summer, you may want to finish it up by then. It just may seem a bit non seasonal

Rebecca: at the rate I’ve been drinking it, it may happen.

John: So we’ve invited you here today to discuss your recent article: “Some Assembly Still Required: How K-12 reforms and recent disruptions created Gen Z’s baffling habits.” College faculty have, as long as there have been records, complained that the K-12 system left a lot of students unprepared for college, but the gap between high school preparation and college expectations seem to have gotten quite a bit worse in recent years. What are some of the changes in student experiences and in the K-12 environment that have made this transition more difficult for both the students and for the faculty who will be teaching them?

Beckie: I’ll mention this article is part of a series that my colleague, Beth McMurtrie and I and another colleague have been writing for really about the past year, called “Teaching Gen Z,” which was really our attempt to describe and untangle a lot of what professors have been noticing with this group of traditional age students. And so we got to a point where we sort of thought, “Oh gosh, you know, we really do need to go look at what’s been going on in K-12.” I hear you, these complaints that “students are coming in unprepared” and “something must be up with schools” are long standing, but there are some things that really do seem to have changed that are important, and obviously that’s what the article is trying to make sense of here. I will say it’s like, “Oh, something must be going on before these students get to college.” And I think one thing I’d like to underscore is it doesn’t seem to be just one something, and I think that’s part of what makes this very complicated, but also what makes it really interesting. A lot of my article looks at the test-based accountability movement and some of its unintended consequences in terms of what is and isn’t focused on in a lot of schools, and how that sets students’ expectations for what education really is. But there are other things too. There’s been a really significant drop in reading for pleasure, which turns out to be a very important thing in terms of students’ reading ability, also the teacher shortage and what that’s meant for who’s in front of classrooms and what they’re doing. And the rise of technology to supplement classroom instruction is related with that last point on the teacher shortage, too. And then, of course, we have the pandemic, which exacerbated lots of existing trends and created some new challenges. And everyone’s still trying to make sense of how that’s all played out, unfortunately, and what some of the longer-term impacts are. And then there’s really the role that schools play in society, and how many things they’re really being asked to do beyond simply educating our country’s children. So what that means, just to take sort of one piece of it that professors are very interested in, students are not getting as much practice reading books or longer articles inside or outside of school, and so professors are noticing that students are having a harder time doing the kind of reading they’re expected to in college. And if you sort of look at what’s going on… again, both in and outside of school before students get there… you can kind of get a little bit of a better handle on why it might be that way.

Rebecca: One of the things that you talk about in your article is the No Child Left Behind Act and just legislation in general that’s intentions are to help our education and our society, but there are sometimes some intended consequences. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Beckie: Yeah, absolutely. So, No Child Left Behind, the federal law signed in 2002 was intended to raise the floor on student performance in school, which I think most people could agree is a good goal. It was a bipartisan effort, and the idea here was that there are groups of students, especially sub-populations, who would be more at risk, students who are members of minority groups or low-income students or in special education programs, and before it was sort of easy to mask if those students were not being well served by school, if they weren’t performing well, and the law was really designed to make it harder to have students kind of passed along through school without getting the education they were supposed to. But what happened is there needs to be some sort of way to evaluate are schools actually educating these students, and the way that that was done is standardized tests. And just like so many things, once you introduce a way to evaluate performance and make it a high-pressure thing where everyone has a lot at stake, everyone’s going to focus on how to look good in that evaluation. And part of what you see is that some of the things that schools might do to try to improve test scores in the short term might be misaligned with things you might do if your goal were longer-term learning. And there are lots of examples of that, and a lot of it’s become more clear now.

John: So, along with the No Child Left Behind Act there was this increase in standardized tests. How did the introduction of these standardized tests affect the way in which classes are taught? One of the examples you mentioned is how 10th graders were taught the Pythagorean theorem. How did that change in response to some of the standardized testing, as well as the breadth and depth of coverage on many other topics.

Beckie: Yeah, so that example about the Pythagorean theorem is one specific example from a test of 10th graders in Massachusetts that a professor I spoke with at Harvard, Dan Koretz, mentioned in our interview that I thought was just such a nice example. So basically, you can reverse engineer these tests to figure out how to help students perform well on them. So in this instance, this example that he gave me, the Princeton Review, figured out like, oh, there’s this pattern where this particular test, for this group of students in this state regularly asked a question on the Pythagorean theorem. And because students cannot use calculators on this test and the Pythagorean Theorem requires using square roots, they’re really only a few kinds of questions this could possibly be, like, if you memorize a few sets of ratios, you can pretty much get the question right, whether or not you understand algebra, and really, whether or not you understand the Pythagorean Theorem. It’s just a sort of test strategy that you could use to perform well on this item, and that’s a problem for a few reasons. I mean one, it means that the item can’t really tell us if students understand math, because they don’t have to [LAUGHTER] to get this question right. So this item, which is one of a small sample of questions used to test: “Do you understand algebra generally?” can’t really be effective at answering that question for us. But a related problem is that if you know that certain material is going to be tested on and again, if there’s a lot of pressure to shore up student performance, there’s all the incentive in the world to really focus on those aspects of a subject in your preparation for students. So lots of practice on specific parts of math, specific reading skills, lots of short passages of reading and writing, because that’s what students would be evaluated on. And so you see this reallocation that certain subjects are emphasized to the detriment of others. And then within subjects like math and reading that were really emphasized, only certain pieces of those subjects would really get attention, which could lead to nice looking test scores, but would also lead to students not having the full preparation they would need to build on those skills in future work, including at college.

Rebecca: When we’re talking about standardized testing, other systematic assessment rubrics also became increasingly common in high schools and colleges. And in your interview, one of the faculty members that you interviewed, Ethan Hutt, suggests that this has made it more difficult for students to create more interesting writing assignments. Is the increased prevalence of rubrics also an outgrowth of the nature of standardized testing?

Beckie: Yeah, so I think that’s a really good example. A rubric can be helpful if students are supposed to come up with a certain type of answer when they’re answering a question on a test. Writing can be kind of formulaic at any level, but there’s some variation in how formulaic it is, and students have been kind of conditioned to write to spec, right? I hear from professors all the time, just interviewing them in our day-in, day-out, coverage of teaching that students really seem to think they are being asked to come up with the answer, the right answer, the answer the professor has already thought of and is walking around with and expecting to hear back, even if students are being asked to share an opinion or talk about their personal experience, something that presumably the professor can’t really have a predetermined answer for. And you can kind of see how this all connects. And so what Hutt was saying is students just feel really lost when they’re asked to just write an essay on a topic. They expect a lot more granular instructions of exactly what to do to deliver the kind of product that the professor wants and will give a good grade to, and when he’ll tell them, like, “I don’t really have that, that’s not really what I do,” they don’t believe it. They think he just won’t tell them. And I’ve heard similar things from other professors as well. I think it’s long been the case that college students are asked to work at a higher level, that they have more freedom to kind of spread their wings and try things out. But it seems like professors are noticing that this group of students, rather than kind of enjoying that and running with it, feels kind of stuck or anxious or just doesn’t know how to proceed without a lot more explicit direction.

John: And that’s put a lot more pressure on college faculty also to use rubrics with assignments, which, again, can limit creativity in students’ writing. We’d like to have students develop some creativity and be able to analyze material, but if we are requiring them only to focus on a narrow subset of their disciplines, might that do some harm to their ability to be productive members of society in a world where they’re not going to be just completing assignments designed to a rubric, or where they’re not going to be getting standardized tests, but they have to deal with real-world problems.

Beckie: Yeah, I think that there’s a lot of concern about all of what you just said on the part of faculty, and it’s hard to figure out how to communicate to students what you really are trying to get them to do, and it’s hard for these reasons, and it’s hard because of generative AI. There’s a lot going on here that’s working against trying to convince students to think critically and do their own creative work, and kind of to find their voice. And that seems to be something that is a heavier lift for everyone involved, sure.

Rebecca: Along those same lines, at the college level, university level, we’re expecting students to be independent and have autonomy and really take those reins. Are there things happening in the K-12 system that are reducing student autonomy? Is that in response to the high-stakes testing and rubrics and all the standardization?

Beckie: Yeah, it’s an interesting question. I think, in terms of how to go about completing the work that does seem to be in play. And some of it, I think, is just also about the way you think about education, and what it’s for. The testing regime is performative, like you’re getting a test and you’re performing on it, and your performance is really important. That’s really different from other ways of thinking about education as being a process. And I think many people in higher education and gosh, you know, many people in K-12 too, would understand that the process thing is important. We’re supposed to be lifelong learners. This is how you go about learning anything. A lot of times, people will talk to me with illustrations of like, “How do you learn to play a sport or a musical instrument?” This is sort of how humans learn. We have better and better handle on that from research on learning, but it’s tough, I think, to get students to shift gears. And this is, I think, interrelated to something that professors also experience, where students are very grade motivated, and I think it’s easy for professors to be exasperated by that, but especially at a place with a selective admissions process like, oh gosh, you know, students have been really strongly conditioned to think about their grades, or they probably wouldn’t be in your classroom at all. And it’s hard to turn that off.

John: And much of this seems to be related to the changes in incentives that K-12 instructors and administrators face because the funding they receive may be tied to the success of students on these standardized exams, but by narrowing what students are studying, or narrowing the range of topics addressed to those things that can be captured in multiple-choice exams and standardized tests, one of the things you’re suggesting, I think, in the article, is that students are missing out on some of the wider explorations and a wider breadth of learning that perhaps might have been more common in the absence of some of the standardization. Is that correct?

Beckie: Yeah, it’s interesting. Some of the education scholars I spoke to emphasize that before all of this, if you go back pre-2002, and there were even some earlier efforts in this direction before that, you just probably had a more uneven landscape. Like a really good teacher could do some things that would be harder to get away with now. But also that isn’t to say that’s always what happened. Teaching was probably a little more uneven before, which is interesting to think about. But this narrowing, I think, is interesting. One of the things that came up again in my reporting here, I also looked a bit at the Common Core, which is designed to help students be college and career ready. Again, like really good intentions there, but there’s this idea that, okay, most of us out in the working world, most of the reading and writing we do is shorter things. It’s emails and memos and reading an article that’s kind of shorter. It’s not sit down and read this book and then write a term paper, and that’s not what most people are doing. But it seems now that there are some things about reading whole books that change the way people read. Their reading ability is different if they only read like snippets of things and don’t have to think about like, “What is this author’s argument in some sort of a context beyond just some little passage?” And another example that came up is history, if you’re reading in history, like as a subject, and then in college as a discipline that, in addition to giving you access to a different disciplinary understanding of the world, would also enhance your reading ability in ways that just doing reading drills won’t. The reading drills can maybe bring up that floor, but there’s some ceiling there that students aren’t getting the ability to work toward, and it’s interesting just thinking about how these things are interconnected. Another dimension that came up in my reporting was students reading for pleasure. And if you think about it, oh, it makes sense. If you just read more of anything, you learn more stuff, and you can make connections between the things you learn when you’re reading this book just because you’re interested in whatever to other things you’re learning at school and elsewhere, and to just take that piece away has a lot more consequences than maybe would be apparent if you’re just thinking about the basic things that everyone needs to know.

Rebecca: One of the things that came up in your article, but we’re also just observing in our landscape is not just short-form reading, but there’s a plethora of videos available, podcasts available, AI available. For example, even on The Chronicle website, [LAUGHTER], now there’s an AI tool to get information fast. It’s great. It’s helpful to be able to get information in a lot of different modalities. There’s real strength in the ability to get information in multiple modalities. There’s benefits to that, as well as maybe some detriments to not always using all the modalities available.

Beckie: I think it’s interesting, and it’s hard for professors to figure out how much reading and writing, per se, really matter as a way to get information or a way to convey what you know. But I think, for most of them, it’s hard to imagine that there isn’t something important about those skills in particular,

John: I remember when I went to high school sometime last century, a while back, but it was really common for us to be asked in English classes and in social science classes to read multiple books in the semester or in the course of the academic year, but with the introduction of the Common Core standards that you’ve mentioned, the focus on that is a bit different. One of the things you suggest is that the Common Core focus is more on close-reading skills, which encourages practice with close-reading skills. How might that be harming students’ ability or interest in engaging with larger texts.

Beckie: When I talked to a professor, James S. Kim, who studies reading and the development of that, one of the things that came up was that there was a sort of virtuous cycle with reading, like, if you read more, you get better at it, and reading at length is just different. I mean, I think close reading is an important skill, but you can work on that while you’re reading something longer, and the reverse kind of isn’t true. And I think part of what’s emerging is that there are so many different things going on with reading, and focusing just on close reading doesn’t enable students to be able to be well prepared to do all the things they need to do with it when they get to college. Reading in college does work differently. It’s supposed to. You read differently in different courses, and that’s always been a hump for students, but it again, seems to have changed. One of the education professors I interviewed for my story was describing how her students in like, not a first-year course, didn’t read the directions correctly on an assignment, and she had to kind of go back and do that with them. And her argument, this is Julie Cohen at UVA, her argument is that this illustrates to her that it’s the teacher shortage, that someone who’s gone through the right preparation to be a classroom teacher would have covered this in high school, and students just aren’t getting enough practice with it before they get to college. That’s her read on the situation. But we’ve heard this from other professors too, that some of this is even just like a simple reading comprehension issue.

Rebecca: One of the things that we haven’t quite touched on yet is the introduction of smartphones and apps. We talked a little bit about AI and video and things and how they’ve predominated our media landscape, but what about the access to smartphones and high school students and earlier having access to these.

Beckie: There’s obviously a lot of debate around this, and I’m not sure that anyone has it all completely figured out, But there are real concerns about attention and certainly time you’re spending scrolling on your phone is time you’re not spending reading for pleasure. That seems kind of obvious. Some of this is about what’s going on outside of school. And then one of the professors I talked to, Morgan Polikoff, at USC, was saying that he thinks a sort of underappreciated dimension of this is that there’s this idea now that younger students don’t read, won’t read, and sort of a hesitation to expect it of them, right? Like, oh, we have just used something that students are going to participate in. And so his argument is that there’s sort of this acceptance of like, oh, students won’t do this, so let’s not even try to make them.

Rebecca: I wonder if that’s tied to whether or not we have role models that are doing that. I’m thinking about my own daughter, who’s in second grade. We’ve instituted family reading time mostly because we want to read, so she has her own sets of books so that she’s reading, but that’s because we’re all spending time reading. And if that’s not a culture in a space where a kid is, where people aren’t reading all the time and they are on their phones, then the expectation might be to be on a phone.

Beckie: I think it’s an interesting question. There’s obviously, like, more than one way you can be using your phone, and I think a lot of us do a lot of reading [LAUGHTER] on our phones too, but from the outside, it’s not always even clear if that is actually what you’re doing. And when I talked to James Kim, he did talk about that, what parents are doing matters here too. Are you talking about school and even if you are reading, is that visible to kids? And we know a lot of adults aren’t reading either.

John: And smartphone apps are designed to get attention, there’s a large financial incentive for the developers of those apps to build apps that capture attention, and so it’s a tough competition, from a student’s perspective, between something that provides this immediate gratification and interesting content, or learning something in more depth, which may be a little bit more tedious, which was a challenge that wasn’t faced in much earlier cohorts.

Beckie: Yeah, I mean, I’ve definitely talked to some students who are aware of that problem. I did another story for this series about students struggling to work independently and just needing more support to do ambitious work in a course, like a big paper or project. And that’s something that came up talking with students about their own habits. It is hard. And I think it’s hard even for those of us who are past that part of our lives, that distraction is real. And I think there are a lot of people who don’t really have the option of just putting the phone in a drawer for large stretches of the day, because they have to be reachable. And if you’re reachable, you’re reachable. It’s definitely a hard thing for students, and I think one that I think a lot of us can sympathize with.

Rebecca: One of the conversations that I had recently with a colleague, and we were having with some kids, where the kids were like, “Well, can you just Google that for me, if you don’t know the answer, like, just look it up.” Yeah, we used to have to, like, look in an encyclopedia, go check out a book from the library, [LAUGHTER] and just like the difference in how quickly you can get an answer to a question versus having to work a little bit to get an answer to even basic questions about whatever.

Beckie: It’s really interesting. And then I think the challenge is then easier to get an answer, but harder to know if it’s a good answer, right?

Rebecca: Yeah.

Beckie: I mean, I think that’s hard for, again, lots of folks who are long past being a student and just figuring out, okay, you can search for something, but how do you evaluate the answers you’re seeing?

John: So, generative AI and hallucinations provide students with some serious challenges there, too, in interpreting or examining the accuracy of information that’s being provided.

Rebecca: There’s a long thread on blue sky recently about hallucinations related to summaries and searches about some basic science topics. So if a kid’s like looking up a basic answer to something it could be completely inaccurate. It would be a topic that would be somewhat simple to answer, but the answer that they’re getting because they’re looking at the AI summaries are just completely inaccurate.

John: Although it has been getting better…

Rebecca: Yeah, It’s getting better, but…

John:… to be fair.

Rebecca: Again, these were searches that just happened in the past.

John: So one of the other things you talk about is the impact that the pandemic has had on student preparation for college. Could you talk a little bit about that?

Beckie: Yeah, absolutely. I think it’s hard to tease out exactly what’s gone on here, just from covering pandemic teaching while it was going on, I think there was a long period of just everyone kind of wishing very hard that things would go back to normal this time, like, okay, next semester, we’re gonna be back to normal. Okay, next semester, [LAUGHTER] we’re gonna be back to normal, and I can sympathize, again, with why people had that expectation, but there are some things that really do seem to have shifted. One question is, did students just not get whatever they were supposed to learn during the period of emergency remote instruction, which, of course, looked different at different schools, like, how long did that last for and how did it work, and how much instruction were students really getting during that time, and how much were they actually expected to do their work? And as time goes by, the students coming into college who have been younger and younger whenever that happened, and have had more time to kind of regroup from that and catch up in various ways. But other things change too, and part of what seems to have changed is expectations. For a while there, students in high school were given a little more ability to push back on expectations, to say, like, “We really can’t do this. You’re asking too much,” and to be listened to in a way that they probably wouldn’t normally be. And I think, even for folks who think that was the right way to proceed during that time, it’s been hard to come back from, like, this idea that deadlines and grades and you really do have to do this stuff, just haven’t come back. And someone else I spoke with, Elena Silva at New America think tank, was describing that even just the question of, like, “Why are we here at all in the first place?” I mean, before you kind of close physical schools for a stretch of time, I think for many students, it wouldn’t really occur to them, like, “Oh, why are we here at all? What could we be doing instead?” And then she pointed out, a lot of the rest of us never quite went back to working the way we normally did, but students have kind of been expected to do that, and there’s a little more pushback and like, “What is this all for?” And it’s something I hear so much, again, from my higher ed sources, from professors, from faculty developers, like giving students that “why,” that reason, is just so important. They seem to need it more now. Getting some buy-in from them that, like, this isn’t just some busy work you’re being forced to do to like kill time, but we’re actually trying to give you something valuable, and being able to really articulate what that is, is not a silver bullet, but it does seem to be a necessary first step in a lot of cases.

Rebecca: How has the pandemic affected student preparation for college?

Beckie: I think that it’s really such a mixed bag. I talked to Tim Renick, who has all this great data from higher education in Georgia looking at entry-level courses there, and he said, like, “Oh, we really saw, like, this immediate pandemic era hit in student performance in these intro courses, but we seem to have worked through that.” Like students have kind of bounced back to normal on that front. But I do think there’s more to it than just “did you kind of get the content that you can build on in this next course?”…all these other things around, like how to function as a student, the independent work, and the sort of understanding of why you’re there, and the ability to kind of forge ahead with that. Those things do seem to have taken a hit. The other article I wrote for this series about students working independently, described that, like a lot of professors, years out from pandemic teaching, have found that if they really want students to deliver some big project or paper or deliverable, if you will, from their course. If they really see that as important, they have to create more time and space for students to work on it, give them more feedback, maybe give them more class time. It seems like students are having a harder time doing work on their own outside of class, and professors have to decide, like, if they really want that work to happen, they might have to sort of change the way it gets done, including where, including it might have to happen more when the professor is available to students in class.

John: Along with the changes in the way students were learning during the pandemic, there were also some pretty substantial learning losses that were shared fairly unequally across the population. All the students who were in elementary or high school during that period ended up being quite a bit behind the usual rate of progression. International standardized test scores like the PISA have been steadily declining, but there was a precipitous drop during the pandemic where students are about anywhere from six months to a year behind in terms of where they would have been in terms of math scores and reading scores, but those gaps are pretty unequally shared. There’s a pretty high variance in that, which again, presents some problems. What sort of things might college faculty do in addressing those learning losses and also the disparity in those losses that occurred across our student populations?

Beckie: I think this is a huge challenge. And again, it’s something that predates the pandemic, but was magnified by it. I mean, students are not getting the same kind of preparation for college. A lot depends on where you went to school and what resources you have available in your school and at home, and that’s long been true, but it’s, I think, kind of easy to pretend that it isn’t, that students are coming in and they’re all kind of expected to sort of do the same thing wherever they’re coming from. I hear a lot of debate among faculty about whether it’s on them to help students do things like learn how to study, learn how to read the directions. Know that you can’t just sit there with your textbook and a highlighter at the library, and then do well on your STEM exam in college. And on the one hand, professors are in their role because of their subject matter expertise… that’s very important to them, and in a lot of courses, making sure that students have a handle on certain material for specific reasons for the future is really the name of the game, and I can understand why people really center that. But I’m hearing a lot of other professors say, like, “Well, if students come in and they don’t know how to do something, even if it’s something kind of basic we all think they should be able to do, we have to teach them now, like they can’t do the work of the course if they don’t know how to study, or they don’t know how to read the way we expect them to read, or they don’t know how to write the way we expect them to write. And even if that doesn’t seem like it’s within the parameters of your job, if students haven’t gotten this somewhere else by the time they get to you, they’re not gonna be able to do well in your course without it, then you do have some responsibility to help them figure that out, and it’s really a lot to ask of professors. It’s not like there’s extra time for that, and also it’s not something that professors necessarily know how to teach students. They don’t have the same kind of training as a K-12 teacher. Some professors really don’t have much training at all in teaching, and it’s really complicated to figure out why people are missing something that they’re missing, and what they need to kind of get there, and if you’re seeing different kinds of misunderstandings or mistakes or gaps than in the past, like that does really put a lot more work on faculty. But what’s going to happen if they don’t try? Like, what’s going to happen to those students?

John: The No Child Left Behind Act was put together to try to make sure that the quality of education was raised for all students so that we weren’t losing more students along the way. And it’s resulted in some changes that probably help students at the bottom a little bit more, but it also may limit the range of topics that students learn and the depth of topics. But in terms of colleges, one of the things that we encourage faculty to do in terms of creating an inclusive teaching environment is to provide more structure on assignments, to use rubrics to make expectations more transparent. That has been shown to reduce some of those equity gaps in outcomes, but it might also tend to reduce the time that students spend on developing critical thinking skills. So that’s a trade off that I think is at the heart of some of this discussion, both in K-12 and also in college discussions. We want to make sure that all students have equal opportunities, but perhaps some of the strategies we’re using to do that might limit learning for all students to those things that we’re focusing on in our rubrics or a test. Do you see any way of resolving that, other than continually experimenting to come up with the best balance?

Beckie: Yeah, I don’t think I have the answer there. It’s hard, and I think it’s hard to ask anyone teaching, meet students where they are and then get them where they’re supposed to be. That’s a tall order, always, and it seems especially hard now. It reminds me a bit of the pandemic era debate on how much flexibility to give students and how much structure, which kind of cuts similarly, like, Okay, it’s a crisis. Students need flexibility. They don’t have time, they can’t meet these deadlines. And then it kind of turns out as time goes on, like, oh, the same students whose lives beyond the classroom really require them to have flexibility also really need structure, because they haven’t gotten the same opportunities to figure out how to build it for themselves. And so how do you support both of those things? It’s hard, and I think like figuring out how to create more equitable conditions, I don’t think you can create equitable conditions, given the very different background students are coming from. But to move toward that and also really support learning is hard, and I think there are things that professors are doing to try to help students that end up not helping all of them or not working out as intended. And yeah, I think there is constant experimentation with that. I think it’s kind of hard to overstate how difficult all of this is if you really care about it and try hard to make it better, as many of the people I talk to in my job are oriented to.

Rebecca: As you were asking your question, John, I was thinking, it’s not just like critical thinking, it’s like creativity, there’s just a lot of space there, I don’t know if balance is the right word either, right if we can find a balance, it’s just like, how do you keep all of those things in the kitchen [LAUGHTER] while you’re cooking as ingredients? So we always wrap up by asking, what’s next?

Beckie: Yeah, that’s a hard question, isn’t it? One of the thoughts I had as I was working on this K-12 story is just how hard it is to remember what it was like for there to be this bipartisan education effort. Consensus is too strong, but like, just sort of this shared understanding, even of like, what are the problems and how might they be tackled? That feels just very unfamiliar right now, [LAUGHTER] even though I was there writing about some of this as it was happening. So that’s just sort of wild to think about. I think for colleges and professors, what’s next, I think, is partly just recognizing there does seem to be something that isn’t just a short-term shift in play here, and just kind of accepting that, I guess, and figuring out some way to try to hold things together in light of that. There’s sort of this crisis approach that everyone was in for a while, and that’s faded. But. It does seem that student work habits and expectations really have changed, and figuring out how to move forward with that is going to continue to be important. Again, one thing I have been thinking about is, is there some shift in what happens in class, and what does that look like? I’ve talked to a lot of individual professors who are rethinking that, both because of these student preparation issues and also because of AI and the possibility that students will turn in work that they haven’t really done work on themselves, would obviously be enormously complicated to expect students to be in class more during college, but that’s one of the things I’ve started wondering about. I mean, this sort of expectation that you spend a couple hours on your own doing this independent work for every hour you’re in the room seems like it’s kind of broken down. And so what do you do with that? I think there’s an answer there for professors, and then there’s the much harder kind of system level answer to that.

John: Well, thank you. It’s been great talking to you. And we’d also like to put in a plug for The Chronicle’s podcast. Could you talk just a little bit about that?

Beckie: Sure, The Chronicle has a fairly new podcast called College Matters, which is hosted by my colleague Jack Stripling, and it’s a great way for people inside and outside of higher ed to kind of follow along with some of the big issues of the day. Jack features Chronicle journalists and also some of the people we write about, expert sources, policy makers, folks who work on campuses. And it’s a really fun listen, because he’s a really good interviewer, and I would encourage folks to check that out.

Rebecca: Well, thanks so much for joining us. I know that you’ll continue being an inspiration for our podcast and always a good read.

Beckie: Thanks so much for having me. I really appreciate it.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

379. Mentor Mindset

Many attempts at influencing adolescent behavior fail. In this episode, David S. Yeager joins us to the use of a mentor mindset by faculty members can  increase student motivation and academic success.

David is the Raymond Dixon Centennial Professor of Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin, and a co-founder of the Texas Behavioral Science and Policy Institute. He is best known for his research with Carol Dweck, Angela Duckworth and Greg Walton on interventions that influence adolescent behaviors. David has served as a consultant for Google, Microsoft, Disney and the World Bank, and is the recipient of over 15 awards for his work in social, developmental, and educational psychology. He has published extensively in scholarly publications, and his research has been featured in The New York Times Magazine, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Scientific American, CNN, Fox News, The Guardian, The Atlantic, and many, many other places. David and Carol Dweck and others have also created a MasterClass on The Power of Mindset. His most recent book is 10 to 25: The Science of Motivating Young People.

Show Notes

Transcript

John: Many attempts at influencing adolescent behavior fail. In this episode, we examine how a mentor mindset may be used to increase student motivation and academic success.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

John: Our guest today is David S. Yeager. David is the Raymond Dixon Centennial professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin, and a co-founder of the Texas Behavioral Science and Policy Institute. He is best known for his research with Carol Dweck, Angela Duckworth and Greg Walton on interventions that influence adolescent behaviors. David has served as a consultant for Google, Microsoft, Disney and the World Bank, and is the recipient of over 15 awards for his work in social, developmental, and educational psychology. He has published extensively in scholarly publications, and his research has been featured in The New York Times Magazine, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Scientific American, CNN, Fox News, The Guardian, The Atlantic, and many, many other places. David and Carol Dweck and others have also created a MasterClass on The Power of Mindset. His most recent book is 10 to 25: The Science of Motivating Young People. Welcome, David.

David: Thanks for having me.

Rebecca: Today’s teas are:… David? Are you drinking any tea with us today?

David: Uh…. No, I am not. I read a short story about tea recently, so that’s the closest tea story that I have for you.

Rebecca: Alright, we’ll count it, we’ll count it, we’ll count it. [LAUGHTER] I know you have water with you, which is, as we know, the foundation of tea.

David:It’s pre tea.

Rebecca: It’s pre tea. [LAUGHTER] How about you, John,

John: I am drinking a spring cherry green tea, continuing the trend of cherry-based teas. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: Yes, the theme continues. I’ve reverted back to the blue sapphire tea.

John: And I thought the spring cherry tea was particularly good with a couple feet of snow that we’ve had in the last few days here.

Rebecca: And it is currently snowing very hard out my window, John.

John: I don’t have windows here, so it’s perfectly nice here until I leave. So we’ve invited you here today to discuss 10 to 25 which brings together a large volume of research findings concerning student motivation in a very accessible manner. Educators at all levels have been raising growing concerns about student motivation. That’s always been there, but it seems to be a little bit more serious in the last few years, while many students report that educators seem to be out of touch with their lives and their experiences, so this book is extremely well timed. How did this book project come about?

David: Yeah, it’s a great question. It’s kind of a convergence of a few different things. So one was just my observation over years that as a society we are so bad at changing and influencing adolescents. One program after another seems to not work, and probably the impetus for that was I was asked to write a paper for the special issue of something called the future of children, like 2017, it’s on social and emotional learning, and it’s an awesome group of scholars and led by Stephanie Jones, who I admire very deeply, and I was asked to write the chapter on adolescents. So what works for social and emotional learning for adolescents? And tell you what, like I kept looking in the literature, and nothing really worked. And then when you look at the meta analyses, it seemed like there was this negative trend where the older the kids in the study, the less effective the program. And the programs that did seem to work weren’t social and emotional learning programs, they were something else that later somebody labeled social and emotional learning. It was like Facing History and Ourselves, which is like a history curriculum. And the side effect of good history education was some better social and emotional outcome. But it wasn’t like they were teaching you square breathing or meditation or something. And I just wanted to get to the bottom of it and I was like, why is it the case that we’ve got all these things that seem to work with younger kids? Because SEL programs did have pretty good results, third, fourth, fifth grade, maybe even younger. So like, what’s going on, seventh grade to 12th grade? And what I discovered was that in general, we kind of have the wrong view of young people, and therefore we keep defaulting to the same kinds of wrong programs, and then we’re shocked that they don’t work, but it’s because they come out of a particular mental model. So everything from DARE to Just Say No to anti-bullying programs, and the list goes on, and I went on sabbatical at Stanford about 10 years ago to try to get to the bottom of this and figure it out. And this book involved a lot more than that, but that’s what started it. And so it’s really been kind of 10 years of work to expand on that idea.

Rebecca: So you just mentioned DARE, and you talk about this and many other educational interventions in your introductory chapter. And similarly, college faculty who give students detailed feedback on their writing often see little feedback being implemented in follow-up submissions. Can you talk a little bit about why many interventions that are designed to improve the lives of adolescents are just so unsuccessful?

David: The first kind of passive insight was that there’s two things: One is that what the programs are trying to change, like the basic hypothesis they’re going after wasn’t the right thing to be changing. And the second is that even if they were targeting the right thing, they didn’t say it in the right way. So just take anti-bullying. The most common way to reduce bullying is to teach kids social skills. It’s like, “Well, the reason why you’re bullying is you don’t have a way of dealing with social conflict that is productive, that you have an unproductive habit.” And the research ended up suggesting that actually, for young kids like third, fourth, fifth, sixth grade, bullying is associated with poor social skills. It’s kids like some of my kids, where they’re ADHD and they just kind of get a rise out of bothering people and saying things repetitively, or getting a rise out of somebody. But for middle school and high school, often bullying is associated with better social skills, because the kind of bullying you’re doing is strategically destroying someone else’s reputation while maintaining plausible deniability, so the adults can’t get you in trouble, but then all of your friends see it, so that way you gain status and you look powerful, and that’s actually very sophisticated to do that. Real world bullying is more sophisticated than what you see in Mean Girls. And it’s not the case that kids need more social skills, because, in fact, the more social skills they had, maybe the better they would be at bullying. So what you often saw actually was an increase in bullying as a result of middle school or high school anti-bullying programs. So that was one big issue. And the second big issue is that even if you were working on the right stuff, and the right stuff, by the way, would be something about trying to maintain your reputation and gain status in a productive way, rather than by destroying others, would be an alternative, for example. But the way the programs are often framed is super lame. I mean, it’s like, DARE is like someone with a neon fanny pack throwing out headbands, like wearing socks and sandals and like, 0% of kids are like, “Oh yeah, you’re right. Next time someone I have a crush on offers me a cigarette, I’m gonna be like, ‘no, because I dare to resist drugs.’” No one’s gonna say that. And in fact, like, if you think back on DARE, they teach skills through scenarios, but like, what are the scenarios? It’s like, you do a skit in front of the class, and like, one kid stands up and they offer the other kid drugs, like, “Hey, man, you want some cocaine?” And then the other kid’s supposed to be like, “No way, dude.” And in every case, the kid offering the drugs looks way cooler than the nerd who says no, and all you’ve done is prove in front of everyone that awesome people offer everyone drugs. And so again, like drug use, on average, goes up in response to DARE and similar programs. So the way to summarize this is that you have to be attuned to the adolescent desire for status and respect, their desire to maintain a good reputation in the eyes of people whose opinions they care about, and if you don’t, then you might just push them away, or you might even make the bad behavior more enticing. And so that’s a launching off point for this book, where I try to suggest better approaches.

John: One of the other things you talk about and you’ve written about is how to provide feedback effectively to students. And one thing that many people have been taught for a very long time and still are is to use that compliment sandwich where you put some critique in between two positive comments. And it turns out that that’s not very effective. One of the things you suggest is that a wise feedback strategy may be more effective. Could you talk a little bit about why the compliment sandwich doesn’t work and why wise feedback may be a more effective way of providing feedback that students will respond to?

David: Yeah, so I’m starting from this premise that young people are like exquisitely sophisticated in they’re thinking about their reputations and how others are perceiving them socially, and given that, when they’re critiqued by a teacher or a coach or a manager or anyone who has power over them, then they’re not just processing it as information to include in their mental model of perfecting a skill, there’s a social implication: “Who is this person who’s implying that I’m not good enough yet? And why do they feel entitled to very publicly say that I’m inadequate? And furthermore, do they think I’ll ever be not inadequate? Like, is there any possibility that I could grow and improve?” So they’re asking these big, existential questions that have their roots in concerns about their status and reputation. What is the adult thinking? Well, they’re thinking, I don’t have to give you any feedback at all, like you’re lucky that I’m even spending any time on you, and don’t complain, stop whining, and the least I’ll do will be to try to soften the blow by being a little nice, but if you don’t like that, then you’re entitled, and you’re a wimp. That’s kind of a lot of adults’ approach. And so what occurs to them is to be like, Alright, well, I don’t want you to cry, so I’m gonna do the compliment sandwich. And the compliment sandwich is something like, “Look, I love your enthusiasm.” It’s a nice thing. And then it’s a negative thing, like,”All of your work is terrible and has to change.” And then there’s the nice thing, like, “Thanks for turning it in on time.” And we do our mental math. It’s like we’re balancing a stoichiometric equation. And then we say “Net positive. So you should thank me for this feedback.” But again, you haven’t addressed the core question in the young person’s mind about their status and their worthiness in our eyes. And so the alternative is to directly address the concern that young people have no value, that they have no potential, they have no future, et cetera, by using something that Geoff Cohen, a Stanford professor, one of my mentors, has called wise feedback. And wise feedback is very simply saying, I’m giving you these comments because I have very high standards, and I know that you can meet them. So it’s first an appeal to a high standard, and second an offer of support so that way they can meet it. And it turns out that that comes across as a very respectful thing to say, and therefore it builds trust, and it puts the young person in a place in which they’re open to criticism, because you’ve addressed their main fear, which is that we view them as incompetent.

Rebecca: So in 2014 you were the first author on an experiment involving wise feedback. Can you talk a little bit about this study?

David: Yeah, so in one experiment that, again, was led initially by Geoff Cohen, my collaborator, and other great people like Valerie Purdie-Vaughns at Columbia, we partnered with a school in the East Coast, and we had teachers assign their seventh grade students an essay to write. So kids write a standard five-paragraph essay, and then the teachers cover them in comments so they do whatever the six plus one writing tactics are, and they kind of do their worst, and then the kids have a chance to revise the essay or not. And the question is, when do kids get their essays back, covered in red ink and say, “This is great. I’m really happy for all of these ways in which I can improve. So thanks for pointing out my flaws, and I’m excited to fix them. So here we go.” When did they say that? And when do they say, “My teacher is such a jerk that he spent his whole weekend trashing the essay in the ego of a seventh grader.” And we found that in the default control group, where we didn’t do any wise feedback, only about 40% of kids even turned in their essays. But we also had teachers append handwritten notes on the essays that said, “I’m giving you these comments because they have high standards, and I know that you can meet them.” And then they sealed the essays in an envelope and handed them back, so that way kids didn’t know which got that note or which got a control group note that didn’t convey any new information. And then a week later, kids had the chance to revise, and what we found is that 80% of kids revised their essay in the wise feedback group. And for me as a parent, you know, I have four kids, and so if twice as many of my kids listened to the things I told them to do, then at least two of my four kids would have pants on by the time it’s time to go to school, and my life would be better. And I was a middle school teacher, and I remember spending all weekend grading essays and thinking, “Oh man, they’re going to be so grateful for all this feedback. They’re gonna carry me on their shoulders like Robin Williams at the end of Dead Poets Society and be a hero.” And instead, they were just like, “Why is this guy such a jerk?” And my life would have been a lot better if I knew about this research at the time. But I will say it’s been interesting since we published that study. There’s a tendency to over claim how important it is. Obviously this is just one assignment one time. I’m not claiming this is a magic bullet. The author, Dan Coyle, in his book The Culture Code, called it magic feedback. And I don’t like that. I don’t think it’s magic. To be honest, what I think the magic is is the feeling of dignity and respect when you’re in a vulnerable position and someone is looking down on you, and they instead assure you that you are a person of worth and value, that, I think is magical. It might happen to the post it note might not. There’s a lot of other ways you can show that, but I think when you do that, then you start tapping into what’s going to motivate adolescents to change. And the more we do that in schools, I think the better off they would be.

John: Is this something that cuts off once you pass adolescence? Could this also refer to the feedback from reviewer two [LAUGHTER] on that paper?

David: It’s funny, I’ve grown less patient as a reviewer over my time as a reviewer. I’m only mean to a specific kind of author. I lose my patience if you’re like, at the University of Chicago, and you have every resource at your fingertips and you still wrote a lazy paper, then I’m like, “I don’t have time for you.” Anybody else, I’m wise feedbacking away. But anyway, I guess I would say that I’m not arguing there’s a magical cutoff of 10 years old, all of a sudden you need wise feedback at 25 you need it, in 25.1 day you don’t it’s really more that the window of 10 to 25 is like the onset of puberty until the adoption of an adult-like role. And that just tends to be a period where your status is very precarious and ambiguous and it’s uncertain to you if you’re going to be taken seriously, if you’re going to be afforded the rights and privileges that you think you deserve. Like a good example is this wonderful study I love from 1998 nobody cites by Ruck and colleagues, and it’s on self-determination needs. And it’s very simple idea. They ask kids at what age do you think you should have a certain right or privilege? And then they ask adults, at what age should kids have it? So an example is being able to write a letter that’s critical of the principal and publish it in the school paper. So seventh graders are like, “Yeah, I should totally be able to do that.” And adults are like, “Not till 11th grade.” So you’ve got this gap. [LAUGHTER] So you got, like, four years or more, depending on the measure, there’s variation in that outcome. But like, you’ve got 1, 2, 3, 4 years where a young person is ready for some right and privilege and society’s saying, “No way.” That’s what I call the adolescent predicament, that your status and respect is in question because of that gap and mismatch, and I think you could experience that later in life. This one interesting guy read my book and emailed me. He’s a general counsel for a large like Fortune 100 company, and he’s like, “Man, I really have to worry about giving feedback to my junior associates, like when they write a brief.” So he’s thinking of himself as the mentor. And then it came out that he’s actually doing a master’s in education because he’s about to retire from being a lawyer, and he’s going to go be a classroom teacher for the sunset of his career. And I was like, as a 60 year old, but first- year teacher, if there’s a principal in the back of the room sitting there with a clipboard making notes on every single thing you’re doing in the classroom, are you going to feel nervous and worried? He’s like, “Oh, absolutely.” So he’s gonna feel back again like a 13-year old getting his essay criticized. So I really think that the operational definition of adolescents, at some level, is this adolescent predicament, this mismatch between the status and respect you think you’re ready for, that you desire, and then what you’re afforded by your context.

John: Beginning early in your book, and through much of it, you talk about the mentor’s dilemma. Could you talk a little bit about what that is and how we can address that?

David: Yeah, the mentor’s dilemma is, again, something coined by Geoff Cohen. It’s the simple idea that it’s very hard to simultaneously criticize someone and motivate them. And the reason why it’s a dilemma is because it feels like you have two bad choices, like one choice is “I’m going to be really honest and tough and impossible to please and tell you all your flaws, but sacrifice your motivation and crush your spirit.” Or the alternative is “I’m going to be nice and friendly and supportive, but I’m not going to tell you the truth. I’m going to withhold feedback.” And neither of those really feels satisfying. It feels like they’re not what you’re supposed to be doing. And what we’ve found, and what we’ve proposed, is that the solution to the mentor’s dilemma is something we call the mentor mindset, and that’s kind of being the walking, talking embodiment of the wise feedback note, where in all your interactions with young people, you’re neither too harsh nor too much of a pushover. You are very tough, you have high standards, but your supports are as high as your demands. So that way young people can meet that demanding standard.

Rebecca: Can you give us some examples of how this mindset might be implemented in a day-to-day student interaction?

David: Yeah, so mentor mindset is something that comes up a lot in let’s just say, how you deal with a student mistake. So in our work, we have this fellowship program for math teachers. Carol Dweck and I and several others developed a new program called FUSE, Fellowship Using the Science of Engagement. And the idea is that the culture teachers create in the classroom can influence whether students benefit from our instruction. So I get to spend all day giving you illustrative math or Eureka math, and correcting all your math misconceptions. But if, fundamentally, the kid thinks that the reason why they made a mistake is because they’re a lazy slacker that the teacher is looking down on, because the teacher explained it clearly and you didn’t do it, and therefore you weren’t paying attention, if that’s your default, then you’re not going to engage with this conceptually demanding, cognitively sophisticated curriculum. You’d be like “No way, because if it’s not clear to me right away, then it’s a threat.” So as a teacher, you need to have a culture in which mistakes are your friend. Otherwise you’re stuck doing a curriculum in which students only ever master things at 100% and they’re never confused, they’re never lost. Therefore, in order to create that culture, you have to have good routines for troubleshooting mistakes with students, because you can’t just blame and shame them or yell at them for making mistakes, nor can you avoid the mistakes altogether. And so I spent some time observing great mentor mindset teachers, teachers who had very high standards and were very supportive, and they make students own their thinking, and they ask tons of open-ended questions, and the students squirm sometimes. And a normal novice teacher, like I would have done, they feel uncomfortable. They think the student’s head’s gonna explode, that they’re sitting there not knowing the answer, but their wait time is unbelievable for these great teachers. And there’s a routine that I call collaborative troubleshooting, and there’s three steps. One is validating what the student has done, so like finding something right about the student’s answer. Next is asking questions to understand: so where did this come from? What was your reasoning? And that ends up being super important, because a lot of teachers immediately jump in and presume they understand the student’s mistake. Oh, you forgot to carry the two. So next time, carry the two. But sometimes we’re wrong, and what teenagers hate is when adults make assumptions about them. And furthermore, when you make assumptions and you’re not right, you end up telling them solutions that were already obvious to them, and then that’s also insulting, like imagine you were lost and you pulled over to ask someone for advice on where to go, and then they’re like, “Did you think about checking Google Maps?” You’re like, “Yes, I thought about checking Google Maps.” It’s a very insulting thing to say, like it’s the most obvious thing. So a lot of times when students come to teachers, that’s how they react, is they tell them to do something obvious that the students already tried. So great mentor mindset teachers don’t do that. They ask questions to understand before they tell and then, last, they kind of ask leading questions to build a bridge to a better understanding, and they wait for the student to piece it together in their minds. Novice teachers don’t do that because they feel anxious that the student is stressed, and then they rush in to tell the answer. This goes back to classic research from Mark Lepper on expert tutors in the mid 90s. Mark Lepper, a Stanford psychologist who coined the term intrinsic motivation initially. He spent years just watching great tutors and found that over 90% of what they say is a question. They’re not sitting there telling you what to think. They’re like, “Huh? Where did that answer come from?” or “Is that right?” And then the student has to have a coach in the head to try to solve the problems. There’s a lot of other examples, but I love that one, both because it’s intuitive once you get it. It’s also not obvious when you’re a novice teacher,

Rebecca: I feel like those same three steps would be great in the healthcare industry.

David: Any industry. You don’t think people like doctors talking down to them for making such idiotic health choices?

Rebecca: I was thinking that might be a great place for teachers to get some empathy. Like, “Where have you been talked down to recently?” Or tech, or any of these places.

David: Well, the interesting thing is, we have this fellowship program for teachers, and their empathy is not hard to get. Just ask them about a time they talk to an instructional coach. Instructional coaches, ideally, are these endlessly empathetic listeners. But that’s not often how it works. It’s like they race in, they tell you what to do. You’re doing everything wrong, and I’m going to check your test scores next week. And I have compassion for the coaches too, because a lot of districts, especially poor districts, use instructional coaches like backup admins, so they’re pushing paper three fourths of the day. They hardly ever get to actually coach. So without blaming any individuals in the system, most teachers almost immediately have access to this idea of everyone making an assumption about your limitations and then telling you obvious things and then making you feel like an idiot. So even though they know that, that’s still often teachers’ default when they talk to kids.

John: As part of this whole mentor mindset, the goal is to treat students with respect and to let them know that you think they’re capable. But a lot of students come in with stereotype threat, a lot of students come in with perhaps some imposter syndrome that they don’t feel they’re going to be successful to begin with. How can we help build that growth mindset in students who may have some doubts about their own ability to thrive?

David: Well, I’d just say that stereotype threat often is more of a situational predicament. It’s more like they’re aware that other people could judge them, even if they don’t personally believe the stereotypes. But I think that for students who are used to adults using something I call an enforcer mindset, which is kind of all standards, no support, or as someone I interview in the book calls it: “Yell, tell, blame and shame.” If that’s what you’re expecting, then it’s very hard for students to see the teacher’s growth mindset and be like, “Yeah, that’s great. I love it,” because all they see is the standard, and they think, “Oh, here we go again, another grown up is going to yell at me for not being good enough.” So I spent a long time interviewing this great teacher who’s kind of like the best growth mindset teacher in Texas. His name is Sergio Estrada. He’s at Riverside High School in El Paso Texas, and Carol Dweck and I interviewed him a lot, like every Friday for months. And every once in a while, some kid would wander in his class during his off period, when we’re talking to him. And I would be like, “Hey, who’s the opposite of Mr. Estrada?” And, I tell you what, I’ve heard some stories. And one kid, Emiliano, told me a story about his English teacher, and his English teacher assigned some essay where they had to write the pro and con or side one/side two, and then he could only come up with one of the two. So he went to the teacher after class to ask for help. He’s like, “I have the assignment. I can only figure out half the assignment.” And then the teacher said, “Tú no lo entendiste porque no quisiste,” which is you didn’t understand it because you didn’t want to. And he was crushed by this, and came back to me and was like, “Dr, Yeager, it’s so unfair.” And I was like, “What do you mean? It’s unfair?” He’s like, “Well, I have ADHD, I only understand half of what anybody tells me,” like, “this is how I get the other half. I can’t imagine wanting the other half anymore than coming after school to come talk to this teacher to try to get it and yet she’s assuming that I was screwing around in class, that I don’t care, I don’t care about my education, don’t care about learning, and then I’m trying to, like, ruin her lesson plan by making everybody be behind and asking questions.” And like, Sergio would never do that, but he also knows when students come in his class that that’s what they’re used to. So he has learned he has to give a speech at the beginning of class explaining that this is a new culture. Say, for example, this idea of questioning, Sergio, like a great tutor asks questions way more than he tells. So if a student is doing a problem set and they’re like, “Mr. Estrada, is this right?” He’ll say, “Well, I don’t know. Do you think it’s right?” So there’s a way of doing that that does not go over well, it goes over like a lead balloon. There’s a way of doing it where you look like the jerk law school professor cold calling people and forcing them to explain their thinking, and you’re trying to humiliate them. And adults do often ask questions of kids in public to humiliate them. I mean, as a parent like, I do that sometimes, even though I don’t want to, I’m like, “what were you thinking?” Or like, “Is that the right way to put your chair away?” Or like, “Should you be grabbing that cookie?” Like, it’s not an authentic question. It’s a question meant to shame and humiliate. So that’s what kids are used to. And so Sergio, before he does his old questioning routine and his collaborative troubleshooting, he’s like, “Alright, guys, I care deeply that you are good at physics after this class. And in fact, everyone who passes this class eventually deeply understands physics, and I don’t want to deprive you of the chance to know that you can do it, so I’m not going to tell you answers, but it’s not because I’m being unhelpful. It’s because I want you to own the thinking. And every year, students eventually get it, and every year students don’t like it at the beginning. So I just want you to know that I’m not trying to shame you, not trying to embarrass you. I’m trying to honor and respect you and make you know that I think you can think, and I want you to build that muscle” or something like that. And then he’ll print it out and he’s got it on the wall. So the next time students are mad or offended and they’re thinking, “Oh, here we go, another enforcer mindset, he’s going to yell at me.” It’s like on the wall, it’s crystal clear. And then by the end of the year, these are students who say, “Mr. Estrada changed my life. He believed in me.” They’re like the first in their family to go to college. They’re getting internships at NASA. I’m not exaggerating, like every summer, students get internships at NASA, but it takes that transparency. You can’t just show up and do mentor mindset if students have that enforcer mindset baggage that they’ve experienced.

Rebecca: So I can imagine that some folks might be thinking adopting a mentor mindset might increase their workload somehow. Is that true?

David: Yeah, it’s interesting. It’s one of the first things I worried about writing this book. I was like, “Oh, am I writing an impossible to accomplish self-help book?” I mean, it would be like, grabbing a diet book where like, “The best way to lose weight is to never eat anything that you enjoy.” Well like, “Yeah, I knew that. The hard part is to eat what I enjoy and still not gain weight.” So I’m not saying the best way to be a teacher is to do it 120 hours a week. And there are things that Sergio does where he’s like, “I don’t recommend anyone do this. It’s like a lot of work.” But I will say two things. One, every great mentor mindset teacher I saw had procedures and policies that they set up early on in the term, and that often involved getting peers to look at each other’s work and having a good culture of peer feedback. It’s kind of a “ask two before me” situation, and they’re not doing that to dismiss kids like gnats. They’re doing it to give them a sense of agency and teach a skill of collaboration. But that, by the way, saves them tons of time, because 80, 90% of errors, like some really high percentage of errors, are things where the minute the kid tries to explain it to their peer, they’re like, “Oh my god, I see it now.” So they actually didn’t need the teacher, like, you just need another human being when they’re explaining. So one thing is, you can still do a lot of this stuff and save time if you just have good procedures for peer collaboration and feedback, it saves you tons of time. The second is, there’s often a short-term, long-term trade off. It does take a little more time to set up procedures and create a relationship of respect, but then the whole second semester, you’ve got independent, autonomous students that are working hard. You don’t even have to like mess with them. So I remembered we interviewed Sergio during COVID, and it was like, April of 2020, and everyone’s on lockdown or whatever. And I was like, Sergio, how’s it going? He’s like, “I feel really bad.” Like, “why do you feel bad?” He’s like, “I’m bored and I feel guilty.” Like, “Why are you bored? Why do you feel guilty?” He’s like, “because I don’t do anything.” “What do you mean, you don’t do anything?” He’s like, “I post the problem sets, then students meet in groups, and they talk about physics all day. Maybe they ask me a question, but otherwise they just work diligently and then learn physics.” And he had the highest rates of passing college level physics that year in his whole district during COVID. And he like was on Tiktok all day, not because he was goofing off, but because students were so self sufficient, and I think that’s the payoff, is you use a mentor mindset, and then you get people where their work is like kind of area under the curve, leading to greater growth and learning, because you’ve created independent, agentic young people.

John: So, it sounds like giving students more agency, perhaps an autonomy-supportive instructional approach and using peers for feedback could be a really effective way of helping improve motivation and maybe some authentic assessments where students see that the work they’re doing has some intrinsic value beyond just a series of hoops they have to jump through, that the instructor is kind of imposing on them to get away from that enforcer mindset and giving students more control over the learning process, it sounds like would be really helpful.

David: Yeah. I mean, I think that there are curricular changes and pedagogical changes that are well known in the literature to be good for student learning and make them agentic or whatever. And I’m not pretending like I’m inventing constructivism or anything like that. It’s more this idea that there’s an unspoken conversation between a student and their past that is present anytime a teacher is pushing them, challenging them, using this maybe more progressive curriculum. And if you’re not attuned to that conversation, and if you’re not able to help a student see that this is different, then they’re going to be wearing a set of lenses that ’s going to cause them to interpret what we’re doing in the worst possible light. And that’s not because Gen Z is too wimpy or too woke or too entitled or whatever it is. It’s because they’re legitimately responding to prior experiences that they’ve had, and they’ve made sense of those, and they’ve allowed that sense making to influence them in the future. That’s just how human thinking works. We form little lay theories of the world based on our experience. So we kind of need to be agents of change, of giving them a new theory that when a teacher is pushing you and challenging you, it’s because they believe in you, and they’re often going to offer you support, and if they don’t, then the support is what you need to find in order to meet that standard.

Rebecca: Transparency can be really transformative and it sounds like that’s something that you’re really advocating for, is being really transparent about [LAUGHTER] doing things that’s respectful.

David: Yeah, like I’ve been saying, you can’t just presume that they will interpret your actions in the best possible light. So a good example that helps, it’s kind of an analogy to teaching, is a study led by Kyle Dobson, who’s a University of Virginia professor, and previously was my postdoc, and we did an experiment where we looked at the context of police officers approaching civilians on the street, and typically, what happens if a police officer comes up and asks you a bunch of questions, is people feel threatened, and we know why. It’s because there are all kinds of stories of arrests and police brutality and things like that. But police officers are baffled by this, because they’re like, “Well, my badge says serve and protect, and why would you not think I’m here to serve and protect? Of course, it’s what I’m doing.” And so there’s this mismatch between the intentions of the officer usually, and then the responses of the civilians. And so we did a study where we had people sitting in desks all around this downtown Austin, and then we had real on-duty police officers, wearing guns and badges, go approach people and ask them a bunch of questions, and they either launched into the questions in a control group, and there, people felt super stressed about it. They had short, kind of curt replies. Their stress physiology didn’t look good when we measured it, implicitly using a PPG monitor on their wrist, and in general, there was very poor rapport. But when the officer started the interaction with a simple transparency statement, when they just said, “Hey, I’m walking around trying to get to know the community, would you mind if I ask you some questions?” When that happened, then people were really open to the conversation. They were kind of into it, and they formed a rapport. And what that suggests is that even in a context where the institutional authority should, in their minds, be viewed as positive, but in civilians’ minds, there’s this history of distrust. And we can look, we see trust going down every single year on major metrics for police and other institutions, you can kind of create a bubble where trust can be restored if you begin with a transparency statement. Now I did a workshop one time for a bunch of principals and superintendents on transparency statements, and I gave the example of, “Hey, imagine you’re a school leader, and there’s a teacher who’s brand new, and you went and set in the back of their class and you took a bunch of notes, and you were giving them feedback. How could you use the transparency statement so that way they didn’t view your feedback in the worst possible light.” And one superintendent was like, “Oh, very easy. I would go up to him and say, ‘hey, look, just want you to know the reason why I’m observing your class is because I think you’re the worst teacher and you need to be monitored.’” And I was like, “You should not be transparent about that. Keep that to yourself, like because that is the main worry that was in their mind already, so do not say that.” So I’m not saying you should be transparent in that way. What I’m saying is [LAUGHTER] be transparent in dispelling the most negative possible interpretations and instead replacing them with better ones. I appreciate the sound of your forehead being slapped [LAUGHTER] as I told that story. That’s a real story. And they were very earnest. They’re like, this is the first person to raise their hand, like, “Oh, this is easy.” I was like, “Really, in a workshop of 100 school leaders, that’s your answer?”

Rebecca: We all know that person.

David: Yeah, they were very confident.

John: In terms of knowing that person… You talked a little bit about the importance of helping students develop that growth mindset and so forth, but there was that study by Elizabeth Canning and others that talk about the importance of faculty having a growth mindset. Both Rebecca and I at various times in various ways do work with professional development. How can we help faculty recognize that maybe having an expectation that students could grow and could become more successful in learning? How can we spread this, other than encouraging people to read your book and other resources, how can we get faculty to recognize that students can become more proficient as they work and develop skills?

David: Yeah. I mean, I think that the beautiful work by Mary Murphy on fixed mindset cultures and Elizabeth Canning is a collaborator, has suggested that what faculty believe can dramatically influence the decisions that they make and what makes sense to them from their perspective. The question of how to change faculty is a little different. So I don’t think that you can just give K-12 teachers or college professors the student growth mindset intervention, like, “Hey, here’s this stuff about the brain.” And a big reason why, we’ve learned, and I write about this in our PNAS article last year, led by my postdoc, Cameron Hecht, growth mindset is really good news to students. It’s like, “Oh, awesome. I don’t have to feel dumb anymore when I make a mistake.” It’s not good news to teachers sometimes, because they’re like, “Wait a second, if mistakes are learning opportunities, then it sounds like I have to re-teach you stuff after you make a mistake, and then I have to regrade it after you try it again, and that sounds like more work.” And as I’ve said, that’s not always the case, but that’s like people’s first interpretation. And so you can’t use that same argument. What we found is you need to use something called a values-aligned argument. And this is a framework developed by Chris Bryan and me. Chris is a business school professor at UT, but he’s a social psychologist by training, and values alignment is very simple the idea that if you want to change someone’s beliefs or attitudes or behavior is easier to align the targeted attitude, behavior, belief, with what they already care about than it is to try to convince them to care about something new. And in the case of teaching, for college professors like we’re very rarely held accountable for what we do, and very few people are ever told even how to backwards plan, let alone teach. And for K-12, they do obviously care a lot about instruction. And obviously college professors do care, but like, in my experience, often the best college professors know about as much about teaching as like, the middle of the road K-12 teacher, because we’re just not given much pedagogical instruction. So for professors, like it’s very hard for your culture of learning and creating growth mindset culture to get to the front of the list. For K-12, it’s also hard because you’re given an endless number of things you’re supposed to be changing and fixing at all times, and you’re going to three PDs a year and there’s three new binders you’re going to put on yourself. It’s going to make you feel guilty that you never implemented them. And so the way we think to cut in line, to get to the front of the line of your motivational priorities, so that a growth mindset culture, or what I call a mentor mindset, is what you want to prioritize, is to align it with what people already care about. And what people already care about often is having the kind of classroom where, when you walk in, students are tracking what you’re doing. They’re motivated, they’re engaged, they’re curious. They ask you questions about your content area. They care more about the learning than the grade. You don’t have this constantly threaten them or blame them or console them to do the minimum. It’s really motivating to have that kind of better motivated classroom culture. And so we say, “Look, if you believe that no one can grow and learn and that it’s all or nothing, that your first grade will be your last grade, then students will pick up on that as disrespectful, because you’re basically telling them that their efforts are wasted and that there’s no point in trying, because if you got an A, well then you’re going to get an A at the end. If you got a C, you’re going to get a C in the end. So what’s the point of doing anything?” That’s a disrespectful way to run your class. And if within 10 to 25 young people are sensitive to disrespect, then they’re going to be disengaged, if that’s how they feel. But if you want to engage them, they need to feel respected. And the way to respect them is to make them feel like they can grow and learn even when they struggle. So we frame growth mindset not as like you should do this, like eating your broccoli kind of thing. It’s more like, maybe there’s some broccoli lovers out there. I don’t there’s an alternative. I don’t want to offend any broccoli eaters. So brussels sprouts…

Rebecca: I like both of those.

David: …specifically brussels sprouts covered in bacon as an appetizer, is mine… But anyway, let’s just pick a food that people kind of have to hold their nose and eat for any objecting broccoli or Brussels sprout eaters and like, that’s not gonna work. But what will work is saying this is a way to be the kind of person you always want it to be, and that, I think, is motivating and exciting for people. And so mentor mindset, framed as a way of respecting young people, and therefore as a way of engaging them, is, I think, more effective.

Rebecca: I think that’s a good pro tip [LAUGHTER] to wrap up on. So I want to be cognizant of our time, so we always wrap up by asking: “what’s next?”

David: Our big initiative right now is basically taking the mentor mindset ideas from the book, and spreading them to educators. So we have a fellowship called the Fellowship Using the Science of Engagement or FUSE that Carol Dweck and I and our collaborators, we personally wrote all the materials and are very excited about them and the results look really good. So in a large randomized trial that’ll be coming out this year later, we find that teachers, if they change their mindsets, they change their behavior. Students, then, when they get the mentor mindset classrooms, they view the classroom as more respectful and more motivating. They feel comfortable raising their hand and asking questions, making mistakes, and then they learn more. And the effects, well, I don’t know if they’ll always be this big, but they look pretty big right now, of .4 standard deviations, which is pretty large in education. And then teacher attrition is down by half, and so is burnout. So the mentor mindset stuff ends up being the only educational intervention that we know of that, in a rigorous randomized trial, changes teachers, changes students’ perceptions, changes students’ grades, and improve teacher well being, and it does so for like $23 a kid, so it’s like 10 times more effective than individualized tutoring at scale for like, 1/100 the cost. So that’s coming, and we’re thinking about how to expand that, scale it and make it better. I will say we hired Sergio Estrada as one of the facilitators for FUSE, and so it’s a real treat for them.

Rebecca: …some really exciting stuff.

John: It sounds like a wonderful program, and we encourage everyone to consider picking up a copy of your book. We’re going to be using it as a reading group on our campus, so we’re really looking forward to it, and we will include links to all the studies that you’ve referenced in the show notes.

David: Great.

John: So thank you, although I do have to say one other thing, that putting bacon around brussels sprouts sounds a lot like a compliment sandwich [LAUGHTER] in some way.

David: I mainly just listened to the Jim Gaffigan bit on bacon and so that was fresh in my mind.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

378. Cure for Engagement

Authentic learning experiences help to create intrinsic motivation for students. In this episode, Julia Koeppe, Bonnie Hall, Paul Craig, and Rebecca Roberts join us to discuss BASIL, a course-based undergraduate research experience in Chemistry that has been implemented in many institutions.

Julia is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Chemistry Department here at SUNY-Oswego. Bonnie is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Chemistry & Physics Department at Grand View University. Paul is a Professor in the School of Chemistry and Material Science at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Rebecca is a Professor in the Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Program in the Department of Biology at Ursinus College.

Transcript

John:Authentic learning experiences help to create intrinsic motivation for students. In this episode, we discuss a course-based undergraduate research experience in Chemistry that has been implemented in many institutions.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

Rebecca: Our guests today are Julia Koeppe, Bonnie Hall, Paul Craig, and Rebecca Roberts. Julia is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Chemistry Department here at SUNY-Oswego. Bonnie is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Chemistry & Physics Department at Grand View University. Paul is a Professor in the School of Chemistry and Material Science at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Rebecca is a Professor in the Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Program in the Department of Biology at Ursinus College. Welcome Julia, Bonnie, Paul, and Rebecca.

John: Today’s teas are:… Julia, what tea are you drinking today?

Julia: I have a wild raspberry hibiscus tea.

John: Very nice. Bonnie?

Bonnie: I have an iced tea because it is quite warm at our location today.

John: And where is your location today?

Bonnie: We are currently in San Juan, Puerto Rico, doing some workshops to support universities here in Puerto Rico.

John: Excellent. And Paul?

Paul: I like Irish Breakfast tea.

Rebecca: That’s a favorite of mine, too.

John: And Rebecca?

Rebecca R.: Like Bonnie, I’m doing the sweetened iced tea because it is warm here in San Juan. And the other Rebecca?

Rebecca: John, I have a new tea that I got this holiday season. It’s called Blue Lady. It’s a flavored black tea, and it’s very tasty.

John: Very good.

Rebecca: Maybe I’ll share with you next time I see you.

John: Usually that only happens when you don’t like the tea.

Rebecca: I know, [LAUGHTER] I know. Usually I give them the stuff I don’t like. [LAUGHTER]

John: And I’m drinking some of the last of the Christmas tea left over from our celebrations several weeks back. It’s not quite as warm here in Oswego right now. I think it’s about 15 degrees, 20 degrees, something like that.

Rebecca: Not if you figure in the wind chill. John, really…

John: Yeah, it’s cool.

Rebecca: Well, we wish we were in Puerto Rico with you, but we’re not. So we’ve invited you here today, virtually, [LAUGHTER] to discuss the biochemistry authentic scientific inquiry laboratory community. Can you give us an overview of this project?

Paul: Sure, the BASIL project is a CURE. CURE stands for course-based undergraduate research experience. And what that means is that we teach a course, a laboratory course, but instead of being a traditional cookbook lab where the instructor knows exactly what’s happening, the students are given directions, and they follow directions and complete their assignments, in a CURE, students actually engage in research. Neither the students nor the instructors know the answer to the question, and so this is open-ended basic research, where discovery actually happens in the course. Our course is focused on predicting protein function. We begin with computational methods, computational tools, these are all web based resources that our students use, and then once they have a prediction, they go in the wet lab, they express and purify the protein, and then they run some assays to see if their prediction is correct. And our overwhelming goal in this process is that we want to transform our students from thinking of themselves as students to thinking of themselves as scientists.

John: So if someone were to visit one of your classrooms, what would it look like? What would be taking place? What would students be doing? What would you be doing?

Rebecca R.: This is Rebecca. It would basically look like a research lab, but going on with a lot of people in the room doing their experiments, and they might be doing different things at different times. So it’s quite an exciting place to be. We have designed BASIL with a flexible structure. So it’s modular, it’s adaptable, and faculty can choose to take as much or as little as they’d like. So we have some faculty that might do only the computational modules with our students, and others might do all of it, or some might choose one module and do it more as a one time in the lab, let’s introduce you to a computational tool. And because of that, it’s been really nice to see how different faculty have chosen to run BASIL at their institutions, depending on their own learning outcomes and student population and the resources that they have at their disposal. We’ve mostly designed it to be at the undergraduate level, but it’s been used at the master’s level. Julia uses it at Oswego in one of her master’s level computational chemistry courses. And we’ve even had some high school faculty take it on for their advanced students at the high school level. The great thing about this flexible structure is it’s what we started with, and it’s what we’ve really maintained a passion for, so that people can use it how they want to use it, and it’s accessible, so it’s open access; all of the computational modules are free web based modules to, again, improve student accessibility and flexibility for the instructors.

Rebecca: Can you talk a little bit about how this differs from traditional instructional approaches in biochemistry?

Julia: So in a traditional biochemistry lab, you might do what’s called, often, a cookbook experiment, where we give you some specific instructions to follow, to learn a particular technique with and then to achieve a known outcome. And in our approach, again, we’re looking at doing some more authentic inquiry and research-based experiments. And so one of the things that is very different from some of the traditional biochemistry lab is the inclusion of the computational tools that we use, and these tools help us to study protein structures in order to predict a function, and then students can use more traditional wet lab techniques in biochemistry to then create their protein sample and do some analysis of that protein to confirm the function. And so there’s a lot more research going on, as far as the instructor doesn’t know the outcome, the student doesn’t know the outcome. The students are really having to come up with a hypothesis based on their initial computational analysis and then design the experiments to test that hypothesis, and when I say they have to do that, it’s because the instructor also doesn’t know what we’re looking for, except that you have the same data the students have already collected computationally. And one of the reasons that I do this in the biochemistry lab is because I like the idea that the students are driving the project, and I also see the students are engaged with the project because they have connections. So they’re learning the different biochemistry lab techniques because they need to use them to solve a problem, rather than just learning techniques, because techniques are important. And I’ll throw it over to Bonnie and Rebecca to talk some about why they’re using the project as well.

Bonnie: So I chose to adopt BASIL because we have a pretty diverse group of students on our campus. We have traditional students coming in at 18. We have a lot of retired military that come in, so veterans, international students, immigrants, and they really go into a wide variety of career options after: some go into industry, some go into sales, some go to graduate programs. And the one thing that we know that every employer, graduate program, whatever it’s going to be, wants them to be able to do, is to learn how to get stuck, which happens in real research, and how to figure out how to get unstuck, how to move forward when you run into a barrier. How do you problem solve and how do you motivate yourself to get through that? And so that’s an experience we really want every student in our program to have.

Rebecca R.: And at Ursinus, I was really interested in the idea of interdisciplinary learning. And again, that’s a tool that students need to be able to have the ability to talk to others in a different field when they’re out of school. And so at Ursinus we leverage the flexible nature of BASIL in that I teach a course in structural biology, and we do all the computational work, the students there, and they then go to the students enrolled in biochemistry and tell them about what they’ve learned, what their hypothesis is, and then the biochemistry students kind of roll with it from there, and they have to talk to each other, and that’s engineered into the syllabus. And they end their semester with a joint poster presentation to the entire campus community during our celebration of student achievement day. And it really forces them to learn from each other and talk to each other, and that is a model that I’ve used to try to engage students in this idea of interdisciplinary conversations across disciplines.

Rebecca: I imagine that the prep for faculty is a little bit different in a course like this than maybe a traditional bio chem class. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Julia: Yeah. And so as far as the computational analysis, that is going to be something that many instructors are not familiar with. And so one of the things that we have done as the developers of the curriculum is try to make these things accessible to the instructors as well as to the students. So one of the reasons we’re here in Puerto Rico right now is that we regularly run workshops to help train instructors how to take on this project and to help them to design their curriculum, to use our modules. And then we also regularly run instructor support workshops, where we will go through how the computational modules work and what you can learn from them, and the kind of data you get, how to analyze those data. As far as the wet lab goes, many of the wet lab experiments, students do follow more traditional labs. It’s just that the focus for each one is a little bit different. Rather than give students a mixture of proteins and ask them to separate that mixture, just to teach them a separation technique, the students have a mixture of proteins because they express a sample using E. coli, and now they need to separate that mixture to isolate their protein of interest, the same as you would do in a research lab. And so many of the wet lab techniques are the same as we would see in a traditional biochemistry lab. And so planning for that is very similar to what you would do for the traditional lab. It’s just your starting material might change from semester to semester, and then the end point for how you test your predictions can change from semester to semester, so that can require the instructor to do a little extra work ahead of the semester, to pick the targets, so that you know what you might need to test, and be able to order your supplies ahead of time, so that you’re not running into difficulties mid semester: I need this thing because these students predicted this function, but the wait time from the company is going to be six weeks, and then graduation will have already happened. So there is some prep time that you have to do ahead. And then there’s also some training. We provide support for that.

Bonnie: For my course, I have my students do a lot of the prep work. When they graduate, if they go into a work or industry environment or an academic environment, there’s going to be the expectation that they can run experiments without a prep person making all their solutions and finding all the reagents. So mine get protocols that look like they do when they come out of the literature. This is what you need to make. How do you take what you took from literature and translate that into steps that you take in the lab? So in fact, we don’t do a lot of prep in advance for my course. I need to know what they’re doing so I can guide them in the right direction, but they’re doing the actual prep work, because that’s experience that’s really valuable for them after they graduate.

John: You’ve all addressed this to some extent, but could you talk a little bit more about the student reaction to this type of instruction? Because it seems like this is providing a really authentic learning experience, which is different from the type of cookbook type approach that was mentioned earlier. And I would think that would make students much more excited, much more curious about the outcomes and so forth, than just doing something that everyone else has done in the past.

Rebecca R.: Students do get excited and when the beginning of the semester starts and I’m explaining what we’ll be doing for the semester, you can see some of the students’ eyes just light up at the thought of doing some real research. One of the powers of course-based undergraduate research experience in general is that you can engage more students in the research better than in the one-on-one mentoring model. And the data in the literature shows that experiences with CUREs do improve the student’s identity as a scientist. They feel more project ownership. They begin to appreciate the reasons behind why they’re doing a certain method. And so that is all really exciting for the students. What was mentioned earlier is this idea of failing, and that happens a lot, and that could be really scary for an instructor who’s taking on a CURE for the first time, because you do lose a little bit of the power and control, because you don’t really know what might happen that day in the lab. And I’ve really embraced that idea of having the students do research, take the risk, experience the failure that was mentioned before, and pushing through it, not taking it personally, learning how to troubleshoot, learning how to celebrate the little things in research that actually do go well and not to get so frustrated by failure. So I like doing a CURE in my courses, because it allows for a safe space, a slightly more controlled space, for students to engage with failure and get the experience of overcoming that.

Julia: Yeah, and I can add that there are students who get very excited that I don’t know what the answer is, so I cannot gauge their ability to do this based on whether they got the correct answer. However, there are also students that are very frustrated by the fact that we don’t know what the answer is, so I cannot tell you if you are correct. And so you see both sides of that, but there’s some students that are very happy to hear: “I don’t know.” I can’t grade them on whether they are correct or not. I can grade them on what they learned, and I really emphasize that as well. I’m gonna see that you can tell me something that you learned and show me that you have some understanding of what you’re doing, but even I don’t know if you’ve got the right answer.

Rebecca: Can you talk a bit about how this project got started? I mean, there’s four of you. You’re together, you’re in Puerto Rico, and you’re doing a lot of work together. How did this all get started in the first place?

Paul: Well, I’m a computational biochemist, and if I never go into another wet lab again or touch a test tube or make up a buffer or grow E coli again, I’ll be perfectly happy when that will be fulfilled. If I’ll never run another gel, I’ll be very happy. And so I had students working with me, and they designed some stuff. And the software they designed, you could feed it protein structure and would give you information back about what that protein probably did. So we developed this original software, and that was fun. But what I found as they developed the software is they would predict the function. Well, they wanted to go in the wet lab and find out what it was. So they started doing that. And then what we found… this is in my research lab, and I was sharing this with a couple other professors… and what we found was that they started acting like scientists. They started looking in the literature to find a better assay to use, they started walking up to me and saying, “You know, Dr. Craig, we think that’s not a good idea. We should do it this way instead.” They came up with alternative proposals. So we talk about experimental design as scientists and part of that is making something that’s going to be statistically robust, but part of the experimental design is choosing the tools. And they started choosing the tools. One of my students actually called up the Head of Research at Argonne National Lab and talked to him for an hour about our project, and never even asked my permission. And that was fantastic. So they’re collaborating with each other. They’re going to people in other departments and saying, “We tried to do this, it didn’t work. Can you help?” As I said, I’m a computational biochemist, if something wasn’t working in the lab, I wasn’t the guy to ask. They asked the other faculty in chemistry and biology and biomedical sciences. And so we saw that, we started to incorporate additional tools. About the time this project really started working well in our research lab, we had funding from the National Institute of Health, and they decided to go a different direction. And so our funding dried up, but our program officer was very supportive at NIH, and she recommended we contact NSF and go through their program. They have a program called Improving Undergraduate STEM Education. STEM stands for science, technology, engineering, and math. So we approach them, and at the same time, our first round of money was unsuccessful, but I presented a poster at a conference, and at that conference, I met Rebecca, and I also met Mike Pikaart, who’s another member of the team, a couple other folks who had joined the BASIL project at that point, and we’ve had new people join us since then. And so Rebecca went back to Ursinus all excited, and presented it to Julia, who was at Ursinus at the time, and Julia signed up. Rebecca was attending a conference hosted by another organization that they’re all affiliated with, called BioMolViz, which is focused on molecular visualization of biological molecules. And that’s where she met Bonnie. And so Bonnie joined the team, and she was, as far as I could tell, it was like the day she joined the team, she’d been there all along. It was a very smooth fit. One of our other team members was doing some stuff very much like what we do, and one of his colleagues at the University of Richmond said, “You know, there’s some people doing this called BASIL. You should contact them.” And so now he’s part of our team. And so we have other people that attend our presentations at conferences, and they join the team. And so there have been ongoing themes. We want to have continuing use computational tools and building for the future, I think. We also want to have authentic science, they really do get into the wet lab and do stuff. We want to share what we’re doing at conferences. We want to write papers about it, and we want to act like scientists. We want to model that behavior for our students.

Julia: So I’ll just add that Paul gave a very good introduction to how we got started, and we’ve been working together on this for 10 years now. So we started in 2015, so this is a very timely podcast, in that we are in our 10th anniversary.

Rebecca R.: Yay, BASIL.

John: So, how many faculty are involved in the project overall? You’ve mentioned a few people in addition to those of you on the podcast.

Bonnie: So we have a core team, and that varies between about 8 and 10 instructors. So there were the original folks who were involved with the project. People retire. They find other projects they’re even more passionate about, new people come into BASIL, but that core team sits at about 8 to 10 people, and there’s a variety of roles. As the number of users of the material has grown, we’ve had to be more organized about how we keep ourselves, as the community, organized. So we are all members of the steering committee, so we’re responsible for high-level things, thinking about funding, thinking about how the different subcommittees work together, about how to let folks know we exist. We also have an instructor recruitment onboarding committee, so they help show new users what our curriculum looks like and support them as they start to adopt that curriculum, or think about how they can adopt it on their campus. We also have an instructor support committee that’s focused less on new folks and more on supporting the folks that are already using BASIL. So as we update modules or find new tools, offering workshops about how to use those and supporting people when they look at things like promotion and tenure: how can faculty use this as part of their natural professional development cycle? We also have an assessment committee that looks at both how do you as an individual instructor assess the work your students are doing in class, but also on a larger scale, how do we assess that this curriculum is achieving educational goals that we want it to achieve. There’s also just some housekeeping. We have a website and data management team. We do collect data. We run a website. So there’s just some logistical support that has to be provided. Another key part is keeping modules updated. So some of that happens organically as we use them in our courses and we say, “Oh, in our instructions, we say, you will see a button to click on the right hand side. It’s no longer a button. Here’s a different workflow.” Sometimes the online tools that we use get a complete redo, and we don’t know when that’s coming. We don’t run those tools. That happened with our SwissDock module, we had great instructions, and then they did an update, and none of our instructions were relevant really anymore. So we had to go in and do a major update on that one so that it would be usable for faculty again. There’s also tools that get retired and new tools that we discover. Probably the last thing that drives those changes in modules are pedagogical demands. Certainly, the pandemic is a good example of how you need to adapt suddenly. And so the computational modules were really great for transitioning to a remote model. But we also had a faculty member develop some Choose Your Own Adventure wet lab substitutes, where the students come into a Google form, they have to choose what they want to use, and if they make the wrong choice, it routes them back and says, “That’s not right. Try again.” And so they couldn’t be in the wet lab at that point, but they were able online to kind of step through that whole lab experience and really get a sense of what it would have been like had they been able to be in person.

Rebecca R.: If I can jump in… And a great thing that happened during that time is, because we are a community, we were sharing data so if one of us had gotten far enough with our students that we had some data, we were sharing that with other BASIL users so that their students could, even if they couldn’t be in the lab anymore to actually collect their own data, they had data to analyze. So that’s how some of the community can help each other out too.

Paul: I think the original question was, how many people are involved? And so we have our core team, but then we have a lot of other people who have attended our workshops, or are using our stuff. Whenever I go to a conference, I search the abstracts in the conference to see if anybody mentions BASIL, and inevitably we find one or two folks who are doing stuff that we’ve never met before, and we talk to them and we offer them our support, and we have a Slack channel for BASIL participants, and we have, what, 200 people there?

Julia: Yeah. So we just checked the numbers yesterday, where over 200 people are connected to us on Slack, and we estimate that we have at least 50 campuses using the curriculum in some form or another. And as Paul said, part of that estimate comes from conferences, the people who reach out to us, the people who are attending any of our workshops. So most of our instructor support workshops are virtual, and we have gotten much better at record keeping to keep track of who is attending, where the people are that are using things. And like I said, we’re in Puerto Rico right now, running a couple workshops. We did a workshop here in San Juan yesterday, and we’ll be traveling to Mayagüez this afternoon and running a workshop tomorrow. We’ve done a number of other in-person workshops, new adopters, the community, and we’ve done even more virtual workshops to recruit new adopters to the community. We also give presentations at conferences, so there are lots of people. There is broad interest. And so I think Paul mentioned that we regularly attend ASBMB meetings, the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, but members of our core team have also been invited to speak at American Chemical Society meetings, at biophysical society meetings. Schrodinger is a software developer, and they’ve invited us to speak during their educators’ week. And this is driven by the community often, that people hear about us, they talk about us, and more people come in.

Rebecca: With a project that seems to be scaling up and up and up, I’m sure sustainability and scale and thinking at scale is always at the front of your mind; these things aren’t free. [LAUGHTER] So what’s on your mind related to these issues?

Paul: I do think about costs. So it costs about as much to run BASIL on a campus as it costs to run a traditional biochemistry lab. So the expenses for BASIL are not unusual. The equipment that we use is not unusual. All of our software is free, and it all works through a browser, and so that’s very sustainable. Now, the people are really, really important, and we really like working together. It’s a very cohesive group, good friends. We work together, we socialize, we stay in each other’s houses, whatever, when we’re in town, and that kind of stuff. And so there’s a very positive reaction and relationships that exist here. I think that’s an important part of sustainability. Also talk about making it work on our campuses, and there’s something called the four frames model and thinking about the factors and effective process. And there’s also, what are the barriers to getting people involved and try to identify and overcome those barriers? Our current grant funding is actually focused on those barriers.

Julia: So, as Paul said, our current grant funding is focusing on identifying barriers, and especially barriers that might exist at different institution types. So one of the things we’re doing in our current workshop, is really exploring that with the attendees and the barriers that we identify, of course, are time and expertise, and those seem to be common across all institution types, because this sounds like it could require some different things than a traditional biochemistry lab and so for sustainability and trying to overcome that barrier of time, that’s where our core team has really tried to do a lot of the work to make the curriculum something that you can adopt without having to put in as much of the time to create all the materials that you might have to do if you’re just creating a new curriculum on your own. As for cost, we’ve really tried to keep the cost down as well, so we use web-based computational tools, so that there’s no requirement to purchase software or software licenses. It makes it more accessible to students who have different devices. So you need a device that connects to the internet, but you don’t need to have a laptop with a certain processor speed or capacity to install software. You can work from a tablet or a Chromebook, and we’ve also tried to use the traditional wet lab method, so that the cost of the wet lab is not any more than a traditional biochemistry lab might cost, and we may even be able to have it cost less than a traditional lab, because half of the work is using free computational tools, which means, if you used to purchase materials for 14 weeks worth of experiments, now you’re purchasing materials for maybe seven weeks worth of wet lab experiments.

Rebecca R.: I’d like to talk just a little bit about this idea of CURES as a pedagogy, and part of the excitement that I find being involved in BASIL is introducing this pedagogy to faculty around the country, and whether they’re choosing to use BASIL or not, just opening their eyes to a different way of teaching biochemistry, or whatever it is that they happen to be teaching, and that is really an exciting place for me, personally, to be. I’ve seen the power of it. I’ve seen how scary it can be from an instructor point of view. And I get scared every time I’m about to start my BASIL curriculum, which will start in a week for me, but I know that I have the support, and I know that it’s so important and so effective for these students that spreading the word is really satisfying to me.

Bonnie: I think another issue that comes up in terms of sustainability is that at one point, BASIL was small enough that everybody doing it could hop into a online meeting room together and have sort of a town hall meeting format and just talk about things. Now with over 50 campuses and all the different time zones that are represented, that’s not a supportable model, and so we’ve had to do things like create the Slack channel, where we can have asynchronous communication and figure out ways to offer virtual workshops. And we also now have begun offering something called BASIL week, where it’s a full week of workshops about all of the different kinds of topics that users of the material might be interested in. So some walkthroughs of computational material, some conversations about how to assess student work, conversations about how to leverage the work that you do with BASIL in terms of required professional activities that your institution asks you to do. So really thinking about how to build that community and how to sustain that community as it grows is another part that we focused on.

John: Is this something you’d recommend to other STEM disciplines, because we do know that we lose a lot of students in the STEM pipeline, and maybe this way, we’d get more people intrigued by the process of being a scientist or becoming more engaged with science as a potential career.

Julia: Yes. So we ran a workshop about a year and a half ago at Prairie View A&M University, outside Houston, Texas, and they had encouraged people from across the sciences to attend our workshop. So we had attendees from biology and chemistry, as we expected, but also from physics, math, computer science, the School of Education, and they even had a couple Deans come to our workshop to see what was going on, and that was a very useful space for them, but also for us to see how others might be inspired by what we’ve put together and looking for ways that they could use our curriculum as a model for creating some additional kinds of experiments, some more research-based things in the labs across the disciplines. And the person who was there from education was also very interested to know that this was happening, because there seems to be a disconnect in those who are training in education departments and schools and those who are in STEM departments and divisions. We don’t necessarily talk to each other, so we don’t know that we’re all thinking about student assessment to some extent and student learning and what the outcomes are. And so I think that this is a good way to engage students in science. And I use it in my courses for Chemistry and Biochemistry majors, but also in my courses for non majors.

Rebecca R.:I think additionally, one of the drivers for other STEM disciplines using a CURE is that the research shows that it engages students. Students are retained, they’re excited. It’s increasing the number of students who have a research experience under their belt, especially underrepresented students in that field, and that, in and of itself, is going to increase the pipeline of students moving through to the next level of their careers. Anecdotally, I have students always coming back to tell me that when they were on a job interview or a graduate program interview or a medical school interview, that they talked about their experience with BASIL and that it made a difference, and people were really excited to talk with them about their experiences.

Julia: Yes, and I think we did mention earlier, but I’ll just re-emphasize that the CURE model, the course-based undergraduate research experience model, is a way to engage more students in authentic research experiences. So many of us are familiar, especially in the STEM fields, with the one-on-one research model, where a student approaches me to join my research lab. But there’s a limit to how many individual students I can take into my research lab, due to the space in the lab, my capacity to mentor each one of them and the resources to support their projects. But if we can do some level of research in the courses that we teach, then that really gives every student some amount of research experience. And the studies show that whether it’s a week or a couple weeks, even, you are going to gain some more identity as a scientist and project ownership than in a traditional lab setting or a traditional lab course and a semester-long project can be even better for that science identity and project ownership.

Rebecca R.: It also is a way of reducing the barrier for those students who might not know or be brave enough to approach a faculty member to ask about individual research. If they’re enrolled in your course, they’re doing it, and so it lowers that barrier, and may be attracting and retaining some students who otherwise might drop out of the pipeline of STEM.

Rebecca: So, we always wrap up by asking: “what’s next?”

Bonnie: So part of what we’ll keep doing as we go into the future is to maintain the baseline that we have: keep updating modules, keep looking at new tools, replacing tools that get deprecated. We’ll also focus on maintaining community. We’re also beginning to have collaborations with other active learning communities, so communities that are not the BASIL CURE, but that provide active learning opportunities to embed in your campus curriculum and trying to see how we can all work together to improve biochemistry and STEM education collectively. So to put all our efforts together and pull in one direction together. We’re also especially interested in BASIL in computational tools. So a big breakthrough in biochemistry in the last couple of years is the ability to use computation to fold proteins and determine their structures. So when we started with BASIL, there were about somewhere between a hundred and 150,000 protein structures. That had been solved with the computational tools available now, there are over 700 million folded protein structures, structures that anyone could use to do research. So we’re interested in adapting BASIL to, first of all, work with data sets that are so large now, every year they’ve grown tenfold. So how do we keep up with data sets that are so large, and there’s also a lot of new tools coming out? So how do we keep our curriculum up to date and relevant? But a really great thing about this is that before there were 150,000 proteins, many of which already had assigned function, now, with 700 million protein structures, most of those don’t have a verified function. So there’s an opportunity for anybody who wants to do BASIL to keep as many undergraduates as they have engaged in research for as long as they wish. So it’s a very exciting time for BASIL and for the biochemistry community.

Julia: Yeah, we’re hoping that the outcome of our research on barriers will lead us to be able to aid in overcoming those barriers to CURE adoption and implementation. Are there ways that we can address that? So I think that’s another future goal for us is really looking at not just adoption of BASIL but adoption of CUREs in general. And as Bonnie said, we’re working with some active learning communities, and if we can identify what the barriers are, that’s the first step in being able to overcome those barriers.

Paul: We’ve been using these computational methods and emphasizing them and it’s really about that, which is probably the most of any CURE that’s out there, and we’re hoping to have an impact, at least to help other people who are doing course-based undergraduate research experience with their students, to identify and implement those tools. And based on our experience with getting these tools into our teaching labs, I think we could probably provide helpful insight to any group that wants to introduce computational tools into their teaching lab, even if it’s botany or nutrition, whatever is out there. I think we could do that.

Rebecca: Well, thank you so much for joining us. There’s lots of great information that you’ve shared. I think no matter what discipline one might be in, there’s lots of rich information. Thank you so much.

Julia: Thank you.

Bonnie: You’re welcome.

Rebecca R.: Thank you.

John: Thank you.

Paul: Yeah, thanks a lot. This was great.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

374. The Disengaged Teen

Educators at all levels have raised concerns about growing student disengagement. In this episode, Rebecca Winthrop and Jenny Anderson join us to discuss their new book, The Disengaged Teen: Helping Kids Learn Better, Feel Better, and Live Better, which examines the causes of, and possible solutions, to this problem.

Rebecca is the Director of the Center for Universal Education at Brookings, where she leads global studies on how to better support children’s learning, and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. Jenny is an award-winning journalist who spent over a decade at The New York Times before pioneering coverage on the science of learning at Quartz. She now writes a column on education in Time.

Show Notes

Transcript

John: Educators at all levels have raised concerns about growing student disengagement. In this episode, we discuss research on the causes of, and possible solutions, to this growing problem.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

John: Our guests today are Rebecca Winthrop and Jenny Anderson. Rebecca is the Director of the Center for Universal Education at Brookings, where she leads global studies on how to better support children’s learning, and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. Jenny is an award-winning journalist who spent over a decade at The New York Times before pioneering coverage on the science of learning at Quartz. She now writes a column on education in Time. Rebecca and Jenny are the authors of The Disengaged Teen: Helping Kids Learn Better, Feel Better, and Live Better which will be released in January 2025 by Penguin Random House. Welcome Rebecca and Jenny.

Rebecca W.: So nice to be here.

Jenny: Thanks for having us.

Rebecca: Today’s teas are: Rebecca, are you drinking tea today?

Rebecca W.: I sure am. I’m drinking Earl Grey, which I drink most mornings.

Rebecca: And how about you, Jenny?

Jenny: I am drinking chamomile because it is my afternoon and I have to ease up a bit on the caffeine.

John: And I am drinking a black raspberry green tea today.

Rebecca: Oh, that sounds nice. John, I have a London Strand breakfast from when I was in London earlier this year from the Twinings flagship store.

Rebecca W.: That sounds delicious. [LAUGHTER]

John: Very nice. So, we’ve invited you here to discuss The Disengaged Teen. Can you tell us a bit about the origin of this book?

Rebecca W.: Yeah, I can start. It’s Rebecca. I was very shocked during COVID. I have two adolescent boys, one was in third grade, one was in sixth grade, and I was shocked to discover that I had misjudged which of my boys was really engaged and which one wasn’t. And as someone who’s worked in education her whole career, for several decades, I thought, “Gosh, this does not bode well for other parents who don’t have this set of expertise,” and knowing how important student engagement is in children’s achievement and developing learning skills and mental health, and all the good things, that was what really motivated me to reach out to Jenny and say, “Hey, let’s partner up.” So Jenny has her own reasons, I’m sure, for saying yes. [LAUGHTER]

Jenny: Well, the timing was perfect. I was a financial journalist for almost 20 years before I switched to education. And I switched because I had my own kids, and I felt I wanted to better understand how they learn and how to support their learning. And I was shocked at how little there was on that topic in the mediums that I’m used to in journalism. So education was traditionally covered very much in a sort of siloed political, charter/non-charter, standards, changing standards, teachers unions. Those were the topics, which are very important topics, but it is one of many, and having covered finance for so long, and seeing how sophisticated it is in terms of way we organize the coverage, the number of people we put on it, and the sort of intensity of the coverage, I was really very disappointed to see how little attention was spent on teaching and learning and understanding learning as a process better, and as a parent, understanding how to support a child’s learning better. So instead of complain about it, I decided to do something about it. And Rebecca asked me to write a book. So we dove in together.

Rebecca: You begin the first chapter with a discussion on the results from the program for international assessment, an international test administered to 15 year olds. What happened to the scores about a decade ago?

Jenny: We started to see the scores in reading and science start to go down in about 2010 and in math, about eight years later they caught up, at which point they had gone from declining gently to kind of falling off a cliff. So there was a very precipitous and alarming decline in these PISA scores. And that’s not what we should see. What we should see, as systems invest more in education, we should see those scores climbing, and we know more about how kids learn and we implement those practices in classrooms. So this was not the expected trajectory. Rebecca, do you want to add anything to that?

Rebecca W.: I think you nailed it. The thing that was particularly worrisome is how, across the board it was, across so many different countries.

John: That decline is rather dramatic, and it was interesting to see that it had begun before COVID, because often this type of discussion takes place within the context of COVID, but that certainly accelerated things. But the issue was already beginning before that. Could you talk a little bit about some of the harm that results to societies when we see this sort of decline in the cognitive skills of students?

Jenny: Well-educated scientists cure diseases and ease discomfort. Well-educated knowledgeable entrepreneurs drive innovation. Well-trained engineers create bridges and make sure they don’t fall down. Really, at the center of everything we want in a society is a well-educated citizenry. There’s sort of multiple layers, but we have tremendous problems [LAUGHTER] in the world, and we need people to be educated to solve these, both in the content of science, math, English language arts, but also in skills, really kind of critical thinking skills, and interdisciplnary skills and tying together things and working with other people, and communicating well and listening to others. So I think when you see those scores falling off a cliff, we’re only measuring one very narrow subset of skills, and those are declining, and they’re very important skills. We’re not even measuring a lot of the other ones. But there’s a lot of evidence that we’re not doing a particularly good job on those either.

Rebecca W.: The only thing I would add to that is how critical these skills are today, but especially over certainly the next decade, given the rapid increase of generative artificial intelligence. So we’re particularly concerned about the fact that so many young people seem to not be able to think critically enough around texts that they read, or how to think about using and applying math. You’re much more susceptible to manipulation, fake news, this infodemic that is spreading around the world, as the UN Secretary General calls it. So to us, that’s also incredibly concerning.

John: Not everyone prefers having low-information voters, for example. [LAUGHTER]

Jenny: Yeah. and I’d love to build on that, and Rebecca, I want to kind of give this one to you, because you know so much about it and have done some deep work in this. But I also just think, and we haven’t sort of said it outright, but we should, which is, for a democratic society, you need educated citizens, and data suggests we’re less educated in a moment where we really need to be building, weaving, civic society together and not tearing it apart. That is another reason we should be very, very concerned about this decline in skills and decline in knowledge.

Rebecca W.: Well said.

Rebecca: The book relies on data from large data sets. Can you tell us a bit about the data that you relied on?

Rebecca W.: Sure, we culled from a lot of different sources, but largely four [LAUGHTER] main bodies of data. First, we did a massive literature review around student engagement in the US, but elsewhere, we looked at studies around the globe, and so that was from all types of disciplines. The second, we did a lot of qualitative research, where we interviewed almost 100 young people, largely between the ages of 10 to 18 and often their family members and often their teachers, to really start getting a vision of their experiences in school. And then we partnered with an organization called Transcend, which is a nonprofit in the US, working in the K through 12 space, and did research that included a nationally representative survey of over 65,000 students and a sort of similar survey of almost 2000 parents. And in those surveys, we were asking questions around students’ schooling experiences. So what were they experiencing when they were at school? Did they have any choice around how to do their work? Did they feel they belonged? Do they feel like there was someone they could go to if they had fallen behind and needed academic supports? A whole bunch of those types of questions. And then we asked… it wasn’t matched parents to the exact students, because there was way more students than parents… but then we just asked parents of that same age group what their perceptions were of students’ schooling experiences. Did they think [LAUGHTER] students felt like they belonged and had friends. Did they think students had supports to catch up if they were behind or had choices over how to do their work in school, et cetera, things like that. So that’s sort of primarily the sets of data that we used.

John: What did the data tell you about the status of students in terms of their perceptions of well being, etc.?

Jenny: We found what others have found, which is that the kids are not alright. There were sort of really alarming levels of apathy and stress. And when you dig into that combination, it’s particularly toxic to think about that, that so many kids feel both overwhelmed and extremely disengaged, extremely apathetic, so kind of bored and overwhelmed at the same time. And I think at a moment in their lives where they feel kind of primed to do stuff and to be part of something. I’m like, how did we pull this off? How have we managed to both bore them and overwhelm them at the same time? I mean, [LAUGHTER] it seems like kind of an epic feat, not one that we really want to repeat. Terms that we heard over and over again from these interviews with young people: unseen, very unprepared for the world in front of them, a little bit hopeless about the state of affairs in the world, and a little bit helpless to change things, bored and overwhelmed I mentioned. So just you kind of put all of these feelings of their experience in school, and it doesn’t translate to motivation. That doesn’t translate to: gosh, I really want to go to school tomorrow. And so that was very telling.

Rebecca W.: One thing I would add to that, which Jenny and I were both really concerned about, was, in addition to everything, she just said, there was a real sense among many students that they couldn’t change things, that they didn’t really have the power, or they didn’t see the possibility of how they could make school more interesting to themselves, or change things in their lives, and it can be very defeating when you feel done too and like you don’t have an opportunity to have volition in your life around things you care about. So that was very concerning for us.

Rebecca: Having no agency at all, or feeling like you have no agency, is certainly not something that’s motivating, that’s for sure. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca W.: Exactly. It’s totally demotivating. If you feel like you have no opportunity to actually have a voice or change things in your daily life that you might be able to do, have a different tactic, do better, if you only could shift something.

Jenny: They’re feeling this lack of agency at a moment where developmentally, it is crucial to the formation of their identity. So the timing of this is just particularly tragic, because when you think about what adolescence is, it’s separating from a caregiver and finding your own tribe and finding your way to live in the world. To do that, you need the experiences which give you the information to form the kind of person you want to be and the sort of tribe you want to join, and the partner with whom you’re going to mate with later on and in this moment, developmentally, where they want to be, craving doing and being and trying, they feel, like I said, helpless and hopeless and without agency. And that is not ideal for adolescent development.

Rebecca: One of the things our colleagues often talk about, and we see in reports pretty consistently, is the lack of student motivation. And educators have reported these concerns consistently for a very long time. What is different in this moment? What’s changed?

Rebecca W.: We really puzzled with this. We really puzzled with this question. Because if you look at the data on student disengagement, kids have been disengaged. It’s gone down a little bit, especially because of COVID, but basically at high levels for a long time. Kids have said that the things that most bother them is school-related pressure for a long time, and this is before the advent of cell phones. So you have kids who are disengaged, especially as they get older, that has existed for a long time. And then we think what’s going on is you’ve got disengaged kids in school. You’ve got the advent of technology like social media and cell phones that are really fun distractions, and the skills that young people really need to thrive in work and life are getting farther and farther away from the normal academic teaching of what’s going on in school. So 50 years ago, most employers were really prioritizing good literacy and numeracy in the US, those were sort of the most requisite skills, and those are needed, but they’re necessary, but not sufficient. Colleges want young people to have invented or patented something… I’m exaggerating, but not totally… to get into competitive schools, [LAUGHTER] and there’s increasing pressure for honors classes and AP classes, and what we’re asking kids to be able to do has sort of gotten out of hand in some ways, and gotten farther away from what this reality looks like when they leave the school walls. So this combination of sort of feeling it’s irrelevant inside school and technology being very distracting, and I would say there’s also been well documented less choice and decision making that young people have over the last couple decades, this sort of sense of not being in control over much of their lives. Those sort of three things, I think, has kind of created a toxic combination all really leading to unmotivated young people.

Jenny: Yeah, I would just build on that a tiny bit and say, as you all point out, and as Rebecca points out, there’s always been a gap between what happens in school and what happens in the real world, that that gap is like a chasm. It’s just much, much bigger, and kids are much more aware of what the world will demand of them because of smartphones. They see what the world is out there. They were a little bit protected before [LAUGHTER]. You saw in your community or in your school what that world was and now, they sort of see it a lot, and I think that feeling of unprepared for the world that’s coming is much more profound.

John: This seems to extend into older age groups as well. We see a decline in fertility, more people are choosing not to bring children into the world, and a lot of it seems to be tied to this same sort of environment where people are not very optimistic about the future and they do feel this lack of control.

Jenny: Absolutely.

Rebecca W.: I think that a lot of the sort of things that people talk about in terms of personal self improvement and, in adults, whether it’s mindfulness and/or developing friendships and connections or finding meaningful work and interests, or, you know, there’s a whole industry to help adults [LAUGHTER] sort of get out of their funk and improve their lives. And I think a lot of these things are sowed in school where young people don’t have a lot of chances inside school to really pursue their interests. They aren’t developing what the folks at CASEL talk about as confident self awareness, where they have a sense of who they are and what path they might like to start on, and if they want to change paths, they’re confident enough to try to figure out how to do that as they go, and all of that is needed to be the author of your own life, which is affirming and creates optimism. And without that feeling, it is hard to move through the world.

Rebecca: You note that more engaged kids learn better, perform better, feel better, and live better. And you describe four modes of engagement, resisting, coasting, achieving and exploring. What types of behavior would we observe for students in each of these modes?

Rebecca W.: So the passenger mode is where kids are coasting, and these are kids who are showing up to school, not disrupting class, but putting in minimal effort, zooming through homework as quickly as they can. They may enjoy school because they have friends, but they don’t necessarily see the relevance of what they’re learning to the real world, to their daily life, and they’re doing what we would call surface learning. They’re not going deep [LAUGHTER] and they may be getting good grades. Some of them may be struggling, so it’s often because school’s either too hard or too easy that kids decide to coast. So that’s passenger mode, and that’s most kids. In middle school and high school, we found that about 50% of kids said that their schooling experiences were sort of “meh,” ones that were not inspiring or terrible, either way, they were sort of coasting along. So that’s the first mode. The second mode is achiever mode. And these are kids who are trying to be perfect and trying to be excellent and get top marks and excel in extracurriculars. And teachers and parents love achievers. Society loves achievers, and achievers can be very happy because they’re doing very well, but there is a dark side. We talk about the achiever conundrum, where a lot of kids who spent a lot of time in achiever mode tip into unhappy achiever mode, where they replace their performance with their sense of mattering, so they feel that they only matter if they do well, so getting a bad grade is sort of the end of the world for them. These kids often have quite a bit of anxiety and mental health challenges, and they’re often very fragile learners in that they don’t really want to take risks. One of the quotes that I think about a lot when we talk about this mode was a kid who was really in achiever mode for a long time saying the thing that she hated most about school that drove her crazy is when teachers didn’t tell her exactly what to do to get an A, a good score, because that’s the sort of mindset [LAUGHTER] of achiever mode. Tell me exactly what to do and I’m gonna go get it. It also limits creativity being in achiever mode too often. So in middle school, high school, that’s about 30% of kids. And then you’ve got the third mode, which is kids in resister mode. These are kids who actually do have a fair bit of agency. It’s just not pointed towards the learning in school that parents and teachers and adults want them to be doing, and they’re using their voice in whichever way they can to say school isn’t working for me. So they are the classic quote, unquote problem children disrupting class, class clowns, not doing homework, skipping school, or leaving school altogether, ultimately, if you can’t re-engage them. So, they often need a wide range of supports to bring them back, because they’re often resisting for different things. It could be they’re deeply overwhelmed, they’ve gotten behind in work. It could be a family issue, and they need extra support. But we found that if you can remove some of the barriers and give them, actually, more autonomy and freedom to pursue their interests or take on responsibility, they do have agency, and they quickly can move to explorer mode, which is the fourth mode. And explorer mode is what we talk about as agentic engagement, which is the term in the academic literature, and that’s where kids are getting good grades, they are happy and they’re developing the resilience, the learning to learn skills needed for an AI world. So it’s the trifecta that you want. It’s just that less than 10% of kids grades 3 through 12, and less than 5% of kids in middle school and high school say they have the regular opportunity to explore in school, and this is where kids’ agency meets their engagement levels, and they are able to ask for things or make suggestions, or find creative solutions to make their learning environment more interesting to themselves and more supportive regardless of the context they’re in.

John: Preschool kids are very much engaged in that exploring mode, and as they enter schools that seems to fade a little bit with each year of schooling. Why is this breaking down? We bring in kids who are intrinsically motivated to learn more and curious. Why is that fading so rapidly in the early years of schooling and continuing through the schooling process?

Jenny: There’s the real intersection of development and sort of what we do to them. So a lot of it is the environment we put kids in, which does seem to dampen curiosity. There’s not as many opportunities to ask questions, or for a teacher with a big class to answer every kid’s questions, a toddler asking sort of 60 to 100 questions a minute, [LAUGHTER] it feels like as a parent. Obviously, that’s not possible. So there are a lot of reasons that in that trajectory from sort of primary elementary school up until middle and high school you see kids disengaged. The top reasons are it’s too easy or too hard. They’re not in their zone of proximal development. They’re either bored or overwhelmed, and so they check out. That’s the easiest approach to that. Mental health problems is increasingly a reason. It’s very hard to engage if you’re anxious or depressed or neuro-divergent. There are a lot of neuro-divergent kids, and that needs to be recognized and diagnosed so that you can put in place the supports to make learning more accessible. A lot of kids experience bullying or discrimination. That would be a very important reason that kids disengage. A lot of kids don’t feel they belong, and belonging plays an essential role in learning. We have a whole chapter on this that… I really love this phrase: “belonging uncertainty,” when you feel you don’t belong, you are looking for evidence to confirm that you don’t belong, and you are very unwilling to do the things that you need to do to learn. In a moment where you don’t feel you belong, you are not going to ask for help and confess to an entire class that you don’t get it. That’s a very brave act. I don’t understand, could we slow down? Could you repeat that? That’s hard to do in college, much less in middle school, when you’re really kind of in the throes of that identity development. And as we’ve talked about in this conversation, this lack of choice is a profound reason that kids disengage. They don’t feel that they have an opportunity to put themselves out there in any significant way, so why try? So we don’t give them limited opportunities. We’re not saying, choose your own adventure in school. That’s one dramatic approach. But another is, you have a homework assignment that you’re going to assign. Let’s offer three ways to do it. That little bit of choice really resonates, because you start to feel a little bit in control, and so you feel a little bit more motivated to do it. It’s very similar to offering a toddler: peas, corn, or carrots. You’re not saying, “Do you want vegetables or don’t you?” You’re saying, here are the three vegetables, which one do you want? And suddenly they feel I get to make this decision, I’m going to eat carrots versus I don’t want any vegetables. So scale that up. And when you get in middle and high school and in college, that’s why so many kids actually can get re-engaged in college, because they can start to exercise a little bit more choice and agency over their schedule. Whether they’ve developed the sort of learning to learn skills and study skills to be successful is a different story. But I do think that you see a number of kids sort of get to college and find a thing. A couple kids in our book, they got to college and the combination of feeling less controlled and having some choice over what they could pick in terms of classes and how structured their days allowed them to re-engage in a way that they were unable to do in high school.

Rebecca W.: I would also chime in and add that the structure and design of schooling, I think, really impacts this downward slide of disengagement, because we see a huge dip from elementary school to middle school. That’s really where, all of a sudden, you get kids reporting many more passenger and resister experiences than achiever and explorer experiences is that switch from upper elementary to middle school. And some of the design features are having multiple classes, not having one teacher who is sort of your go to, who knows you very well, and that continues. So it’s important for educators to have subject matter expertise, of course, so they can teach well. But the entire sort of design of having siloed, not necessarily connected different subjects can be quite mind numbing to kids, plus they feel a little bit lost in the shuffle. They don’t necessarily have a place to belong in traditional schools, in traditional design of schools. Now, lots of folks are playing with how to redesign middle school and high school, but I think that has a big role to play.

Rebecca: You’ve hinted towards some changes that K-12 could promote, where they could promote student agency and engagement. Can you elaborate a little bit more on what some of those design changes could be to maybe improve engagement?

Rebecca W.: Yes, I think we have a whole section towards the end of the book suggesting organizations that are doing this work, if readers want to go be champions in their communities or in their institutions, and there is a spectrum. So on the one hand, you could really work with teachers themselves to use autonomy-supportive teaching practices. This work comes out of Johnmarshall Reeve and his colleagues, so 20 years of research on this, which really is shifts in style. You don’t have to shift your curriculum or your lesson, a bit of tweaks on the lesson plans or your disciplinary approaches as an educator. But it is things like Jenny said, offering choice on homework. It is things like being vulnerable enough to ask students at the end of a lesson, and if you have a large class, you can give everybody either an electronic exit ticket or a sticky note to say, what’s one question you want to explore tomorrow or you didn’t understand, and then taking that feedback and shifting it. So there’s small things like that that actually engage them and give them more agency. There’s also more profound design changes. We interviewed a number of students for the book who are in big picture learning schools, which basically take the traditional school day in their high schools and three days a week they’re in class doing their courses, and two days a week they are in internships in the workplace where they are developing all sorts of life skills and collaborative problem solving skills and critical thinking skills. And then every week their entire high school career, they meet with an advisor, the same advisor and the same small group of kids in their advisory across all four years. If done well, of course, they become like a little family, and it’s a go to person, and they debrief on their internship experiences and what they’re learning from them. Because, of course, you can learn a lot of these quote, unquote, 21st Century Skills anywhere in life actually, it doesn’t have to be inside a classroom around academic subjects.

Jenny: I would add two things. I would say a K-12 timetable is a zero-sum game. And I think we’ve been willing to push more content in because we’ve decided what we care about, and let’s do more of that. And I think Rebecca and I would say that agency is the skill that needs to be developed, and it needs to be developed through the ability to make choices and to exercise that. And so I would argue that that skill actually is worthy of cutting up some time and that it will help with everything else. It can help with the other academics, but take away a little of the content and put in its place an ability for kids to make some choices. So I’ll give you an example. In a lot of countries around the world, you can do something called an extended project qualification in your final couple of years of schooling. Y ou pick a subject, and it’s very carefully designed such that you have to go find your advisor, you have to design a timetable. 20% of your grade is your ability to manage a project over a year. It’s a time management skill, and another 30% is the quality of the sources you choose. So at 50% you are not assessing the content of that project. You are assessing some skills we know are going to be incredibly important in college or in the workplace, the ability to manage multiple demands, to ask for help, to know when you’re falling behind, to change your mind, and all of that. So I can really envision, and we’ve interviewed some schools in this process who did studios or projects just carving out some time to say, even if you assume they don’t learn anything, which is 100% not going to happen. But let’s just give some credit to those who say not enough knowledge acquisition happens, they are developing other skills, and those skills are worthy of the time we are taking away from other things. And the gravy, the cherry on the ice cream sundae, is that it will make kids happier, which we should care a lot about. [LAUGHTER] You know, we should care deeply about that as a factor to motivate, but just as the sort of we would like our kids to be happy. So I do think the timetable is a major barrier, but it is one that is surmountable, and I think we can be creative, and it doesn’t mean that we have to give up all standards tomorrow if we do this.

John: Much of this discussion reminds me of a discussion we had earlier with two economists, with Fabrizio Zilibotti and Matthias Doepke, who talk about differences over time and across countries in the amount of freedom that children have outside of school and how much of their lives are controlled. And what they observe is that in those time periods and in countries where there’s more income inequality, parents tend to put much more structure on children’s lives. And I’m wondering if this could be related to the lack of autonomy that children may have outside of the classroom, where they spend a good deal of their time. So it does seem like in the US, in particular, where we have an extremely high level of economic inequality and there’s a lot of pressure on children from their parents and other sources to do well in school, that perhaps that lack of autonomy, both within schools and outside of school, might be leading to some of this disengagement. If that’s the case, is that something that parents perhaps should work on, providing students a bit more autonomy and choice and control in their day-to-day lives. Would that be helpful?

Jenny: Absolutely. I interviewed them and did a couple stories on them, and I read their book, and I would say my favorite conclusion from that book is that parents aren’t crazy. Parents are responding to the environment that they’re in. So our responses may seem irrational, but they’re rational within the context that we’re in. And so in Sweden, where you’re almost guaranteed a university place, there is a lot less stress around what kids need to do in that process. I’d say between the US and the UK, there are very different markers, and those markers of how you get into university then shape everything that comes down. So to me, the thing that’s challenging about what you’re saying, I think it’s 100% true, and I think parents do have the influence. We showed this in our book, and there’s a ton of research to defend this. We know that parents have a lot of influence, but that you have to be brave. You have to say, is this a long game? I care about my kid and their happiness more than I care about feeding a system that is insatiable and does not care about my kid. And so I think part of why Rebecca and I wrote this book, it requires the confidence of knowing that long term, these bets pay off, investing in agency over more math. Not that math is irrelevant. We’re not saying knowledge doesn’t matter at any turn, but investing in agency, in choice, in a little bit of freedom, and definitely giving them autonomy so they can figure out who they are. That will 100% pay off in the long term, but it might not pay off on the math test tomorrow, and it requires bravery on the part of parents, and that’s hard, it’s hard to be brave in the face of a system that is telling you otherwise.

Rebecca: It seems like there’s a lot of bravery in this discussion. [LAUGHTER]

Jenny: …name of my substack: how to be brave.

Rebecca W.: We talk about in the book that one thing explorer mode does, if you give kids the opportunity to be in explorer mode in school or out of school, is it helps them be brave, because it takes bravery to chart your own path. It takes some element of bravery to think about what you were really interested in and try to pursue that regardless of what other people around you might be telling you to do. And I think more and more, it’s going to take some level of bravery to navigate this huge shift we have coming with AI that’s going to be massively shifting how our jobs work, what skills we need, how we’re teaching… kids are gonna have to have the courage and gumption to figure things out as they go, [LAUGHTER] and to tack and weave and navigate. It takes bravery to do that. You don’t need as much courage to follow a well trodden path that someone has told you just to walk along.

Jenny: We cite and we spoke with a developmental psychologist named Ron Dahl in this book, and said something to me that really stayed with me, and it comes up at different points in the book, which is, you can’t tell a kid to be brave. They need an opportunity to be brave and feel what it is to be brave to then feel a little braver. I mean, it’s very obvious when you say it out loud, [LAUGHTER] but when you think about it in the context of learning, what opportunities are we giving young people to be brave, so they feel the benefit of that bravery and they want more of it. And so we’ve loved that framing.

Rebecca W.: Yeah, one of the quotes I love most in the book is from a young woman who was a total achiever mode her entire time in high school, got to an Ivy League university and had a total meltdown because she didn’t have that internal explorer muscles and that bravery. She didn’t know what the path was, and it was very disorienting. And she said, “You know, I wish I’d had failure therapy [LAUGHTER] in high school.” We were like, “What do you mean? What is failure therapy?” And she said, “Well, I never once failed in high school, and I didn’t know what it felt like to not be able to do things perfectly and then have to pick yourself back up again.” And that is a form of bravery. So just to give some color to Jenny’s point, I’m not saying we should go around and fail all our kids, but give them an opportunity to struggle and figure out how to get out of it again.

Rebecca: We have a lot of students that enter college who haven’t been in explorer mode, as you just illustrated, they might have been in an achiever mode, or they might have been coasting along. How do we help ignite explorer mode as college faculty, knowing that maybe they don’t have the skills quite yet to be in explorer mode. How do we help ignite them to be in that mode and support them to be in that mode when we probably think that that’s what college should be about?

Jenny: I have a great example of that from university, and then I’ll pass it over to Rebecca, but I interviewed a Clayton Spencer who was the head of Bates, and she developed a program called purposeful work, which kind of had three prongs, but one of the key prongs was asking faculty to bring practitioners into the classroom. And you will probably not be surprised to learn that there was quite a bit of resistance to this when it was presented. But her idea was that you’re teaching these wonderful classes, you have this incredible content that you are imparting to these kids, but they don’t know how yet to tie it to the real world. They don’t get the relevance piece of it. The practitioners by dint of having them come in… four practitioners a semester, if it’s a psychology class, it might be a doula, it might be a nurse practitioner, it might be a social worker. They come in, talk a little bit about their day, and you’re starting to get these data points as to, “oh, wait, this matters in the real world.” Okay, I’m gonna double down on why this particular experimental method is really important. It can really feel quite disconnected. And I think one thing that I think college professors could do is to try to connect it better, and that can be outsourced. They shouldn’t be expected to be able to draw those connections, but inviting practitioners in would be one way. And this program is also another example of timetabling. They decided to use every January to do these kind of mini-courses, but four weeks doing something with zero stakes. It does not affect your GPA. It is literally all about explore something you love, see how it goes, and bring that back to the classroom. And it’s just four moments in college to try something, no stakes, no GPA affected, collecting data here. For students who have to work in college it might have a different structure. But I thought those were two interesting attempts to try to build relevance, help kids find their purpose, and also break up the school year a little bit.

Rebecca W.: Another way that I think college professors could be incredibly helpful in helping young people develop these explorer skills is really sending the message that they can advocate for themselves. Often, of course, and we could ask you guys, one assumes that young people come to college or university with these explorer skills already, but often they don’t. So we interviewed one young man who lived in Dallas, and he was first generation. His family had immigrated from Latin America, a first-generation college goer, and he had learned to really advocate for himself in high school, because he did great the first two years, and then started to struggle when classes got a lot harder, and he had someone in the front office. It wasn’t a college counselor, but I think it was like the assistant principal or something, to sort of take him under his wing and say, you go talk to the teacher and ask them this question, and then here’s how you study, and here’s how you can ask for help and communicate like “I’m flailing. I need help, but I care.” And he had really gotten those skills. So when he showed up in college, he was very excited. It was a big deal, and his first sort of core course for his major, he found super difficult. It was super hard. He didn’t quite have the academic knowledge to really excel. And midway through, he was getting a C, close to a D. And he was like, “Oh my gosh, this is my major.” He knew it was something he wanted to do. And he went to the professor and said, “I’m really struggling. I don’t know what to do. I know I need your help to help me succeed.” Like he had the gumption to say that. And then the professor also had the perfect response. She said, “I got your back.” She sat him at the front. It was a very large lecture class. You guys have talked about pedagogy for large classes, but she sat him at the front. She paired him with two other top students in the class. Introduced him, said, “Hey, I’d like you guys to be in a study group together.” They ended up becoming sort of best friends, and he aced the class. So any of those strategies to really let kids know they can advocate for themselves and when they do, taking it seriously and really trying to find ways to help them, I think can be incredibly helpful.

John: We always end by asking, what’s next?

Rebecca W.: One of the things that I have started to do organically, not planned, is use these modes as language with my team members, particularly my young new fresh out of college, or maybe fresh out of their masters, team members, early career team members who have spent a lot of time in achiever mode. But also I always look for a fair bit of sort of explorer tendencies, and they often get overwhelmed with the large task lists that we have at the Brookings Institution to do every day. And one of the things I’ve been telling them is, look, you can modulate between modes. [LAUGHTER] Sometimes you just gotta get it right. Sometimes you gotta really create something, and sometimes tasks are not that important. You can go in passenger mode, do the bare minimum, and it’s enough to be fine. So I’m beginning to experiment about what these modes look like in the workplace. Jenny, what about you? Over to you.

Jenny: I’m in the process of writing something about launching, so sort of launching from college into the real world. And Rebecca’s saying how relevant everything that we’ve written in this book is for that moment as well. So it’s kind of relevant all the way through, is the bottom line. But this idea of, in this really tricky moment, of even if you’ve succeeded in college, suddenly the workplace seems very fuzzy, very fast changing, very hard to get a toe hold, very choppy right now, it’s not so much about the job as it is about the sort of projects or gigs, or less kind of I’ve got my job, I will succeed, and more kind of forever hustling. There’s the complaint I’m hearing more, the forever hustling and feeling like you’re not getting anywhere, and sort of using the modes to build the self awareness to try to target those searches and think more about kind of how I fit in in the world and what I want to do versus what’s available, just so it doesn’t constantly feel so completely overwhelming, that’s sort of like, well, I’ll just try everything, and I don’t really know what I want, and I’ve never had to really ask myself this question. And there’s this kind of paralysis that can come from that and be like, “Okay, well, let’s think about these modes, and how do you show up in the world, and where are you most comfortable, and what do we need to get out of,” and so I think this sort of developmental period, launch period, I think, is interesting to me right now.

Rebecca: Well, both of those sound really interesting as the next phase of this work. Thanks for a really great conversation.

Jenny: Thanks for having us.

Rebecca W.: Thank you for having us. It was really fun.

John: Well, thank you. You’re doing some really great work on a topic that’s incredibly important.

Rebecca W.: Thank you so much.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

372. Dance and Math

Students in math classes often treat math as a set of rules or procedures to be memorized, and do not see it as a creative and powerful way of modeling reality. In this episode, Manuela Manetta and Lori Teague join us to discuss how they have combined dance with math instruction to help students develop a deeper connection to mathematical concepts while also building human connection with their peers.

Manuela is an Associate Teaching Professor in the Department of Mathematics at Emory University. She is the recipient of a 2023 Emory Williams Distinguished Teaching Award. Lori is a choreographer and Associate Professor of Dance and Movement Studies at Emory University. They are co-developers of the initiative Mathematics through Movement, and they have taught different types of courses integrating movement into mathematics instruction at Emory.

Show Notes

Transcript

John: Students in math classes often treat math as a set of rules or procedures to be memorized, and do not see it as a creative and powerful way of modeling reality. In this episode, we examine how combining dance with math instruction can help students develop a deeper connection to mathematical concepts while also building human connection among the students.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

John: Our guests today are Manuela Manetta and Lori Teague. Manuela is an Associate Teaching Professor in the Department of Mathematics at Emory University. She is the recipient of a 2023 Emory Williams Distinguished Teaching Award. Lori is a choreographer and Associate Professor of Dance and Movement Studies at Emory University. They are co-developers of the initiative Mathematics through Movement, and they have taught different types of courses integrating movement into mathematics instruction at Emory. Welcome Manuela and Lori.

Lori: Thank you.

Manuela: Thank you for inviting us.

Rebecca: Today’s teas are:… Manuela, are you drinking any tea today?

Manuela: Yes, I’m drinking a wild sweet orange tea.

Rebecca: Oh, that sounds lovely. How about you, Lori?

Lori: I am drinking an Organic Chocolate Super Berry Burst. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: Wow.

John: That sounds flavorful.

Lori: Yeah, it’s a special day.

John: And I have a ginger peach green tea today.

Rebecca: A nice favorite. I also have a favorite John. I have an English breakfast tea today.

John: Very good. So we’ve invited you here today to discuss your mathematics through movement initiative. Can you tell us how this collaboration came about?

Manuela: During a review session for a final exam, my students were struggling with understanding the geometric properties of a system of differential equations. They were just staring at the graph on the board trying to make sense of it, but they were completely lost. So I tried something unusual. I stepped back from the board, I paused, and then I walked towards it, saying, hey, look, I’m walking along the curve. I have past time beyond my back, the future in front of me, and as time goes on, I get closer and closer to a straight path. So as I approached the board, I saw that something clicked in them. They could finally see it. And so it was amazing to watch the transformation in their faces. And most of them nailed this topic on the final exam. So then something else happened during office hours. I got an email from the college with this chance to teach a sidecar course. So a sidecar course is an interdisciplinary class that is taught by faculty from different departments when they can find a unique connection between their subjects for a single semester. Since I’ve always loved to dance, I thought, what if I could bring math and dance together? And right then, there was a student with me, and I shared this dream with her, and she said, “Oh, you know what? I’m in a dance class right now, so I just know the right professor for you.” And soon after, I invited Lori over to the math department. I showed her some of my course graphs that represent the solutions of differential equations. She looked at those shapes and curves, and something just clicked for her. She saw the connections with dance language. So we decided to make it happen. And we brought students in my differential equations class and our move improvisation class to work together in a sidecar course.

Lori: Well, I just remember this same student that we shared walking up to me and saying, “Hey, my math professor wants to work with you.” And I was like, “Me? Why me?” [LAUGHTER] But again, when I went over to Manuela’s office, I’m definitely kind of a “yes” person. So I’ve been teaching at Emory for so long, I thought, well, let me just see where this is going to go. And we did call the first iteration of what we did, Dancing Dynamical Systems, and it was really triggered by Manuela’s description of what’s called population dynamics, predator and prey systems, and she tried on her computer to explain this to me through the visuals that she typically uses in class. And I just will say that as a choreographer, I’m always in the unknown. We don’t know the outcome. All of our dances are experiments. And so I agreed to do this because I thought this would be exciting to see where it would go. And I think the other thing that is part of this initial piece is people have a lot of fears around dance as well. They think they can’t dance, just like people think they can’t do math. And we’re all movers, but some people don’t identify as movers, and we’ve had a very eclectic group of people take our classes. Some people have studied dance, they’re an athlete, and some people have no real body knowledge at all. And I think we’re helping them articulate the knowledge they hold in their bodies in a cognitive way, via the body, because movement research is founded in the body, sort of a reverse process of what math does.

Rebecca: I love this collaboration so much. [LAUGHTER]

John: Since you began this initial collaboration with the sidecar course, have you explored other classes that blend math and movement together?

Manuela: Yes, we did. So most of the classes were set as directed research classes. So those are kind of research labs where we let the students lead the collaboration among them and basically design their own learning experience, especially when we asked them to come up with projects where, basically we asked them to be the teacher and explain math through movement. Then we participated also in an initiative of the college that’s called LINC, which really means learning through inclusive collaboration, where the goal was to connect, again, two classes in the college with different goals, different experiences, and we decided to connect my partial differential equation class and Lori’s dance literacy class, and we basically had like a different setting, in the sense that we had four meetings total in the semester, and they were based on a theme. So we chose waves, and it was a lot of fun to bring my 40 students in partial differential equations into a dance studio. You can imagine that mathematicians, or like people in applied math, don’t feel like dancers at all, and so we threw them in a dance studio, and it was very fun to observe as the situation unfolded. But at the same time, we basically brought the dancers into our math classroom. You must have seen their faces when they saw all the equations on the board. But then we let them lead an activity in class to basically represent waves even if the students were sitting in their desks. So it was a very fun experiment. Then I let Lori speak about another experience that we had that is a freshman seminar.

Lori: Yeah. And also just want to reinforce that I think that it was very important for them to be in each other’s spaces. We’re recognizing that there’s a prescribed, I guess, type of learning style or approach that one would take in a studio type class, a creative type class, very interactive with the professor and classroom where students are sitting at desks, and so when we went into the math class, they are in desks, and the space doesn’t have a lot of room to move. How do we use the space? So that problem solving was kind of fun, and that project was more choreographic in terms of showing waves as a choreographic little entity. Then we did a freshman seminar, and that class has a prescribed amount of students. It’s usually 12. I think we ended up accepting 19, because the topic was attractive to freshmen. It met one day a week. Well, the other ones met one day a week. Freshman Seminar met twice a week, and it allowed us to test all of these lesson plans that we had started doing again. I think it was really fun for the students. We also recognized we had a mixed level, I guess, of math skills. So people who had high math skills sort of helping someone who had not low, but maybe struggling with some of the concepts, not remembering algebra or calculus concepts from high school. So returning to those things and as always, moving into the body in a way that maybe people who’d never taken any kind of dance class, all of that would have been new to them.

Rebecca: Can you describe some of the ways in which the math and dance are combined in course activities? Can you illuminate what a particular activity might have looked like? You’ve hinted at some of these things are. But it might really help for folks that maybe have never been in a dance classroom, or maybe have never been in a differential equation classroom, [LAUGHTER] to see what some of these things might look like.

Lori: Exactly. I have never been in a differential equation classroom. [LAUGHTER] I still don’t completely understand everything that I’m looking at, and so I’m going to say this is a true collaboration. I need her. I cannot do this class. I don’t understand high math the way that Manuela does, and it’s been a long time since I’ve taken a math class. My approach, or our approach, is that we’re looking for, like, parallels, different correlations, shared imagery, just material that you introduce to the students to invite them to reinvestigate the concept or explore a component of the equation. So it’s not a direct like by moving, they’re going to completely get it. It’s just that by moving, there’s a part of the equation they can understand more fully. One example, we have these physio balls. They use them in movement therapy. We have them in dance classes, and they really are a great way as a prop to understand physics concepts. So on a physio ball, you may be on your back or your belly, and there’s a particular equation that Manuela has aligned with this, but you’re finding different points of balance from your center of gravity shared with that ball’s center of gravity, like if you were lying on your belly, trying to raise your arms and legs and finding that maintaining and finding that balance point. This movement will help you find what is called constant solution of a differential equation, and you’re also kind of recognizing physically what your challenges are in your body, just as you would, what were the challenges in solving the equation. Another way we work a lot… so they have a lot of experiences where their own individual… how they sense something, or how they feel it in their body, is unique to them. And then we do a lot of things where we work in pairs, and those are maybe more choreographic that this trajectory is interacting with this parabola, like the shape of that in space and time. That’s maybe more graph assignments. And then we work in small groups, also to solve problems, and that’s where they discover a little bit more choreography in their own movement choices. When we do vectors and eigenvectors, there’s a prescribed behavior for a vector and an eigenvector of what it can and cannot do, and that’s very similar to choreography in terms of applying restrictions to the body to get a different dynamic behavior and stage that for us is just esthetically pleasing or communicates an idea, and for Manuela, or in math, it’s to solve the problem.

Manuela: So one thing that I want to add to what Lori said that she needs me to kind of come up with the activities, because she doesn’t have, like, a strong math background. I need to say that I need her so much because my training when I was young was in ballet, so I always thought that dance was like a strict set of rules. Same thing that people think about math. There’s a strict set of rules, and, oh, that’s it. You want to do your choreography, you want to execute it as well, and that’s it. But Lori opened my mind to a pretty new world where improvisation… I was so awkward in it at the beginning. I was like, why am I in a dance studio? What am I doing? [LAUGHTER] I don’t know what I have to do here. So it is really like the collaboration, a key point of our work. And even when we are working together in the dance studio, most of the times, we are picking on students’ ideas and we consult and we go ahead and try new things, even if we’ve not planned them. One activity that I want to talk about that is about differential equations is an experiment that we call competition game. We basically propose it all the time because it’s fun for the students, and it represents something that I cover towards the end of the differential equation course, when we introduce the predator-prey model and the competition model. And I noticed that the students have a hard time not really understanding the equations at that point, because they’ve trained a lot from that, but understanding what is the behavior of a solution, what is the biology application attached to it? And connect those points for them is really hard. So basically, what we do is we don’t reveal what we’re going to achieve in the game, but we ask them to select their strongest asset and move according to that. So one fun fact is that during a semester, a student chose hair, and so it was just flipping his head [LAUGHTER] the entire time.

Lori: I think he lost the game. In the end, hair did not work. [LAUGHTER]

Manuela: So what we do is we usually mark a small region on the floor with tape, and this will basically represent the limited resources that these populations have. And as we go on into the game, we try to limit the space making the area smaller and smaller and smaller. And so eventually the students need to leave this area. And so this could basically represent the fact that they lose in the competition.

Lori: Yeah, I do remember there was a student that, kind of remembering her choice, but let’s say that you said, “Oh, I think a real asset of my personality is that I’m adaptable.” And when the space gets smaller and smaller, a person who can change levels, move in those tight spaces. being the most adaptable, often wins honestly. So it’s not the strongest or the tallest. It was this woman that had that quality I remember, who succeeded in our first game.

John: So I imagine one advantage of this is you’re pushing students quite a ways out of their comfort zones, for both students with backgrounds in dance and math. What are the main benefits to students of participating in this combination of activities?

Manuela: So one thing that I’ve noticed, especially after COVID, is a big shift in students’ approach to learning. So more than ever, they tend to focus on memorizing everything, almost word to word, and repeat back exactly what the instructor says. It’s like they’re playing it safe, relying on notes, videos, and any resources that they can get to make sure they’re prepared. But what’s interesting is they’re not as concerned with really digesting or understanding the material, and they’re focused on having the right notes and information just to pass it down. So it’s becoming basically more about reproducing what’s given to them, rather than exploring ideas for themselves. And so when we combine math and dance, the movement based activities force the students to step outside of the typical problem-solving approach they’re used to in math. And so instead of following a set of instructions, as I said before, like they do for a math problem, they have to focus on the concepts themselves and think more creatively. So these activities require them to engage deeply with the material, often in ways that go beyond the usual analytical methods. And then when students are asked to embody mathematical ideas through movement, they’re forced to make those connections and think in new ways and figure things out on their own without the right answer. There’s no right or wrong answer for us, so they actually feel free to speak up, even if they leave their comfort zone. They’re not afraid of asking the math professor that question that can be a dumb question for them. So in that sense, including dance or movement in math can also kind of get them closer to the math instructor and to their peers. One big difficulty that I have in my class is to make them work together. I try every semester to organize group work. It doesn’t work. It just doesn’t work. They don’t talk to each other. They don’t know each other. They have no willingness to make friends in a math classroom. They just want to work on their own. And so, in this setting, we change all of that. They start collaborating. They interact with each other, and even the quieter students who usually hold back in a traditional math classroom, they feel comfortable contributing.

Rebecca: It almost seems like the extreme discomfort that probably all of them are facing [LAUGHTER] is like, “Well, we at least have this in common.” [LAUGHTER]

Manuela: That’s right, and it was even true for me, right? So when we did our sidecar course and I had to move in front of students and in front of the dance professor. That was awkward for me, that was embarrassing for me as well, and I think it helped me a lot in my growth as a human being as well.

Lori: I just want to add that this is not territory that’s hyper familiar to dancers, either. Manuela talked about her own ballet identity, and that’s a prescribed form that is a lot about perfectionism. And then many of our students grow up doing competition dance in studios, and that’s also about being exact and competing and winning. And the kind of dance in our program at Emory is not that at all. And so they’re introduced to improvisation. Dance is a very social form, and so our class sizes are smaller, and we are used to moving, of course, in front of them, because that’s what we do. So I think those two things are different from the get go, but I do see a similarity, that it’s unfamiliar territory for dancers as well, until they get to college, and then dance in college is different from what they’ve grown up doing. So we saw the collaborative nature of class. They were laughing a lot, but they were willing. And we actually asked them that at the beginning. I know this is going to be different, but you just have to have a willingness to experiment, and that’s going to make a big difference. And I think the other thing that I remember… it was between classes, and I said, I think we should really share with them our discomfort and that transparency, I think, helped as well. We talked about when we were in high school, I was shy. I didn’t want to raise my hand and admit that I didn’t understand something. So I hope that helped. We felt like it did, just to say we get it, but you have to ask questions if you are lost.

Manuela: So I have to say that in this. I identify so much… like in Italy, I studied my whole life in Italy, and in Italy you have like this distant relationship with your professor, and so I never raised my hand to ask a question, even in college, I didn’t wanna ask a question in front of everybody to a professor. So I really relate to the students in this sense, even though I try to make my classes engaging and let them share as much as they can with me and be nice or whatever, be friendly, but there’s nothing like as a dance studio to make this happen, rather than a math classroom.

Rebecca: It really sounds like this collaboration and the opportunity for these groups of students around this discomfort has taken down a lot of barriers. You’ve started talking a little bit about how students have responded. I’m sure the response shifted over the course of the semester. Perhaps at first, it maybe was about shock, [LAUGHTER] and probably evolved. You talked about students laughing in the studio and things later on in the semester. Can you talk a little bit about how students responded at the beginning and how you ease them into this space? Because I’m sure you had to do some onboarding, and then how maybe that evolved over the course of the semester?

Manuela: Yeah, so there’s a bit of hesitation at the beginning. So some students were distressed or in discomfort with the movement aspect often and unsure about the space at first, but Lori would take the lead of this in a beautiful way. So one thing that was memorable is that she made us introduce ourselves with pronouncing our names and associating with our names a movement. I usually in my math class introduce everyone the first day of class, and some of them, they’re afraid to speak up, even if they just have to say their names and why they’re there, which is usually because of a requirement for the major. But anyways, that experience of associating a movement with their names was memorable, and everyone had to echo the movement and repeat their names. And I think this is not only like a way to get acquainted with one another, but also to remember the names. Because if you associate a name with a movement, you most likely remember the name.

Lori: I do, because when you have three classes, I’ve got to learn about 60 something names every semester. And there’s a lot of different ways that we learn. And I will see someone on campus, and I will remember their movement, sometimes easier than I can, sometimes, their name. And then it takes several weeks, and I can integrate both things. But again, in a beginning level class, Modern I, which is where this shared student we had was, we all do, we just call it the name game, and it’s very effective. It kind of breaks the ice. And I will say, in terms of the progression that we feel over a semester, we repeat things, warm ups, they’re not prescribed, but we continue to repeat some of the same material of body awareness techniques that are somatic, that they get more and more comfortable with. I’m not correcting anyone, it’s just an experience to be in the body and be present to learn, and then when we get into improvs, and that is a course that I totally love teaching at Emory, and I’m in my silly self, I think, when I teach improv, it’s about the potential of anything to go in any direction, and it is about breaking rules sometimes. And once you charge an environment or a room with that kind of energy, it’s just different than having to get to a concrete outcome. It’s very explorative, and the freedom, I think, is what you feel more than anything,

Manuela: To speak more about the students’ response about the course, I think that we had such a positive feedback. Some of them at the end of the semester said that they like to start with a movement-based activity before introducing the math concepts. And I think this is what the students like, and I do also. I always ask Lori, let’s start with a movement hook, because to start with an equation, it’s always hard to get their attention. I do that in my classes already. I don’t want to do that in a dance studio. And some of them have also said that this basically is a new study technique for them, that they’re going to associate movement to what they’re learning, and then I guess what they see the most is the visualization of the mathematical concept. So we think about embodying it and experiencing it in the body, but I think that, for them, it’s more about really seeing, not only in themselves, but seeing in the other students as well. And one thing that I’d like to add on this is that we had also two students, Luoran and Ruishi, working on theses for math and movement, and basically they took the lead of one of the courses in one semester, and one of them studied the pedagogical side of math and movement, and the other one took the assessment part, so she developed questions and surveys and everything to see if this course was beneficial to the students, and they turned this experience into two honors theses for their graduation. And now we’re working together in trying to publish their results in a nice paper, hopefully, [LAUGHTER] that we get out soon.

Rebecca: That’s great.

John: That’s a great experience for students.

Lori: It was and it was inspiring to me that they wanted to do an honors project in it, because that means that this really resonated in them. They both graduated with highest honors, I will say as well. We weren’t collecting empirical data at all. We were just allowing this thing to be free for many years. And one of the things that we did, though, is we have the students reflect and so after class, we said, “How do we know what really happens? Is this sinking in? How are we going to know if what we’re doing is working?” And I did go back, because I don’t want to try to paraphrase what I’m remembering, these light bulb moments sometimes for students, we don’t know when they happen. Is why we need them to write it in a reflection journal. But we were doing a class that was physics concepts, really, so like resistance, velocity, momentum, Newton’s laws of motion. And this is something that one student said, “I physically felt the resistance of air molecules as my body moved through the atmosphere. It was eye opening. It provided a tangible connection to these abstract concepts. I descended through the atmosphere. I keenly felt the drag force exerted by the air molecules, this resistance or drag I felt in my arms and my legs.” And so I think again, in science classes, which are so different from classes in the humanities, where people discuss and write a lot, it was also helping these students describe feelings, really, sensations, that they were having in the body when they were exploring these mathematical concepts.

Rebecca: Manuela talked a little bit about how dance maybe lit up some math. [LAUGHTER] Lori, can you talk a little bit about how maybe dance students saw math differently?

Lori: Well, we really don’t have that reverse scenario, because in those first years, we had two dance students, we had four TAs, and two were in math and two were in dance. And these were two people, one was a dance major, the other was a dance minor. They were very interested in doing this, and they were my demonstrators a lot, but typically, I would say most of the time, the people that sign up for this are in math, so the crossover really hasn’t happened, even though, in our field or at Emory people double major. So there’s plenty of people who are biology or chemistry and dance and they take math classes. I think that this will unfold over time, but I would say that we’ve designed this for math students to introduce movement to them, as opposed to the reverse.

Manuela: Still too scary for dancers to get to math.

Lori: Yeah, [LAUGHTER] back to fear. [LAUGHTER] Yes.

Rebecca: Well, it sounds like you’ve conquered fear in one direction…

Lori: Yeah. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: …so it shouldn’t be that hard to conquer it the other way.

Lori: That’s right.

John: It does take a bit of work though to get to the level of differential equations.

Rebecca: That’s true. [LAUGHTER]

Lori: Oh, my goodness, yes.

John: So I can see how connecting mathematical concepts to dance provides students with some additional cognitive hooks, ways of connecting what they’re learning to other experiences, which can make it quite a bit more memorable. Could you imagine this type of approach of embodied learning being applied to other disciplines? For example, if you bring some people in from music, might you have a course called Hamiltonians or something. [LAUGHTER]

Manuela: That’s great. I get it.

Lori: I mean, the short answer is yes, because I think movement relates to everything personally. But I can give you an example that was eye opening for me. So in 2023 there was a conference at Emory, hosted by the Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, and it was called Minds and Movement: Prospects for the Study of Embodied Cognition, and Dietrich Stout, the director of that, initiated the whole conference, and he had heard, I think, our article had been written about us in the Emory Report, and he was like, “huh, movement and math, let’s bring them into it.” But it brought together these researchers in different disciplines: psychology, neuro/brain, behavioral biology, anthropology… a lot of anthropologists… who believe that cognition is grounded in the body sensation and movement, but the disembodied models from AI were starting to produce or suggest another outcome or another theory. So, the question, really, that was asked at the conference, the overarching question. was: “has embodied cognition run its course?“ Like, how do we use our bodies in learning, and how could it foster applications in human health, therapeutic practices, all kinds of things. And the conference was fascinating. Everyone had, like, 20 minutes to present, so it was really lectures all day long, or mini-lectures, and I was like, we can’t do what we do in 20 minutes, so they gave us a two-hour workshop. It was at the end of the day, and I thought, “My goodness, they’re not going to come.” [LAUGHTER] I was skeptical. I was like, they’re tired, they’re going to want to go home and eat. But we brought them into a dance studio. They did all come. They were participating, just like our students, and laughing and sweating and interacting very playfully, and it just opened that door again, a huge door, asking questions that stimulated discussions about how movement could be in any of these fields. But one of my takeaways was just this man that looked at deep sea divers and the reflex, the skill building, in the body of free diving, or the embodiment of reflex. Another person, her research was the neuro-mechanics that sculpt differences in our movement. There was another woman, I think she taught at Georgia State. Her paper was called “The Mindful Dynamics in Architectural Design.” So the body is part of everything, and it’s just kind of our awareness or your entry point into that. Mine is dance, but people use movement to research all kinds of disciplines or interact with other disciplines.

John: One thing I’d like to mention is that this reminds me a lot of some of the work that Susan Hrach has done. She was on a past podcast, and she has the book Minding Bodies, we’ll include references to that in the show notes, because much of that discussion relates to this concept of embodied learning, and I think they compliment each other very nicely.

Lori: Yeah, I’d love to look that up. I’d love to connect with her.

Rebecca: So we always wrap up by asking: “what’s next?”

Manuela: We have been working through research labs and initiatives and things that have been going on in Emory. But finally, we got our course approved from the college, and it’s a lab attached to my differential equations class that is optional for the students, and it’s called “Differential Equations through Movement,” so we’re going to offer this 50-minute lab every week to the students, and every week we’re connecting with the classes that have been taught during the normal sessions of differential equations. And sometimes we’re going to use that lab to kind of reinforce the ideas. Sometimes we’re going to use those labs in order to introduce new topics for the next week. So for instance, we’ve seen that with population dynamics, those games have worked beautifully. So we are gonna use those games to introduce population dynamics before I cover those in a analytical fashion. Since we haven’t done our research in collecting data and our case study, we’re going to do that too. So we are now designing assessment tools so we will have pre- and post-tests, surveys, video interviews, observations in class, and students’ journals and reflections, so that we can compare all students in differential equations with the students that take the lab and see if this is effective or not. And now we have another dream, but I’ll let Loriaura speak for that.

Lori: Well, I think that, even in our initial design, I think of this partnership, how do we share it with other educators, to empower them to find new ways to help students learn, and we both have presented in our own fields at conferences and things like that. As Manuela said, we’re working on a paper that will be shared, and that’s another way that it moves out into the world. But a more imaginative, perhaps creative, way, is that we’re thinking of creating either a film, which would be some type of dance performance and/or a live performance, where you could use technology in terms of the set design or background screen, where someone would be seeing mathematical concepts in some way, maybe abstract or creatively expressed, and to create choreography with professional dancers, not students, that would help share concepts in math, and we’re not sure when that’s going to happen, but we talk about it almost every year, and it’s really about finding the time to do it.

Rebecca: And now you’ve said it out loud on a podcast, so maybe it’ll be real.

Lori: I know. careful. That’s right. [LAUGHTER]

Rebecca: That’s how you turn dreams into reality. [LAUGHTER]

John: Thank you. This has been an interesting conversation, and it’s nice to see people doing some creative things to help students make connections and to learn more deeply.

Rebecca: Yeah, that sounds really fun, and a great class for people to observe.

Lori: Thank you.

Manuela: Thank you.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]

371. Student Motivation and UDL

Providing more autonomy can increase students’ intrinsic motivation. In this episode, Chris Hromalik joins us to discuss ways of increasing student autonomy within the UDL framework. an Assistant Professor of Spanish and Distance Learning Instruction and Design at SUNY Oswego. He is also the Project Manager of the Universal Design for Learning at SUNY Project. In this role he provides Universal Design for Learning professional development across the SUNY system. Chris is also the recipient of a SUNY Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Scholarship and Creative Activities. His research focuses on UDL as well as statistical analysis on applied linguistics and education.

Show Notes

Transcript

John: Providing more autonomy can increase students’ intrinsic motivation. In this episode we explore ways of increasing student autonomy within the UDL framework.

[MUSIC]

John: Thanks for joining us for Tea for Teaching, an informal discussion of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.

Rebecca: This podcast series is hosted by John Kane, an economist…

John: …and Rebecca Mushtare, a graphic designer…

Rebecca: …and features guests doing important research and advocacy work to make higher education more inclusive and supportive of all learners.

[MUSIC]

Rebecca: Our guest today is Chris Hromalik, an Assistant Professor of Spanish and Distance Learning Instruction and Design at SUNY Oswego. He is also the Project Manager of the Universal Design for Learning at SUNY Project. In this role he provides Universal Design for Learning professional development across the SUNY system. Chris is also the recipient of a SUNY Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Scholarship and Creative Activities. His research focuses on UDL as well as statistical analysis on applied linguistics and education. Welcome, Chris.

Chris: Thank you.

John: Today’s teas are: … Chris, are you drinking any tea?

Chris: I am. I have the Tazo RefreshMint. Very good.

Rebecca: Nice and relaxing, right?

Chris: It is.

John: And Rebecca?

Rebecca: I am back to my Scottish afternoon tea.

John: …and I am drinking Darjeeling tea today.

Rebecca: Oh, you’re mixing it up, John. So Chris, we’ve invited you here today to discuss your work with UDL and instructional design. Can you talk a little bit about how you got started with UDL?

Chris: Sure. So thank you, Rebecca, thank you, John for having me here today. All of it began as far back as 2011 when I took my first course in accessible usable web design. And wow, it’s been a while, but at that time, Nancy Carr, who was the director of the Office of Accessibility Resources at Onondaga Community College, she recruited me to be an Office of Accessibility Resources ambassador, and the idea was to be able to make other faculty aware of how to work more closely with the Office of Accessibility Resources. And I was tasked with helping faculty to better understand digital accessibility, how to make their documents more accessible. With time, I ended up joining the Universal Design for Learning Academy, which, at the time, was funded by the Onondaga Pathways to Career Project through a grant from the Office of Disability Employment Policy through the US Department of Labor. The idea was to train faculty in the Universal Design for Learning Framework. We had a three-day workshop. It went very well, repeated three more times, extended to four days even, and ended up training over 110 faculty, staff, and administrators at Onondaga Community College. And then fall 2021 I ended up bringing it to the SUNY level, and here we are today. All is going well so far.

John: Well, I suspect most of our listeners are familiar with the basics of UDL. Could you just provide a really quick overview of what UDL is, and why should we consider using UDL.

Chris: Universal Design for Learning is a framework based on scientific insight into how humans learn that can help to make more accessible, inclusive, and usable learning experiences for students. We’ll talk a little bit more about the three principles of UDL throughout the interview today, but some of the main benefits would be that if we are thinking proactively about how we can design our instruction to reduce barriers for students during the design process, as opposed to trying to be reactive, and trying to then retrofit our instruction or change our instruction later, we can create learning experiences that are going to be better for all of our students. One of the examples I like to give comes from, going back to the Universal Design for Learning Academy back at Onondaga Community College, a fantastic professor of mathematics. Part of the Universal Design for Learning Academy was, during the summer, be trained in the Universal Design for Learning Framework, and in the fall, we would implement some sort of instructional intervention, some way that we would apply the UDL framework to our instruction with students. And this professor of mathematics had recognized that there was a unit of his instruction that was more challenging than others for his students. It was a lesson on eigenvectors, vector spaces, linear transformations. When you realize that this isn’t a matter of engagement, the students are really interested in this. These are math majors, they really like what they’re doing, but it was a challenging topic. And we took a look at the textbooks, how the textbook was this 2D presentation in text and mathematical formulas and that sort of thing. But he found a visual representation in the form of video that took this, what really is a more three- dimensional concept, and made it three dimensional, as opposed to the 2D representation of the textbook. And where I bring this in is that when we think about Universal Design for Learning, the idea is that we’re creating more accessible, usable, inclusive instruction for our students, but there are going to be benefits that are going to benefit everyone in the classroom. When this professor was thinking about how he’s going to present this, he presents the video, but he is also supplementing the video by describing the visuals aloud. Keep in mind the idea that if we have a student who is blind or has low vision in the class, how can we ensure access to all students in the classroom? And so he would take the time to describe the visuals aloud. And yes, this does benefit a student who is blind or has low vision, but all students are benefiting from this, because when the professor is making salient the most important information from this video, this benefits all the students in the classroom. And so the idea being that when we think about how we can design to reduce barriers for the students in our class, we’re able to then make a better learning experience for everybody.

Rebecca: On July 30, 2024, CAST, which is the organization that puts out UDL principles, released the 3.0 version of the UDL guidelines, both the earlier and current versions of the UDL Guidelines focus on course design that results in students having multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression. So those are the three overlying guidelines, but there were substantial revisions in how those guidelines are described. The 3.0 version of the UDL guidelines remove the word “provide.” Can you talk about the shift in focus away from having faculty provide these UDL features.

Chris: So, Rebecca, the shift that you’re referring to is the idea of moving from providing multiple means of representation, providing multiple means of action, expression, providing multiple means of engagement, and instead saying to design multiple means of representation, design multiple means of action and expression, design multiple means of engagement. And a lot of that comes down to this idea of moving away from a more teacher-centered approach to the classroom and having a more learner- centered approach to the classroom. And so a lot of what we’re going to see in these changes that are in the UDL 3.0 guidelines is this idea of moving toward a more learner-centered approach to the classroom. And it’s not like it wasn’t there before. The idea of teacher-centered of teacher-centered versus learner-centered, it’s always been part of it, but to place greater emphasis on the idea that it isn’t necessarily us as the instructors who are providing the learning experiences, and that we are the ones who are responsible for this. And I’ve seen this with the workshops that I’ve given, that one of the questions that I oftentimes will receive is, is the onus always on us as the instructors to be providing for the students. And so to me, when I saw the change, it made sense. It addresses some of the concerns that faculty in higher education have expressed to me, this idea of, well, we want our students to be intrinsically motivated. We want our students to be interested in what they’re learning. And so the idea is that we’re moving away from this idea of we are the providers of knowledge. We are the sages on the stage. It’s going to be a more learner-centered approach to the classroom.

John: The original guidelines focus on developing student expertise. The new guidelines focus instead on developing learner agency. What’s the purpose of the shift? And what are some ways in which instructors can do this?

Chris: So a lot of this does come back to the idea of learner-centered versus teacher-centered. Nothing has changed in terms of wanting our learners be expert learners. But the idea is, as opposed to focusing on understanding content, it’s more the idea of students taking ownership of their learning, the idea that students are going to help to shape the learning process. So when I think about learner agency and I think about learner autonomy, the first thing that I begin to think about is thinking about self-determination theory. So when we think about self-determination theory, we have three components that are going to influence our levels of intrinsic motivation. We have competence, whether or not we believe that we can actually complete a task or complete a task to a high level of quality. One of the others is relatedness, which we’ll talk a little bit about when we get into talking about some of the other changes that’s related to bias and exclusionary practices. We’ll talk about this idea of relatedness and autonomy is going to be one of the most important aspects, the idea of agency and being able to feel like you’re in charge of the learning experience. And if we think about the idea that if students are more intrinsically motivated, they have this inherent interest in learning, versus extrinsic motivated, going to be more outside influences. It’s the difference between having a student, for example, who’s interested in learning about something just because they are interested in the topic, versus someone who’s learning to get a better grade in the course. And if you want to be able to build up this interest in students’ inherent interest in their intrinsic motivation in the course, increasing their autonomy is going to help to do that. Intrinsic motivation, greater levels have been associated with greater academic performance, greater creativity in the classroom and so it all leads together. Thinking about it from a student success perspective, if we can increase learner autonomy, we can increase their intrinsic motivation, increase their academic performance, and one of the ways to do that is to be able to offer options to learners. But going even further then, in the 3.0 guidelines, offering students the option of having choice, to be able to discover resources on their own. As opposed to giving one textbook reading, could there be other options that we could offer to learners, or the learners can find their own options too? We have so many different things that can be found online, that allowing learners that agency, that autonomy, to be able to search out the information that’s going to help them to be successful and reach the learning objectives of the course.

Rebecca: Are there ways that you embed agency in the classes that you teach?

Chris: I’m going to give a lot of examples today, from online courses that either I’ve taught in the past or courses that I’m preparing at the moment. And one of the ways that, when you think about designing multiple means of representation, one of the ways to offer choice or offer more autonomy for learners is to be able to more guide them toward being able to find things, be able to offer different options. So we have our textbook readings, we have videos, instructional materials that come with it. Be able to point students toward other resources and guide them to understand how to actually purposefully search for information, because search, in and of itself, is a skill. To be able to create a purposeful search, be able to find resources on your own, is part of the learning process itself. So as opposed to just providing just the resources to be able to tell students, here are some other sources we can be consulting. Here are some other high quality resources and then be able to teach them how they can be able to search for that information on their own.

John: While UDL has always had a component of providing students with multiple means of engagement, to provide students with multiple ways of connecting to the content that is the focus of the class. The new guidelines include a focus on removing bias and exclusionary practices. Could you talk a little bit about what this sort of change involves and how it may affect the way in which courses are designed?

Chris: when I think about designing multiple means of engagement, typically when I have a shorter workshop or a shorter webinar, the way I’ll explain this, here’s a simple way of thinking about it is, as opposed to with designing multiple means of representation, where we are considering, how can we provide an accessible, usable option for how we present content, with action expression, how can we design an accessible and usable option for how students demonstrate the knowledge? With engagement, I think about relevance, and how can we design multiple examples for what we’re trying to teach students? So if we think about multiple examples, and we think about examples that are going to represent the diversity of our student population, this is going to help us to remove bias, be more inclusive in the classroom, and for the students to be able to then see themselves in what it is that we’re teaching. To get back to self-determination theory, for example, the idea of relatedness. And if we think about whether or not students do see themselves in what we’re teaching them, will we be able to then help them to build up intrinsic motivation, which, of course, then can lead them to be more successful? This is going to be something that can and has potential to increase student success, for them to be able to see themselves in what they’re learning. And also we think about feedback, one of the strategies I like to emphasize the idea of providing multiple examples of what we’re teaching, and especially thinking of examples, maybe outside of our typical canon. But if we also think about the feedback that we provide to students too, and if we’re providing feedback to students, ensuring that the feedback we’re providing is going to be free of bias as well too. This is a different example, it’s outside of higher education, but I think about the experience of my own daughter and thinking about some of the feedback that at a young age she would receive. That I am not necessarily your typical American in many ways. I don’t necessarily always have all the same customs and traditions. I don’t always honor the same customs and traditions, in the sense of we may do things differently at different holiday times, may eat different foods and what might be typical. And my wife is also not from the US originally. And so when we were raising my daughter, she wasn’t necessarily being raised with the same songs, with the same nursery rhymes, with the same poems and the same ways of doing things that other kids were, and the type of feedback that she received at a young age was there was just a misunderstanding of the fact that she wasn’t raised in the same way as many of her classmates, and it was a misunderstanding about her intelligence, a misunderstanding about what she was capable of doing, because there was a misunderstanding about her upbringing. So thinking about how we can provide feedback that’s going to be supportive and understanding of students who may not have the same lived experiences as each one of us. In the classroom, asking students to be able to provide their own examples, going back and thinking about my daughter and her experiences, they’re discussing in class different traditions they have for Thanksgiving, for the holidays, and having each of the students share their examples, what they do in their household. That it may be that there are different practices that each one of us has, and we may not even realize that they’re going to be different practices. So having students be able to have a voice to share their experiences in, for example, language classroom, students could share the types of foods that they have when they’re at home.

Rebecca: I think along the same lines, the new guidelines provide more focus on development of other things like student goal setting, self regulation, and metacognition. Can you give some examples of ways that you might incorporate these into a class as well?

Chris: So when I think about goal setting, when I think about self regulation, metacognition, the way that I like to incorporate this in the classroom is through reflection. I’m very much a strong proponent of reflective journal entries for students, and especially when in my online courses, I like to have weekly reflective journal entries as students submit one to two paragraphs, just thinking about their learning and how they’ve been learning up until now. And one of the first things we do at the very beginning is goal setting. And so when I think about self regulation, when I think about goal setting, it’s that idea of considering setting goals at the beginning, and how are we going to monitor our progress toward reaching those goals, and how are we going to regulate our emotions? How are we going to regulate our behavior? So in other words, how are we going to use learning strategies that are going to help us to achieve those goals? How are we going to, if there’s a setback, keep going toward reaching our goals? And so for me, when I have reflective journal entries, I like to base them around six dimensions of self-regulated learning. So that’s the “with whom,” the “what,” the “where,” the “when,” the “why,” and the “how” of self-regulated learning. So with whom? Well, basically, at the beginning of the semester, I’ll ask students to say why they’re even taking an online Spanish course to begin with, and what are their goals for the semester? Next week, we’ll be thinking about their learning environment. Where are they studying? Are they working in a distraction-free environment? What are some of the materials that they’re using in order to support their learning? We think about the with whom, with whom are they working? Are they working with other people? Are they asking for help? Are they seeking help when needed, if they have questions and concerns, are they reaching out to the instructor, reaching out to their peers? When we think about the when, another week’s reflected journal entry is to think about how do they manage their time? How do they plan their time? Do they set aside time for studying online? We start to get to our first exam, we think about going back to those goals again. What were your goals originally in your first week, your first reflective journal entry? Do you believe you’re on track to reaching those goals? If not, what can you do differently in order to get close to reaching those goals? So monitoring your progress. Think about how we’re going to change our behavior, adjust our learning strategies, in order to get more closer to reaching the goals we set for ourselves. And so that’s the idea and we’re thinking about the student goal setting that first day of class could be, why are you taking this course? What goals do you have for yourself? In a language course, it’s great because a lot of times our goal is, I want to travel. Or I want to be able to speak to somebody that at this moment I currently am not able to communicate as easily as I wish I could. And then, as we get a little bit further on the semester, we get our first exam back, so we get our feedback on that as we think through, am I working toward this goal? This can be done both online, it can be done a face-to-face classroom as well, and a lot of times we’ll have five minutes at the end of a class session, we’ll have we’ll have just five minutes that we’re not really sure what to do with it. And this is a great opportunity to have a written reflection. In the case of an online course, it could be an option of written versus a video submission for reflection. So we have goal setting, taking that time to reflect on what our goals are. Are we reaching them or working toward them, and what can we do to adjust our behavior in order to get there?

Rebecca: I can imagine that sometimes there might need to be some scaffolding or coaching around goal setting too, because depending on the discipline or shifting between kinds of courses, our expectations may not align with what our goals may even be initially. I want to be fluent by the end of this beginning Spanish class may not be a realistic expectation, and that can lead to frustration or other kinds of emotions that might get in the way of learning if we’re not being realistic about what our goals are.

Chris: And as soon as you were saying that, that was the first thing I thought of too, is in a Spanish 101 course, we’re working in the novice level. We’re beginning. We’re not going to leave being able to speak at a superior level. And this is the opportunity to be able to temper those expectations, to provide feedback to students and say, “Okay, I know we want to reach a certain level, but after four months, we’re only going to be able to reach this level” and to be able to put into clear words, well, this is what we’ll be able to do by the time all is said and done at the end of this course, and say, yeah, that is an opportunity to be able to help to keep expectations in check also.

Rebecca: You have a five-point plan that’s gonna take three [LAUGHTER] semesters to accomplish.

Chris:…but thinking back, even to as a student, I would actually prefer to have a student who has these high expectations and really just wants to shoot for the stars. I don’t want to bring them down, but somebody who has that enthusiasm? Obviously, we take courses to fulfill requirements all the time. We all did that as students ourselves. And so if that’s the reason for taking the course, well that’s great too. That is a reason for wanting to take a course. Wow, if we have someone who has these high expectations, well maybe we want to bring them down to more realistic expectations. But wow, it is also so exciting when you get someone who really wants to learn to communicate in the language and that really is their goal by the time they walk out of the classroom. It’s exciting.

John: One of the things that a number of economists have noted recently is that the rate of change in labor markets seems to have been accelerating in the last 30 or 40 years. A lot of the occupations that made up a large share of the labor force have effectively disappeared, and there’s lots of new occupations appearing. And I would think that this focus on self-regulated learning and so forth would be really helpful in helping students become lifelong learners because the skills they’re developing now might be very different than the types of skills they need in the future. So is that part of the reason perhaps for this shift?

Chris: Definitely, as we, ideally, will be more self-regulated learners, as opposed to other regulated, and being able to be more lifelong learners, being able to then adjust to to be able too, to be more flexible as learners, as you said, in the workforce, we’re in times that are constantly changing, whether it’s new technology, whether that’s going to be new requirements in the workforce. To be able to be lifelong learners, whether that’s through advanced certificates, whether that be through just being able to adjust to changes in technology, then yes, for sure, being more self regulated, opposed to being more other regulated, will definitely be a plus and an important part of how our students are going to be able to make the most when they’re moving into the workforce, for sure.

Rebecca: You just mentioned some new technology, and one of the things that we’ve talked a lot about on the podcast has been AI. And faculty have certainly been concerned about how the widespread availability of AI tools will affect student learning. What are some of the potential benefits and challenges associated with the use of AI in the UDL context?

Chris: So I’ll be honest and say that there’s a lot happening because, as you all know, and it can be difficult to follow change that is happening so rapidly and so a lot of different things that come to mind as I think about this question. The first is thinking about some of the concerns we have as faculty. And it’s true, we do have more concerns about whether or not we can maintain academic integrity, whether or not we’re going to be able to still be able to offer the same types of assessment that will be able to allow for critical thinking for students in the way that we have up until now. And so there are a lot of concerns for sure, when it comes to use of AI. A lot of really great things about it too, though. And so for me, it is a challenge thinking about that balance of where we have challenges, but also thinking about some of the benefits that we have, and especially when we think about benefits in terms of learner agency and learner autonomy, and helping students to be more self directed, more self-regulated learners. AI really does present an opportunity for that. A first thought that comes to mind when I think about my Spanish courses, if we’re completing a chapter of instruction and we’re working toward an exam, one of the most challenging aspects of that exam for students tends to be the composition. When we’re getting to an exam and they have to work on a piece of writing, basically, they’re going to be applying what they’re learning to a longer form piece of writing. And that can be difficult because it can oftentimes be difficult to get feedback on their progress along the way, and thinking about how AI could be leveraged in order for students who want to take charge of their learning, who want to be able to have this opportunity for practice and feedback, is to put into ChatGPT: “What have we been learning about? Here’s a vocab we work with. Here are the grammatical concepts. What are going to be some composition prompts that I might see on the exam? What could I possibly be asked to be able to do?” And from there, you can be writing up your composition and submit it and say, “Well, how did this go? What kind of feedback can you provide in terms of grammar, in terms of vocab, in terms of my overall performance of the task of the prompt you gave me, in terms of my creativity, in terms of how I’ve expressed myself at the 101 level?” So there are opportunities for us to use this to be more self-regulated learners. And I think that part of that comes from teaching students how to do that, to understand what are going to be the ethical ways of using AI. There are still going to be challenges. There are clearly challenges that we’re gonna face as faculty when it comes to AI and lots of transitions that are happening at the moment, but there are a lot of benefits that we could be seeing in terms of helping students to become more self-regulated learners, to feel like they have more autonomy in the classroom too.

Rebecca: Some faculty are reluctant to adopt a UDL framework in their classes because they are concerned that it could require a lot of time. What advice would you give to faculty who express this concern?

Chris: So I’m certainly feeling the crunch of time, and I imagine each of us in this room feels that way too. There’s a lot going on. There’s a lot happening. It isn’t that there aren’t good intentions. Is that there seem to be more and more things that are being given to us as faculty members. There’s more to do. Our days are full. You look at your calendar and you see where the free time is to be taking professional development. When you look for the time when you can make a change to something that you’ve taught 3, 4, 5 times already, there is a limited amount of time. And so what I would say is that one of the best ways to go about that then, if we were to thinking about what’s something we can be doing right away, what can we take from this podcast and be able to make changes in our face-to-face instruction, is to start to think about something small that we could do, that maybe might take a little bit of time now, but could eventually save us some time in the long run. And so I’m just gonna bring it back to UDL and some of the things that I’ll sometimes teach, and some of sometimes teach in some of the workshops that they give. One of the things is providing a model. So when I say providing a model, I’m thinking of a model assignment from a prior semester where a student might have completed a high-quality assignment. If you reach out to a former student, ask if you can share their work, anonymize it, and make it available to students, that takes a few minutes to do at the beginning, but can save you so much time in emails and questions that you receive from students. And so here we have a best practice of giving an example, giving a model to students. And it’s one of those things that can be done in a little bit shorter amount of time, but it can also save time for us in the long run. So these types of things, of building in best practices, can actually save us some time in the long run. When I think about offering a second option for an assignment where, if you can offer a second way that an assignment can be done, it can oftentimes save you, as an instructor, some time too. It may take five minutes to put in a second way of doing that in the assignment directions, but it can save you time. In my online courses, I spent years working with students who would tell me that they had difficulty writing diacritics, accent marks on compositions. And I would set up office hours time with students, and they would come and have extra time at the beginning of semester, and trying to work through, first it was Mac and PC, and then there were Chromebooks, and then there was iOS, and there was all that. And eventually one student said to me, can I just write it by hand and take a picture and submit it to the Dropbox? And then thought to myself, “Well, that makes sense. It all goes the same place. There’s no extra work for me. It takes me five minutes to change all the assignment directions. Why not just let everybody do it? If you want to type it? Great. 90% or so students will type it and submit it; for the other 10% that maybe would potentially withdraw from the course and move on to a different course.” Well, now I’ve retained them because they have the second option. It saves me time. I don’t have these extra office hours on my calendar anymore. I’m not answering as many emails. So some of these best practices of offering a second option that still gets at that same learning objective, these are types of things it can save us time. I think that’s where a lot of challenge comes in, is time. There’s just not time. A lot of times, even for for taking part in a lot of things we wish we could.

Rebecca: It might even bring you a little bit more joy, because you don’t have to have a meeting about how to put diacretics.

Chris: I’m thinking, my reflective journal assignments… I love having a second option of video. So I will get, again, 90% of students will just write one to two paragraphs. Every so often, I’ll get a student who takes me up on the idea of a second option of one to two minutes max on your video. When they do it’s like, “Wow, I feel like I’ve gotten to know this person better.” They seem to be really interested in it. They’ll do it kind of just video blog style, and it’s really interesting. And so yeah, just the joy that comes from a second way of completing an assignment that still reaches that same learning objective. It can make it interesting for us as faculty too. We need that every so often, that little spark of joy that keeps us interested in doing what we’re doing, no matter how difficult it can be.

John: And I’m reminded of Tom Tobin’s suggestion of a “plus one” strategy. Just make one change, and over time, those changes will accumulate, and you’ll end up with courses that are more engaging for students and for you,

Chris: It is sometimes just taking those baby steps. It’s doing something, taking one step, moving the needle just a little bit, because it can be very demotivating if we try and do too much at once. If we try to put too much into place, it will no longer be something that’s going to bring us joy. It’s going to be something that’s going to be demotivating for us and also for the students. If we try and do too much, it can be confusing, it can be blurry. To have too many things going on at once. So trying just little baby steps is in many ways better to be able to just try to start small and make small changes.

Rebecca: I like to remind people that accessibility isn’t an on and off switch, it’s a spectrum. And so you think that you can just turn it on or get somewhere where it’s just on, it’s not really a thing. So if you just remember that it’s a spectrum, and you keep working towards making it better and better, and it’s iterative, then it’s an ongoing process.

Chris: I’ve been working with document accessibility since 2011 and I still learn something new all the time. I have a lot to learn, for sure, and it’s little steps, little things to do to continue to improve, for sure,

Rebecca: Incremental change for the win. So we always wrap up by asking: “What’s next?”

Chris: Wrapping up the semester, winter break, preparing for the spring. That’s kind of where I’m just thinking that light at the end of the tunnel, starting to see it.

Rebecca: It sounds like one step at a time.

Chris: Yes, that’s exactly it.

Rebecca: Well, thanks for joining us.

Chris: Thank you, Rebecca; thank you, John,

John: Thanks. It’s great talking to you, and we look forward to more conversations.

[MUSIC]

John: If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or your favorite podcast service. To continue the conversation, join us on our Tea for Teaching Facebook page.

Rebecca: You can find show notes, transcripts and other materials on teaforteaching.com. Music by Michael Gary Brewer.

[MUSIC]