CIRTL Network Administrative Meeting 11:00-12:00 ET/ 10:00-11:00 CT/ 9:00-10:00 MT / 8:00-9:00 PT This meeting will be recorded Begin by running the Audio Setup Wizard Select : Tools>Audio> Audio Setup Wizard or select the audio wizard icon Backup Call-in: Toll-free Number 1 (888) Passcode: #

Agenda Reminder: Network Meeting, October 11th - 12th (partial day for travel home) ** Institutional Leader participation a must ** Topic 1: Status report on NSF proposal - Bob Mathieu (15 Min) Topic 2: Moving forward this fall in advance of NSF funding (25 Min) a) Status report on cross-Network activities - Robin Greenler (5 minutes) b) Institutions pursue one CIRTL activity from two-pager for January launch - Bob Mathieu (5 minutes) c) Examples (15 minutes) Topic 3: Moving forward this fall in absence of NSF funding - Leadership Team (20 Min)

Proposal Grades so far … ExcellentFair Very GoodFair

Excellent, Excellent, Very Good The CIRTL network has shown a sustained commitment to assess its own activities, to incorporate means of continuing to improve their "products," and to contribute their learning beyond their own institutions. The application of their three core principles into being standard practice for STEM faculty at US colleges and universities is potentially transformative. These are defining features and to be greatly admired. The assessment instruments used appear to have done a very good job of showing that CIRTL graduates have processed their learning and can identify (and identify with) many of the core concepts. As such, the proposal convincingly shows a transformative approach by which a cornerstone is built to address this national problem.

The CIRTL network has shown a sustained commitment to assess its own activities, to incorporate means of continuing to improve their "products," and to contribute their learning beyond their own institutions. This proposal will allow the transformation of the existing CIRTL network, amply studied as a proof-of-concept partnership, into a nationwide network capable of substantial impact on member institutions, affiliates, and groups of national scope. The plan for transfer of funding from the grant to the institutions is reasonable. They have shown themselves to be committed and have excellent experience to bring to bear. The efforts to engage with individuals and institutions not in the network of 25 on a selective basis seems well thought out and prudent. A very strong case for NSF support has been made; the grant should be funded. The organization of the project is thorough. The cross-Network plans will be important for maintaining communication and providing cohesion across CIRTL. As current members have held events and classes, it has demonstrated the feasibility of such a network relationship. Excellent, Excellent, Very Good

Improving the overall STEM experience of the nation's undergraduates depends on more than the quality of individual teachers in individual classrooms. There is no mention of impact on departments or institutions, including curricular structure, climate of expectations, institutional support, and reward mechanisms. Fair, Fair, Fair Questioning of the premise that research universities will provide the future faculty. Will that new workforce actually be prepared by institutions like UW-Madison or will they enter the ranks of faculty through other routes? Community and technical colleges don’t hire from research universities like those in the CIRTL Network. Centers for Learning and Teaching can already do this; benefit gained from a network of 25 universities is not established. For example the Searle Center for Excellence in Teaching at Northwestern has staff that would be capable of doing all that is being proposed without being part of the CIRTL network. It seems unlikely that very much will change at Northwestern University by being part of this network. The same is probably true for Purdue University.

NSF should fund such projects and let universities choose what direction they wish to go. It is not clear from the evidence provided why this team is best suited to guide all 25 universities and provide a national model for PFF. Fair, Fair, Fair Not enough longitudinal research evidence for outcomes as faculty. Concern about future institutionalization. Why are the current 6 requesting funds? The plan in the proposal doesn’t have a funding level comparable to what is being requested. (From the Very Good reviewer.) Desire for more evidence about institutional change. Will this process of NSF funding go on indefinitely.

Cross-Network Network leaders learning community Fall courses, Coffee Hours and CIRTL Casts WIDER proposal submitted Institutional Choose one facet of two-pager plan for development and implementation in January => Engagement of local team and 25 accomplishments! Timeline … for the fall preparation for Spring 2013 is a major challenge Moving forward this fall in advance of NSF funding

Coffee Hour Discussion Series: Building an Academic Career 4th Thursdays, 12-1 CT September 27, 2012Teaching at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution October 25, 2012The academic job interview: What to expect, how to prepare November 29, 2012University politics: Navigating the rules and expectations January 24, 2013Tenure and promotion: What you should know, what you should ask February 28, 2013Developing a work-life balance for a sustaining a productive career and your sanity March 28, 2013Teaching at a primarily minority institution April 25, 2013Alternative academic careers

Coffee Hour Discussion Series: Teaching and Learning in the STEM Classroom 3rd Wednesday 1-2 CT January 16, 2013Electronic distractions in the classroom: managing and utilizing the instant connections to the world February 20, 2013Teaching in diverse classrooms March 20, 2013Teaching and using writing skills in the STEM classroom April 17, 2013Open slot

CIRTLCast Presentations Oct 22, 1pm CTActive hands-on learning in large lecture classes Dr. Simon Bott, University of Houston Early December Research Ethics University of Alabama at Birmingham TBDIssues confronting minority graduate students: Examining the issues and responses through case studies Dr. Kermin Martinez, St John Fisher College TBDTeaching professional skills in the STEM Classroom Dr Sandy Courter, UW-Madison TBDMentoring Laura Harrington, Cornell University More CIRTLCast suggestions welcome

Institutional Each university needs to have an internal discussion about continuing within the Network = Participating in the process of re-visiting our scope and actions (activities and funding). Leadership Team Continue discussion of possible paths => Seed Network discussion Network September Network meeting – All-hands brainstorm of possibilities October face-to-face meeting – Hammering out a plan Moving forward this fall if proposal not funded

Future Faculty “Potential Participants” Current Faculty “Potential Participants” Local CIRTL Learning Community “Participants” Local CIRTL Team STEM = natural and social sciences, engineering, math Graduate students, post-docs Faculty, instructional staff Institutional leaders Administrative staff Graduate assistants Evaluation staff Steering Committee