1. UIUC Alliance for Teaching Excellence: A Partnership of GSLIS and the University Library University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Linda C. Smith (lcsmith@uiuc.edu)lcsmith@uiuc.edu Susan E. Searing (searing@uiuc.edu)searing@uiuc.edu Jeni V. Weidenbenner (MzWeidster@aol.com)MzWeidster@aol.com http://leep.lis.uiuc.edu/seworkspace/teachingalliance/home.html

2. UIUC Context l Teaching Advancement Board l Provost’s Initiative on Teaching Advancement (PITA) l Distinguished Teacher/Scholar Program l Office of Instructional Resources (OIR) l Annual faculty retreats on teaching for active learning

3. Teaching Academies l ACES -- Academy of Teaching Excellence l AE3 -- Academy for Excellence in Engineering Education “Who dares to teach must never cease to learn.” -- John Cotton Dana, 1912 l Smaller colleges pursue partnerships

4. GSLIS/Library Partnership l Support from PITA (GA, training materials, refreshments, facility and AV rental) l Year 1: varied programming on topics of common interest ($12,925) l Year 2: improving undergraduate instruction in the information curricula ($10,600)

5. Participants l GSLIS Faculty (full-time, adjuncts) l Teaching Assistants l Library Faculty l Graduate Assistants

6. Types of Teaching l Face-to-face vs. online l Undergraduate vs. graduate l Single session vs. semester- long course

7. The Teaching Alliance’s 1st Year: A Smorgasbord of Programs

8. Kick-off Retreat (September 2001) l Learning styles l Brainstorming l Peer observation

9. Year 1 Sessions l “Teaching with Technology” (October 2001) l “Teaching in the Electronic Classroom” (November 2001) l “Learning from Exemplary Teachers” (February 2002) l HTML Workshop (March 2002) l “Effective Lecturing” (April 2002)

10. Assessing & Evaluating Programs Value of Feedback l Gauge participants’ satisfaction l Make sure program’s goals are accomplished l Gain input for designing future programs

11. Strategies for Evaluation l Surveys/feedback forms for each session (formative) l Comments from participants (formative) l Data on participants’ faculty roles and program attendance (summative)

12. Distribution of Year 1 Participants

13. Event Attendance for Year 1

14. Statistical Analysis l 46 unique participants over course of the year l Average number of sessions attended: 2.4 sessions l Each event: average of 21.4 people (8.8 GSLIS, 10.8 Library, 1.8 OIR)

15. Survey Questions Ask participants to rate qualities of the presentation on a continuum: ● Satisfaction with presentation ● Plans to make use of information ● Relevance of presentation to current position ● Success of presenter(s) in relating material ● Interest in future sessions on same topic

16. Open-ended Questions Provide occasion for participants to give qualitative feedback: l What did they come expecting? l What did they get? l What was the most valuable aspect of the session? l Suggestions for improvement?

17. Sample of Evaluative Comments Received l “I think some of the instructors and professors on this campus need to attend this kind of event [exemplary teaching session] along with the exemplary teachers.” l “This series is just exceptional.” l “I value the opportunity for library & GSLIS people to get together to talk about teaching/learning.” l “I value the chance to spend time thinking about how I teach.”

18. Know Where You’ve Been... Collect data l Event attendance l % of new participants at each event l % of returning participants each time

19. And Where You’re Headed Sum it all up ● Were original goals met? ● Overall strengths? ● Overall weaknesses? ● Changes for the future? ● Program topics requested for future?

20. l Potpourri of topics l Both technological and human issues l Different venues l Both “inside” and “outside” experts l Changing cast of characters l Focal point for connecting to campus-wide community concerned with improving teaching Teaching Alliance Year 1 Observations

21. l Good planning and organization are essential! l Value of GA position to handle logistics, registration, reminders l Provide hands-on practical tips and applications Keys to Success

22. Community Building l It helped to have name cards and assign seats l Lunch provided opportunity for informal getting-to-know-each- other

23. Involvement l Programs especially attractive to newer Library faculty and PhD students. l There’s a lot of local talent to draw upon for presenters. Good teachers like sharing what they know.

24. Contact Us Linda C. Smith lcsmith@uiuc.edu Susan E. Searing searing@uiuc.edu Jeni Weidenbenner, Graduate Asst. MzWeidster@aol.com Teaching Alliance Website: http://leep.lis.uiuc.edu/seworkspace/teachingalliance/home.html