1. SUBJECTIVE Training Workshops (2) EMCC Adjunct Faculty Professional Development OBJECTIVE Training Workshops (4) SUBJECTIVE Personal Development Workshops (2) OBJECTIVE Teaching Skills Workshops (5) Classroom Management Technology Integration Student Engagement Assessment Techniques Responsiveness to Student Needs (Veterans, Students with Disabilities, Honors, etc.) Self and Diversity Learning/Teaching Styles “…improved college completion will have real meaning only with serious and sustained attention to the quality of what goes on between teachers and students.” The Heart of Student Success CCCSE What can we do? -Integrated support -Intensive student engagement -Professional development Partial list of effective practices, CCCSE EMCC Adjunct Faculty Professional Learning Community APPLIED INTEGRATION in the Classroom MENTORING

2.  Mentees should identify the skills necessary for effective teaching on which they wish to focus. Program content should not be dictated.  Mentor and mentee collaborate to set specific goals to develop those skills  Mentor and mentee must view each other as equals, although one may have more experience.  Mentors should be flexible enough to adapt to mentees needs and interests, and mentees must be open to feedback.  Evaluate the program formally, and pay attention to unexpected results. 3 Sands, R.E., Parsons, L.A., & Duane, R. (1991) Faculty Mentoring Faculty in a Public University. The Journal of Higher Education, 62 (2), 174-193. Applied Integration in the Classroom Mentoring – Best Practices 3

3.  Purpose  Methods for matching  Mentor/mentee training  Program Evaluation  Next Steps Applied Integration in the Classroom Mentoring – EMCC Program Model 4 4 Lumpkin, Angela, (2011). “Keys to mentoring programs. “ A Model for Mentoring University Faculty” The Educational Forum, 75, 357-368.

4.  Transfer of best practices to the classroom The mentoring relationship focuses on application of the best practices gained in the Subjective (Part 1) and Objective (Part 2) portions of the training programs within educator’s actual classroom.  Continuous improvement and learning -Dialogue, teaching goals, and classroom observation through the mentoring relationship leads to continuous improvement in effective teaching -Mentor encourages mentee to utilize learning resources such as CATS and to continue professional development Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

5.  Mentors and Mentees Self Nominated -Spring 2013 Pilot Program includes 5 Mentees and 5 Mentors who submitted online applications through the CTL - All Mentors and Mentees were supported by Division Chairs - For pilot program, Mentees were required to have taught at EMCC for 1 or more semesters and completed one workshop from the Adjunct Faculty Institute (Saturday workshops) - Mentors were required to have taught for 3 or more semesters and completed two Saturday workshops  Mentees and Mentors Matched by Ad Hoc Committee - Residential and Adjunct Faculty Methods for Matching Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

6.  MCCCD Mentor Program Training – 1 hour Mentors and Mentees completed training workshop on Tuesday, January 8 th prior to Division Meetings  Training aligns with MCCCD Mission, Vision, and Values http://www.maricopa.edu/employees/divisions/hr/ development/mentor/mcccd/benefits Mentor/Mentee Training Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

7.  Key Program Characteristics - Based on Learning Centered Paradigm - Strength based (improving, not fixing) - Peer to Peer (reduced hierarchy over older models of mentoring) - Mentor is facilitator, navigator and resource (not an evaluator) - No assumption that Mentor and Mentee are from same discipline Mentor/Mentee Training Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

8.  Program tracked through completion of two checklists and two feedback forms Mentor checklist and formal evaluation Mentee checklist and formal evaluation  Checklists modeled after mentoring program at Austin Community College http://www.austincc.edu/hr/profdev/mentoring.php  Checklists align with program purpose and best practice (time lined for contact throughout the semester) - Dialogue related to objective skills and subjective personal development -Collaboration on mentee goals on effective teaching strategies -Mentor and mentee classroom observations Program Evaluation Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

9.  PLC and Office of Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (OPIE) Formal Pilot Evaluation April 19, 2013 Mentors and Mentees will receive electronic evaluations April 26, 2013 Mentors and Mentees will have completed formal evaluations Evaluation: Quantitative and Qualitative – Self Report Transfer of Best Practices to the Classroom Continuous Improvement and Learning (Employee Engagement)  Wrap Up Meeting and Celebration May 7, 2013 Mentees and Mentors come together, review summary of evaluations, add insights through face to face debrief and celebrate completion of the pilot program Program Evaluation Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

10.  What Mentees are saying … "I believe that a mentor/mentee program has the potential to bring an awareness to various aspects of becoming first time teachers. It provides ideas and approaches in areas of concern and promotes student engagement.” Terri Saunders, Psychology “I am so glad that I applied for the ‘Mentor Program’. My mentor was awesome because I knew I could come to her with my questions and concerns. She communicated with me in a timely manner and my semester was less stressful because I had her to ‘lean’ on. I would recommend this program to all of the new Adjuncts.” Kimberly Owens, Communication Program Evaluation Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

11.  What Mentors are saying … “Mentoring across disciplines was a great idea. Sharing different perspectives and encouraging each other to try something new helped both of us grow in our craft” Marianne Smith, Math “The experience helped me to learn about questions incoming adjuncts have about EMCC, the district and teaching. The ‘new person’ perspective allowed me to learn about what is important to a new adjunct”. Bronwen Steele, Science Division Chair Program Evaluation Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

12.  Complete Pilot Program Timeline - May 7, 2013 Wrap Up Meeting and Celebration  Recommendations for Improvements - Based on Formal Evaluations, Wrap Up Meeting and Celebration Discussion and PLC Learning  Continuation Vision and Implementation - Summer/Fall 2013 Questions and/or Comments? Next Steps Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps

13.  Boyd, D. (2002). A Mentoring Program for New Associate Faculty Members of the School of Professional Studies at Eastern University. Retrieved from http://ahea.org/files/pro2002boyd.pdf  Boyd, D. (2004). The Impact of Mentoring on Adjunct Faculty Performance. Retrieved from http://ahea.org/files/pro2004boyd.pdf  Lyons, R.E. (2007). Best Practices for Supporting Adjunct Faculty. Boston: Anker Publishing  Sands, R.E., Parsons, L.A., & Duane, R. (1991) Faculty Mentoring Faculty in a Public University. Mentor Program Best Practices References

14.  Faculty Diversity Standing Committee. (2006). Mentoring of Faculty: Principles and Practices at Duke University. Durham, NC: Allen. Retrieved from http://www.provost.duke.edu/policies/Faculty_Mentoring_Initiative.htm  Valencia Community College. (2012). Learning Partners. Retrieved from http://valenciacollege.edu/facultydevelopment/learningPartners/  Zutter, C. (2007). Best Practices for Supporting Adjunct Faculty. R. E. Lyons, (Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  1 Boyd, D. (2002). A mentoring program for new associate faculty members of the School of Professional Studies at Eastern University. Paper presented at the 22nd annual meeting of the Adult Higher Education Alliance, Pittsburgh, PA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478134). Additional References

15. The Adjunct Faculty Professional Learning Community, 2011-2013 Jeanne Bruce – Modern Languages Lisa Jenson – Interior Design Jill Nico – Mathematics/Engineering Carol O’Connor – Nursing and Allied Health Chris Picarelli – Science Michael Powell – (BSCS) Political Science Tim Ramsey – Modern Languages Jazmine Rubin – (BSCS) Adjunct Faculty Caron Sada – Psychology Ben Slack – Communications Marianne Smith – Mathematics OYO William Stein – Culinary Arts Erik Stenehjem – Biology Kim Wagner-Hemmes – Art & Composition Convened & Facilitated by Sylvia Orr – Dean, Academic Affairs Recorded by Teri Denman – Administrative Secretary Thank you!

16.  Complete Pilot Program Timeline - May 7, 2013 Wrap Up Meeting and Celebration  Recommendations for Improvements - Based on Formal Evaluations, Wrap Up Meeting and Celebration Discussion and PLC Learning  Continuation Vision and Implementation - Summer/Fall 2013 Questions and/or Comments? Next Steps Purpose Methods for matching Mentor/mentee training Program Evaluation Next Steps