| VIEW IN BROWSER | |
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Letter from Our Senior Director | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Welcome to Fall!Dear Colleagues, Our fall newsletter theme is inspired by humanizing pedagogy, an educational approach that recognizes and values the lived experiences of both students and educators. Invoking the principles of humanizing pedagogy—originally theorized by María del Carmen Salazar (2013)—a qualitative analysis of thank-you messages reveal students’ gratitude toward instructors who extend kindness and support, incorporate meaningful and relevant content, offer new perspectives, fortify students’ personal and socio-cultural resources, and empower them as learners (Kim, Kong, Hernandez, & Soban, 2023). Building trusting relationships deepens students’ emotional, social, and academic engagement. Humanizing pedagogies, such as active learning and transparency, will be featured prominently in the University Practicum, now in its fifth year. We are thrilled to have so many wonderful collaborators join our Content Design Team, bringing their unique perspectives to the “wicked problem” of supporting student success. In our debut newsletter section, "What We Are Writing," Erika Nadile explains that while active learning boosts academic performance, focusing on affective learning is also important. To advance inclusive excellence in STEM, the Searle Center invites instructors to experiment with humanizing pedagogies that ignite intrinsic motivation, keep the flame burning for all learners, and reduce exclusionary factors that can extinguish interest. In “Teaching Tips: Pinch Points and Plus Ones," Jacqueline Babb further highlights the transformative impact of humanizing pedagogy in her culminating IMC course in London. Their final ritual of “Letting Go of Assumptions” at Tower Bridge demonstrates the power of shared experiences between instructors and students. We celebrate our newest Distinguished Fellows and Searle Fellows for their exemplary commitment to student learning and continued curiosity about evidence-driven pedagogical approaches. Fellows play an important role in fostering critical reflection and collegial knowledge-sharing. In our Educator Spotlight, Elizabeth Spencer Norton, neuroscientist and former Searle Fellow, grapples with the complexity of understanding individual differences among learners and advocates for neuroinclusivity in education. Equally important, and to ensure this pedagogy is sustainable, educators must safeguard their own well-being by setting boundaries with work, connecting with supportive colleagues, and finding efficient strategies. In “How to Use AI Tools to Create and Enhance Assignment Rubrics,” Lina Eskew, also at the Searle Center, demonstrates how instructors can harness the time-saving power of Generative AI to create and enhance assignment rubrics that clearly articulate expectations for student performance. Educational developers at the Searle Center are here to provide thought partnership as you explore and implement humanizing pedagogy. Wishing you a Fall Quarter filled with enriching experiences and meaningful connections. Kindest Regards, Jennifer Keys, Senior Director | ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Fellows of the Searle CenterWe are proud to announce our new cohorts of Distinguished Fellows and Searle Fellows! Distinguished FellowsRecipients of the University Teaching Awards become Distinguished Fellows of the Searle Center. These inspiring, innovative educators heighten the visibility of interdisciplinary, campus-wide conversations about learning and teaching praxis.
Searle FellowsSearle Fellows is a time-honored tradition supporting the promise of early-career faculty by cultivating a community of learning and teaching leaders who engage in pedagogical experimentation, critical reflection, and demonstration of equity and excellence.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Elevating Teaching Practices: The University PracticumBy Eun Sandoval-Lee, Project Administrator of Strategic Initiatives Over the past four years, the Northwestern University Practicum has drawn over 1,000 instructors across all schools, advancing the institutional priorities of strengthening community and championing access, diversity, and belonging. Every year, the Practicum is collaboratively designed to enhance evidence-based teaching practices, leverage educational technology, deepen the integration of Universal Design for Learning, and cultivate inclusive learning environments.
In last year’s Reimagining Assessment Practicum (RAP), now an Open Educational Resource, instructors explored grading and assessment practices that center learning, growth, and equity. To learn more about the positive impact on participants, check out this infographic. To ensure sustainability, we have added greater flexibility for participant engagement and a campus survey to identify emerging needs of instructors. Among the 215 respondents, the top choice for the 2024–25 Practicum was Supporting Student Success. A Content Design Team has been selected, based on expertise, to create the Supporting Student Success Practicum in the fall and deliver in winter and spring quarters. The University Practicum Content Design Team
More information and updates regarding registration will be shared later this fall. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
What We're Writing: Inclusive Excellence in STEMBy Erika Nadile, Assistant Director of STEM Education Active learning, a method encompassing a broad range of techniques to engage students in their own learning, decreases failing (Freeman et al., 2014) and closes "achievement gaps" (Theobald et al., 2020)—differences measured by academic performance (e.g., grades). Despite its effectiveness, the high attrition rate of students with identities and backgrounds historically underserved in higher education remains a persistent problem, even in classes that have fully transitioned to active learning. This attrition is even more pronounced in undergraduate STEM majors, where—in the words of David Asai, Senior Director for Science Education at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute—"students leave science almost as quickly as they arrive” (Asai, 2020a). Asai highlights how Persons Excluded due to Ethnicity or Race (PEERs) are overrepresented when looking at entrance into STEM disciplines but leave at greater rates compared to non-PEERs (Asai, 2020a; Asai, 2020b), even if equally motivated upon entry. In a peer-reviewed study conducted under the mentorship of Dr. Naomi Wernick-Pfaffmann, forthcoming in American Biology Teacher, I demonstrate how intrinsic motivation (i.e., the drive to learn for learning’s sake) and self-efficacy (i.e., confidence), not just grades, change and differentially impact PEERs. The study findings add to the robust literature on active learning at the individual- and classroom-level to further enhance how we think about equitable STEM education. Interest in this research started on a deeply personal and observational level as a first-generation, lower income (FGLI) college student and white woman in science. As an undergraduate and someone who was a biology major and then switched out to psychology, and then immediately back to biology, I remember looking around in the classroom, asking if others were like me, driving me to get involved in research on this topic. I was inspired to take what we know from the psychology literature and apply it in spaces where affective outcomes, like feelings and attitudes, are often not discussed, but are well-documented, to impact learning and extend beyond performance measures. For instance, extrinsic motivation undermines the drive to learn (Ryan and Deci, 2000)—so why keep exploring only performance goals that do not tell us the whole story? Studying over 100 students at a public institution in the Northeast, we demonstrate that students who are first-generation and underrepresented in science, start as equally intrinsically motivated and confident in their abilities to learn at the start of the semester in an introductory biology course. Alarmingly, both outcomes decline over only one semester. Importantly, this decline was only seen in first-generation PEERs, not continuing generation non-PEERs, a distinction which had not been well-documented in the literature, as most studies do not disaggregate among groups when exploring motivation. Our findings are present after course transition to active learning, and interestingly, changes were observed with a decline in DFW rates (i.e., the number of students who receive Ds, Fs, or withdraw), while controlling for student SAT scores, suggesting active learning was “working.” We now have insight into when particular learners might consider leaving just by examining a single active learning course starting from a place of personal interest. I urge instructors to tap into what intrinsically motivates their students at the start of the course and implement ways to monitor changes in motivation—using pre-, mid-, and post-surveys, especially if already using active learning. Exploring performance outcomes is only the starting place to advance STEM education, and the study findings and methodology will fuel how we develop the forthcoming STEM Education Initiatives at the Searle Center by centering multi-vocal evidence and experiences at a variety of levels—core values at Searle that we are excited to share with the Northwestern community. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Educator Spotlight: Elizabeth Spencer NortonBy Laura Ferdinand, Assistant Director of Content and Communication | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Elizabeth Norton takes great satisfaction and pride in the ways her many roles at Northwestern coalesce to advance developmental science and student learning. The highly lauded neuroscientist models for her students a practice of self-care and self-advocacy, which honors rest and recharging as a fundamental component of success and good science. In the following excerpt from our recent conversation, Norton shares her early interests in language, reading, and brain development; how her research influences her approach to student learning and neuroinclusivity; and her new role in the largest-ever study of children’s brain and behavior development. You started your doctoral work at the forefront of the neuroscience of education as a field. Would you tell me more about that time?I think that when we gained the capacity to scan people's brains in a safe, non-invasive way using MRI in the 1990s, people thought that that would provide enough detail about the brain for us to understand meaningful differences across people and then optimize their education. This was similar to what happened with genetic sequencing in a similar time frame; we thought that if we could sequence people's whole genomes, we could easily make meaningful, actionable insights about their health and their well-being. In both cases, what we've realized is that humans are so much more complex than would allow us to make straightforward inferences about those things. Being able to look at someone's brain with the tools that we have now gives us quite a rudimentary—or not very insightful—picture of what their brain is, in terms of what we need to know about how they're going to learn effectively. Has the recognition of the complexity of humans and the human brain shaped how you approach teaching?I really think about this a lot. I think about a piece of knowledge that comes from the autism research world: if you know one person on the autism spectrum, you know one person on the autism spectrum. Generalizations are very hard to make. So, when I think about approaching my students’ learning, I try to take this view that humans are extremely different, for all kinds of different and interesting reasons, and if we try to apply one approach to everyone, it's likely to be unsuccessful. In my courses and in my lab, I really try to do my best to get to know each person for who they are, not based on their similarity with people that I've known or their diagnostic category. I try to really understand what it is about them that is going to meaningfully make a difference. At the same time, there are some things that brain and cognitive sciences studies have shown us [about how people learn]. Learning styles or preferences is a good example. Science tells us that a person’s learning preference doesn’t necessarily align with how that individual learns most effectively. So, if somebody says, “I'm a visual learner,” they may prefer that but it doesn’t mean they will learn better in that style. While I really try to individuate, I also lean on the science that tells us that there are universals and person-specific factors that support learning, but they aren’t linked to one’s “learning style.” | ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
How to Use AI Tools to Create and Enhance RubricsBy Lina Eskew, Senior Assistant Director of Equitable Assessment Rubrics are powerful tools for promoting transparent and equitable assessment by clearly articulating student expectations and ensuring consistent grading. They align with frameworks such as the Transparency in Learning and Teaching (TILT) model, which emphasizes the importance of providing explicit assignment expectations to increase students' academic confidence, sense of belonging, and ability to self-regulate their learning and development. Creating a well-structured rubric, particularly an analytical one (which breaks down expectations into specific criteria and performance levels) can be time-consuming. Generative AI (GAI) tools like Copilot (now available to the Northwestern University community with secure data storage through a Northwestern University tenant) or ChatGPT offer instructors an efficient and effective way to draft rubrics. Identify the CriteriaBefore generating a rubric, ensure you have a clear understanding of your assignment's learning outcomes. This will help generate more accurate suggestions for the criteria, which are the essential assignment components to be assessed. Clearly outlining what students should achieve, along with detailed descriptions of the knowledge, skills, or attitudes you want to assess (e.g., critical thinking, written communication), will improve the quality of the AI-generated rubric criteria. Ask AI: "Help me create a rubric for an undergraduate capstone paper in Latin American history with a learning outcome focused on critical thinking." Alternatively, you could ask a broader question such as: “What key criteria should I consider when creating a rubric to assess critical thinking at the college level?” Customize Performance LevelsAnalytical rubrics typically include multiple performance levels that measure either frequency (e.g., "Always," "Sometimes") or quality (e.g., "Excellent," "Needs Improvement"). AI can help differentiate performance levels for each criterion, giving you descriptors that can be tailored to your specific assignment assessment. Ask AI: Use a prompt like: "Can you create a rubric for an assignment on the hero's journey, with a learning outcome that focuses on creative writing, using five performance levels: Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, Somewhat Meets Expectations, Does Not Meet Expectations, and No Evidence Provided?" AI will provide performance descriptors, which you can modify as needed. Ensure ClarityRubrics need to be explicit and aligned with the learning outcomes of the assignment. If your rubric’s language seems unclear, AI can help simplify it to ensure students understand the expectations.
Pro Tip: You can ask AI to combine the criteria and performance levels it generates to create a template-ready rubric that is downloadable. In Copilot, there's a feature that allows you to export the template into Excel by simply clicking the download button, as shown in the screenshot. This removes the need for copying, pasting, and manual rubric formatting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Letting Go of Assumptions: A Study Abroad TraditionBy Jacqueline Babb, Senior Lecturer and Full-time IMC Academic Director, Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications My courses are bookends for full-time graduate Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) students. Students begin graduate studies with a strategy course: we interrogate strategy frameworks, dismantle marketing decision-making, and encourage each other to check our assumptions. It’s as much a critical thinking course as a strategy course. Students come away with the courage to ask questions and think critically. Over the subsequent months, my colleagues in IMC put that critical thinking to work as students develop and defend strategies. And by the time they come back to me for their final quarter, our students are ready to learn how IMC shows up around the world.
We board a plane and fly 4,000 miles to London in the spirit of learning. The London course ponders how brands connect with customers. On one hand, heritage brands like Coca-Cola, Selfridges, and Wimbledon are icons. These brands have invested heavily in their rich history. On the other hand, emergent retail brands like Assouline and DIPTYQUE create multi-sensory experiences to engage customers in their stores. We can purchase a candle or book anywhere: why do these brands invest so heavily in customer experience? This type of inquiry brings us back to the first quarter when we unapologetically questioned our assumptions. The students know quite a bit about marketing and come to the London course with those ideas. We want to see how those ideas activate and inspire. But, to truly learn from this global experience, students must let their assumptions go and open themselves up to a new way of learning as experts in IMC. On the first day of class, students write their assumptions about how brands connect to consumers though heritage and experience on a piece of flying wish paper, a biodegradable piece of tissue-like paper. This exercise gets our assumptions out of the way. We spend the week using London as a classroom, exploring brands from the inside out.
On the final day, students meet at the iconic Tower Bridge to light a match to their assumption paper and watch it fly away. This ritual reminds students that learning evolves as we become experts, and we can let our assumptions go. As a summative learning activity, students gather around the bridge to share their new perspective on our course question and what they learned in the process of being open to new experiences. A special thank you to Lauri Dietz, Director of Pedagogy and Assessment, for inspiring this learning activity. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2024 Searle Center for Advancing Learning and Teaching |
