Round Tables and Posters

The round table discussions and poster presentations will take place on Thursday, February 23rd from 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Round Table Discussions

RT1 : Promoting and Supporting 3M Nominations in the College Context


Author: Apryl Gill, Educational Developer, Niagara College


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: In 2016, the STLHE 3M National Teaching Fellowship Award broke with ‘tradition’ and expanded its recipient criteria to include college educators. With over 30 years of past experience with the 3M award, many universities have well-established processes for promoting, supporting, and celebrating this award. As colleges enter into this new arena, exploring well-established processes could prove invaluable. In this round table session, colleagues from colleges and universities, who have past experiences or are interested in supporting this award, are invited to discuss how colleges might: enhance the general profile of the award and raise awareness within the community, identify and support the ongoing development of potential nominees, and support the development of the 3M nomination package. Additionally, an in-progress nomination framework for faculty at Niagara College will be shared with the table for discussion and critique.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Consider how to enhance the general profile of the award and raise awareness within college communities

  • Consider how to identify and support the ongoing development of potential nominees within college communities,

  • Consider how to best support the development of the 3M nomination package within college communities,

  • Engage with a 3M nomination framework for college faculty at Niagara College


RT2: Supporting Indigenous Epistemologies through Educational Development


Author: Kathleen Bortolin, Curriculum Specialist, Vancouver Island University


Session Type:Round Table


Abstract: This round-table session looks at how teaching and learning centres are supporting faculty, staff and students in understanding and incorporating Indigenous perspectives and ways of knowing into higher learning. As Augustus (2015) asserts, recent reforms at many Canadian institutions have lead many of us to challenge the dominance of Western epistemologies in higher education, and consider the ways in which Indigenous ways of knowing can be integrated more meaningfully. In this session, the moderator will outline some examples of institutional initiatives, both in Canada and abroad, that illustrate points of intersection between  educational development and Indigenous epistemologies. Participants will then be encouraged to discuss their own institutional context. As well, participants may suggest possible directions educational development may move toward, both in theory and in practice, in supporting a greater, more meaningful integration of Indigenous perspectives into higher education. The goal of this discussion is to uncover and familiarize ourselves with some of the ways in which Canadian educational developers are supporting multiple pedagogies and to inspire a dialogue that continues to support Indigenous knowledge, content and perspectives in higher learning. Augustus, C. (2015). Knowledge liaisons: negotiating multiple pedagogies in global Indigenous studies courses. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 45(4), 1-17.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Understand two-three examples of what other educational developers in Canada are engaging in with regards to supporting Indigenous perspectives and ways of knowing at their institutions

  • Consider possible initiatives related to supporting Indigenous epistemologies that could be taken up within their own context


RT3: Envisioning a Plan for Long-term Evaluation of eLearning Programming


Author: Lauren Anstey, eLearning and Curriculum Specialist, Western University


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: Faced with a centre review and a broader goal of measuring our programs over the long-term, the eLearning Team at the Teaching Support Centre (Western University) has recently worked to envision a long-term evaluation plan for our programming. Drawing from recent investigations of centre evaluation practices across Canada (e.g. Kolomitro & Anstey, 2016; Kolomitro, 2016; Ellis & Holmes, 2015) we focused on finding a process that meets our centre needs and considers a  broader evidential mix of data collection. This roundtable discussion will outline our process of: (1) taking stock of available data in order to meet centre review  needs, and (2) setting out to re-envision a plan for long-term evaluation by identifying what data had been most valuable to us in centre review and using centre objectives to think creatively and diversify the evidential mix of our data. The latter half of the session will facilitate conversation around processes for establishing data collection methods and habits of practice necessary for long-term success of program evaluation.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Consider the factors that informed one approach to developing a re-envisioned plan for long-term evaluation measures of eLearning programming;

  • Practice an approach for expanding the evidential mix of data collection by aligning evaluation data/methods with centre objectives/outcomes;

  • Participate in collegial discussion to consider processes for centre program evaluation


RT4: Collaborating with the Writing Centre on Write-Ins


Author: Stephanie White, Instructional Developer, University of Waterloo


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: For many years, the University of Waterloo Centre for Teaching Excellence has required participants in the advanced Certificate in University Teaching program to write teaching dossiers. This year, in response to slow completion rates of this essential program component, we began to offer teaching dossier “write-ins” (guided writing sessions) in collaboration with the UWaterloo Writing Centre to encourage participants to work on their dossiers—a practice promoted in scholarship on graduate-student writing (Allen, 2014). In this roundtable session, you’ll learn about our write-ins and explore how write-ins might augment existing programming at your institution. The presenter will briefly describe how we structure these intensive writing sessions with strategies like the Pomodoro technique. We will then discuss how participants could use write-ins to augment existing programming for students or instructors. We will also discuss how writing centre collaborations like these can demonstrate for graduate students and for faculty the value of paying attention to writing practices (Reardon, Deans, & Maykel, 2016).


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Explain the concept of write-ins

  • Identify areas of their own programs that could benefit from write-ins

  • Describe benefits of collaborating with writing centres


RT5: Linking Learning to Life: Educational Developers as Partners in Supporting the Communication of Professional Competence


Authors: Peggy Pritchard, Learning and Curriculum Support Librarian (retired), University of Guelph; Amanda Hooykaas, Sessional Instructor, University of Guelph; Jill Ferguson, (Acting) Director and Manager, Curriculum Team, Co-operative Education and Career Services, University of Guelph; Michelle Reyes, Program Manager, Business Career Development Centre, University of Guelph


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: Think tanks, governments, employers, educators and career counsellors around the world, concerned about the ability of employees to compete in the global economy, have identified “essential skills” and professional competencies that are necessary for success. (1,2)


In Canada, Federal and Provincial government funding priorities and quality assurance expectations demand increased accountability & metrics related to improving the employment readiness of graduates. (3,4)  Post-secondary institutions are responding but, according the Ontario task force report, Building the Workplace for Tomorrow (p.35), “there is a skills and competencies gap…and it needs to be closed.”


Interestingly, the report reveals that, “In some cases, skills gaps were perceived rather than real…[i]ndividuals might have the right set of skills and credentials for a job based on education and experience, but do not know how to articulate their skill set to potential employers.” (p.35, emphasis added)  While curriculum developers, cooperative education and career development professionals, librarians, and writing specialists are addressing the actual gap in essential skills and professional competencies, Educational Developers (EDs) are uniquely placed to play a role in narrowing the perceived gap.


This is the topic that will be investigated during this session. Through a series of guided questions, 1-minute talks, case studies, and more, facilitators and participants will explore how EDs can support instructors and curriculum developers who want to help their students link their learning to life. Participants will contribute to a Google Doc through which the group will capture information, strategies, ideas for individual practice, action items, further questions, etc.


References


To benefit most from this session, participants are asked to review the following documents prior to attending. These documents will also be made available on the EDC 2017 Slides and Readings site.



  1. Canada West Foundation.  (2015).  “Smarten Up.  It’s time to build essential skills.” Retrieved from www.cwf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/CWF_HCP_SmartenUp_Report_JUN2015.pdf

  2. OECD. “Skills” [website]. http://www.oecd.org/skills/ and OECD. (2016).  “Skills Matter: Further Results from the Survey of Adult Skills.” DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264258051-en. Available from http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/skills-matter-9789264258051-en.htm

  3. Universities Canada. (2016).  “2016 Federal Budget Highlights.”  Retrieved from http://www.univcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Universities-Canada-2016-Federal-Budget-Highlights.pdf

  4. Ontario Government.  Premier’s Highly Skilled Workforce Expert Panel.  (2016).  “Building the Workplace for Tomorrow.  A shared responsibility.”  Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/page/building-workforce-tomorrow-shared-responsibility


By the end of this session, participants will:



  • Have a “toolkit” of information resources, best practices, real-life examples, and strategies for developing workshops, activities, and resources for course instructors wishing to help their students link classroom learning to life skills

  • Be able to help instructors develop appropriate learning outcomes for their courses that focus on identifying essential skills and professional competencies, and communicating them effectively


RT6: Remediation and Retention Initiatives for First-Year Students


Author: Milan Singh, Analyst in Applied Research in Teaching and Learning, Simon Fraser University; Michael Lockett, Educational Consultant, Simon Fraser University


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: This roundtable discussion is focused on the first-year “student experience.” Literature in the field can be traced to the 1970s and Vincent Tinto’s (1975, 2012) work is widely cited, especially in relation to student experience. His early work categorizes different forms of dropout behaviour and he argues that it’s “the individual’s integration into the academic and social systems of the college that most directly relates to [her or] his continuance in that college” (p.96). Gajewski and Mather (2015) have since adopted Tinto’s framework in a study on a first-year foundations course at Centennial College; they cast course design as a fundamental factor and encourage design practices that acknowledge the diversity and complexity of students’ experiences and expectations. To engage attendees in a roundtable discussion, we will begin by summarizing research on the topic of student retention and remediation before situating these findings in our particular institutional context. Participants of this session, after being introduced to findings in the literature, will first discuss factors affecting remediation and retention efforts in their respective disciplinary and institutional contexts. We will then draw on examples that range from individual courses to Faculty-wide initiatives designed to enhance the first-year student experience. By providing these examples, our aim is to invite attendees to discuss “student experience” initiatives at their respective institutions, including some of the successes and challenges they face.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Identify curricular and extra-curricular factors related to student retention.

  • Catalogue remedial delivery modes and curricular structures employed at Canadian institutions.

  • Situate localized logistical challenges in relation to remedial and retention interventions.

  • Evaluate interventions relative to disciplinary contexts.


RT7: Postdocs in Teaching and Learning


Author: Jerusha Lederman, Postdoctoral Visitor, York University


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: Traditionally, workshops at Teaching & Learning (T & L) conferences have been geared toward the interests of community members who fall into either or both of the following categories:  1). Educational Developers,  2). Course Instructors / Faculty.   As Higher Education (H.E.) Institutes across Canada continue to forge ahead in the pursuit of excellence and innovation in T & L and SoTL, a new, third category of community is emerging. Canadian universities have increasingly been visibly demonstrating their commitment to H.E. by, among other things, appointing postdoctoral  visitors dedicated specifically to T & L, thus facilitating positive change and growth in Canada’s professional H.E. landscape.  This workshop will unite pan institutional T & L focused postdocs and those interested in creating such positions at their home institutions for the first time within a conference setting. The purpose of the workshop is to lay clear, concrete foundations for creating a dynamic and supportive Community of Practice (CoP) ultimately designed for those with T & L-centric postdoctoral positions and their prospective supervisors at H.E. institutions both across the country and internationally.


Participants in this workshop will be able to engage their colleagues candidly in a beneficial exchange of ideas within a safe, encouraging environment on many issues such as:



  • The role of the T & L postdoc both institutionally and individually;

  • Best practices T & L postdocs should adopt to support the wider H.E.community;

  • Individual research interests / projects / collaboration requests; and

  • Longer term objectives of this new CoP, including target audience definition & development of first steps toward creating an effective strategy to implement an online, open forum for postdocs in which discussion and practice of rethinking the face of H.E. may flourish.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Work together to define the role of the postdoc CoP in the H.E. community both at large and in relation to the self.  

  • Come away from the discussion with actionable items they may pursue individually and institutionally and have a clear understanding of next steps required to afford this new community an opportunity to thrive.


RT8: Advanced Assessment Considerations


Author: Kyle Scholz, Instructional Developer, University of Waterloo


Session Type: Round Table


Abstract: Assessment is an integral component of any course design process, and is often the basis by which we determine how well a learner has met the intended learning outcomes of a course. While typically a course will have a mixture of formative and summative assessment with opportunities to receive valuable feedback from the instructor, there exist more advanced assessment considerations that can further improve the learning potential of the learner and make a more accommodating learning environment. Designed to focus on the learner and promote agency in the assessment process, this advanced approach to assessment positions the learner as a collaborator in all stages of assessment. Rather than discussing new assessment types or debating the efficacy of one tool over another, we will instead focus on the characteristics of assessment and how best to facilitate assessments. To do so, we will examine aspects such as timing, the student’s role, varied feedback, and assessment cycles to better understand how to craft thoughtful assessments that benefit all learners. By examining current research on innovative assessment practices, individuals will have the opportunity to discuss these various considerations and consider how they could be applied when designing, facilitating, and grading various assessments, especially in their role as educational developers when consulting with instructors.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Reflect critically on current assessment strategies.

  • Discover and take into consideration advanced practices related to assessment.

  • Integrate advanced assessment considerations into educational developer repertoire


Poster Presentations

Concurrent with the round table discussions, the following posters will be presented.

P1: Identifying Student Approaches to Learning: Undergraduate Student Perceptions of Teaching and Learning at the University of Windsor


Author: Brandon Sabourin, PhD Student, University of Windsor


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: A student’s approach to learning can help teachers and educational developers better understand student learning. Biggs and Tang (2011) stress the importance of understanding “what the student does” as a way of understanding how a teacher’s actions can help or hurt the learning experiences of students in and out of the classroom. The actions a student takes in relation to their learning (study habits, attitude, effort, etc.) contribute to their overall learning approach. As teachers and educational developers, it is critical that we understand our learners. This research sought to understand the dominant approaches to learning of undergraduate science students at the University of Windsor. Participants completed Biggs, Kember, and Leung’s (2001) Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ- 2F). Through an analysis of the data collected, it was found that deep approaches to learning were more prevalent among fourth-year students than first-year  students. Participants identified numerous factors which contributed to the approach they took to their learning, including: time, course design, study habits, personal interest, and effort. These results have implications on teaching within the faculty of Science at the University of Windsor, but also prompt questions of student approaches to learning in other faculties at the University of Windsor, and other Ontario Universities. This presentation session highlights recent master’s thesis research supported by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) through a Canada Graduate Scholarship.


By interacting with this poster presentation, engaged participants will be able to:



  • Describe what a student approach to learning is (Cognitive);

  • Identify their own approach to learning using the Revised Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) (Performative);

  • Critically reflect on the self-identified approach to learning, as it relates to their individual learning (Performative);

  • Advocate for an approach to educational development or teaching that considers the approach to learning that students take (Affective);


P2: Being Instructor MacGyver: A Part-time College Instructor's Implementation of Course Outlines


Author: Brandon Sabourin, PhD Student, University of Windsor


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: Mac•Gy•ver /mə-gīDvər/ n. 1. One who makes or repairs (an object) in an improvised or inventive way, making use of whatever items are at hand. Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology are required to develop and maintain course outlines for all courses offered. College course outlines differ from university course syllabi in that they are not designed by each individual instructor, but by teams comprised of department chairs, program coordinators, learning specialists, and faculty members. Course outlines include various components, including course learning outcomes (CLOs), essential employability skills (EES), and an assessment structure. The part-time college instructor lives in the crosshairs between course development and direct instruction. Part-time instructors comprise nearly 75% of the total number of instructors in Ontario Colleges, though this number is suspected to be higher “due to gaps in reporting requirements within the faculty collective agreement” (MacKay, 2014, p. 34). However, the part-time instructor is discouraged to engage in effective course development due to the inherent lack of credit and compensation provided for activities beyond in-class contact hours. As a result, the instruction a part-time college instructor provides can become hindered by the course outline. The question then becomes: how does a part-time instructor teach a course that someone else has developed? This poster presentation will highlight the opportunity of one fortunate part-time instructor who assumed the role of a Mac Gyver of educational development. Drawing inspiration from previous experiences and using the immediate tools and resources around him, he operated within the boundaries of the unknown world he entered, successfully implementing courses not of his own design. This poster won’t be patched together with chewing gum, but it might come close…


By interacting with this poster presentation, engaged participants will be able to:



  • Identify some practical strategies which can aid part-time instructors in the adoption of a course they did not design;

  • Transfer the information on a course outline into a practical course schedule using backwards design;

  • Reflect on their treatment of course outlines and course syllabi;

  • Appreciate the challenges that exist between part-time instructors and the Ontario CAAT system;


P3: Inquire - A Graduate Certificate in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning


Author: Clarke Mathany, Educational Developer, University of Guelph


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: As educational developers, how do we effectively support graduate students who are interested in developing as SoTL researchers? In rethinking traditional graduate student teaching certificates, Kenny, Watson and Watton argue that opportunities exist to integrate SoTL into graduate student certificates as a means to “address the complexity of teaching and learning in higher education” (2014, p. 14). Inquire, a graduate certificate in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, is a year- long intensive certificate program that supports participants through the process of completing a SoTL research project. Using a blended approach, participants in  the certificate work in collaborative groups to develop a research question, design methods aimed at answering the question, navigate the research ethics board process, conduct the research as outlined, and communicate the findings to the appropriate audience. This poster will outline the Inquire certificate curriculum as a way to spark discussion about the traditional ways we support the development of SoTL researchers at our institutions. Using a series of reflective questions,  participants who engage with the poster will be asked to consider what elements of the certificate design may work at their institutions. Ultimately, viewers of the  poster will be engaged in dialogue around the strengths, opportunities, aspirations, and results of a certificate program that scaffolds participants to complete a SoTL project over the course of one year.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • outline the inquiry-based, blended, collaborative approach applied in the Inquire Graduate Certificate in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

  • consider elements of the program they may be able to apply in their own SoTL researcher development programming


P4: Reconstruction Time: An Integrative Framework in Building a Collaborative and Sustainable Faculty Culture


Authors: William Kay, Educational Developer, St. Mary’s University; Jonathan Shaw, Educational Developer, St. Mary’s University


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: This poster presentation will describe the approaches that have informed two educational developers in attempting to cultivate a collaborative and sustainable faculty culture in teaching, learning and scholarship at Saint Mary’s University (SMU) in Halifax, N.S. This initiative has been pursued within the wider context of a recently launched Global Studio for Teaching and Learning education hub that was conceived as a comprehensive and expanded teaching and learning support service for faculty, staff and students. The presenters will begin by discussing the processes they followed in applying a systematic  ecological model (Bronfenbrenner, 1994; Johnson & Ryba, 2015) to foster best practices in teaching, learning and scholarship collaboration amongst faculty within SMU. Implications will then be discussed on how this model can serve as a conceptual backdrop in developing more dynamic faculty learning communities operating within a transdisciplinary “landscape of practice” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). The presenters will finally share some future directions in designing a research strategy to capture the evolution of this integrative model in creating a culture dedicated to promoting the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) at SMU. This interactive session will encourage discussion and provide participants with ideas that they can apply in their own professional contexts.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Identify the process steps in implementing the integrative model presented during this session.

  • Discuss strengths and weaknesses of the integrative model.

  • Discuss possible adaptations of the model to fit different needs and contexts.


P5: 'Connecting the Dots': A Practical Approach to Transforming Lesson Design


Author: Mabel Ho*, PhD Candidate, University of British Columbia; Jens Vent-Schmidt*, PhD Candidate, University of British Columbia


*Both authors contributed equally to this presentation.


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: Interactive workshops are critical for educational developers to share ideas about best practices. As facilitators for diverse teaching and learning workshops, we work with faculty and graduate students across many different disciplines. With this poster, we will share a process of developing and facilitating a lesson planning  workshop that is centred on creating authentic learning experiences using design thinking. Research on higher education emphasizes the importance of designing lessons that continuously motivate learners, have clear learning objectives with well-aligned active learning, and assessment techniques (Ambrose et. al, 2010). At the same time, experiential learning draws attention to learners processing their learning at different stages (Kolb, 1984). There is a call to try non-traditional pedagogical approaches that create spaces for students to reflect and the need to facilitate authentic learning activities aligned to learning objectives (Herrington et. al, 2014; Major and Palmer, 2006). However, these components are often seen as discrete rather than interconnected. At the Centre for Teaching, Learning, and Technology (UBC), we witnessed many workshop attendees struggling with the application and alignment of all components of a lesson. To address this lack of appreciation of interconnectedness, we designed and delivered a workshop that transformed participant’s current lesson planning approach. Our poster reports our lessons learned, showcases common practices in lesson design, a toolkit of best practices, and strategies of how to generate meaningful learning experiences. Educational developers play a key role in sharing this knowledge to interested parties.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • identify common practices in lesson design and assess pitfalls and promises in implementation and appreciate the value of coherence within the lesson and alignment to their professional discipline.


P6: Recasting the Role of Educational Developers in Mentorship


Author: Shaya Golparian, Educational Developer, University of British Columbia; Joseph Topornycky, Educational Developer, Manager of Graduate Student Programs, University of British Columbia; Mabel Ho, Graduate Student Facilitator, University of British Columbia


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: Mentorship embodies the ideal of a university culture that values teaching and learning. As educational developers in central teaching and learning units, it is essential for us to foster and promote effective (formal and informal) mentoring relationships through initiatives, programs and workshops.


There is substantial literature on the benefits of mentorship in higher education. Different taxonomies have been developed to characterize mentorship (Terrion et al., 2007). Existing literature on mentorship covers areas including senior-junior faculty mentorship (Bean et al., 2014), graduate student peer mentorship (Holmes et al., 2013) and faculty-graduate mentorship in research supervision and teaching contexts (Calkins, and Kelley, 2005; Finch, and Fernández, 2014) .


In our teaching and learning unit we engage in practices of mentorship on variety of levels and depth. This includes formal and informal mentoring, hierarchical, and peer mentoring. As educational developers we have reimagined our roles from mentors to capacity builders to supporters of a culture of mentorship across the university.


In this  poster we share a  model for recasting the role of educational developers in mentorship in higher education. The model represents mentorship as an evolutionary process in which the educational developer’s role changes over time (from that of a mentor to fostering and supporting mentorship practices), and offers strategies for developing and expanding the educational developer’s engagement with mentoring practices. Together with our audience we will engage in conversations around the proposed evolutionary processes of mentorship.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Explore possibilities to support mentoring and open up new avenues to engage in conversations around those evolutionary processes.

  • Walk away with strategies to develop and expand their engagement with mentoring practices


CANCELLED P7: The Development and Implementation of Online Decision Trees for Procedural Learning


Author: Sarah McLean, Assistant Professor, Western University


Session Type: Poster


Abstract: How much do students retain by simply following a protocol? Can we provide students with a chance to fail and get feedback? In this session, participants will learn about designing and implementing decision trees for procedural learning. Online decision trees present students with a scenario. Students then execute a procedure by selecting options that will lead them down different paths which will ultimately lead to different outcomes. With each path, students are presented with feedback  on their choices through mini tutorial videos. The decision trees are developed to closely mimic the decisions and procedures that occur in a face-to-face classroom session (such as a laboratory). The decision trees are formative assessments that allow students to safely “fail” prior to completing a procedure. In this session participants will learn about designing decision trees using a constructivist pedagogy. Participants will also have the opportunity to try an online decision tree on their own devices. Finally, participants will brainstorm in groups how the decision trees can facilitate procedural learning in their own disciplines.


By the end of this session, participants will be able to:



  • Appreciate how decision trees can facilitate deep and active learning.

  • Apply a constructivist framework for creating decision trees.

  • Incorporate feedback elements into online decision trees.

  • Learn about tools for developing decision trees.