Search for: All records

Recent reports have highlighted the varied and complicated paths STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) students often take to graduation, which may include attending multiple institutions and increased time to degree. These issues can be addressed, in part, by better coherence between institutions of higher education, such as two-year colleges (TYCs) and four-year colleges and universities. This article presents a cross-case comparison of two faculty-driven partnerships between TYCs and four-year institutions. Outcomes include impacts on individual faculty and increased coherence across the partnering institutions, resulting in course and program transformation, evolution of faculty identity and roles, better coherence and alignment across institutions, and faculty participation in national dialogue surrounding educational transformation. These two partnerships developed and operated independently, but common features include a concrete programmatic focus; regular, equitable discussions between faculty from different institutions; participation of faculty from institutions with similar missions and values; and initial external funding. These cases illustrate how faculty-driven, non-hierarchical, and discipline-based partnerships can facilitate faculty growth, while increasing coherence between two- and four year institutions in an effort to better serve STEM students. 

An effective Learning Assistant (LA) Program provides benefits for both Learning Assistants (LAs) and faculty, in addition to benefits for students. By analyzing LA and faculty reflections, weekly preparation sessions, and interviews with LAs and faculty, we can better understand the partnerships that develop between faculty and their LAs. We leverage a combination of qualitative and quantitative data to investigate the types of LA expertise and skills faculty value and how this affects the formation of these partnerships. The Preparation Session Observation Tool (PSOT), developed from this work, can be used by LAs, LA Program Coordinators, and faculty to reflect on the types of LA partnerships that emerge, and how these partnerships can be used in constructing effective learning environments. We anticipate that this tool can then be used to help LAs, coordinators, and faculty modify their working relationship to develop the type of partnerships that are best for their particular instructional setting. PSOT provides a finer-grained analysis to three broad partnership classifications that exist along a continuum: mentor-mentee, faculty-driven collaboration, and collaborative. 

A key component to the success of the Learning Assistant (LA) Model is the relationship that forms between LAs and faculty members. These relationships can enhance the effectiveness of the model by leveraging the expertise of the LAs and placing LAs in leadership roles where they can co-think and codesign activities and lessons with faculty, as well as provide insights to faculty about the students in the class and the learning environment. Interviews with LAs and faculty members, in addition to video from weekly preparation sessions, illustrate the different types of partnerships that can evolve between LAs and faculty and help us understand the roles different factors play in these partnerships. We contrast three different types of partnerships between LAs and faculty that exist along a continuum: mentor-mentee, faculty-driven collaboration, and collaborative. This data highlights the importance and the benefits of being attentive to these partnerships in developing a robust and effective LA Program.