“I try to relax more and reveal a little bit more of myself to my students than I did when I started teaching. I take more risks with classes and students and methods – but also deal with the consequences more often when things don’t work
out as planned.” – Prof. Scott Moore

At last month’s New Faculty Seminar, three veteran John Carroll University professors – all of whom have been honored for outstanding teaching skills – presented insights, methods, and adaptations in their continuing efforts to instruct their students effectively. Maryclaire Moroney, Scott Moore, and Mark Waner provided a lively, passionate discussion of different pedagogies, offering various perspectives and approaches, as well as common challenges and solutions. Here’s a synopsis of ideas shared.

Teaching insights: Veteran Carroll faculty members
(from left) Scott Moore, Maryclaire Moroney, and
Mark Waner presented at the New Faculty Seminar last month

Support Them Where They Are

Maryclaire Moroney, associate professor of English and 2009 recipient of the Lucrezia Culicchia Excellence in Teaching Award, incorporates a strategy of offering options in her writing assignments and exams. Her prepared questions or “prompts” vary in range of difficulty to meet the academic needs of the greatest number of students in the class without compromising rigor. In designing the choices for students, Prof. Moroney keeps their background and abilities in mind.

“It’s best to keep some assignment options at the top of the weaker students’ game, so they stretch,” she says, “while also supplying the stronger students with more demanding alternatives, so they stretch as well.”

For example, the harder essay question on an exam requires more abstract and analytical thinking that not all students are ready to do, she explains. “It’s a fair way of not denying the stronger students the opportunity to demonstrate their strengths without blowing the weaker ones out of the water.

“It’s about supporting them where they are,” Prof. Moroney continues. “I’m essentially saying, ‘I know you can do this much. Now I’m asking you to go further.’” She also uses frequent informal assessments – ungraded writing assignments – to find out what students are processing and where they need help, while not overburdening her grading load. The incentive for students is that they receive 10 percent course credit for the assignments and valuable feedback.

“They can take some risks on these papers, try some things out,” she says. “I can then point out where they’re off base. Students use these as the core for their formal papers and to study for exams. Students are constantly telling me how useful these papers are.”

Prof. Moroney admits to having been overly concerned with content and has learned over the years to focus more on developing her students’ writing and analytical skills. One way she does this is to model the analytical process in class discussion. For example, the class will read a poem and identify its contents, discuss different interpretations, and then argue the interpretations.

“When I model analysis,” she says, “I label each process for them so they know what’s happening. It’s useful when you tell people what you’re doing.”

Fine-tuning Reception

Scott Moore, assistant professor of finance, has long studied pedagogies and has published papers on teaching by case method versus lecture. Prof. Moore, the 2007 recipient of the Wasmer Outstanding Teaching Award in the Boler School of Business, explains the value of lectures versus active learning methods as it relates to “ratio of signal to noise.”

The lecture is a very efficient one-way communication, but the lecturer doesn’t control reception. Communication can get lost from distractions, such as cell phones, he says. Prof. Moore suggests using frequent low/no-value assessments as a way to improve attention. Active learning methods, on the other hand, such as case methods and cooperative learning techniques, can improve reception because students are more engaged, but the volume of signal and signal to noise ratio decline.

“While students may enjoy active learning methods more, it’s unclear whether they actually learn more, and such methods often require more time in preparation and evaluation of the students’ work. But if I don’t use some kind of active learning methods in class, I know I’m going to lose them,” he concludes.

Prof. Moore says he has gained invaluable lessons on teaching from attending seminars and conferences and reading books and other materials. He shared how a guest lecturer at John Carroll read a paragraph to the audience that seemed to be nonsense, containing no time or personal references. After the speaker explained that the actors in the passage were King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, the point of the story was completely clear. It was a powerful example of how important context is to understanding, he says.

He notes he has also learned much from the late author and lecturer C. Roland Christensen (Teaching and the Case Method and Education for Judgment: The Artistry of Discussion Leadership), who taught at a workshop he attended at Harvard University on case method teachings. From Dr. Christensen, he realized he needed to be more reflective as a teacher, says Prof. Moore.

“If I make sure to make time to reflect on what I want to accomplish before I go about it,” he says, “the results are usually better.”

A Little Help from Your Friends

Mark Waner, associate professor of chemistry and director of the Center for Faculty Development, encourages faculty to receive input from departmental colleagues, as well as those from other disciplines. Identifying similar problems and exchanging ideas on approaches has been helpful to him, says Prof. Waner, who received the Culicchia Award in 2006.

“I learned not only from my own mistakes, but, from talking to my colleagues,
I learned from their mistakes, too.” He also recommends getting input from outside sources and cited The Teaching Professor newsletter (now available to JCU faculty electronically).

“Explore what works and what doesn’t,” he says. “There is not one right way to teach. I’ve had to identify what works best for me. I must ask, what are my strengths and how do they match up with my students’ learning styles? I may have a great pedagogical approach, but my students may not be ready for it, so I may have to stick with a more traditional method.”

To convey greater relevance, Prof. Waner says, it’s helpful to find ways to make connections to other classes students are taking. In his physical chemistry class, for example, he’ll point out characteristics that link to biology.
The instructor uses pre-lab assignments as a way for students to get immediate feedback before a lab and to address areas where they may be confused. In addition, this encourages them to reflect on the written report early on, he says, and allows him to assess if they are grasping the material and if they need more direction on what’s expected.

Prof. Waner has also observed through experience that students will often respond to high expectations. “If I challenge them and hold them to it, they usually do quite well.”

– Article by Susan Curphey