We are a loosely formed collective of like-minded individuals who are passionate about providing high quality learning opportuntities to students. We care about what is right and best for the students and not what is right or best for the instructor at the expense of the students.
The collective has been together in different ways and forms for probably ten years now, with ebbs and flows of people helping, participating. Within the collective we have individuals with various undergraduate degrees, graduate degrees and a relatively wide age representation from the twenties to the almost seventies. We have individuals with undergraduate and graduate degrees in education. We have members who work in teaching support and education as their vocation. We have undergraduate and graduate students. We have members who have studied Cognitive Science specializing in problem solving, cognitive skill acquisition and who have conducted research and supervised graduate students in teaching, millenials, and the transition from high school to higher ed. We have experience in process evaluation and process design. The membership is diverse.
None of us are doing this because it is our job or because we have to. We are doing it because we believe that there is 'stuff' that needs to be said and shared about teaching that is not normally talked about and is hard to find. It is as simple as that.
The notes are based on what we have studied, learned, and experienced. We have walked the talk, we practice what we preach. There is nothing in the notes that we have not done multiple times, discussed, debated, improved, and learned from. Nothing is theoretical. Nothing is impossible. We use the royal 'we' at times in the site. Like in this paragraph. This means that least one of us is being referred to, not all, but at least one. Often two or more have had similar insights and experiences. It is all rolled into the 'we'.
Unfortunately, there are few simple recipes. It isn't that easy. Does it take effort to learn how to provide a quality learning experience? Yep. Can you do it without effort, serious learning and commitment? Nope. Can you do it without thinking it through, reflecting, deliberate practice? Nope. Can you addiress it in a myopic, non-holistic way and be 'best practice'? Nope. Can you do this stuff, the stuff on the site? Yep. If we can, others can too. There is an existence proof. All of this is related to how you see teaching and being a 'professional'. In most cases, we as instructors are being paid a pretty penny and we should take this seriously and deliver value commensurate with the compensation we receive.
Our intent is not to replicate what can be found in other sources. Our intent is to focus on the interpretation of the ideas and concepts; getting into the details, leaving nothing off the table. We want to share what we have learned about the necessary and sufficient conditions for a method or idea to work; co-dependencies and assumptions. There are no 'you can't talk about THAT' guiding principles. If it affects the quality of the students' learning, it is on the table.
For each note, we have provided a few summary takeaways, some general points, observations and suggestions, a note to first time instructors if necessary, and references for further reading. We have tried to be concise and to the point. We wanted to hit the big points and not overwhelm the reader with minutia.
There are over 150 notes. They add up. They are not unique or special and we think that almost all instructors encounter the topics as they design and deliver courses during their career. The encounter might be implicit or explicit. The thinking might be think fast or think slow (Kahneman 2011). The thinking might be a few minutes or hours. The thinking might be reflective or the first thing that comes to mind, what was done in the past, what worked for the instructor. We do not think that many instructors spend many hours on these topics, debating them, discussing them with colleagues. Thinking about the cause and effect relationships. The assumptions. The necessary and sufficient. The dynamic relationships, the long term learning, the Bloom taxonomy notions of cognitive complexity. We did not when we started. We started to do this in the last decade, with buddies, in 'communities of practice'.
Each of the notes has suffered through many hours and in some cases many days, weeks of introspection, secondary research, debates and challenges. The notes encapsulate our thinking and conclusions. The notes have been a long time in the making. Many many many hours on key topics and methods. It has been fun to debate and think about the methods and concepts and to tease them apart. We hope that you will find our results useful and that they will help you. The 150+ notes emphasize how rich and complex the world of post-secondary instruction is. There is so much to think about and consider. There are so many skills to learn and develop expertise in.
It saddens us when other instructors dismiss the science of learning and teaching by 'you learn how to be an instructor by being student', 'you learn to be a TA by having TAs as a student', 'students know how to do projects because they did projects in high school, worked in teams in high school', 'it worked for me', 'this is what I liked as a student', 'cognitive complexity? what's that?', 'students are learning if they are memorizing', 'I took a workshop on x and know all I need to know about x', 'I read a blog on x, got it, no problem', 'x is easy to do'. Sigh. Nothing about teaching and learning is easy or obvious. To be a competent, expert, professional instructor probably takes as much time and effort as it takes to do a doctoral degree. Why assume less?
The contact point for the website is kmckay at uwaterloo dot ca. Please feel free to suggest topics, additional points for a topic, or further readings related to a topic. And, of course, any corrections.