Model Sabbatical Applications

Model Sabbatical Application: Judy McKenzie, Academic Learning Skills

Application for Paid Sabbatical

(Faculty Professional Development Long-Term Leave)  2006

PART I:   Applicant Information

Name:                                Judith McKenzie

Department:                      Academic Learning Skills (Center for Learning Advancement)

Extension:                         463-5073

Home Phone:                    xxx-xxx-xxxx

Assignment:                      Academic Learning Skills full-time Faculty

FTE: 1.0

Years at Lane under contract:                   six

No previous long-term leaves

Term Requested:            Winter 07

Leave location:               Tacoma, Wa;  Seattle, WA;  Salem, OR;  Grants Pass;  Portland, OR; Olympia, WA;

I have read the guidelines and I understand them

Applicant signature __________________________________  Date: __________

Part II:  Leave Information

1.           Background:    The Academic Learning Skills department provides skill-building courses for credit students whose academic skills require improvement in one or more areas.   Most ALS Students, while taking our developmental classes, are also enrolled in transfer classes, attempting to apply their skills at the same time that they are learning them in our classes.   In this year’s ALS Unit Plan, a change in the WR 080 curriculum was a high priority.  However, the problem is being sure that changes made accurately reflect the latest and most effective pedagogies for delivery of this material.   

Writing 080 is a class designed to improve students writing ability at a fundamental level – their understanding of the basic structure of our language - Effectively, it is a grammar class.   The current curriculum utilized in the Department is a curriculum based on classic methods of grammar instruction – detailed study of the syntax, grammar, and structure of the English language, delivered in a structure-oriented format.   For many instructors, this format/pedagogy does not fit well with their teaching style.  Also, while this approach works well for many students, it is not the best approach for every student’s learning style.  Acknowledging this, the Department agreed to propose the development of an alternative curriculum using different delivery methods.   Some suggestions were to use the process approach to teaching writing at the grammar level, or to design an online or technology-based curriculum.  

Faculty in the Department have varying backgrounds and training in this area.  Some cited the process approach as successful in developmental grammar instruction;   while others pointed out that those studies which showed this approach to be successful were done solely with ESL students, which does not accurately reflect our demographic.  Similar difficulties surround discussions of utilizing technology in grammar instruction.  Also faculty have not had the time or resources lately to stay current on the outcome of the most recent studies in grammar pedagogy, or what other developmental education departments are doing with adult grammar instruction.

The plan:    The plan includes five parts;   three involving visits to other similar programs to ALS, and two involving research.   Parts one through three involve visiting at least four other community colleges (proposed:   Pierce College, Tacoma, WA;  Chemeketa CC, Salem, OR;  Portland CC, Portland;  South Puget Sound Community College, WA; ) with departments similar to ALS to determine three things. (see below for specifics)  ( if time permits, visit two additional colleges:  Rogue Community College; Seattle Central Community College, WA)

Data gathering at community Colleges

• At each college, to conduct classroom observations and interviews to determine what pedagogies and curricular approaches are used for grammar instruction, and to gather data about success rates with varying pedagogies
• At each college, to gather data about assessment methods used for evaluating student success in grammar instruction
• At each college, to observe and gather data regarding the use of instructional technology in grammar instruction
• Gather data on workload assignments for grammar instruction

Research goals

The final two parts of the plan involve research into leading-edge studies in grammar instruction.

• Continue research on methods being taught in education programs and/or teacher certification at the university level – at the Evergreen State College, St. Martin’s College MEd program, and Oregon State University
• Do a comprehensive literature survey of recent studies of the effectiveness of various pedagogies in grammar instruction

It is anticipated that, to gather necessary information, at least four days would be necessary on each campus – two for conducting interviews, one for observation of programs, and one for gathering numerical data from campus records.  The schedule and timeline are currently designed to visit all six colleges, with the four mentioned above being the minimum if scheduling problems occur.

TimeLine

Since some of the libraries and repositories of data for parts four and five are located in the same cities as some of the community colleges to be visited, the proposed timeline overlaps the activities as follows:

First two weeks of January 07:

• Firm up appointments and expectations with all campus sites to be visited.  Establish schedules for visiting classes, resource centers, faculty, and firm up interviews with faculty and program supervisors, firm up travel and housing arrangements
• Develop spreadsheets and formats to use in literature review and in recording data as gathered
• Begin literature search in University of Oregon libraries

Second two weeks of January 07:

• 4-5 days at Chemeketa Community College’s Developmental education department
• Interview with Dev. Ed Department chair, Susan Fish
• Interviews with at least two language/grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of Chemeketa’s grammar curriculum
• Review of Chemeketa’s records of student success (including definitions of success in use)& workload
• Interview with Susan Fish re:  Chemeketa assessment programs
• visits/observations of Chemeketa’s use of instructional technology in language arts
• 4-5 days at Oregon State University’s libraries in literature research
• Literature review of studies in grammar pedagogy
• interview with Valerie White,  EdM program chair
• Attendance/observation at classes in language arts instruction

First two weeks of February 07:

• 4-5  days at Portland Community College
• Interview with English Dept Chair (Dev Ed classes at PCC are taught in the relevant division)
• Interview with at least two grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of Portland’s grammar curriculum
• Review of PCC records on student success (including definitions of success in use) & workload
• interview with PCC VP re:  Portland assessment programs
• visits/observations of Portland’s use of instructional technology in language arts
• 4-5  days at South Puget Sound Community College
• Interview with Crystal Ashley-deVerglas, Dev. Ed. Dean
• Interview Lynda Swanson, lead grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of SPSCCs grammar curriculum
• Review of SPSCCs student success data (including definitions of success in use) & workload
• interview with Michael Beehler, Dean of Instruction,  Re:  SPSCC assessment
• visits/observations of SPSCC’s use of instructional technology in language arts
• 4-5 days research with Evergreen State College’s MA (Ed) program
• Interview with Joye Hardiman on education pedagogy at Evergreen
• Interview with Masao Sugiyama,  MAEd coordinator
• Interview with Scott Coleman, MIT Director
• Attend/observe classes in language instruction pedagogy

Second two weeks of February 07:

• 4-5 Days at St. Martins’ College Education Program (Masters in Teaching)
• Interview with Dean, MEd Program
• Interview with Language arts faculty
• 4-5 days at Seattle Central Community College
• Interview with Andre Loh, Dean, Basic Studies Division
• Interview with Kathren Whitman, Grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of SCCC’s grammar curriculum
• Review of SCCC’s records on student success (including definitions of success in use)& workload
• Interview with VP for Instruction re:  SCCC assessment
• Attendance/observation at language instruction classes
• 4-5 days at Pierce College Tacoma, WA
• Interview with Kathy Boddicker, Director of Learning Center
• Interview with at least two grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of Pierce’ grammar curriculum
• Interview with Donna Accarda, Chair English Department
• Interview with Dean of Instruction re:   Pierce assessment
• review of Pierce’s reports on student success (including definitions of success in use) & workload
• visits/observations of Pierce’s use of instructional technology in language arts

First two weeks of March 07:

• 4-5 days at Rogue Community College
• Interview with Dr. Lori Taft Sours, Dev Ed Chair
• Interview with Caroline Bessey, grammar faculty
• Interview with Sue Miller, grammar faculty
• Observation of grammar classes
• review of RCC’s grammar curriculum
• Review of Rogue’s records on student success (including definitions of success in use)& workload
• Interview with VP for Instruction re:  RCC assessment
• visits/observations of RCC’s use of instructional technology in language arts
• Complete research at University of Oregon program

After returning to Eugene:

• Complete literature review through UO library
• Attendance/observation at classes in language arts instruction at U/O
• Begin compilation of data and writing of recommendations

(Any remaining time in any given period to be used in organization of data and transcription of interviews and materials)

From the preceding timeline, it is clear that the research will comprise three forms:  literature review, observation and recording of methods in use, and interviews.   There are also four types of interviews.   Each type of interview has a different objective in terms of data or information gathered.  I am working collaboratively with other ALS faculty and others at Lane to develop instruments outlining appropriate questions and areas of inquiry for the interviews.   Summaries below of directions for interviews are preliminary.

interviews with faculty actively involved in grammar instruction

• rationale for existing pedagogy
• perceived gaps in coverage for existing curriculum
• anecdotal summaries of successes/problem areas
• perceived areas for curriculum changes and rationale
• experience and evaluation of use of instructional technology
• determination of definitions of student success in grammar instruction
• interviews with heads of departments where grammar is taught
• rationale for existing pedagogy
• history of curriculum development
• problems associated with articulation to other college programs
• interviews regarding institutional and program success in grammar instruction and assessment
• assessment methods currently in use and rationale
• success rates of grammar students in institutional composition courses
• success rates of non-grammar students in composition courses
• success rates of grammar students in degree or transfer programs
• success rates of grammar students after graduation
• graduation rates for grammar students
• interviews with those who teach grammar teachers
• Primary pedagogy used in instruction and rationale
• Evaluation of current research into methods of grammar instruction
• Evaluation of effectiveness of current pedagogy
• Observations and evaluations of use of instructional technology

Lane is acknowledged across our region as a leader in community-college education, an innovative campus that encourages learning-centered approaches to education.   It is hoped that, through this research, we can develop the research foundation necessary to allow ALS faculty to develop the best possible approach for instruction for WR 080.

2)           My own education as an undergraduate and graduate student largely focused on creative writing and cognitive science.  For nearly fourteen years prior to coming to Lane, the bulk of my instructional experience was in higher-level composition and creative writing.   I had, at the time, only three years of experience in teaching paragraph-level and grammar-level language arts classes.  For this reason, I put a great deal of post-graduate energy into researching and learning about pedagogical methods in basic language arts instruction.   I was surprised to find that the current method in use in ALS (a highly structured examination of the grammar and syntax of the English language) works well for me, and I seem to have a high rate of success with my students in using it.   I had originally thought that I might have a great deal of trouble with it,  since my history of creative and process approaches to language instruction seem counter to this method.     So, I was even more surprised to find that some other faculty members were/are having difficulty making it work for them, and are anxious to find other instructional approaches for the Department.   

              Conducting this research will broaden my perspective on the possibilities for instructional methods to use for this curriculum, and deepen my understanding of what works for a variety of student populations.   I hope it will also provide me with a depth of understanding of the potential for integrating instructional technology in developmental education.   My recent participation in the League for Innovations international project to develop standards for the use of instructional technology in developmental education gave me expanded insight into the overall possibilities, and the innovative methods instructors around the world are using to integrate technology at the basic level.  I hope that this research will, in addition to identifying pedagogical opportunities, help me to develop specific methods for such integration.

In the area of instruction, this research should broaden my understanding of the range of possibilities for language arts instruction, developing a perspective more inclusive of multiple pedagogical approaches to grammar instruction.   In the area of instructional technology, this research will allow me to expand on knowledge gained through my participation in the League for Innovation’s international seminar on technology in developmental education, developing perspectives on opportunities for implementation of use of such technology in developmental classes.

3)           WR 080 is one of the highest-demand classes on campus, generating large amounts of FTE.   It is highly likely that, in every class across campus, there is at least one student who has taken or is taking WR080.   Improving the performance of these students through an improved pedagogical approach would improve instruction outcomes campus-wide.   The research results also hope to provide us with clearer pathways to articulate to degree and transfer programs for WR 080 students.  I will compare data gathered from this research to LCC data maintained by IRAP on students who have completed WR 080 compared to those who have not.

              The research on use of instructional technology will also fit into Lane’s current strategic directions and allow for increased retention and success rates with developmental students, and their improved readiness for the use of instructional technology at higher levels.

              It has long been acknowledged  that language arts classes (which constitute the bulk of developmental education workload) are more workload-intensive than many other classes, requiring long hours in subjective grading and feedback.  This research can help us to determine the effect of workload issues on student outcomes in developmental language-arts classes.

              Also, this research could position Lane to be a leader in research in developmental outcomes.   Preliminary literature research shows several studies of pedagogical methods in grammar instruction.  However, all such studies found in a preliminary literature review used ESL students as their demographic.  In the preliminary searches, no studies were found which used a general developmental population in a study of pedagogical methods for grammar instruction.   Conducting this research will put Lane in the position of being a leader in such research and design of grammar curricula.

4)  N/A

5)           I expect to write a detailed report of the results of the research in both narrative and spreadsheet form, which I can make available to all language arts instructors on campus.   The summary should include recommendations for proceeding with re-design for LCC, and a summary of best practices as indicated by the data gathered at other schools.   I also hope to create video tapes of classes, resource centers, and programs observed, and can share an edited video during in-service presentations of sabbatical reports.

III. Division Chair Impact Statement

Note: the leave request may be submitted even if there may be a negative impact to the Division. The committee would like to be aware of this up front, so that steps may be taken to facilitate negotiation and/or problem solving.

Division Chair: Please indicate your detailed plan for a replacement instructor and include estimated costs to do this.

If Judy McKenzie is awarded a one-term sabbatical, the ALS Department would need to hire part-time instructors from its current pool or add additional instructors to teach 15 credit hours, or 5 classes of 3 credits each. Estimated cost is below:

Please provide a written statement of the impact to your division if this applicant is granted the proposed leave.

The department wouldn’t have Judy’s participation for the term in ALS activities. However her research would assist in evaluating current practices in English grammar teaching that could have a long-term benefit to students, faculty and staff.

Estimated replacement cost: Wage $                           OPE $ Total $