Game changers: developing graduate faculty for a technology-rich  (Page 10/14)

Isolation and the status quo

Our Department shares a common and cohesive identity that has been documented over time and in multiple formats, particularly (1) a Statement of Commitments—the faculty’s vision statement that underscores our collective commitment to the social construction of knowledge and of inquiry-based learning communities for the purpose of social transformation and social justice in vigorous support of an equitable, just world (http://www.uncg.edu/elc/statement.html), (2) a strategic plan, and (3) covenant vision (Mullen, Bettez,&Wilson, 2011). We regularly revisit our commitment to each other and our students and constituent groups, with technology-based equitable curriculum taking prevalence. In 2011, we worked with our departmental colleagues to create a document that reflects where we are currently with respect to our commitments, translating the strategic planning process required of us into our own living artifact of core values. We have made a commitment that we will “continually strive to create vibrant and intellectually enriching programs dedicated to the development of citizen-educators who are committed to social justice, moral inquiry, and innovative and inclusive teaching/learning practices” (UNCG, 2012, p. 1).

Nonetheless, our Department is not exempt from stymying influences that have the effect of perpetuating faculty identity not as an interdependent collective but rather as a collection of independent actors. As such, changing this culture of isolation and reorienting ourselves as a faculty towards collaborative inquiry and learning proves both challenging and exhilarating as we actively seek out opportunities for a shared identity as mutually supporting entrepreneurs.

Programmatic conquer and divide

Our Department offers cultural foundations (PhD) and educational leadership (MSA, EdS, and EdD) degrees. While faculty teach across the divide, tension occurs around resources, status, and primacy allotted to the program areas (Mullen, Bettez,&Wilson, 2011). While IMPACT V grant resources are being invested in professional development for the entire faculty, including faculty in other departments, there is sensitivity around this being an educational leadership project that lacks relevance for the PhD program. That said, cross-fertilization of ideas occur in this context, with the participation of some cultural foundations faculty in the PLC and tech labs.

Time and other resources

Time is perhaps the scarcest of resources as we struggle to create opportunities to expand our capacity to invest ourselves as a faculty in additional commitments beyond those we have already made to our teaching, scholarship, and service. As such, our PLC is sensitive to claims we make on faculty members’ time. Toward this end, we have conducted a survey of the faculty to determine interest—instead of presuming this would be a worthwhile exercise—air ideas, and decide best times to meet for professional learning activities.

The faculty’s struggle over expected involvement

Early on, our faculty as a whole debated whether these professional learning opportunities should be expected or voluntary. Some departmental colleagues felt that because the importance of new directions in online programming affects the entire Department, everyone should participate in learning and dialogue around this topic. Others felt that learning opportunities should be voluntary—for reasons varying from the philosophical (academic freedom) to the practical (the opportunities would likely be more productive if not populated by people expected to participate). We, the organizers, were somewhat taken aback by these discussions, presuming the voluntary nature of this project and thus departmental buy-in of the professional learning approach taken to online teaching. We learned that we needed to underscore that this work and all of the associated activities such as survey completion, video debriefing, book reading, retreat participation, joint presentation, and coauthored publication would be voluntary, educative, and supportive of the Department’s social justice commitments.