From Critical Thinking to
Reflective Practice About Environmental and Health Sciences in Their Social
Context
Peter Taylor, September 2005
Graduate Program in Critical and Creative Thinking
Program in Science, Technology, and Values
University of Massachusetts Boston
In the fall of 1998 I was appointed to the
science and technology position in the Program in Critical and Creative
Thinking (CCT) in the Graduate College of Education (GCOE) at UMass
Boston. From the following spring
until this last academic year I was the sole full-time CCT faculty member. With the responsibilities of
directing/coordinating the CCT Program I had fewer opportunities to teach in my
specialty area of science in its social context, but my affiliation with the
undergraduate Program in Science, Technology, and Values has now led to my
becoming assistant director in 2002 and, since 2004, the director.
Critical thinking, as I view it, means that you
understand things by placing established facts, theories, and practices in tension
with alternatives. But where do a
critical thinker's ideas about alternatives come from? Not out of individual inspiration, but
from borrowing and connecting. The
more items in your tool box—the more themes, heuristics (rules of thumb),
and open questions you are working with—the more likely you are to make a
new connection and see how things could be otherwise, that is, to be
creative. Yet, in order to build up a set of
tools that works for you, it is necessary to experiment, take risks, and reflect
on the outcomes. Such reflective
practice is like a journey into
unfamiliar or unknown areas—it involves risk, opens up questions, creates
more experiences than can be integrated at first sight, requires support, and
yields personal change. Indeed, the experienced educators and
other mid-career professionals who pursue an M.A. in CCT have always viewed the
Program in terms of changing their practice as much as learning about thinking. Let
me say that it has been an unusual privilege to serve as a guide and a witness
to their CCT journeys, to personal and professional development that stretches
well beyond my formal training.
Moving from critical thinking to reflective
practice also characterizes the
rest of my work, where my professional goal has been to contribute to
discussions, research collaborations, and educational initiatives that
influence researchers intellectual and practical responses to, in a very broad
sense, complexity and change (see sect. I.A, below). Building on my view of critical thinking, I envisage
audiences for my work
defined not by field or discipline as much as by three qualities: an
interest in exploring new propositions, themes, questions, or framings and
seeing how these might adapt to their own inquiry; a sense that disciplinary
boundaries (for example, between science and interpretation of science) give
them trouble in their work; and a disposition to reflect on the conceptual and
practical choices they have made in relation to alternative possibilities, past
and future.
In this spirit, my statement and accompanying
materials
convey not only my accomplishments, but also the ongoing self-assessment and
development of research, teaching, and institutional development across
disciplinary boundaries. The
cross-fertilization among those three aspects of my work, which together I
consider to be my scholarship, is also significant. Taken as a whole, this should demonstrate that I continue to
be productive and innovative as a researcher, teacher, and colleague and, with
more than six years in leadership positions in CCT and elsewhere in the GCOE
and University, have met the College and University research, teaching, and
service criteria for promotion to full professor.
I. Research and Writing
I.A
Unruly Complexity: Ecology, Interpretation, Engagement (U. Chicago
Press, 2005)
As the prologue of Unruly Complexity begins (p. xiii-xiv):
Simply put, this book explores concepts about
complexity and change. To be more
specific—although at this point very abstract—I am interested in situations
that do not have clearly defined boundaries, coherent internal dynamics, or
simply mediated relations with their external context.
The book is a contribution to critical thinking
about environment, science, and society in the sense that many alternatives
emerge that can be put in tension with established facts, theories, and
practices as soon as we examine the ways that situations are built up over
time from heterogeneous components,
are subject to ongoing restructuring, and are embedded or situated within wider dynamics—in short, once we contrast what I call unruly
complexity with prevalent
assumptions that situations are well-bounded systems. The book is also a contribution to moving from critical
thinking to reflective practice in that
I explore the
significance of unruly complexity in three realms: in ecology and
socio-environmental change (in which social and ecological processes are
interwoven); in the interactions among researchers and other social agents as
they establish what counts as knowledge; and in efforts to feed interpretations
of those interactions so as to influence ecological research—or, more
broadly, to link knowledge-making, interpretation, and engagement in social
change.
I construe social change broadly. Its scope may be as far-reaching as
stemming the degradation of some natural resource or redirecting government
policies for allocation of funds to different scientific fields. But social change may also be as local
as securing a three-month extension to complete a research project or managing
to focus an audiences attention on certain themes. Indeed, the latter is closer to the spirit of this
book. I do not provide possible solutions
to pressing environmental, scientific, or social problems, nor a comprehensive
theory of their causes. My
goal—which is ambitious enough—is to stimulate scientists who study
ecological complexity and researchers who interpret the ecological-like
complexity of scientific change to become more self-conscious and systematic
about the ways they deal with the unruliness of complex situations. This shift would involve researchers
reflecting more critically—that
is, in relation to alternative possibilities—on their efforts to modify
the social and technical conditions in which their research takes shape.
The way I promote critical reflection on concepts
and practice is to introduce questions and themes, which are intended to
disturb conceptual boundaries used by researchers when they focus attention on
(supposedly) well-bounded systems and push complicating dynamics or processes
out of view. I develop these
questions and themes through concrete cases from my own work; these cases open
up one to the next in a way that mirrors to some degree the critical reflection
I favor. The cases all involve
ecological or socio-environmental situations, but their style and content
differ according to the intellectual field in which each case is
centered—first, theoretical ecology, then philosophy of science, history
of science, sociology of science, socio-environmental studies, and eventually,
critical reflection on practice.
[Moreover—and
this is one of the strengths of the book—by chewing further on issues in
various fields that are no longer in the spotlight, I develop fresh
perspectives and expose problems that were not well-resolved or recognized when
researchers in the field moved on.]
The sequence of cases should help researchers and students in
this wide range of fields appreciate more acutely the limitations of assuming
that ecological, scientific, and social complexity can be delimited into
well-bounded systems. My hope is
that readers will then take steps—on their own and in collaboration with
others—to reconstruct the unruliness of complexity without suppressing
it, to link knowledge-making to social change, and to wrestle with the
potential and limitations of critical reflection as a means to redirect
practice. In the words of Raymond
Williams (1980, 83), I want to encourage others not to mentally draw back [and
be] spared the effort of looking, in any active way, at the whole complex of
social and natural relationships which is at once our product and our
activity.
The reviews on the cover are
appreciative of the different qualities of the book. I look forward to seeing how a wider audience reads the
work, which has only just appeared.
I.B The Study
of Complex Interactions in the area of Environment, Health, Science, and
Society
This area represents a new focus for my research
and writing about critical thinking and reflective practice. As evident from the previous section,
my previous case studies have been related primarily to ecology and
socio-environmental research.
However, NSF-funded research that I began in 2003 initiated a shift that
allows me to make more use of my scientific training in quantitative analysis
and modeling and to seek opportunities for day-to-day engagement with
researchers and their subjects.
(My previous work had led me into case studies of field research on socio-environmental
change in remote regions, especially in Africa, but teaching and family
commitments are not conducive to my spending extended periods abroad
collaborating with field researchers.)
The project, Genes, Gestation, and Life
Experiences: A Critical Comparison of Concepts and Methods Used in Analyses of
Biosocial Development, is described in the following overview and in a 2004
publication:
Everyone "knows" that
genes and environment interact, but, in this "Age of DNA," genetics
is often seen as the way to expose the important or root causes of behavior and
disease or as the best route to effective therapeutic technologies. Several scientific currents, however,
are bringing back into the picture environmental contributions in the
development of behavioral and medical conditions over any individual's
lifetime. This trend provides a
wealth of potential issues and case material for science and technology studies
(STS).
The particular project proposed here centers on a
comparison of the questions, concepts, and methods of three fields:
Research on gestational programming, which
has identified associations between nutrition during critical periods in
utero and diseases of late life, including heart disease, diabetes, and
death by suicide;
Life events and difficulties research, which has
exposed relationships between severe events and difficulties over a person's
life course and the onset of mental or physical illness;
and
Reciprocal causation models of IQ development in
which there is a matching of traits and the changing environments in which
traits develop so as to allow both high heritability and large gains from one
generation to the next.
The three fields have been
chosen for this project for the following reasons:
1) The fields are active, but
not yet well known in North America.
They have well-articulated questions, concepts, and methods for
analyzing human development in ways that integrate biological and social
processes. The conceptual and methodological
commitments of the fields differ quite markedly and continue to evolve;
2) The fields complicate
persistent contrasts in scientific and social thought: inborn and unchangeable versus environmental and changeable; and biological versus social.
The project aims to show how the fields challenge both sides in
longstanding debates about biological determinism;
3) The fields go beyond general
statements that traits arise from interactions of genes and environment and
beyond the general dictates of developmental systems theory. By comparing these fields' specific
attempts to address the complexities of environmental contributions to
development, this project aims to supplement discussion of the conceptual
problems of genetic determinism with more attention to the methodological and
other practical challenges of realizing alternative conceptual structures;
4) The fields provide suitable material for me to employ my
scientific background in statistics and quantitative methods and to further an
approach to STS research that uses close examination of conceptual and
methodological developments within a field to open up questions about the
interactions of scientists' concepts and methods with their work organization
and wider social relations.
I had a lot to learn about researchers methods,
concerns, and collaborative practices in this general area of social
epidemiology (i.e., the reconstruction of the biological and social factors
that build up over the life course of any persons development). During the last two years my research has
centered on reading, conducting interviews with selected researchers, and
attending seminars and courses as a visiting research fellow at Harvard
(2004-5). I am now preparing the
publications and web-based teaching material laid out in the grant proposal and
am planning the resulting book manuscript.
An offshoot of my research on reciprocal causation
models, however, has already led to a pair of papers (soon to be submitted to Biological
Theory by request of the editor)
and a grant proposal for further research. The two papers and the proposal examine
conceptual and methodological issues that have been overlooked or not well
appreciated in research and policy debates about genes and intelligence. Extremely briefly, I argue that there
is room to question—again in the critical thinking spirit of holding
alternatives in tension—any assumption that, when similar responses of
different genetic types are observed, similar conjunctions of genetic and
environmental factors have been involved in producing those responses. Even if the similarity among close
relatives in IQ test scores is associated with similarity of genetic factors,
these may not be the same factors from one set of relatives to the next. For this and other reasons, I argue
that the statistical quantity heritability has limited relevance in
investigation of genetic and environmental factors and no relevance in
explaining differences between means for different human groups or generations.
In future research and writing I plan to delve
further into the work of researchers who consider the heterogeneity of factors
operating at different levels—from the individual to the
community—and to examine ways that such research can go beyond the
conventional epidemiological emphasis on exposures impinging on subjects. How can quantitative researchers
accommodate the effects on health and behavior of people becoming resilient and
able to reorganize their lives and communities in response to social changes?—i.e.,
how can researchers adopt what I call an agent-oriented emphasis?
I.C
Contributions to New Interdisciplinary, International, and Educational Projects
Bringing critical analysis of science to bear on
the practice and application of science is not well developed or supported
institutionally, so I continue to initiate or participate in new collaborations,
programs, and other activities, new directions for existing programs, and
collegial interactions across disciplines. In this spirit I have contributed to four major grant
proposals since 2001 (three UMB; one non-UMB) that link science, education, and
professional development
and to seven interdisciplinary anthologies, many of which that evolved from
conference sessions or workshop series that I helped run. As I describe in section IV on
integration of research, teaching, and service, seed funds received last year
from NSF allowed me to initiate the New England Workshop on Science and Social
Change, an annual workshop with international participation that links science,
science education, and science and technology studies.
I.D
Research and Writing in relation to College of Education Indicators of
Excellence in scholarship
Indicators of Excellence in
scholarship
The category of scholarship is broadly construed to
include all original inquiry (both theoretical and empirical); systematic
analysis or critique of problems (both practical and theoretical) that result
in original writings or products; systematic program development work; and
creative activities (such as artistic production). In general, the category of
scholarship involves the question of through what scholarly and creative
efforts, the faculty member is adding to society's understanding of education
and counseling, and is strengthening capacities for identifying and resolving
issues in those fields. The assumption is that productive scholarly activities
in the College will take many forms and involve many disciplines or
combinations of disciplines. The measure of what is productive scholarship is
that it is judged to be creative, rigorous, and valuable after being publicly scrutinized
by professional peers.
The advancement of theory and practice in education,
counseling, school psychology, and related fields of the College calls for many
kinds of scholarship. Therefore,
various specialized forms of scholarship are likely to be found among
faculty. Each specialized form
requires somewhat different criteria for judging the significance and soundness
of the faculty member's work. In
many areas, scholarship is heavily empirical, analytic, and quantitative,
drawing from a variety of methodological traditions in the natural and
behavioral sciences. In other
areas, the approaches may be more qualitative, drawing upon naturalistic or
ethnographic approaches. In some
areas of education, counseling, and school psychology, faculty members
contribute through applied or decision-oriented inquiry as opposed to
conclusion-oriented inquiry. The
development and evaluation of policy is another important form of inquiry in
these fields.
Evidence of scholarly work in almost every field will
include written documents (articles, chapters, and books as well as evaluation
reports, grant proposals, etc.) or other products (computer software, videos,
etc.) that show:
deep theoretical
underpinnings relevant to the current state of the discipline and its related
fields;
rich conceptualization
of some aspect of the field's problems/issues/questions and of how particular
areas of inquiry or activity might be relevant to addressing them;
an approach to
scholarly inquiry/applied scholarly activity that is well justified, coherent,
and appropriate to the goals of such inquiry or activity;
analysis, synthesis,
model-building, or otherwise making sense of what is being learned from this
endeavor;
with
whatever has been learned, some sense of its implications and what real
difference it might make to the work that goes on in relevant settings.
It is recognized that certain types of scholarship
require more effort and are held to higher standards of public and peer
evaluation. Therefore, the College
Personnel Committee recommends that in major personnel decisions, different
weightings be considered. Listed
below are two categories, A and B, in which the A category requires more
stringent public scrutiny and, therefore, should receive more weight in
personnel reviews.
Scholarship activities include (but are not limited
to):
Category A [only publications
since 1998 listed; sole or senior author for all items, except two marked
*; items marked ** are those
selected for review]
a. Articles published in refereed journals
** "What can we do? -- Moving
debates over genetic determinism and interactionism in new directions," Science
as Culture, 13
(3): 331-355, 2004.
"Critical Reflections on the
Use of Remote Sensing and GIS Technologies in Human Ecological Research," Human
Ecology, 31
(2): 179-182, 2003 (with M. Turner*).
** "Situatedness and
Problematic Boundaries: Conceptualizing Life's Complex Ecological
Context," Biology & Philosophy, 16 (4):521-532, 2001. (with Y. Haila)
"The Philosophical dullness of
classical ecology, and a Levinsian alternative," Biology &
Philosophy, 16
(1), 93-102, 2001. (with Y. Haila*)
"Socio-ecological webs and
sites of sociality: Levins'
strategy of model building revisited," Biology & Philosophy, 15 (2), 197-210, 2000.
"How does the commons become
tragic? Simple models as complex
socio-political constructions" Science as Culture, 7 (4), 449-464, 1998.
** "Natural Selection: A heavy
hand in biological and social thought," Science as Culture, 7 (1), 5-32, 1998. Reprinted as "La seleccin
natural: Un lastre sobre el pensamiento biolgico y social," Ludus
Vitalis, 7
(12), 27-55, 2000.
b.
A
scholarly book that advances the knowledge base or synthesizes existing
knowledge
** Unruly Complexity: Ecology,
Interpretation, Engagement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
d. Chapters in books written by or for scholars or
practitioners
Conceptualizing the heterogeneity, embeddedness,
and ongoing restructuring that make ecological complexity unruly, in Handbook
of Ecological Concepts, ed. K. Jax and A. Schwarz. Dordrecht: Kluwer, in press.
** Exploring themes about social agency through
interpretation of diagrams of nature and society, in How Nature Speaks: The
Dynamics of the Human Ecological Condition. Ed. Y. Haila and C. Dyke.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press, in press.
** "'Whose
trees/interpretations are these?' Bridging the divide between subjects and
outsider-researchers," pp. 305-312 in R. Eglash, J. Croissant, G. DiChiro,
R. Fouch (eds.), Appropriating Technology: Vernacular Science and Social
Power. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 2004.
A reconstruo da complexidade
ecolgica sem regras: cincia, interpretao e prtica reflexiva crtica
[Reconstructing unruly ecological complexity: Science, interpretation, and
critical, reflective practice], pp. 529-551 in Conhecimento Prudente para
Uma Vida Decente: Um Discurso sobre as Cincias Revisitado [Prudent
Knowledge for a Decent Life: A Discourse on the Sciences Revisited], ed. B.
de Sousa Santos, Porto: Afrontamento 2003. Revised version to appear in Cognitive Justice in a
Global World: Prudent Knowledges for a Decent Life, ed. B. de Sousa Santos,
Madison: University of Madison Press, forthcoming.
"Gene-environment
complexities: What is interesting to measure and to model?" pp. 233-253 in
The Evolution of Population Biology: Modern Synthesis, ed. R. K. Singh
and M. Uyenoyama. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
** "Non-standard lessons from
the 'tragedy of the commons'," pp. 87-105 in M. Maniates (ed.) Encountering
Global Environmental Politics: Teaching, Learning, and Empowering Knowledge. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield,
2003.
** "Distributed agency within
intersecting ecological, social, and scientific processes," pp. 313-332 in
S. Oyama, P. Griffiths and R. Gray (Eds.), Cycles of Contingency:
Developmental Systems and Evolution.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.
"Philosophy of Ecology," Encyclopedia
of Life Sciences. London:
Macmillan, 2001. (with Y. Haila)
** "From natural selection to
natural construction to disciplining unruly complexity: The challenge of integrating ecology
into evolutionary theory," in R. Singh, K. Krimbas, D. Paul & J.
Beatty (eds.), Thinking About Evolution: Historical, Philosophical and
Political Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 377-393,
2000.
"What can agents do?: Engaging
with complexities of the post-Hardin commons," pp. 125-156 in L. Freese
(ed.), Advances in Human Ecology, Vol. 8. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press,
1999.
"Mapping complex social-natural
processes: Cases from Mexico and Africa," in F. Fischer and M. Hajer
(eds.) Living with Nature: Environmental Discourse as Cultural Critique,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 121-134, 1999.
g. Receipt of a major research and/or training grant (with high
impact on programs, students and the institution)
NSF Grant, Genes, Gestation, and
Life Experiences: A Critical Comparison of Concepts and Methods Used in
Analyses of Biosocial Development, $71,670
Category B
a. Presentation of a research or scholarly project at a
prominent international, national, or regional conference or gathering of
professionals
b. Presentation of a solicited or referred scholarly paper at a
prominent international, national, or regional conference or gathering of
professionals
See C.V., SELECTED PRESENTATIONS
(average of 9 presentations or workshops led per year since 2001)
c. Publication of a scholarly review of a book for a
professional journal or other major publication
See C.V., Reviews, commentaries,
and notes
g. Membership on an editorial board of a major professional
journal
Science as Culture
II. Teaching and Advising
My work as a teacher and advisor has continued to
exemplify the themes identified in previous reviews and in my practitioners
portfolios. In this section I highlight two areas
in which significant developments have occurred since 2001.
II.A Guiding Research
and Writing for Reflective Practice
Since 2001 I have been involved with 63 CCT students
developing and completing their M.A. syntheses
on a very wide range of topics (appendix A). Four features of my courses on research and writing have
come to fruition in meeting this challenge:
1. A
framework of ten phases of research and engagement that the students move through, then revisit in
light of: a) other people's responses to what they share with them; and b) what
they learn using tools from the other phases. This sequence and iteration allows students to define
projects in which they take their personal and professional aspirations
seriously, even if that means letting go of preconceptions of what they ought
to be doing. During the
pre-synthesis course, CCT698, the students are introduced to range of tools for
each phase, then practice using those tools in class and in assignments. A downloadable library of previous
students work illustrates the different ways these tools can be taken up.
2. A model of cycles and epicycles of action
research that integrates
evaluation, constituency building, reflection and dialogue, and can be applied
to professional and personal change as well as educational and organizational
change (Appendix B).
3. Dialogue
around written work—written
and spoken comments on each installment of a project and successive revision in
response—which
allows me to accumulate a portfolio for each student in each course
that facilitates generative interactions with students even when I am not an
expert in their areas. By
generative I mean students bring to the surface, form, and articulate their
ideas (as illustrated especially by syntheses marked ** in appendix A).
4. Making
space for taking initiative in and through relationships: in building horizontal peer relationships, in
negotiating power/standards, in acknowledging that affect is involved in what
you're doing and not doing (and in how others respond to that), in clearing
away distractions from other sources (present and past) so you can be here
now Don't expect to learn or
change—or to teach—without jostling among the five aspects.
These four features form the basis of the exit
self-assessment CCT instituted in which graduating students reflect on their
development through the Program and identify specific areas for further
work. The insight shown in most of
these self-analyses gives the CCT faculty confidence that the graduates can
continue learning without our superintending them.
II.B Creating
Problem-Based Learning Units and Other Innovations to Accommodate Students
Diverse Interests Within Interdisciplinary Courses
Following the lead of my
colleague, Nina Greenwald, an expert in Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
and building on my involvement in BioQuest curriculum development workshops,
I have introduced PBL or Action Research units in several courses, including
one course at a doctoral level. I position the units at the start of
the course, with the aim of allowing students to expose and coordinate a range
of angles for investigating an issue, practice tools for rapid research, and
gain a shared experience to refer back to during the discussions and activities
that make up the rest of the course.
On another tack, I was pleased with the students
response when I integrated the content of my scholarship with CCT-like
reflective practice in an advanced graduate seminar that I taught at the Yale
School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. The seminar theme was research, policy, and participation in
issues of Conservation and Development.
As well as critically reviewing literature on selected topics students
also learned new approaches for developing their own writing and supporting
others to write. I was able to
link these two strands under the theme of paying attention to the challenges
for individuals participating in collaborative endeavors.
II.C
Teaching and Advising in relation to College of Education Indicators of
Teaching Excellence and Advisement Contributions
1. Indicators of teaching excellence
a. consistently
high responses via student evaluations with an analysis of any weak evaluations
and steps taken to address any specific concerns
See official evaluations and some
personally designed course evaluations.
For example of steps taken to
address concerns, see syllabus for CCT698 revised in response to students
request for easier access to the material and requirements (compare the 2001
and 2002 syllabi).
b. evidence
from student evaluation comments and student letters that show impact of
teaching on student understanding and student development
See student comments on personally
designed course evaluations.
c. evidence
from course materials/syllabi substantiating: a rich conceptualization of the
field, how the relevant knowledge of the course relates to the
conceptualization of the field, and pedagogical design that gives students both
immediate and larger critical and evaluative understandings
For rich conceptualization, see
webpages and downloadable materials linked to syllabus webpages for individual
courses.
For innovation in pedagogical
design, see Problem-Based Learning (PBL) units developed for CrCrTh 611 [Fall
01], 645, PPol 749, PolSci 260 and Action Research units for CrCrTh693 (see
handouts linked to syllabus webpages for individual courses).
d. evidence
of course development to accomplish the above (c) within courses, and of new
course development that contributes to a richer conceptualization of the
program and includes expansion or deepening of course materials, activities,
and updated bibliographies
Part of undergraduate course,
Politics and the Environment (PolSci 260) & doctoral course, Science, Technology
& Public Policy (PPol 749/ CrCrTh 649).
Developed a new syllabus for CCT645
(previously taught as CCT611 in Spr 99).
Developed a syllabus for a new
course, Research & Writing for Reflective Practice, designed to bolster
students research and writing practices early in their program of study (not
yet offered).
e. evidence
of activities related to improving ones own teaching as well as modeling and
mentoring for others (such as participation in and/or leading teaching
improvement seminars or professional development activities)
Updated on-line Practitioner's
Portfolio, including Student comments on personally designed course
evaluations: http://www.faculty.umb.edu/pjt/portfolio05-TOC.html
Undertook Teacher-research survey
on students in the Practicum class functioning as a support & coaching
structure to get most students to finish their reports by the end of the
semester. The peer support was
very strong in 2003 and continued through the synthesis semester.
See II.B (above) re: Problem-based
learning units and Action Research unit in CCT693.
Participation in CIT Fall 03
faculty seminar on Teaching Globalization, which led to my leading a faculty
development workshop on Teaching Global Perspectives in the Sciences at Mt.
Mary College, Wisconsin during 2004.
Promoted and modeled educational
innovation as part of New England Workshop on Science and Social Change, 2004
& 2005.
See online publications on
Teaching/learning dynamics,
especially in regard to use of computers in education, e.g., Guidelines about
specific situations and specific ways in which specific technologies are of
significant pedagogical benefit
and associated presentations to UMB audiences (see C.V.)
f. consideration
of actual teaching loads, numbers of students taught, modality (seminar,
lecture, on-line course), extra efforts to meet teaching needs of program (e.g.
summer sessions, training, field experience)
For the three research and
engagement courses I taught (CCT693, 698, 694), the student numbers often
exceeded the course cap, which itself was set higher than comparable Teacher
Research courses until recently for CCT693 and 698. I served as the major or second advisor for many
syntheses even when I was not the instructor for the seminar.
See also independent studies,
summer course, and new courses listed in AFRs.
g. evidence
from personal statement of reflective practice in teaching and advising,
including a grounded understanding of what students need to learn within their
field and program, of personal teaching goals within that context, of the
efforts made to accomplish those goals, and of ones own learning from those
efforts
See sect. II.A, above
h. evidence
from personal statement, if appropriate, of ways in which teaching and advising
are integrated with, contributing to, or informed by ones scholarship and
service
See New England Workshop on Science
and Social Change (in sect. IV, below) and Inter-college faculty Seminar in
Humanities and Sciences (in sect. III, below) for research and service informed
by my CCT teaching.
i. additional
supporting documentation such as portfolios, web pages, examples of student
work, (with consent forms filled out by students); examples of mentoring and
peer coaching with colleagues, etc.
On-line Practitioner's Portfolio
See webpages for courses, which now
include as links weekly handouts and student reports
PDF compilation of tools used in
teaching
2. Indicators of advisement contributions:
a. Number
and type of advisees
Average of 27 current students at
any given time, as well as (until Fall 04) all prospective & incoming
students.
b. Quality
of advisement based on an evaluation of both advisor and advising
The online CCT handbook, which I designed and keep
up to date, is structured to allow most students to self-advise on
administrative matters, leaving the person-to-person interactions with advisors
free for substantive issues of shaping projects and designing the best program
of study.
c. Contributions
to dissertation, thesis, and final project committees with distinctions between
serving as chair or reader and with designations regarding this work in
relation to teaching load.
Of the 65 M.A. syntheses completed
since Fall 2001: 32 I was major advisor; 15 second advisor; 16 of the other 18
took their initial shape during the pre-synthesis, Practicum course, I taught.
See II.A, above
3. Evidence of serving as a model and
mentor to students, faculty, and colleagues:
A broad vision of critical thinking
and reflective practice concerning science in its social context has informed
an extensive series of workshops I have organized and faculty-development
workshop sessions I have led at UMB and elsewhere (Appendix C). As a particular example of mentoring,
from 2000-2002 I organized a Thinktank for Community-college teachers of
critical thinking, in which CCT graduates and associates explore[d] issues of interest to each of us in our quest to
promote effective thinking and problem solving in our professional lives and
communities and consider[ed] ways to share the results of our explorations
with wider audiences.
See also #e above.
III. Service and
Institutional Development
I view service in terms of institutional
development: a) to initiate and
sustain new projects concerning critical reflective practice in science and
science education (see sect. I.C); and b) to respond in existing programs to
the shifting resources, priorities, and other challenges we persistently face
in public education. In both
arenas, my efforts are characterized by:
planning that takes into account the often-limited and
uncertain state of resources, guides where we put our not-unlimited energies,
and seeks to make the result sustainable or cumulative;
community-building, not only for the sake of a sustainable product,
but so participants/ collaborators value their involvement in the process;
probing
what has been taken for granted
or left unarticulated until coherent principles emerge to guide our efforts;
transparency
and inclusiveness of consultation
in formulating procedures and principles and in making evaluations available;
documenting process, product, and evaluations to make
institutional learning more likely;
and
organization, including efficient use of computer technology,
to support all of the above.
III.A
Building a Basis for Interdisciplinary Science and Environmental Education
1.
Science, Technology & Values Program. When I became
assistant director of this zero-budget program in Fall 2002, I created a
program website that provides up to date information for students and, when
printed out, doubles as a flyer to advertise during registration periods the
upcoming course offerings. I helped initiate monthly discussion
meetings of interested faculty, and built on this in organizing a semester-long
thematic Inter-college faculty Seminar in Science and Humanities each spring, which started 2004. ISHS is a forum
for discussion and interaction among faculty at UMass-Boston. Faculty from different disciplines and
colleges come together to focus on topics of common interest, exchange ideas,
renew their intellectual energy, and advance their work in a spirit of
adventure and collaboration. As well as building community around
the STV program, ISHS is designed to bridge the Humanities/Sciences gap after
the separation of the College of Arts and Sciences into two colleges.
Since becoming STV director in January 2004, I
have articulated and pursued many other concrete steps
grouped under four overall goals:
build the students numbers in the
Program;
maintain a regular and rich set of
courses to fulfill STV requirements;
build a community of faculty and
students around the program; and
build external recognition for the
program.
2. Curriculum development for Education for
Sustainability. In fall 2002, Chancellor Gora and Dean
Kibel reactivated Education for Sustainability initiatives at UMB and appointed
me chair of the committee to Infuse Sustainability into the Curriculum,
assisted by Steve Rudnick of Environmental Studies. The committee developed a vision of sustainability that
integrated an environmentally sustainable (green) economy, with just and equitable governance, and
an engaged populace. The corresponding teaching mission
was that curricula should seek to develop students' ability to:
appreciate and monitor the state of the
environment, social structure, human health —to become
"environmentally literate";
understand and analyze the complexities of
phenomena that link economics, politics, culture, history, biology, geology,
and physical processes;
be involved in dynamic, vigorous exchange across
the traditional disciplinary boundaries within and between natural and
social/human sciences; and
work within specific communities to facilitate
self-conscious, reflective engagement with linked socio-environmental
processes.
The
plans of this committee
progressed as far as hosting a pair of faculty curriculum development workshops
in the spring, from which some new curriculum units or courses arose. Since these workshops, however, we have
not sustained our efforts; my judgement was that we needed to pause until the
reorganization of the Environmental Science and Studies units was completed and
until what has become called the Center for Environmental Health, Science, and
Technology had taken shape. While
this was happening, the administrators who had sponsored the Education for
Sustainability initiative left the University and I was made director of
STV. Steve Rudnick has taken over
primary responsibility for any further work of this committee.
3.
The International
Society for History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Biology (ISHPSSB) has been the most
significant venue for my work outside my formal appointments. In its biennial
summer meetings the ISHPSSB brings together scholars from diverse disciplines,
including the life sciences and history, philosophy and social studies of
science. I served on the Executive
from 1993-99 and as President I established committees and procedures, a
graduate student prize, a Presidential plenary, and other traditions that have
continued under the subsequent administrations. My earlier contributions on the program committee (1987-89)
and as program organizer (1989-91) were equally significant. It was during this period that the
society was being formalized, and I worked hard to ensure that institutionalization
did not undermine the tradition of innovative, cross- disciplinary sessions and
discussions. Although I
established an Education Committee in 1997 and served on it until this year,
and although I continue to organize sessions at ISHPSSB meetings, my ISHPSSB-style efforts have
shifted more to the smaller and more focused New England Workshop on Science
and Social Change,
which I leave until sect. IV to describe.
III.B Ensuring a Viable CCT Program without another Full-time CCT faculty
Member
Since
the Graduate College of Education became the home college for the inter-college
CCT Program in 1996-7, the core priorities of the College have taken precedence
and resources of all kinds for CCT have progressively declined. Nevertheless, students continued to be
admitted—in record numbers for the years 2001-3—and it fell to me,
as the sole regular faculty member since 1999 dedicated to CCT, to ensure that
the Colleges responsibilities to serve the matriculated students were
fulfilled. I have no hesitation in
calling this yeomans service to the College, especially after January 2001
when program directors in GCOE lost their formal status and course release. My annual faculty reviews describe the
many routine administrative and advising duties performed as a program
director/coordinator,
but I undertook concrete steps directed at additional, program-sustaining
goals, namely, to:
i) streamline the administration of the Program so it could run
without Administrative assistance;
ii)
arrange community events and orientations as ways students could get more
support and input from each other and from alums; and
iii)
address problems around moving students through to completion and reinforce
guidelines to prevent those problems in the future.
At
the same time, the program needed to maintain its higher enrollments, so I
continued to work on
iv)
outreach for recruitment;
v)
clarifying and strengthening CCT's role in the GCOE [see III.D below].
These efforts took place in line with a set of
specific Objectives under six broad Goals (see below) laid out in the AQUAD
(Academic QUality Assessment and Development) plan for CCT, which I submitted
in June 2000. These goals were:
A. To
provide graduate students with an understanding of the processes of critical
thinking and creativity, and with ways of helping others develop these
processes in a variety of educational, professional, and social situations.
B. To
establish planning parameters that allow CCT faculty to determine the best use
of their experience and energies and [added since 6/00] adjust operations to
work within those parameters.
C. To
contribute to increased cross-program collaboration in the GCOE.
D. To
contribute to increased collaboration with and contributions to other units
within the University.
F. To
support CCT faculty and students in research on and publication of their
distinctive contributions to the fields of critical and creative thinking.
G. To
evaluate and continue developing the Program.
The goals and associated objectives became the
basis for the Programs self-study as part of the 2002-3 seven-year AQUAD
review of CCT described in the next section.
III.C
Clarifying and Strengthening CCT's Status in GCOE and UMB
The 2002-3 AQUAD review was seen as an
opportunity to resolve the long-standing uncertainties about CCTs status in
the College and University. The
self-study I coordinated was, by all accounts, exemplary. The external review was very favorable,
recommending "that a relatively
small amount of resources be invested in this program to ensure that UMB can
continue to provide the leadership in innovative multi- and inter-disciplinary
pedagogy represented by this Program." Restoration of resources for CCT did not, however,
match the priorities of the College or the Provost, so a moratorium was placed
on admissions and the existing students were to be moved speedily through to
graduation.
For a short time this settled the
status of CCT, but then incoming GCOE Dean Goodchild wished to preserve the
Program as part of a possible new interdisciplinary Center focused on
psychology and education. In fall
2003, I formulated post-AQUAD proposals for: 1) a smaller admissions cohort
that could be served without additional resources;
2) for a Center for Science, Education and Society that incorporated existing CCT
and STV initiatives and strengths;
3) for incorporation of appropriate CCT courses as substitutes for required
courses in the Teacher Education programs that had been redesigned to meet
State Department of Ed. requirements;
and 4) a certificate partnership with the Division of Continuing Education to
preserve a program identity and a basis for courses needed by Teacher Education
students even if the M.A. admissions moratorium continued (see sect.
III.D). In short, I continued to
take initiative and respond constructively to possibilities floated by
administrators in the context of continuing uncertainty about the institutional
status of and resources for CCT.
An interdisciplinary center
incorporating CCT has not yet emerged, but the GCOE Dean managed to secure an
end to the admissions moratorium with the appointment of Nina Greenwald on a
full-time basis for 04-05 and now 05-06. I continue to seek a secure planning frame in which to
recruit M.A. students and offer courses.
While Nina has taken the lead in program outreach and admissions
recruitment, I am concentrating on providing guidance and backup to maintain
the core advising and administrative functions and on making the Certificate
partnership a success (see sect. III.D, to follow).
III.D
Developing CCT in New Directions
The AQUAD self-study evaluated a number of options
for the Programs institutional role and location, but these were eclipsed
first by the decision to put admissions on hold, then by the new GCOE Deans
vision of a future interdisciplinary Center linked to Psychology and
Education. I have, however,
shepherded into being one of the post-AQUAD proposals (see sect. III.C),
namely, the partnership with the Division of
Continuing Education (CCDE) to promote the existing 15-credit CCT graduate
certificate with a marketing focus on Creative Thinking at Work. (This focus subsumes the popular
Dialogue and Collaboration in Organizational Change focus I had built up
since Summer 2000.) The partnership agreement requires CCT
to develop several online sections so that students could, in theory, complete
the certificate from a distance. I
have recruited the faculty for these sections, which will all be up and running
by Fall 2006. The next step is to improve the
publicity so that not only do the sections fill, but also new students join CCT
after experiencing one of the Creative Thinking at Work courses. A key plank in the publicity strategy
is to build a network of CCT graduates who take initiative in making
CCT-related presentations in their workplace or community.
Separately from the publicity network,
I have initiated the organization of a Reflective Practice Support Group to
support CCT graduates in putting into practice, taking stock of outcomes, and
extending what they learned during CCT studies and afterwards. This group would meet a long-expressed
need of CCT graduates for a community to support their steps after they
graduate. Arranging such support
matches the emerging emphasis in education programs on mentoring and support of
recent graduates. On a personal
level, I would value the opportunity to experiment in such a supportive setting
with new approaches for individual reflection and group interaction. The organizing committee plans to
convene the group this fall.
III.E Leadership in Regular
Service
During my years in the GCOE, faculty members have
had to respond to a high turnover of administrators and staff, to early
retirement schemes that increased service expectations on those remaining, and
to Accreditation reviews and regulation changes from the Department of
Education that entail extensive revisions and documentation of procedures,
practices, and syllabi. These
challenges set a premium on organization when undertaking the service on
College committees; efficient organization has been characteristic of my
contributions on search committees and personnel reviews and as chair of the
GCOE Academic Affairs and Curriculum Committee (2000-2 and 2005-)
and College Personnel Committee (CPC) in 2003.
My work chairing the CPC—my most difficult
College assignment—can be characterized also by principles mentioned
earlier—probing what had been left unarticulated; transparency and
inclusiveness; and documentation for institutional learning—as well as by
the principle of taking care for colleagues reputations when disputes arise,
especially colleagues coming up for or currently under review. At the time three faculty members were
to be reviewed for promotion to full professor (two of them CPC members) and
past practice for participation in such CPC-level reviews had not been
consistent or codified. The
eventual outcome was the Senate reconstituted the CPC mid-year so that only
full professors served on the reviews of candidates for promotion to full
professor. This move did not
reflect my advice to the Senate chair and was not smooth in its implementation
so the affair seems to have eclipsed my work in the months I was CPC
chair. With the wish that the
quality of that leadership not be discounted, let me draw attention to: a) the
attachments to my 2003-4 Annual Faculty review, which document the careful
consultation I undertook; and b) the draft of principles regarding
participation in reviews that I derived from such consultation, which could
still help regularize CPC reviews (Appendix D).
III.F Service and Institutional Development
in relation to College of Education Indicators of Excellence in service
Most of the items under this
category are well covered by the sections above (and are illustrated by
documentation on the websites listed in the accompanying footnotes), but
section IV.A of Annual Faculty Reviews and the few footnotes below should be
consulted for additional detail.
Indicators of
Excellence in service
Service activities are evaluated
primarily along two dimensions:
the level of
professional competence or expertise required for its performance;
the effectiveness of
the service, which includes the scope and significance of the service to the
welfare of the college, the profession, and/or the community, as well as its
impact on the development of the institution.
Contributions relative to service
are expected:
to
be balanced between activities that can be classified as internal and external
to the College
to
show coherence
if
in an administrative role, to show how attention to program/department/college
and student or community needs and concerns have shaped the administrative
unit's policies, practices, and procedures
Service may include:
a. administration at any level
b. service on department, college, or university committees
with distinctions between one's role as chair or member
c. service to student organizations
d. service to any public or private counseling or educational
institution
e. consultation or service to government or other public
interest groups
f. service to professional organizations
g. direct community organizing and development
h. presentations to schools, organizations and institutions
that enhance the profession
i. consultations within the institutions
j. developing and implementing partnerships with schools,
school districts and agencies.
Evidence of serving as a model
and mentor to students, faculty, and colleagues
IV. Integration of Research, Teaching, and Service
Coherence of scholarship and integration
with teaching and service
Coherence is a key dimension of presenting and
understanding a faculty member's scholarly work -- How does the candidate see
coherent threads of meaning and impact in his or her scholarship and how does
she or he reflect on her or his contribution to important issues and the
current state of knowledge in his or her field(s)? How does she or he, if appropriate, integrate her or his
scholarship with teaching and service?
My book, Unruly Complexity: Ecology, Interpretation,
Engagement, develops a framework for the
integration of research—in science and interpretation of science in its
social context —with
teaching and service—in the form of critical reflection on concepts and
practice by researchers and students. Indeed, the framework is made clear in
the last chapter, which builds explicitly from an approach to teaching
interdisciplinary students. The
opportunity and challenge of fostering the reflective practice of the diverse
adults who come through the CCT Program has given me sufficient experience and
confidence to push further in putting that framework into practice with diverse researchers. This integration of research, teaching,
and service has led, in particular, to my establishing the New England
Workshop on Science and Social Change (NewSSC), an umbrella under
which to organize
innovative,
interaction-intensive workshops designed to facilitate discussion, teaching
innovation, and longer-term collaboration among faculty and graduate students
who teach and write about interactions between scientific developments and
social change.
The
prospectus of NewSSC, which is evolving in response to evaluations and reviews
of funding proposals, provides the following overview:
Participants will be sought from the various areas of Science
and Technology Studies, the sciences, and science education and—with an
eye to training "interdisciplinarians"—will include graduate
students as well as more experienced scholars.
Participants will be expected to submit new syllabi and curriculum
units (primarily for college-level courses) or outreach activities (e.g.,
hosting a citizen forum on a science-based controversy) related to their
workshop's topic within six months of its completion. These will be made available as in an expanding compilation
of Online Resources for Science-in-Society Education and Outreach.
Formative (during the process) and summative (after the fact)
evaluations of the workshops will provide a basis for developing the workshop
experience from one year to the next and for establishing a model of workshops
that can be repeated, evolve in response to evaluations, and be adapted by
participants.
The first workshops in Spring 2004 and 2005 addressed topics
in line with my new research (see sect. I.B): " Complexities of
environment and development in the Age of DNA and How complexities of the
social environment shape the ways that society makes use of knowledge about
'genetic' conditions."
Detailed evaluations of both workshops (available online)
convey the process and outcomes of the workshops, but let me share my favorite
comments from participants in 2004:
An advisory group has formed to help plan and secure funding
for proposed workshops for Spring 2006 and 2007 in the area of Ecological
Research and the Complexities of Participation in Social and Environmental
Change. I have also included a
Fall 2006 workshop as part of an NSF proposal for research on issues about
heterogeneity and biological determinism (see sect. I.B). Let us now see whether NSF reviewers
support such integration of research, teaching, and institutional development!
Appendix A. CCT Syntheses
completed since Fall 2001
(Items marked **
included in the packet for internal reviewers)
Peter Taylor as major advisor [35]
Joelle Barton Nims tales of gen x nothing: A synthesis of
theory and practice
Shelly Billingsley Evaluating Different Forms of
E-Learning
Andrea Brenner Collaborative
Insight: Fostering Communication Between Designers and Their Clients
Jeffrey Bretsch Have Your
and Eat it Too! Using a course
website to facilitate student-centered learning and improve the effectiveness
of the high school mathematics experience
Kathleen Bullock Teaching
Economics In United States History:
One Teacher Shares Some Lessons
**Susan Butler A Tellers
Tale: Joining The Circle -- A Discussion of Process in The Writing of a Novel
for Young Adults
Michael Cartledge Three Workshops For Teachers of
Math in The Intermediate Grades; Communication, Content, and Kinetic Activities
**Suzanne Clark Building and Sustaining
Connectedness to Ones Musical Creativity and Spirit
James E. Clements Capturing the Dance: Producing the
Live Dance Performance of '128' For Video
**Nicholas Conlin From Teaching to Writing: The Creation
of a Reader Intended to Support a Focus on Communication and the Cognitive
Needs of the Learner in Spanish Classrooms
**Paul Dobbs How
Would Artists Design CBIR?
Facilitating Collaboration to Develop Content-Based Image Retrieval on
an Art-School Campus
John Duff Reorienting
College Student Affairs Activities to Emphasize Student Learning Through
Experiential Approaches
Dory Fish Finding
Meaning Through Writing: A Personal Journey Into Writing Development Through
Writing Workshops, Personal Experimentation, and Finding The Balance to Create
Ideal Writing Environments and Communities With Elementary School Students
Mary Frangie My
CCT Guidebook: Keeping The Critical and Creative Thinking Momentum Alive
Jeanne Hammond Facilitating a
Learning Work Environment Through Teamwork Strategies: One Nurse Managers
Journey
Barbara A. Huscher The Process Of Creating An Information Public
Presentation: A Speech On Comprehensive Sexuality Education
Jane Kenefick The
Use of Dialogue in Education: Research, Implementation and
Personal/Professional Evaluation
John Lewis Learning,
Teaching and Brain Research: Insights From Current Research That May Affirm
Teaching and Learning Strategies
Robert Lingley Bureaucracy:
An Original Creative Project
Mary Moniz Tools
For The Architect of Whole School Change: A Handbook of Information and
Strategies
**Melissa Moynihan Developing My Knowledge and Experiential Understanding Towards
a Creative Contribution to Work & Family / Life Balance
Tamami Nakashima A Plan for a Community Education Center in
Japan
Benjamin Okafor Personal Experience
and Professional Development Through Critical and Creative Thinking
Laura Rancatore A Commitment
For Change
Michael Ruf New
representations of Afro-Americans in films: an analysis of 'Do the right thing'
and 'Eve's Bayou' following the framework of Stuart Hall
Kristen Rushworth Narrative Inquiry: Conversations That
Reinforce My Commitment To Inquiry Based Learning
Maryann Scheufele My favorite pastime becomes a career
possibility (Reading and story telling for children)
Scott Seiler A
case for implementing an electronic document managament system (EDMS)
Danielle Shylit The
Colorsong Prophecy: Using
Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences to Develop Hero Archetypes for a
Young Adult Fictional Fantasy Series Aimed at Promoting a Mythology of
Nonviolence
Davis Sweet Teaching
Critical Thinking as a Late-Life Career Change
Kathleen Walsh Embracing
Systems Thinking and the Dialogue Process Within My Classroom
Brooke Wentzel Acknowledging
Alternate Realities by Being Responsible for Our Own
**Luanne Witkowski Basic Training: Inspiring Institutional Change in Higher
Education in the Fine and Professional Arts Through Wholistic Practice and
Sustainability Education
**Roanna Yangco Creating Inner and Outer
Sacred Space: An Adult Learner Programs Wholistic Approach to Supporting
Low-Income Women Who Have Been Impacted by Violence
Srijula Yongstar From "Listening
Together" to "Thinking Together": The Use of Thai Radio to Promote Creative Thinking
PT as reader/second
advisor [12]
Robert Blackler Using
Students Own Ideas to Change How They Understand Energy: A Teachers Evolution
Towards Conceptual Change Teaching
Pin-Yu Chen Cognitive
Science Models And Analogies To Support Music Education That Incorporates
Multiple Tonal Systems
Senait Fesseha And
There Was Light. On Becoming a Writer: A Reflective Journey
ElizaBeth Garcia Developing
Intrapersonal Synergy though Dialogue and Expressive Writing: Implications for
Education and Living
Kristen Hanks Creating
a Life of Art: a Personal Journey Towards Creative Freedom
Matthew Jans Dynamic
Systems Theory and Human Development: A Cognitive Journey Through Intellectual
State Space
Linda Jeffrey Hands-on:
Lessons for ESL adults
**Kyle Lindholm Doodles to Drawings: The
Creative Process of Drawing & Thinking for Cartooning
Meghann McNiff Critical and
Creative Thinking Reflections of an Adventure in Career Changing
Michelle K. Morgan Personal Evolution: Reflections on a Journey
to Self-Understanding
Nancy Sheehan Helping
Middle School-Age Girls Understand the Value Of Participating in Physical
Education Programs Through Critical and Creative Thinking
Barbara Wickwire Finding Voice: Turning Fragments Into Stories --
Teaching Memoir to Enhance the Journey of the Non-Confident Student
Note: All but 2 of the other 18 syntheses completed
since Fall 2001 took their initial shape during the pre-synthesis, Practicum
course, taught by PT.
on EFFECTS of ACTION
IMPLEMENTATION
of ACTION
DESIGN
of ACTION