As the education department prepares for the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) visit to UMBC, its chair, Mary Rivkin, reflects on the fact that "It takes a university to create a teacher. The department is not alone in this mission, because there is a commitment across campus to sharing the vision of making good teachers and that it's about making a difference in the world and developing people?both the teachers and the students.?

Teams from NCATE and the Maryland State Department of Education will be on campus November 13 through 17 to talk with administration, faculty and students, as well as with alumni and the faculty from the education department's Professional Development Schools (PDS). At the end of the visit, chairs of the NCATE teams will give a brief oral report on UMBC's strengths and weaknesses in teacher training and follow up with a written report by March.

Rivkin, who has been at UMBC since 1987, has seen the standards for teacher training become more intense?especially in the wake of the No Child Left Behind Act?but says the University has always been supportive and involved. "Our students don't major in education; they have the unique opportunity to combine an academic major in their subject area of interest with our teacher training, so UMBC as a whole is responsible for teacher education,? Rivkin explains. "Our academic departments supply a strong background?I think we are lucky that it works in this way because it makes our future teachers knowledgeable about the subjects they teach. We cherish our contacts with other departments and rely on them a great deal.?

UMBC's commitment to high admission standards and diversity, as well as its reputation as one of the country's technology leaders, help to support the education department's mission: to research teaching and learning, and to develop caring, thoughtful, knowledgeable and skilled teachers who are responsive to children, families and the community. The department expects graduates to be leaders in their schools as well as advocates for democracy and social justice.

All UMBC departments collaborate with the education department to foster and assess the vision set forth in UMBC's Teacher Education Conceptual Framework. Faculty and administrators from the arts and sciences work with the education department to develop and assess course sequences for majors in the various disciplines and help create and review advising materials. They help prepare and review Specialty Professional Association reports and work together to make necessary changes to curriculum recommended by SPA groups. The arts and sciences faculty serve as advisors to students completing academic majors and monitor their progress on a regular basis.

In addition to this collaborative approach on campus, UMBC's education department has built a successful PDS program in neighboring school districts. The goal is to create learning communities that incorporate both professional development for teachers and student achievement. UMBC teacher candidates who intern at these schools are supported by the PDS teachers as well as UMBC faculty who are also actively involved at the schools.

Another example of UMBC's achievement in teacher training is the recent Maryland Teacher of the Year honor awarded to Bradford Engel, a UMBC alumnus who was selected for his achievements in leadership in Queen Anne's County Schools. Two other UMBC alumni were also in the running for "Teachers of the Year? in Baltimore and Howard Counties. (Robert Rivkin, a part-time ancient studies faculty member, received the first Maryland Teacher of the Year award in 1975-76.)

Currently, Mary Rivkin is meeting with administrators, chairs and faculty about the upcoming visit. For more information on the visit and how you can play an important role, e-mail rivkin@umbc.edu.

By Jack Prostko, Director, Faculty Development Center

Having run many evaluations in classes at UMBC, in courses from physics to political science, information systems to art, I have met and talked with a wide range of students. These classes have also run the gamut from small freshmen courses to large introductory courses to senior and graduate seminars. One student concern (sometimes more of a complaint) that is raised often enough to be troubling is the desire to have a clearer sense of what the next exam will be like. This concern produces requests for study guides, more review sessions, and a clear answer to the perennial question: "Will this be on the exam??

I call this a concern because there are several ways of looking at this issue. On the one hand, it's possible that many of the students requesting this clarity are simply asking professors to do more of the work so that students can spend less time studying (and still do well). And of course there is a certain amount of truth to this view. Students in recent years are indeed spending much less time outside of class for every hour in class--one researcher reports that students spend only 0.3 to 1.0 hours for every hour in class (Gardiner, 1997). Below, I'll suggest some solutions for addressing this problem.

But another view of the situation is that though many students are motivated to do well, they're not sure what they're supposed to be doing well at. What does it mean when the professor tells students that they are supposed to "know? the material? What are we asking them to do, especially in terms of developing their conceptual skills? Are we asking them to concentrate on specific thinking skills, and do we teach our students in ways that identify and measure these skills for them?

Part of the problem lies in the way we structure courses, focusing primarily on the content and less carefully and consciously on the thinking skills we are trying to nurture. A simple but useful way of examining our demands on students is to consider Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Bloom breaks down thinking skills into six levels of increasing difficulty: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. If you are unfamiliar with these levels, you may want to check out a fuller explanation including resource links, and an interesting discussion of how these levels apply to developing multiple choice exams.

If we want to create critical thinkers, we have to understand the level of thinking that we are attempting to develop and also the strategies students will need to learn in order to reach those levels. Because a course may focus so much on content, students may not feel compelled (or able) to move beyond memorization, a skill that may have served them well in the past but is far below the level you wish them to achieve. And if we keep adding more difficult content as the course develops but do not provide ways for students to examine their skills and improve on them, many will simply flounder. Students need to be taught how to begin to think like a professional in your discipline--and taught in stages throughout the semester because they will not develop these skills quickly or easily.

There are some simple ways of having students focus more on skills. Model the thinking behavior you wish them to emulate--don't just produce information. This means illustrating the thinking process--where things go right and wrong--rather than just illustrating results or correct procedures. And consider basing much of what you do on raising questions, not producing simply producing answers. On the Critical Thinking Consortium Web site, an article on "The Role of Questions in Thinking, Teaching, and Learning? addresses this issue in detail, noting that

thinking is not driven by answers but by questions. . . . Questions define tasks, express problems and delineate issues. Answers on the other hand, often signal a full stop in thought. Only when an answer generates a further question does thought continue its life as such. This is why it is true that only students who have questions are really thinking and learning. It is possible to give students an examination on any subject by just asking them to list all of the questions that they have about a subject, including all questions generated by their first list of questions. That we do not test students by asking them to list questions and explain their significance is again evidence of the privileged status we give to answers isolated from questions. That is, we ask questions only to get thought-stopping answers, not to generate further questions.

If we can give students assignments that ask them to generate questions, and work their way through to answers--and then provide feedback on their thought processes--we will begin to address areas of critical thinking. Weekly assignments can be the basis for reflection on, for example, whether a student's analytic skills produced the right approach to a problem or a text. And these assignments need to build, over the course of the semester, in complexity. They can be done individually or in groups, and they need not be graded.

Now it's time to return to the question I raised above about how we get students to do more outside of class, because the following example from Gibbs (1999-2000) not only helps with this issue, but also directly addresses what I have just been discussing. Gibbs describes ways of improving learning through making students do more outside of class--without changing the way a course has been taught.

Forbes and Spence describe a failing engineering class in which student performance was transformed by simply requiring students to submit problem sheets for peer assessment on six occasions during the course, while all lectures and tests remained the same.* The improvement resulted from:

• the requirement for students to submit work, even though it was not graded, which made sure that they actually did it;
• the social pressure produced by students' work being seen and comment uponby others, which made sure that they did it well;
• the internalization of standards resulting from assessing others' work so that they could judge and improve their own work;
• and learning from seeing others' mistakes and imaginative solutions to the same problems they themselves had tackled.

We can make students do more outside of class, and they will respond if the assignments we require aren't just busy work And this kind of skill building work outside of class will create opportunities that are necessary for students to begin to think about our content in appropriate ways--and therefore not to worry so much about what to memorize for an exam.

* Forbes, D., & Spence, J. (1991). An experiment in assessment for a large class. In R. Smith (Ed.), Innovations in Engineering Education. London: Ellis Horwood.

Web Resources

www.criticalthinking.org/
Critical Thinking Consortium offers rich list of resources of university teaching.

www.wolcottlynch.com/WolcottLynch Associates: Creating steps for better thinkers. Good list of educator resources and conference handouts.

bokcenter.harvard.edu/docs/TFTlectures.html
Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, Harvard University: Online Document: "Twenty Ways to Make Lectures More Participatory."

Written resources available at the FDC

Bean, J. (2001). Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fink, D. (1990-2000). "Higher Level Learning: A Taxonomy for Identifying Different Kinds of Significant Learning.? In Teaching Excellence: Toward the Best in the Academy, Vol 11. No.2.

Gardiner, L.F. (1997). Redesigning Higher Education: Producing Dramatic Gains in Student Learning. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports, 23, (7). Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.

Gibbs, G. (1999-2000). "Changing Student Learning Behavior Outside of Class.? In Teaching Excellence: Toward the Best in the Academy. Vol 11, No. 1.

Halonen, J. & Brown-Anderson, F. (2002). "Teaching Thinking,? In McKeachie, W. Teaching Tips, 11th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, pp. 284-290.

Lee, V. (ed.) (2004). Teaching and Learning Through Inquiry: A Guidebook for Institutions and Instructors. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Weiss, C. (1992-93). "But How Do We Get Them To Think?? In Teaching Excellence: Toward the Best in the Academy, Vol. 4 No. 5.

Take a moment to recall your departure for college. As an 18-year-old, there were so many uncertainties racing through your head: Is this school right for me? Will I survive without mom and dad around? Can I make new friends? The list is endless and it's not only the student who departs with consternation, but parents and families feel the anxiety as well.

Now put yourself in the shoes--or soccer cleats--of Matt Watson. A native of Redditch, England, he was recruited by many schools for his outstanding ability on the soccer field. There are always numerous hurdles to negotiate as an international student coming to the United States, but Watson's were made more difficult because of the last-minute nature of his decision to attend UMBC.

His parents were determined and confident that things would work out. And did they ever: Matt was just named America East Conference Rookie of the Year, Midfielder of the Year and a First Team All Conference member.

"I was really happy, I couldn't believe it really,? said Watson. "I think at the moment I found out, I thought about my parents because they went through so much to get me here. They were really proud of me.?

Watson scored four goals and added nine assists to finish third on the team with 17 points. His assist total was remarkable--the nine "helpers? in 17 games is currently the fifth-best figure in the nation and set a UMBC freshman record for assists in a season. He earned one America East Conference Rookie of the Week (October 18) honor, and scored game-winning goals in league wins over Maine and Hartford.

"I was pleased with my play, but there is room for improvement,? said Watson. "Away from home, I did not play as well, and we didn't play as well as a team. But for my first season, I thought it was a good start.?

Watson doesn't think there are huge differences between English "football? and American intercollegiate soccer. He thinks the officiating is somewhat different, as more free kicks are awarded on this side of the Atlantic.

"I like it here a lot. The campus is great-?The Commons is amazing and places around Maryland, like the Inner Harbor, are nice as well,? said Watson.

It probably didn't hurt that countrymen Marcus Gross and Matt McGowan were already at UMBC and experiencing a great deal of success on the field and in the UMBC community. According to Watson, it has been a real team effort.

"Everyone on the team gets along well,? said Watson. "I really didn't know what it would be like, but everyone has been really friendly and helpful. If it wasn't for them, I wouldn't have had a good as time as I've had?it has been easy to make friends.?

UMBC's Center for Art and Visual Culture presents The HOME House Project, an innovative multi-year initiative organized by the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art (SECCA), Winston-Salem, North Carolina, on view now through November 27, 2004. The exhibition will be enhanced by public programs and a K-through 12 educational outreach program at area schools.

About the Exhibition

Through a competition and subsequent exhibition addressing the future of affordable housing, SECCA challenged artists and architects to propose new designs for affordable and sustainable single-family housing for low and moderate income-families. These designs were guided by the existing building criteria and price parameters for typical three and four bedroom Habitat for Humanity houses, supplied by Habitat International in Americus, Georgia. Competition participants were required to use the Habitat information as a point of departure.

The design criteria also focused on green and sustainable materials, technologies and methods. Response was overwhelming, with house designs from more than 442 individuals and firms from the United States, Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, Canada, Russia and England.

The jury consisted of three nationally-known figures who share the multiple designations of critic, architect, educator, author, designer and builder: Michael Sorkin (New York), Ben Nicholson (Chicago) and Steve Badanes (Seattle).

The 100 works represented in this exhibition are the award winners plus other selections from the initial group. Presented as framed two dimensional works or in virtual format, they offer a range of design solutions?from the adventurous and visionary to the traditional and everything in between.

The HOME House Project was made possible by grants received from the North Carolina Arts Council, an agency funded by the State of North Carolina and the National Endowment for the Arts; the Elizabeth Firestone Graham Foundation; and an anonymous gift. The HOME House Project Design Awards were made possible by a generous gift from Bank of America. For its exhibition at UMBC, funding for The HOME House Project is provided by the Neighborhood Design Center, AIABaltimore, the Enterprise Foundation, the Baltimore County Commission on Arts and Sciences, and the Maryland State Arts Council, an agency funded by the State of Maryland and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Public Programs

The HOME House Project exhibition will be enhanced by public programming, including a lecture, a panel discussion, a symposium, a film series, a solar home tour and co-sponsorship of Baltimore Architecture Week:

October 9?16
The Center for Art and Visual Culture partners with American Institute of Architects Baltimore Chapter, the Neighborhood Design Center, the Baltimore Architecture Foundation, and Baltimore Heritage, Inc. to sponsor the first annual Baltimore Architecture Week, a week of lectures related to architecture and planning in the Baltimore/Washington areas. Support for this program has been provided by media sponsors WYPR and urbanite and host sponsor Century Engineering.

For more information, call AIA Baltimore at 410-625-2585

October 11
The Center for Art and Visual Culture and the Neighborhood Design Center present Michael Pyatok, who is considered the leading designer of low-income housing in the United States.

Pyatok's lecture, "Affordable Housing in the US: Who is Responsible for Good Design?? will review the role of twelve different players who contribute to the circumstances that can improve the chances for quality design (from elected officials to residents, and ten other participants in between, one being the architect).

Pyatok is a professor of architecture at the University of Washington, is principal of Pyatok Architects, Inc., and is part-time tenured professor and Director of the Center for Affordable Housing and the Family at Arizona State University. A practicing architect for some 30 years, Pyatok is known both for his innovative design work and for his efforts to assist in the creation of the community groups that design and build low-income housing projects.

6?8 p.m., Albin O. Kuhn Library Gallery.
$10 general admission (payable by cash or check), free for UMBC students with an ID and free for members of the Neighborhood Design Center.

October 14
As part of the HOME House Project Film Series, the Center for Art and Visual Culture and The Commons present The Rural Studio, directed and produced by Chuck Schultz. Fine architecture is usually reserved for wealthy patrons or grand civic spaces. But in 1993, MacArthur Fellow and Auburn University Professor Samuel Mockbee set out to change that. He and Professor D.K. Ruth founded The Rural Studio, which guides students in the design and construction of homes and community spaces in economically depressed Hale County, Alabama.

6 p.m., the Sports Zone at The Commons

October 28
In partnership with the Neighborhood Design Center and the UMBC Department of Geography and Environmental Systems, the Center for Art and Visual Culture presents "Community Building by Design: Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization," a panel discussion on affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization in the Baltimore-Washington area.

Panel Moderator: Ralph D. Bennett, Jr., School of Architecture, University of Maryland College Park
Panelists:
? David Brown, Senior Curator, Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art, Winston Salem, North Carolina
? Jelili Ogundele, Director of the Harlem Park Revitalization Corporation
? Stephanie Prange Proestel, Housing Initiative Partnership
? Dr. John Rennie Short, Professor and Chair, Department of Geography and Environmental Systems, UMBC
? Thomas J. Vicino, doctoral student, UMBC Department of Public Policy, Center for Urban Environmental Research and Education

6?7:30 p.m., Fine Arts Building Room 306

November 4
As part of the HOME House Project Film Series, the Center for Art and Visual Culture and The Commons present Blue Vinyl, which searches for the environmental truth about vinyl.

With humor, chutzpah and a piece of vinyl siding firmly in hand, Peabody Award-winning filmmaker Judith Helfand and co-director and award-winning cinematographer Daniel B. Gold set out in search of the truth about polyvinyl chloride (PVC), America's most popular plastic. From Long Island to Louisiana to Italy, they unearth the facts about PVC and its effects on human health and the environment.

6 p.m., The Commons Cabaret

November 11
In partnership with the Neighborhood Design Center, the Center for Art and Visual Culture presents "Building Community Through the Arts," a symposium on the role of the arts in community development and cultural activity in neighborhoods. Speakers will include:
? Steven Goldsmith, Director of the Rose Fellowship of the Enterprise Foundation, who will address Affordable Housing in the Art Community.
? Jennifer Mange, Public Art Coordinator, Baltimore Office of Promotion and the Arts
? Nick Francis, Executive Director of Gateway Municipalities Community Development Corporation, who will discuss successes and challenges in developing the Gateway Arts District along Route 1 in Prince George's County.
? A representative from Station North, who will speak about recent accomplishments in the Station North Arts District in Baltimore.

6?7:30 p.m., Fine Arts Building Room 306.

November 18
As part of the HOME House Project Film Series, the Center for Art and Visual Culture and The Commons present two films: Up Close and Toxic and Ecological Design: Inventing the Future, which examine issues related to environmental hazards related to indoor pollution and the evolution of environmentally aware design.

6 p.m., The Commons Cabaret

December 2
As part of the HOME House Project Film Series, the Center for Art and Visual Culture and The Commons present The Next Industrial Revolution, directed by Chris Bedford and Shelley Morhaim, which outlines the work and vision of architect William McDonough and chemist Dr. Michael Braungart, two leaders in a growing movement to transform the relationship between commerce and nature.

6 p.m., The Commons Cabaret

For more information on the HOME House Project exhibition and programming, call 410-455-1440.