Search DU CTLAT Blog

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Call for Proposals: 20th National HBCU Faculty Development Network Conference

20th National HBCU Faculty Development Network Conference

Relevance ● Pedagogy ● Assessment ● Sustainability

October 24-26, 2013

859 Convention Center Boulevard · New Orleans, Louisiana 70130


Call for Proposals


Dear Colleagues:


The HBCU Faculty Development Network is hosting its 20th National Conference October 24-26, 2013 in New Orleans, LA.  We cordially invite you to submit a proposal for presentation.  Our theme this year Relevance ● Pedagogy ● Assessment ● Sustainability encompasses the missions and strategic plans of many universities.   Your proposal submissions should reflect the following:

·         programs that address the relevance of institutional curricular offerings in a global society;

·         effective teaching and learning strategies that you are currently involved in at your institutions;

·         effective assessment of student learning outcomes, and

·         innovative or model academic programs that are sustainable.


Presentations should relate to any one of the following strands:

(1) Collaborative Models of Teaching; (2) Assessment and Evaluation; (3) Active Learning and Engagement; (4) Curriculum Design and Revision; (5) Learning Across the Curriculum and Learning Communities; (6) Instructional/Educational Technology; (7) Civic Engagement and Social Justice; (8) Diversity and Globalization (9) and Special Topics that include a variety of academic disciplines.


For additional information on the strands and on how to submit your proposals, please visit the website at


Session Types

The Network welcomes proposals for a variety of session types, including the following:


Workshops                                       2.5 hour interactive workshops

Concurrent Sessions                      75 minute interactive sessions

Roundtables                                    75 minute discussions

Poster Presentations
Guidelines for Proposals


All are welcome to submit a proposal. Once a proposal is accepted, all presenters must pay registration fees.

Number of proposals per person

Each attendee may propose up to one workshop as either the primary or co-presenter.

Each attendee may also propose up to two concurrent sessions where he/she may be the primary presenter for only one of these sessionsFor the second session, he/she must be listed as a co-presenter.  Please note that interactive sessions, roundtable discussions, and posters presentations are included in this two-session limit.

Example #1: An attendee may submit one concurrent session proposal as the lead presenter and a second concurrent session proposal as co-presenter.

Example #2: An attendee may submit two concurrent session proposals as co-presenter.

            Example#3: An attendee may submit one workshop proposal as the lead presenter, a concurrent session proposal as lead presenter, and a second concurrent session proposal as co-               presenter.



Proposals may be submitted online beginning Friday, February 1, 2013 on the HBCU website at and will be due by 5:00 PM (CT) on Friday, March 29, 2013.

Detailed submission instructions are provided on the website.

Before you prepare a proposal, please ensure that you have read the guidelines for proposals.  Failure to follow these guidelines may lead to the rejection of a proposal.

Components of the proposal

All proposals are blind-reviewed in accordance with the guidelines described above and should include the following:

  • Contact information for primary presenter and all co-presenters (address, phone, email)
  • Session title (no more than 10 words)
  • Session abstract (no more than 100 words)
  • Please select the type of session best suited for your proposal.  Be sure that there is a fit between what you intend to accomplish and the type of session you choose. 
  • Session description (no more than 500 words)
  • Provide, goals, implementation, research findings, and assessment
  • State expected outcomes for session participants
  • Outline the session activities and plan for interaction. Please model exemplary teaching and learning practices.  For poster presentations, focus on the manner in which you plan to present your work rather than on the type of interaction you anticipate


Abstract submission dates:

Submissions accepted: February 1, 2013 - March 29, 2013

Online submissions available at

Notification of acceptance:  April 30, 2013

Participation confirmation due from all presenters:  July 31, 2013


Conference Organizers:

Jeton McClinton, Conference Coordinator

Barbara Albert, Program Coordinator

Laurette blakely Foster, President, HBCU Faculty Development Network


Hosting Institution:  Dillard University



Sale of materials and the solicitation of consulting work

To avoid the possibility of a conflict of interest, the Network does not permit in any conference session the sale of materials.  Furthermore, the Network does not allow presenters to solicit consulting work during any session listed in the program.

Session presenters are permitted to use materials they have created and to refer to consulting work that they do, but neither materials nor services may be offered for sale during the session. Authors, if present, will be available to sign books at the end of a session.

Questions about this conference practice should be addressed to the Executive Director or the Conference Chairs.


Deadline for Proposals:   Friday, March 29, 2013, 5:00 P.M. (CT)



Barbara M. Albert

Executive Assistant

Office of Academic Affairs

(504) 816-4216 (office)

(504) 816-4144 (fax)


FridayLive! February 8 Mystery Session Revealed. Topic: "Flipping MOOCs & sMOOChing"

FridayLive! February 8 Mystery Session Revealed. Topic: "Flipping MOOCs & sMOOChing"
08 Feb 2013 2:00 PM EST

Bookmark and Share
Mystery Session Revealed  Topic:  "Flipping MOOCs & sMOOChing" 

February 8, 2013  2:00-3:00 pm ET - free to all. 

discuss whats new/old about -and the relationships among-

- flipped classroom


- supplemental instruction



sMOOChing as Teaching;  Teaching as sMOOChing 

-  Good New Answers for Good Old Questions

 - FQ3:  a 3rd Fundamental Question


sMOOChing:  Facilitating the most effective integration of MOOCs and similar new resources into undergraduate programs of colleges and universities that are NOT producing or hosting the MOOCs.  And thereby increase the variety, quality, and quantity of undergraduate instruction available to  students and alumni.


FQ3:  3rd Fundamental Question:


How can we help people learn from an available information resource?

          [NEW info resource:  like a MOOC?]   

          [OLD info resource:  like a book?]

·  More, better, faster, easier, ...?

·  Without the participation of the author/publisher/lecturer?

·  Without the awareness of the author/publisher/lecturer?

·  Without the permission of the author/publisher/lecturer?

Deep Background

New technologies almost always enable the production of new information resources much sooner than humanity can figure out how to use them for educational purposes.  

Entrepreneurs and innovators outside of education almost always figure out how to begin using the new resources before educators do. 

Independent self-motivated learners almost always figure out how to begin using the new resources before teachers and other professional educators do.  

Some of the better ways of using the new resources may not emerge for a long time - may wait until some people begin thinking in new ways, perceiving new kinds of possibilities for using them.


TLT Group's Roles

In the TLT Group's online activities during the past several years, especially in FridayLive!, we have developed some practices and roles that both improve the quality of the sessions and the sense of community for those who participate often. 

·  Voice of the Chat (VoC)

·  Extermission

·  DIIGO project

·  Designated Learner

·  sMOOChers cohort's foci:  content, method, roles

I believe that we could adapt these valuable roles and practices to enhance the educational benefits of rapidly emerging new resources like MOOCs, especially for learners who are NOT affiliated with the institutions that are producing and hosting the MOOCs et al.  


Local Facilitators

Those who take on some of the roles listed above and other roles to be developed for helping undergraduates learn more effectively from MOOCs and similar resources integrated with undergraduate courses.  

Potential "local facilitators" of undergraduate learning via MOOCs and similar resources include: faculty (full-time, part-time, current, retired) and other academic professionals, current undergraduates and graduate students, alumni.

    NOTE:  Login instructions for the session will be sent in the Registration Confirmation Email. Please check your Junk folder as sometimes these emails get trapped there. We will also send an additional login reminder 24 hours prior to the start of the event.

More information and online registration: FridayLive! February 8 Mystery Session Revealed. Topic: "Flipping MOOCs & sMOOChing"

Hope you can join us!


The TLT Group, A Non-Profit Organization    301-270-8312


NCUR 2013 27th National Conference on Undergraduate Research April 11-13, 2013

27th National Conference on Undergraduate Research
April 11-13, 2013
Deadline for Early Conference Registration is February 19
Registration NOW OPEN!

To register for NCUR 2013 go to . When registering don’t forget to check out Excursions! 
Korean-FansNCUR 2013 is proud to partner with UW-La Crosse’s International Education program to bring you The International Banquet-“Bridging Creativity & Culture While Building Global Communities”.  NCUR participants can taste foods from around the world, enjoy musical performances, dance routines, and other entertainment acts. This excursion is a great way to enhance your NCUR 2013 experience! Be sure to sign up your entire delegation for this Friday evening of fun and entertainment that will without a doubt be one of the highlights of the conference! Buses will shuttle participants from the venue back to hotels at the conclusion of this event. Cost is $20 and includes transportation, dinner, beverage, and entertainment. Register by March15 to ensure your spot!
Reminder: registration is now open to graduate schools interested in having a table at the NCUR Graduate School Fair! Connect with 3,000+ bright, motivated, and talented students! To register for the fair click here , set up an account in our Career Services Office database and register as a first time visitor.  From there, search Career Events and click NCUR 2013 Graduate and Professional School Fair.  For further information contact Karolyn Bald at
For More Information

University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Continuing Education • 1725 State St - 205 Morris Hall • La Crosse, WI 54601


MSIRPC National Conference April 18-20, 2013

MSIRPC National Conference
Hello ,
We wanted to remind you that the MSIRPC National Conference is taking place on 4/18/2013 - 4/20/2013 at Location:
Sheraton Hotel and Resort
(866) 932-7269
200 Convention Boulevard
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00907
United States

We expect the available registrations to fill up quickly. So, we would like to offer you the opportunity to reserve your spot at a reduced early bird rate through March 15, 2013! To RSVP, click here .
We look forward to hearing from you!
Thank you,
MSIRPC National Conference


Call for Submissions for the Spring 2014 issue of the CUR Quarterly: “Human Rights and Undergraduate Research"




Please contact me if anyone is interested in responding to this Cal for Submissions of Articles for the Council on Undergraduate Research 2014 Quarterly.


TOPIC: "Human Rights and Undergraduate Research"


FINAL TEXT: June 1, 2013



Lynn Strong

Director, Undergraduate Research

Dillard University

PSB 250

2601 Gentilly Blvd.


Call for Submissions for the spring 2014 issue of the CUR Quarterly:

 “Human Rights and Undergraduate Research”

The theme of the spring 2014 CUR Quarterly will focus on undergraduate research on human rights.  We hope to attract four to five articles that report on or explore issues regarding research from a variety of disciplines on a number of different human rights issues.  In addition, we welcome shorter vignettes (300 words) that offer concrete, creative suggestions with regard to any aspect of undergraduate research and human rights.

Examples of topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

·        Descriptions of innovative efforts to include undergraduates in human rights research or to encourage undergraduates to pursue their own human rights research questions

·        Examples of courses or other structures that expose undergraduates to human rights issues and encourage them to design research projects to further explore these issues

·        Reflections on methodological issues involved when undergraduates conduct research on human rights issues

·        Explorations of ethical issues when conducting undergraduate research on human rights

If you are interested in contributing an article or vignette, please submit a short (300-500 words) prospectus describing the focus of your proposed article or vignette online at (this is a new process- see some additional details below) by March 15, 2013. Accepted authors will be notified by April 1, 2013.

Final articles will be 2000 to 3500 words in length.  The final text for review and editing must be submitted by June 1, 2013.

Please forward the message to anyone who might be interested in submitting an article or vignette. Also note the CURQ takes non-theme articles at anytime here:

-March 15, 2013 Short (300-500 words) prospectus of proposed article or vignette submitted online.

-June 1, 2013    Final text for review and editing deadline

Kelly McConnaughay              Janet Stocks                            
Editor-in-Chief                         Issue Editor                             
CUR Quarterly                         CUR Quarterly

-We will now be taking abstract/article submissions through content management software. 

-To start the process visit:
- For first time users please click the link “register for an account” 
(Please note you login information will not work on this page)
-After registering for an account, login
-Click the link “ Submit Manuscript” 
- Select the Prospectus button
-The software will walk you through the remainder of the process

Lindsay Currie
Communications & Membership
Council on Undergraduate Research
734 15th Street NW  Suite 550
Washington, DC 20005
p: 202.783.4810 x 206
f: 202.783.4811
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From President Kimbrough...Potential Increase in Federal Oversight/Involvement in Higher Education

FYI- two articles summarizing the NAICU meeting this week in Washington. In short, expect more Federal Government intrusion, wanting to know the return on investment for government support (for us that means Pell Grants, Title IIIB), as well as how much graduates make once they finish. Incidentally, I know of 2 studies that have tried to do this for HBCU grads, one saying they perform worse than Black grads of PWIs (Frierson at Harvard), and one saying HBCU grads outperform Black PWI grads (Price at Morehouse).


The earnings piece is a concern because it devalues liberal arts (which is already happening with foundations pushing STEM- and I am a STEM guy but value liberal arts). STEM folks make more money so having more of them helps address that issue.


One more piece to consider. I am in conversation with the Kresge Foundation about a grant to help us boost recruitment efforts. We are up 6.5% from spring 2012 to this spring (which again is good compared to most schools), but we really need a couple of years with 10% growth to get to 1,600 and stabilize fully. I think they will help BUT they want us to talk about how will we grow in a way that will be cheaper than what it cost for us to run a school with 1,600 students in the late 1990s? So they want to know how will we reinvent ourselves by decreasing our operating budget and increasing enrollment? This can be a sub question for the next strategic plan under resources- not just how do we acquire more but how do we maximize resources and in fact use fewer resources.


Tough big picture questions I’ll be asking so start thinking about them now.




College Administrators Discuss Dealing With Increased Government Involvement


February 4, 2013

by Jamaal Abdul-Alim




Maureen Budetti, NAICU director of student aid policy, says that schools are being asked to provide prospective students and their families with information that might be overwhelming.


WASHINGTON — As the federal government seeks to expand its reach within the realm of higher education, administrators should expect their institutions to face more scrutiny, more accountability and more unfunded reporting requirements.


That was a the advice delivered during a half-day “academy” that kicked off the annual meeting of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, or NAICU, this week on Capitol Hill.


Some of the more spirited discussions concerned federal efforts to require colleges and universities to collect and disseminate data on how much their graduates earn upon graduation.


“If you want to look into the crystal ball to the new regulations of higher education, you need to be prepared to collect more systematically and report more information related to the employment of graduates,” said Susan Hattan, NAICU senior consultant.


Hattan made her remarks during a session titled “Assessing Institutional Quality through Graduates’ Earnings.”


Hattan said efforts to tie wage data for graduates back to institutions and programs emanates from larger conversation about whether a college degree is worth it in light of the nation’s ongoing employment woes, the rising cost of tuition and growing amount of student debt. She noted how two bills known as the “Student Right to Know Before You Go” act — one sponsored by U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and another one by U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif. ) and Robert Andrews (D-N.J.) — would have required the posting earnings data on graduates by institution, degree and program. She also recalled the Obama Administration’s court-blocked bid to require for-profit colleges to post “gainful employment” data on their graduates.


“This is something that Congress very much wanted during the last go-round,” Hattan said of tying earnings data for graduates to institutions and programs. “This is something that the administration wants, and all signs are this is something they will demand at a greater level of detail than has been included … in the past.”


Tying wage data for graduates to institutions and programs is already being done, said Mark Schneider, vice president of the American Institutes for Research, who spoke of research he has done in half a dozen or so states to link wage records to student transcripts in order to determine how much graduates from a given program within a school earn upon graduation.


While the records enable him to determine short-term earnings for graduates, he said the data does not enable him to figure out how much they earn later in life.


The longer-term data is important because it will confirm or refute the notion held by proponents of liberal arts education that liberal arts degree holders may not earn much after graduation but fare much better in the long run.


But in the short-term, Schneider’s research in Virginia has found that graduates of occupational or technical associate degree programs out-earned bachelor’s degree graduates by almost $2,500 statewide.


Graduates of not-for-profit colleges — where he said graduates mostly earned liberal arts degrees — fared the worst in Virginia in terms of earnings upon graduation, according to Schneider’s research.


“This is a serious issue in terms of measuring what students earn,” Schneider said during a forum titled “The Changing Role of the Federal Government in Higher Education.”


“We need you to say [to policymakers]: ‘One-year data is not sufficient,’” Schneider said. “We have to know what happens to students 10 or 15 years out.”


Others noted that Schneider’s data on Virginia graduates only captures students who continue to work in Virginia — about a third or so of the graduates — whereas many graduates from Virginia colleges and universities may go on to work for the federal government in D.C., on Wall Street in New York or on the West Coast.


Schneider conceded that there is a need to capture data of graduates nationally.


“This is a serious data issue that the nation has to address,” Scheider said.


In a session titled “Shopping for College: What the Feds Think Students Should Know,” Maureen Budetti, NAICU director of student aid policy, said that colleges and universities are being asked to provide prospective students and their families with information that may overwhelm or confuse prospective students.


“We’re not against disclosures. We believe that [with] consumer information, transparency is a good thing,” Budetti said. “The problem we’re having is that it’s just too much information,” she said, raising concerns that prospective students and their families may ignore the information altogether if they don’t deem it useful.


She also said it was burdensome for institutions to produce much of the data.


“It’s overwhelming, redundant, unclear, costly and of questionable usefulness,” Budetti said. “Other than that, they’re pretty good.”


Among the things that Budetti took aim at was the new Shopping Sheet created by the U.S. Department of Education.


Though no NAICU institutions were among the 500 colleges and universities that have volunteered to use the shopping sheet, Budetti said it “has a lot of problems in it.”


The problems, she said, included checkboxes that don’t work well if an institution has graduate students, and other checkboxes that are “confusing and inadequate.”


“We tried to tell [the Department of Education] you can’t put everything on the first page or the way that you think is best,” Budetti said. “We need to have some flexibility.”




Higher Education Leaders Wary of Increased Federal Oversight


February 5, 2013 |

by Jamaal Abdul-Alim



WASHINGTON — Despite the largeness of the audience they addressed this week at the NAICU annual meeting, all of the fresh-faced Congressional staffers and Obama Administration officials who spoke about federal efforts to hold colleges accountable declared their remarks “off-the-record.”


But to the extent that you can trust that a room full of college presidents and other senior administrators were listening intently, you can still get a good sense of where these young politicos were coming from — or at least where their “bosses” were coming from — based on the responses from the attendees, including some who indicated they were former Congressional staffers themselves.


“As I listen to you and listen to your agenda, I’m beginning to hear a centralizing, top down force out of the concern that we all share for affordability, for student success, for graduation rates, for giving students the ability to thrive in their lives after they arrive (on campus),” Marlboro College President Ellen McCulloch-Lovell told the speakers during the Q-and-A session of the panel talk, titled, “Holding Colleges Accountable: A View from Key Capitol Hill and Administration Staff.”


McCulloch-Lovell said the Congressional staffers spoke as if “we have to solve a problem” in higher education.


She was joined in her criticism by C. Todd Jones, president of the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Ohio, who noted how most of the student loan defaults and lackluster completion rates the staffers lamented were “primarily and disproportionately” concentrated among for-profit colleges, not the private nonprofits that were represented at the annual meeting of NAICU, an acronym for the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities.


Statistics support that view.


According to “The Condition of Education,” an online resource maintained by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, the six-year graduation rate at private nonprofit institutions was 65 percent, compared with 56 percent at public institutions and 28 percent at private for-profit institutions.


As for default rates, for the fiscal year 2008 cohort, the default rates were highest at private for-profit two-year institutions at 12 percent, and private for-profit four-year institutions at 11 percent, but lowest at private not-for-profit and public four-year institutions, each with 4 percent.


McCulloch-Lovell and Jones addressed their comments collectively to the panelists:

•Ajita Talwalker, special assistant to Under Secretary of Education Martha Kanter;

•Libby Masiuk, education policy advisor for the majority staff at the Senate HELP Committee, which is chaired by retiring U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa);

•Brian Melnyk, professional staff member for the majority at the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, which is chaired by U.S. Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.); and

•Rich Williams, education policy advisor for U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), senior democratic leader for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.




McCulloch-Lovell prefaced her remarks by saying she understands the position the young staffers are in because she once worked as chief of staff for U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) from 1983 to 1994.


But that did not stop her from critiquing the staffers’ “bosses,” whom she suggested are “experiencing kind of a lag time.”


“I think we’ve got the message, and I think collectively, we are doing everything we can to cut costs, be efficient, keep our quality high and come up with the lowest possible increases in tuition and to increase student aid,” McCulloch-Lovell said. “And I’m wondering if part of what needs to go on with the administration and Congress is catching up on all of our actions and our innovations, because I hear this federal government’s urge to regulate more, and one of the reasons we’re having trouble with our costs is regulations and the cost of regulation.”


Her comment about the cost of regulation drew a hearty applause.


McCulloch-Lovell also took exception with the staffers’ repeated references to “return on investment” when they spoke of federal tax dollars being used to support higher education.


“I’m also hearing a kind of consumerist ‘return on investment’ kind of language that makes me a little afraid, because the return on investment for higher education is not only jobs that help people advance their lives and have families and become good participants in society,” McCulloch-Lovell said. “It’s also the perspective and knowledge that helps us reanimate our democracy.


“I want to know what you mean by ‘return on investment.’”


All of the speakers gave various answers, but — as per their request — their comments were off the record.


In summary, however, the staffers collectively stated that the issue of “return on investment” emanates from fact that as providers of what they said was some $170 billion in federal aid to higher education, federal policymakers bear special responsibility for ensuring quality in the academic “enterprise.”


They also said that as students take on high-stakes risk when they invest in a college education, that it’s a matter of concern when students are unable to get jobs that justify the investment and enable them to pay off their student loans.


The staffers also said they welcome input on how to reduce the regulatory burden to colleges and universities.