蜜桃传媒

The temperatures are dipping, we have not seen sunlight in three weeks, and the Bills continue to play with our emotions, which can only mean the end of another fall semester has arrived. With it, of course, thoughts begin to turn toward holiday meals, the beginnings of a festive mindset, and the cheery prospect of course evaluations opening.

A confession: despite the title, I don鈥檛 really love course evaluations. If two years of answering emails for the campus-wide course evaluations system has taught me anything, it is that I am not alone. They can be a source of enormous stress, a confusing labyrinth of ever-changing user interfaces and new tools that muddy the quest for clear answers.

As educators we are well aware of the many delays in bringing theory to practice. Whether it is through delayed pedagogical recommendations in adjusting campus learning spaces, conceptual challenges encountered in effectively leveraging distance and remote learning opportunities, or in identifying creative ways of providing students with the course experiences sufficient to actively construct and add meaning to their own learning, we are constantly dealing with the overarching problem of delayed practical application of theory.

A perennial problem that we, in the assessment world, grapple with involves understanding the full impact of the physical space on learners and instructors.

In our Director鈥檚 previous blog post, Carol Van Zile-Tamsen introduced our friends and partners to the enhanced structure of the Office of Curriculum, Assessment and Teaching Transformation. Through the merger of CEI and OEE Carol explained what鈥攊n its broadest sense鈥攊t is that we are trying to achieve in relation to supporting the 蜜桃传媒鈥檚 needs.

In these past few weeks following our recent merger between the Office of Educational Effectiveness and the Center for Educational Innovation, I have been thinking hard about how to most effectively communicate what it is about our new office that will allow us to better serve the university.