Tag Archives: conferences

Ten Simple Steps to Conference Networking

Networking opportunities abounded at the Association for Psychological Science (APS) convention last week. As I was reflecting on the week’s general highlights, it soon became clear that effective networking was the key to most. Let me be clear here: I’ve been going to conferences for about ten years, and I have a long history of being nervous about networking at conferences (still am!). At this point, I suspect it’s some leftover grad school/new faculty imposter syndrome, but it doesn’t really matter why it happens. What matters is I’m not letting my nervousness get in my way too much anymore.

One of the symposia I went to last week specifically addressed professional networking (sponsored by WICS). Perhaps because of this symposium, I have been reflecting on what I think led to my networking successes at APS. In case it’s helpful to someone else, here are ten things I did this week that I think helped me build my connections. Of course, this isn’t meant to be an exhaustive list.

My Ten (Relatively) Simple Steps to Networking

  1. Tweeted regularly. Hands down, best decision. Led to meeting people IRL (read: in real life), and I was recognized by others at times when I didn’t say a word out loud. Importantly, I was re-tweeted, sometimes by APS, Society for the Teaching of Psychology and some major names in the field (thanks APS, STP, Hal Pashler, and Bobbie Spellman!). That means all their followers can see what I wrote. Plus, tweeting helped me stay focused and engaged throughout the conference, and I now have a searchable record of my own (see @cdrawn) and others’ (see #aps2013dc) conference-related thoughts.
  2. Thanked a few speakers and introduced myself, briefly noting a common connection or a sound-bite about why I was interested in their talks. Each time, I met someone else too, because someone else was either standing there who knew the speaker, or because the speaker said “oh, then you should meet…” in response to my sound-bite.
  3. Went to a post-preconference reception. Followed up, elaborated on an earlier brief encounter (see #2). Had ONE glass of wine, which I sipped so slowly it wouldn’t have had a physiological effect, but it relaxed me a bit and helped me switch into a more social mode of conversation.
  4. Grabbed the chance to sit next to a colleague from my institution (who is well-known across the discipline), who sat next to someone else who was well-known across the discipline. Got to know both a bit better through in-session on-topic (and in-joke!) whispers.
  5. Went to a big-picture session everyone seems to be talking about (in this case, replicability). I knew a bit about it beforehand so I knew the key players and ideas. This meant I could tweet responsibly and thoughtfully on this hot topic, and could contribute meaningful whispers (see #4).
  6. Stumbled through asking that first question early in the conference in a small symposium so I’d be more confident and more articulate when asking the next one.
  7. Introduced myself to the speaker/crowd before asking a post-talk question (only after completing #6!). In one case, this meant I gained a couple of followers on twitter, including the speaker, who then tweet-suggested I meet his collaborator on the project who happens to live in my home city.
  8. Hung out in the lobby lounge. A friend wandered past, who then stopped and introduced me to his colleague. Made dinner plans (see #9).
  9. Went to sessions solo. Dined with friends. Years ago I would go to a session because my friend was going to it. I’ve learned to spend conference days largely on my own so I can take advantage of spontaneous conversations as needed, follow my own main interests and odd curiosities, and take quiet breaks when I need them. Dining with friends is then especially fun as we share our most interesting tidbits from the day… or not, if we need a brain break! (This is why it’s important to dine with friends IMO, so no need to worry about impressing them. I can’t spend all day and all evening being “on”.) As Lynn Liben at the WICS symposium noted, networking with peers is important: They start as “siblings” but “grow-up” to become the field.
  10. Followed-up on a twitter exchange. One of the challenges/strengths of writing on Twitter is that it’s limited to 140 characters (10 of which are used by the hashtag required so you’re part of the conversation). Misunderstanding is a real risk. During the conference, I responded to a tweet that I thought had really misrepresented a speaker’s intent, and I hoped it came across politely (after all, I am Canadian!). When I saw the person IRL (see #1), I approached him with a friendly Hi!. He knew immediately who I was, and we were able to further our discussion and finish it amicably.

We can all read other peoples’ papers. In my mind, the real advantage of conferences is the people who are there. Be bold, even just a little, and take advantage of the networking opportunities that come your way. Now, shall we continue this conversation on Twitter? I’m @cdrawn

STLHE 2012 Conference Reflections

I recently went to the annual conference for the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. This year it was held in Montreal (last year in Saskatoon Saskatchewan, next year in Cape Breton Nova Scotia). It’s my favourite conference of the year because it’s relatively small (about 400 delegates), and everyone there is committed to improving teaching and learning in higher education. Some delegates are faculty like me, but many others are educational developers who work at places like UBC’s CTLT, others are graduate students, administrators, and so on. I always leave with a ton of great ideas ranging from the big picture to day-to-day implementation. If you follow me on twitter, you may have noticed my live tweeting. Like my earlier list, with this post I’m trying to collect and remind myself of the major ideas from this conference:

  • A deliberate method for implementing successful iclicker questions is called “Peer Instruction” out of the physics literature. Includes students reading ahead, then giving a mini-lecture, providing a tough clicker Q, students explaining reasoning to someone else, class discussion going through all options, mini-lecture, tough clicker Q (younger level to converge on answer, upper level to diverge). From Rob Cassidy. Seems similar to what I do normally, but reading about it could give me ideas for implementation.
  • Look up research on peer instruction by Weiman, Eric Mazur (Harvard), Derek Bruff (Vanderbilt), and contact Rob Cassidy (Concordia).
  • Graduate courses on university teaching exist at Guelph, McMaster, Dalhousie, SFU, etc. Fantastic contacts, including Erin Aspenlieder at SFU, Suzanne Sheffield at Dalhousie (for evaluation materials), Cynthia Korpan at UVic (made updated critical incident films, new head of TAGSA), Natasha Kenny at Guelph.
  • Idea gems about grad courses on university teaching (from Natasha Kenny): every moment is a teaching moment, the goal is that students leave the course knowing teaching is about *students* first and foremost, syllabus contained “how this course was changed based on last year’s feedback”
  • Based on Erin Aspenlieder’s lit review on how to train grad students to teach, what works is mentorship, practice with feedback, and portfolio development to promote reflective practice. What doesn’t work is single-event workshops — which is what grad students & faculty say they want!! To improve single-event workshops, need to follow up with participants to find out how they implemented the information. *This gives me impetus for Psych Dept TA Training follow-up.
  • Film the teaching in my Teaching of Psych grad class to facilitate reflection.
  • Make a Western Canada TA training conference! There are loads of us doing this work, and it could be a fantastic opportunity to network and improve.
  • Ways to evaluate impact of my Teaching of Psych class: Approaches to Teaching inventory (pre/post), midterm and end of term feedback, focus groups, course outlines, teaching philosophy statements with coding scheme (see Concordia crew including Rob Cassidy for their draft rubric that considers line-by-line).
  • I’d like to co-design a session for next year’s STLHE on integrating qualitative and quantitative perspectives. A meeting point that’s relevant to many educators is interpreting student evaluations of teaching (including one’s own, guiding others, and the research literature). To do this, I need to find an expert in qualitative research to co-facilitate this!
  • When guiding others to improve their teaching, start with two questions: What is your content? (to get them excited and to define parameters of the course), and What do you want students to know about it? (to guide creation of learning objectives, switch their thinking to learner-centred). — From Cynthia Weston’s lifetime achievement award address
  • Consider “luck-free” written portions of my exams: here are 10 questions, three will be on it, prepare as you wish (teams or individuals)
  • Build regular writing time into my professional life.

That is a rather odd collection, but they’re the ideas I want to make sure I keep. Many are related to teaching graduate students to teach, which I think is going to be a big part of my upcoming year.

 

Interuniversity Conference on Education (ICE) 2011

Over the weekend I gave the keynote address at this interesting, student-driven conference. It united students, faculty, and community members from all across the country to question our assumptions about education and to promote innovation. Consistent with this spirit, in my keynote I discussed my section of Psyc 208 (Psychology in your life: How social psychology can help you succeed). I have created that course with students in mind from the very start. I strive to create a course that matters, and I challenge both educators and students (yes, it’s a two-way street!) to make education matter. I also discuss how the course has changed from the first time I taught it to the second, and share how I have relied on student feedback to make important changes for the better. If you’ve taken the course before, plan to take it in January, or are interested in course (re)design more broadly, check out the video here.

Congratulations to Tyler Nelson and the entire planning team for a great conference. If you’d like to check out more about the conference, we had a twitter feed going all day long (search for #ice2011) and videos from all of the interesting speakers are available here.

Upcoming Conferences

I have the great privilege of speaking at two fantastic student-driven conferences this month. Check out the websites and mark your calendars!

First, on Saturday October 15 in the new sustainable CIRS buiding, is ICE 2011: the Interuniversity Conference on Education. The focus is on innovations in education, and I’ll be speaking about how I’ve approached the question “Why should any student care about my class?” Check out the agenda and my talk abstract here. Everyone is welcome, and registration is free!

Second, on Monday October 24, is the kick-off to CLASS: Conference on Learning and Academic Student Success. This year it’s a full week of workshops and speakers geared toward helping first year and otherwise new-to-UBC students transition to life at UBC-V. I’ll be speaking about  “What I’ve Learned that has Changed my Life” at the opening ceremony.  I met with organizing team members Julie and Bowen this morning for a brief interview. Check it out on the CLASS website or a direct link to Youtube here.

Exciting times! Hope to see you there!

STLHE

I have spent the last three days at the annual conference of the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in Toronto. Wow, I have hit exhaustion. So many ideas. So many engaging conversations. Inspired. Overwhelmed. I can’t do it all. But I can do. The challenge over the next few days for me will be to hold on to the most important nuggets. A list of some key ideas to help:

  • Embrace the Smackdown in Teaching Smackdowns. Try to find out what real issues are facing faculty in our department, and invite conversation. Consider a panel including undergrad and grad students, faculty, and administrators. Ground the discussion in the literature. — from Pedagogical Provocations workshop (e.g., Connie @ U of A)
  • A cat doesn’t come until the can opener sounds. Creative insight doesn’t occur with out work. — a metaphor Amanda Burk heard
  • What in my courses is taught/assessed, taught/not assessed (and so on to fill out the quadrants)? Decision points. — from someone Amanda Burk heard
  • Students learn what they do. What are students in my classes doing?
  • To download a Youtube video, add pwn before youtube in the url.
  • To teach “knowledge-ability” (1) enage in real problems, (2) with students, (3) while harnessing the relevant tools. — Michael Wesch @ Kansas; implications for my 208 assignment; see ideas document
  • To examine  test questions: What is the test question asking? What learning is the question evaluating? How can it be re-written so these align? Consider cognitive load theory. — Joanne Nakonechny
  • “On an exam, I ask you to be competent, not clever. On an assignment you have 2 weeks to think about, I ask you to be clever.” — another participant’s comment re: evaluation
  • Break down a tough exam question. Think out loud as I respond. What assumptions do I make? Can I structure the question so that students demonstrate understanding of the theory, then ability to use it, then ability to apply it, then ability to turn it on its head. — insight from Joanne’s session.
  • Email my former student Gillian about her work on the NSSE.
  • Think about how I can help demystify academia for my students.
  • At the first year level, you are joining the professional academic community. What impact does that have for my first weeks of class? Tie professional communication to job preparation. Email and general etiquette. Give examples of high quality work, compare to poor quality, and differentiate them. — from Professionalism session (Waterloo connection)
  • Celebrate failure: “How fascinating!”  — from Nicola Simmons’ session (Waterloo office of learning and teaching)
  • (How) can I contribute to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning? What will that look like in my career? How can I balance this in the context of my other responsibilities, especially in terms of time? — from Nicola Simmons’ session (Waterloo office of learning and teaching)
  • What excites me about SoTL is the potential for collaborating with students and colleagues, making a meaningful contribution, expanding the impact of my work, staying accountable for my teaching and learning actions. — from Nicola Simmons’ session (Waterloo office of learning and teaching)
  • Grad student teaching portfolio resources: http://www.mcgill.ca/tls/teachingportfolio/
  • Interdisciplinarity: There are more commonalities that one would think. The creative process as described by artists is not unlike the process of developing research and writing it up. We don’t talk about it in the same way, but the processes of attempts, failure, revision, inspiration, feedback/peer review — and the accompanying emotional roller coaster — have many parallels. There are also common issues in teaching people to do really difficult things: e.g., learn technical proficiency and content, critically evaluate their own and others’ work.

This list became much longer than I had anticipated it would, given my fatigue. Yet one of the most important things I’ve learned this year is that whenever I’m close to exhaustion, I can easily be energized by thinking about teaching and learning.