Winter Institute Archive
What was the Winter Institute?
Each Winter Institute was part of a series of annual, week-long, intensive programs of presentations, small group mentoring, Special Interest Group meetings (SIGs), and participant dialogue on a theme relating to some aspect of learning assistance.
Limited to 60 participants, the Winter Institutes were based on a teaching/learning philosophy created by Frank L Christ. Winter Institutes were designed to provide participants with optimal learning experiences that could be translated into practical actions upon participants return to their institutions.
From 1992 to 2003, the Winter Institutes were co-sponsored by the University Learning Center of the University of Arizona (supported by Sylvia Mioduski and Guillermo Uribe) and the Maricopa County Community College District (Supported by Rick Sheets, David Gerkin, & Bill Mathis).
No Winter Institute was held in 2004.
The Winter Institutes briefly revived in 2005 sponsored by the University Learning Center, University of Texas/Austin with Alan Constant, the Director of the Learning Center at the University of Texas at Austin as its director and Frank Christ as its Associate Director.
What was the Winter Institute Philosophy?
The Winter Institutes embodied a learning assistance philosophy of enhancing new learning experiences while providing support for the individuals involved. The Winter Institute philosophy evolved as a way to enhance the learning experiences of Institute participants as they came together in a common location for:
- scheduled presentations,
- mentoring activities (group and individual),
- impromptu SIGs (Special Interest Group) meetings, and
- hands-on computer activities and technology support.
Below are a series of ten phrases that exemplify the learning opportunities that were offered during the weeklong professional experience for learning assistance directors and practitioners. The actions associated with each phrase was consistent with research findings on efficient and effective learning. These ten learning enhancing opportunities set the Winter Institute apart from most professional conferences.
Structure with Freedom
From the start of the Institute, participants are reminded that the Institute is the cooperative responsibility of both staff and participants and that as adult learners they have the right to come and go as they wish and to use their time and energy for the good of their professional careers and usefulness to their institutions. Although there is structure in the scheduling of Institute activities, the freedom also exists to modify this structure when it appears to be in the best interests of participants or when participants decide modifications are in their best interests.
Collegiality/Networking/Ongoing Dialogue
Everyone at the Institute is a learner including Institute staff, mentors, and presenters and all participate equally in the week-long dialogues. For many participants, the Institute is the beginning of a collegial network that will continue to expand throughout their lives as they dialogue on the Internet, through visitations, and at professionals conferences.
Collective Intelligence
The 60 to 70 participants, presenters, and mentors that make up each Winter Institute represent a cross-section of learning assistance directors, practitioners, and developmental education specialists from community colleges and four and six year universities. The synergy that evolves from the Institute’s week-long, live-in interactions creates a dialogue that is very different from conversations that go on at most professional conferences.
In-depth Common Learning Experiences
Unlike professional conferences where participants are deluged with hundreds of concurrent presentations having little time between sessions to question the presenters and to explore implications and applications of a session, the Institute schedules all presentations as general sessions and schedules time after each session for participants to reflect, question the presenter, and dialogue with their colleagues from a common experience.
Mentoring
Mentoring is a special component of the Winter Institutes. Mentors are chosen for their experience and expertness in learning assistance as well as for their collegial enthusiasm and empathy for the concerns of Institute participants. The Institute ratio of participants to mentors is maintained at six or seven participants to one mentor. Mentors are equally divided between men and women, and represent a multi-ethnic diversity that reflects a similar student diversity that Learning Assistance serves. Participants choose or are assigned a mentor for the five-day Institute. Mentor/participant activities include daily overviews at breakfast meetings, feedback sessions at the end of each day’s presentations, and scheduled consulting sessions with an individual or an institutional team. Frequently, mentors are also presenters, session chairpersons, or Special Interest Group facilitators.
Presentation Readiness through Proactive Listening
Each day, participants meet with a mentor at a scheduled group breakfast meeting to preview the day’s schedule and to consider presentations in view of each participant’s institutional and professional needs. Based on the title and an overview of each presentation, participants are encouraged to make up questions that they would like the presenter to answer, hopefully at the presentation or later in the week at a private consultation with the presenter.
Presentation Learning through Feedback and Closure
After each presentation, participants have many opportunities to “talk back” to the presenter’s ideas both publicly at the scheduled follow-up session and at the group feedback meeting at the end of each day. In addition, participants can meet privately with the presenter during the week.
Currency in Research, Methods, and Technology
Institute presentations focus on the latest information and practices in learning assistance programs and services. Bibliographic handouts complement each presentation.
“Next Steps” as Institute Follow-up
Another of the features that sets the Winter Institutes apart from almost all other conferences is the “Next Steps” session that is scheduled on the last day of the Institute. Two “Next Steps” that participants are asked to put at the top of their list involve sharing their list with their staff and with their immediate supervisor. At this two-hour session, participants are first allotted quiet time to look over their Institute notes, edit, and summarize them with special emphasis on listing specific actions that they will initiate when they return to their campuses. Next, in pairs, participants share their notes. Then in small groups, participants are asked to share these actions and prepare one or more large wall charts that list the combined “next steps” for each group. When all the groups have made up their charts, a spokesperson for each group then shares its wall charts with the other groups. After all groups have shared their “next steps,’ everyone is encouraged to move around the room and read all the wall charts, adding any relevant “next steps” that they consider useful to their own list. Two “next steps” that participants are asked to put at the top of their list involve sharing their list with their staff and sharing their list with their immediate supervisor.
Example: “Next Steps” of the 1998 Winter Institute
Unfinished Business, A Life-long Learning Process
The Institute dialogue that evolves from presentations, consultations, and group discussions does not end with the Institute. In addition to conventional post-Institute interaction by telephone and mail, participants can also continue to dialogue with each other and with their mentors and presenters through individual email, on LRNASST-L , the listserv created by the Winter Institute at the University of Arizona and now hosted by the University of Florida, and on this Winter Institute web site pages.t.
History of the Winter Institute
History of the Institutes 1977-2007
From the original vision of Martha Maxwell to hold a week-long summer training program for learning support center directors and staff at UC Berkeley, to Frank Christ’s leadership at CSU Long Beach, to an interim institute at the United States Air Force Academy, to the the winter series co-sponsored by the University of Arizona and Paradise Valley Community College to the new series of Winter Institutes hosted by Alan Constant, Director of the Learning Center at the University of Texas at Austin beginning in January 2005.
The history of the Institutes can be divided into seven phases (shown below). With each change in institutional sponsorship, leadership, and location, came changes in program philosophy and format. The focus, however, always mirrored the original vision of Martha Maxwell, the primary founder of the institutes, that learning assistance administrators and staff need an intensive professional opportunity to network, to learn from each other, and to grow professionally so that their learning assistance programs and services could serve students more effectively and efficiently.
NOTE
As a footnote to this history, it should be noted that all the institutes described in this history (CSULB, USAFA, University of Arizona, and Paradise Valley Community College) were inspired by Martha Maxwell’s groundbreaking series at UC Berkeley. In addition, it seems that the summer series of institutes for learning centers sponsored by Les Wilson at NY Long Island CC, and the MCLCA summer series were influenced by the UC Berkeley program.
We thank the following colleagues for their help in finding and sharing materials on the institutes: Martha Maxwell (Consultant, Bethesda, MD) and Kenneth Zech (Kings River Community College, CA).
Original Vision and Beginning
Original Vision and Beginning
The following article from New Directions for College Learning Assistance, 4, 1981 pp. 39-45, was reprinted with permission of Martha Maxwell and Jossey-Bass publishers.
The Annual Learning Center Institute at the University of
California-Berkeley, attracts a national pool of directors
and skills specialists who come for a week of intensive
management and professional development training.
An Annual Institute for Directors and Staff of College Learning Centers
Martha Maxwell
Every summer 100 people from college learning centers across the country converge on Berkeley for a week-long intensive program. Some are faculty from diverse disciplines, newly appointed to administrative roles in learning assistance centers; others are old hands at the business–but all are seeking ways to improve their programs and their own professional development.
Berkeley’s Annual Institute for College Learning Center Directors and Staff offers a one-week, in-depth learning/sharing experience for professionals from college learning assistance centers. Sponsored by the University of California, Berkeley Extension, in cooperation with the Department of Education, the institute’s programs are designed for three groups: (1) new administrators, (2) experienced administrators, and (3) learning specialists who want to improve their ability to teach basic skills.
For those beginning careers in learning assistance, the institute provides a comprehensive introduction to the field. For experienced staff, it offers an opportunity to update knowledge and skills and learn “state of the art” information.
Who Attends?
Over the past four years, the 412 people who have come to the institute represent an interesting cross-section of college programs in the United States and Canada, both geographically and institutionally. Typically, each class has participants from sixty to seventy colleges and from more than thirty states. The colleges they represent are equally diverse–public and private, large and small–with admissions policies that vary from open to highly selective. Many of the participants come from small colleges that enroll less than 10,000 students, and 70 percent are from public colleges.
Most learning center directors are part-time administrators who also hold academic or other positions within their institutions. About 15 percent of the participants are skills counselors or instructors with no administrative duties but who aspire to management positions.
The types of students with whom they work also range from technical-college freshmen to graduate and professional students; from those preparing for the GED to pre-meds taking the MCAT. A third of the group work in community colleges and a quarter are from universities. The rest are from four-year colleges.
People who attend the institute vary greatly in background and interests. The average participant has a master’s degree with academic preparation in English (33 percent), education or reading (21 percent), or human behavior and counseling (18 percent). Although the majority of the participants have administrative responsibilities, only 10 percent have had any managerial training. They tend to be relatively inexperienced administrators, even though some have worked in teaching or counseling positions for many years (Bennett, 1979).
Ninety percent of the directors who attend the institute work in older, well-established learning centers. Only 10 percent are starting new centers.Over the years, institute participants have changed somewhat:
- Current participants are more experienced. Forty-two percent of the 1980 group had more than three years of experience in learning services, while in 1977 only 27 percent of the group had worked for more than three years in such programs. Either the field is maturing or the institute is attracting more experienced professionals. In addition, alumni of the program are returning to take additional work.
- There were more full-time administrators among the learning center directors attending the institute in 1980 (40 percent) than in 1977 (27 percent), yet few of these people had previous managerial training or experience.
- More of the learning skills specialists who attend are teaching mathematics skills, English as a Second Language (ESL), and mainstreaming the learning disabled than was true in earlier years.
How Did the Institute Get Started?
It was not until 1976 that the support to start an institute was available. Ernest Gourdine, then at the University of California-Davis, and Barbara Tomlinson, then at the University of California-Riverside, joined the author in discussing the desperate need for information that newcomers to the field showed in their questions and entreaties following a presentation we gave at the International Reading Association Annual Conference. We consequently agreed to try to start an institute.
The three of us presented the first program alone–dividing the topics among ourselves–an exhausting experience. Additional speakers were selected for subsequent institutes, and we increased the number of topics, adding small-group discussion sessions, demonstrations, book sales, and other services. Criteria for selecting speakers were that they have something worthwhile to say, can express their ideas well and concretely, and can deal effectively with our very critical audience. Over the years, we have speakers like Jim Gray of the Bay Area Writing Project, Frank Christ of California State University-Long Beach, Paul Copperman, educational critic, and many others.
The variety of needs and interests that participants bring to the institute are recognized in planning the program, and speakers are scheduled from both open-admissions and selective colleges to speak on the same topics. For example, the Stanford Writing Center differs a great deal from writing centers in open-admissions colleges.
The range of program topics seems to increase each year. A list of current topics is given below:
1. For New Administrators
- Starting a Learning Center from Scratch
- Designing a Learning Assistance System
- Management by Objectives
- Organizing the Services
- Setting Up a Record System
- Budgeting and Staff Selection
- Developing and Maintaining Good Relations with Faculty and Administrators
- Tutor Selection and Training
- Staff Selection and Training
- Staff Development
- Grant Proposal Writing
- Program Evaluation Techniques
2. For Experienced Administrators
- Planning Long-Range Goals and Objectives
- Integrating Learning-Skills Programs with Learning Resources
- Uses of Micro-Computers in Learning Center Programs
- Advanced Grantsmanship
- Personnel Issues–Recruitment, Training, Promotion
- Impact of Academic Reorganization Plans on Learning Centers
- Maintaining the Dynamics of the Established Learning Center
- Sophisticated Evaluation Techniques
3. For Learning Specialists
A. Writing
- Establishing and Improving Writing Centers
- Techniques for Teaching Basic Writing
- Methods for Improving Writing Skills
- Evaluating Student Writing
- Selecting Appropriate Materials for a Writing Center
- Teaching Writing to the ESL Student
- Mapping–A Technique for Improving Reading, Writing, and Speaking
B. Reading
- Diagnosing Reading Difficulties (Formal and Informal Measures)
- Selecting Appropriate Materials for the College Remedial Reader
- Reading Programs for the Above-Average College Student
- Implications of Current Research in Reading for the College Developmental Skills Specialist
- Teaching Reading and Writing to the Black Dialect Speaker
- Teaching Reading to Students from Different Ethnic Backgrounds
- Adjunct Skills Courses in Social Science
C. Mathematics and Science
- Math Anxiety Workshops
- Techniques for Teaching Math Study Skills
- Reducing Math Avoidance
- Problem Solving Can Be Taught
- How to Develop Adjunct Skills Courses in Science
- Improving Tutorial Services in Math and Science
- Developing Preparatory Courses for GRE, LSAT, MCAT, and Other Professional Exams
D. Topics of General Interest
- Study Skills Workshops–Informal Diagnostic Measures,
- Training Peer Study-Skills Aides, Planning Effective Academic-Skills Group Programs
- Bridging the Gap Between High School and College Learning in the Liberal Arts
- Audio-Visual Aids for Improving Basic Skills
- Helping Students Overcome Procrastination
- Implications of Research on Learning Styles for the Developmental Skills Specialist
- Training Faculty to Teach Study Skills to Their Students
- Diagnostic and Placement Techniques
- Teaching College Survival Skills
- Working with Learning-Disabled Students in the Learning Center
- Motivating Students to Use Self-Help Materials
- The Relation Between Language and Thought: Implications for Instruction
Credit
Those who wish to enroll in the institute for credit are required to prepare a project that applies one of the topics to their own campus programs. People have completed a wide range of projects from developing a traveling learning center (a bus that visits community locations) to preparing a letter justifying a sabbatical to developing a placement testing battery and persuading faculty at an open-admissions college to adopt it.
What Is the Impact of Institutional Participation?
One of the spinoffs of the institute has been its spawning of new conferences. There has been an explosion of local, regional, and even some national conferences started by alumni of the institute. Attending our program has apparently inspired some directors to replicate their experiences locally in such conferences as Long Island University Brooklyn’s The Non-Traditional Student in the College Learning Center (Lester Wilson), and in the Conference for Learning Center Personnel in Post-Secondary Institutions co-sponsored by the University of Wisconsin branches at Eau Claire and Platteville (Rosemary Mueller).
Networks.
People who attend the week-long institute become well acquainted with others who share their interests and roles. Close friendships as well as professional networks are the result. The length of the program provides an atmosphere of total immersion in which participants gain a different perspective on problems and explore the implications of their work with students.
Increased Sense of Efficacy.
Our evaluation surveys show that participants report the following gains from attending the institute: (1) Most feel more confident about their ability to function successfully in their roles as professionals; (2) most say they will return to their colleges with a renewed sense of purpose and with many new ideas to implement; (3) some say that attending the institute gave them the reassurance that they were doing the right kinds of things on their jobs and that they were doing them well; (4) some got positive reactions to their ideas and job performance, while others found an incentive to change their ways; and (5) others are convinced that they can now successfully pursue plans and projects that they had been hesitant about starting before.
In summary, the Annual Institute for Directors of Staff of College Learning Centers attracts a diverse group of college learning center managers and skills specialists and fills their need for specialized professional training.
Reference
Bennett, B. “The Training Needs of Learning Center Directors–Results of a Survey.” Paper presentedæat the Western College Reading Association Annual Conference, Honolulu, April 10, 1979.
Martha Maxwell is an educational consultant and evaluator who founded and directed learning centers at the Uniuersity of Maryland and the University of Callfornia at Berkeley. She now directs the Annual Institute for Directors and Staff of College Learning Centers. She is the author of Improving Student Skills: A Comprehensive Guide to Successful Practices and Programs for Increasing the Performance of Underprepared Students (Jossey-Bass, 1979).
Phase I: 1977-1982
Phase I: 1977-1982
Institute Beginning: A Summer Tradition, UC Berkeley (CA)
According to Dr. Martha Maxwell in an article , “An Annual Institute for Directors and Staff of College Learning Centers,” published in an 1981 volume of the Jossey-Bass series, NEW DIRECTIONS FOR COLLEGE LEARNING ASSISTANCE , audience response to an IRA presentation by herself, Ernest Gourdine (UC Davis), and Barbara Tomlinson (UC Riverside), demonstrated to Maxwell and her two co-presenters that there was a need to have some type of program for learning center directors and practitioners to learn what other learning centers were doing, to exchange information on successful practices and materials, and, in general, to improve their professionality in a relatively new and expanding program area.
In 1977, with support from UC Berkeley Extension and the sponsorship of the School of Education, Maxwell began the UC Berkeley Annual Institutes for College Learning Center Directors and Staff. The first institute was the collaborative effort of Maxwell, Gourdine, and Tomlinson at which they made all the presentations during that first live-in week at Berkeley. Although Martha Maxwell left the directorship of the UC Berkeley Learning Center in 1976 to become its Academic Liaison and retired from the university three years later, the institutes were continuously under her direction.
In the first five years (1977-1981), the Berkeley Institutes hosted over 450 new and experienced learning center administrators and skills specialists. After the first institute, each institute had 20 to 25 speakers involved in 70 to 80 presentations, discussion, focus groups, and forums. In her article, Maxwell listed over 50 topics that were presented in those five years. Although the first two institutes had no publicized themes, the next three addressed the following themes: “Increasing the Impact of Learning Centers” (1989), “Meeting the Challenges of the 1980’s” (1990), and “Bridging the Gap” (1991). For each of the UC Berkeley Institutes, proceedings were published and given to participants at the beginning of the institute. Institute topics included starting new learning centers, program management, writing skills improvement and writing centers, reading and study skills improvement, math and science skills development, and updates on current research. In addition, at some of the institutes, presentations were taped and audiocassettes were made available for sale.
In 1982, the Sixth Annual Institute with its theme “Stretching Our Resources” was announced and advertised but ironically was cancelled because only 95 people signed up for the Institute and UC Berkeley Extension required 100 sign-ups for the institute to be held. This institute ended a series of Berkeley Summer Institutes that had hosted over 450 participants representing administration and faculty from more than 100 postsecondary institutions who listened to over 300 presentations made by 60 different presenters.
Phase I Presenters
Adams, W. Royce (Santa Barbara City College) 80, 81
Algier, Ann (Eastern Kentucky University) 80, 81
Bennett, Bruce (UC Berkeley, West Nevada Community College) ’78?, 79, 80, 81
Bogue, Carol San Jose City College) 78, 79, 80, 81
Brooks, Phyllis (UC Berkeley) 79, 80, 81
Brown, Beryl (UC San Diego) 80
Brown, Wesley (CSU Hayward) 81
Buckley, Marilyn Hanf (UC Berkeley) 79, 80
Burka, Jane (UC Berkeley) 80, 81
Burrows, Celeste (UC Berkeley) 79
Christ, Frank (CSU Long Beach) 79, 80, 81
Coda-Messerle, Margaret (CSU Lomg Beach) 79
Coleman, Jack (Sangamon State University) 79
Cook, Donald (Northeastern University) 80, 81
Cooper, Charles (SUNY Buffalo) 78
Cox, Gordon UC Berkeley) 78
Cummins, Richard (University of Montana) 78
Davidson, Sue Johnson (CPU San Luis Obispo) 78, 79, 80
Drucker, Ronald (UC Berkeley) 78
Enright, Gwyn (San Diego City College) 79, 80, 81
Fields, Irving (Rogue Community College) 81
Fodor, Janice (Elmhurst College) 81
Franklin, Karen (UC Berkeley) 79
Friedl, Gordon (UC Berkeley) 78
Gillies, Donald (University of Iowa) 78
Gourdine, Ernest (CSU Fullerton) 77, 78, 79, 80, 81
Gray, James (UC Berkeley) 78
Hawkins, Thom (UC Berkeley) 78, 79
Heard, Patricia (University of Texas at Austin) 81keynoter
Herlin, Wayne (Brigham Young University) 79
Hubin, David (UC Irvine, University of Oregon) 78, 79, 80, 81
Kaufmann, William (Wm. Kaufmann Publishers) 80
Kfoury, Rosalie (UC Riverside) 79, 80, 81
Lauridsen, Kurt (UC Berkeley) 78, 79, 80
Law, Virginia (West Valley College) 78
Maxwell, Martha (UC Berkeley) 77, 78, 79, 80, 81
McHargue, Michael (Foothill College) 78, 79, 80
Michael, Beverly (University of Pittsburgh) 81
Mills, Helen (American River College) 79, 80
Nautapsky, Mark (USAF Academy) 81
Pond, Jack (Leeward Community College) 81
Richman, Janice (UC Berkeley) 78
Rin, Hadas (UC Berkeley) 79
Risto, Thomas (Wayne County CC) 78
Rodarte, Angelina (Foothill College) 78
Sanders, Vickie (University of the Pacific) 81
Schiller, Susan (University of Pittsburgh) 81
Spalding, Norma (San Jose State University) 80, 81
Starks, Gretchen (University of Minnesota Technical College at Crookston) 80
Sullivan, Janet (Bowling Green State University) 81
Sullivan, Leroy (University of Arkansas, Little Rock) 78
Thompson, Jerry (UC Irvine) 81
Thum, Carl (Olivet College) 81
Tomlinson, Barbara (UC Irvine) 77, 78, 79, 80, 81
Tompkins, Ernest (Forsyth Technical Institute) 81
Turner, Carolyn (UC Davis) 79
Vazquez, Juan (Alameda College) 78, 79, 80, 81
Walker, Carolyn (Stanford University) 78, 79, 80
Watanabe, Calin (UC Berkeley) 78
Westbrook, Colston (Minority Consultants Service, Berkeley) 78,79,80,81
Wilson, Lester (Long Island University, Brooklyn) 78
Phase II: 1983-1984
Phase II: 1983-1984
Looking for New Sponsorship
After the cancellation of the UC Berkeley Sixth Annual Institute, the College Reading & Learning Association (CRLA) Board asked for volunteers to continue the tradition of the annual institutes. A CRLA member from Brigham Young University agreed to host an institute in 1984 but the institute failed to materialize due to a lack of interest and subsequent low enrollment.
Phase III: 1985-1989
Phase III: 1985-89
Continuing the Summer Tradition, CSU Long Beach (CA)
Three years later, Frank Christ, Coordinator of the Learning Assistance Support System at CSU Long Beach, and a regular presenter at the UC Berkeley Summer Institutes, contacted Kurt Lauridsen, the new director of the UC Berkeley Learning Center, and Martha Maxwell, now retired in Maryland, to suggest that the Learning Assistance Support System was interested in continuing the Institute tradition as a five-year series at CSU Long Beach if there were no interest in continuing the institutes at Berkeley, Both Kurt Lauridsen and Martha Maxwell agreed that Frank Christ and his staff could continue the institute tradition at CSU Long Beach.
Appropriately, the first Summer Institute at CSU Long Beach (Seventh Annual Institute) began with a keynote address to institute participants by Martha Maxwell from her home in Maryland. This audio presentation was sponsored by Bell Telephone of California at no cost to the institute.
The CSU Long Beach series (Seventh through Eleventh), under the direction of Frank Christ and Elaine Burns, saw the introduction of an institute limit of 60 participants, special registration fee structure for Canadian educators, daily general sessions and fewer concurrent presentations, the use of presenters as mentors with mentor group breakfasts and end-of-day closure sessions, a hands-on-computer lab, and social/networking activities such as Dinner-on-the Town, learning center tours, and consultation sign-ups. Over twenty presenters made over 60 presentations to nearly 300 participants on Learning Assistance related subjects during this five-year series.
Presenters & Mentors Phase III: 1985-89
CSULB Summer Institutes: 1985-89 Presenters, Mentors, Guests
Austin, Delores (UC Santa Barbara) 86, Presenter & Mentor
Bogue, Carol (San Jose City College) 88, Mentor
Boylan, Hunter (Appalachian State University) M85
Brown, Wesley (University of North Carolina/Chapel Hill)
Burns, Elaine (CSU Long Beach) M85
Christ, Frank (CSU Long Beach) M85
Church, Gay M85
Dozen, Patti (CSU Long Beach) M85
Enright, Gwyn (San Diego City College) M85
Hackworth, Robert (St.Petersburg Junior College) M85
Helm, Phoebe (Triton College)
Johnson, Crawford (Indiana University, PA) M85
Kerstiens, Gene (El Camino College) M85
Kusunoki-Sakamoto, Karen (University of Hawaii/Manoa)
Lemelin, Robert (University of Southern Maine)
MacDonald, Anita (University of Missouri) M85
Maxwell, Martha (UC Berkeley, Emeritus) M85
Miles, Curtis (Piedmont Technical College) M85
Montano-Harmon, Maria (CSU Fullerton)
Smith, Karen (Tulane University) M85
Spann, Milton (Appalachian State University)
Tadlock, Dee (Yakima Community College)
Ybarra, Rosemary (Hartnell Community College) M85
Phase IV: 1990
Phase IV: 1990
An Interim Solution, United States Air Force Academy
Recognizing that a new series of institutes required strong sponsorship and that time was needed to solicit this sponsorship, Christ asked Captain Andy Stricker, Director of the USAF Academy’s Learning Center if he would consider asking the Academy to sponsor an interim institute. Thus, the Twelfth Institute was held in summer, 1990, at the USAF Academy sponsored by the Learning Skills Center of the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) through the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership. The Director of the Institute was Diane Nicoletta, Assistant Director of the USAF Learning Skills Center. Among the 44 participants were representatives from the four major military academies (USAFA, USMA, USNA, and USCGA), two other military schools (NMMI and the Citadel), as well as from 23 community colleges and universities. The welcome remarks were given by Brigadier General E. Royer, Dean of Faculty, USAFA. The program consisted of ten general presentations, separate panel sessions on the future role of learning skills centers in community colleges, universities, and the military academies, a panel session on community Right to Read programs, tours of the USAF Academy and the Learning Skills Center, and evening dinner events. Eight mentors held mentor group breakfast meetings and daily mentor group sessions. Both mentor activities, now established traditions at Winter Institutes, began at this institute.
As a result of the 12th Annual Institute for Learning Assistance Professionals, the military participants developed a charter for a spin-off academic group–the Military Learning Assistance Board (M-Lab). Its mission statement reflects a dedication to enhancing the potential of all cadets and midshipmen admitted to any highly competitive environment. Since the board’s focus is to communicate regularly about student programs, services, and assessment, M-LAB has created its own special institutes which have subsequently convened at the Coast Guard Academy, The Citadel, West Point, and Annapolis.
Presenters & Mentors Phase IV: 1990
An Interim Solution, United States Air Force Academy
List of Presenters:
Bryant, Carl (LtCol: USAFA), “Cognitive Complexity of Undergraduates”
Cleet, James (Cadet First Class USAFA), “Cadet Research on Learning Skills”
Goetz, Ernest: (Texas A & M University), “Developing Reading Comprehension Skills in Undergraduates”
Ince, Elizabeth: (United States Military Academy), “The Role of Learning Skills Centers at Military Academies”
Pine, William: (Col USAFA), “The Center for Teaching Excellence: Its Role at the USAF Academy”
Porter, David: (LtCol USAFA), “Developing Critical Thinking Skills in Undergraduates”
Rachels, Jack: (LtCol USAFA), “Technology on Display: Laser Disk Applications”
Stricker, Andy: (Capt USAFA), “Thinking One Step Beyond: New Frontiers in Learning Skills Centers”
Thurman, Daniel (LtCol USAFA), “Individualized Study Skills Instruction”
Wanat, Stan (Stanford University), “Critical/Creative Thinking Development”
Muse, Vashti (Hinds Community College), “What is NADE?
Mentors: USAFA Twelfth Summer Institute 1990
Christ, Frank (CSU Long Beach) Mentor
Enright, Gwyn (San Diego City College) Mentor
Johnson, Crawford: (Talented Tenth Educational Consultants) Mentor
Kerstiens, Gene: (El Camino College) Mentor
Madrid, Sandra: (University of Washington) Mentor
Porter, David: (LtCol USAFA) Mentor
Stricker, Andy: (Capt USAFA) Mentor
Tadlock, Dee: (Washington State University) Mentor
Phase V: 1991-1997
Phase V: 1991-97
The Winter Series, University of Arizona (Tucson)
In 1990, Frank Christ retired from CSU Long Beach and relocated to southeastern Arizona with an understanding that the University of Arizona would consider sponsoring the Institutes in Tucson. At this time, breaking with the tradition of holding the institutes in the summer, the Winter Institute series began. With regular advertising in the JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION and word-of-mouth advertising, the new series began in January, 1992 with Frank Christ and Sylvia Mioduski as co-directors of this new series that featured some radical departures in format and philosphy from the previous institutes. See “What is a Winter Institute?” and “Winter Institute Philosophy” for descriptions.
The Winter Institutes continued the annual institute tradition of having experienced professionals in the field as participant mentors (six to eight participants to a mentor). There were 29 mentors and presenters during this fifth phase of the annual institutes.
With an increasing emphasis on technology, the Winter Institutes:
integrated a multi-platform, multidisciplinary computer lab into each annual program
started a listserv, LRNASST (under the sponsorship of Guillermo Uribe, at U of A), for learning assistance and developmental education personnel
emphasized the role of technology in learning assistance programs and services to further enhance the professional opportunities for training and networking among learning assistance professionals
The Winter Institutes (thirteenth through the eighteenth) focused on the following themes:
Student Retention (1992),
The Internet: Its Potential and Possibilities for Learning Assistance (1993),
Learning Assistance Program Design, Start-Up, and Development (1994),
Technology and the Learning Assistance Center (1995),
Role of Learning Assistance Professional as Manager (1996),
Teaching/Learning, and Faculty & Administration Issues (1997).
The Eighteenth Winter Institute (1997) and the Nineteenth Winter Institute (1998) are both described in detail on this web site. In addition, you can review the evaluations that participants gave if you are wondering what participants have said about these experiences and whether you might be interested in becoming a part of the Winter Institute experience.
Mentors/Presenters Phase V: 1991-97
The Winter Series, University of Arizona (Tucson)
List of mentors (M), keynoters (K), and presenters (P) from 1992-97 of the Winter Institutes. Links will take you to information and/or picture of mentor chosen
David Arendale (University of Missouri, MO) P&M97
Marie-Elaine Burns (Skyline Community College, CA) P&M93, M96
Hunter Boylan (Appalachian State University, NC) M92
David Caverly (Southwest Texas University, TX) P&M94, P&M95, P&M97
Frank L. Christ (Emeritus, CSU Long Beach, CA) P&M92, P&M93, M94, P&M95, P&M96, P&M97
John Earnest (Nassau Community College, NY)) P&M94
Gwyn Enright (San Diego City College, CA) M92, M93, M94, P&M95, M96, M97
Tom Gier (University of Alaska-Anchorage, AK) P&M93, M94
Bob Hackworth (Emeritus, St. Petersburg JC, FL) P&M93
Karan Hancock (University of Alaska-Anchorage, AK) P&M93, M94
Eleanor Harner (University of Arizona, AZ) P&M92 , M93
Robert Hashway (Grambling State University, LA) M96
Brad Hughes (University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI) P&M92, P&M93, P&M94, P&M96, P&M97
Gene Kerstiens (Scottsdale Community College, Maricopa, AZ) P&M92, M93, M94, P&M95, M96, M97
Pete Kresan (University of Arizona, AZ) P97
Kurt Lauridsen (UC Berkeley, CA) P92
Lucy MacDonald (Chemeketa Community College, OR) P&M96
Wilbert McKeachie (University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, MI)?K97
Martha Maxwell (Emerita, UC Berkeley, CA) M92, M93, M94, P&M95, M96
Sylvia Mioduski (University of Arizona, AZ) M92, M93, M94, M95, M96
Bob Mittan (Casper College, WY) P&M 94
Gen Ramirez (CSU Long Beach, CA) P&M92
Rick Sheets (Paradise Valley CC, Maricopa, AZ) P&M92, M93, M94, P&M95, P&M96, M97
Karen Smith (Rutgers University, NJ) P&M95, P&M97
Guillermo Uribe, (University of Arizona) P96, P97 (Computer Lab Support, 92-97)
Socorro Vasquez (University of Arizona, AZ) P&M94
Tillie Warnock (University of Arizona) K92
Robert Wrenn (University of Arizona) K93
Yvonne Zeka (GateWay CC, AZ) P92
Agenda
1997 Winter Institute Program Focus on Teaching & Learning
| Day/Time | Events |
|---|---|
| Sunday PM: | Welcome, Mini-keynote on issues related to theme – Frank Christ |
| Monday AM: | Mentor BreakfastKeynote: Bill McKeachie, U of Michigan; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion |
| Monday Lunch: | Provided By WI |
| Monday PM: | Teaching Styles-Learning Styles by Karen Smith, Rutgers University; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion; Mentor Group Meetings |
| Monday Evening: | Dinner-on-the-town by Sign-ups SIGs (impromptu Special Interest Group meetings selected by mentors & participants) |
| Tuesday AM: | Mentor Breakfast Teaching-Learning: Composition by Brad Hughes, U of Wisconsin-Madison; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion; Mentor Group Meetings |
| Tuesday PM: | Peter Kresan -Teaching-Learning: Science U of Arizona; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion |
| Tuesday Evening: | Dinner-on-the-town by Sign-ups SIGs; Computer Lab Open |
| Wednesday AM: | Mentor BreakfastTeaching-Learning: Supplemental Instruction by David Arendale, U of Missouri-Kansas City; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion |
| Wednesday PM: | Participant Renewal Time & Options: Shopping; U of A Campus Tour; Local Sites (pic of Saguaro National Park); On your own |
| Thursday AM: | Mentor Breakfast Teaching-Learning: Reading by David Caverly, Southwest Texas University; Mentor Responses; Group Discussion |
| Thursday PM: | Teaching-Learning: Key Sites on Internet – A hands-on Computer Lab experience in using the web. |
| Thursday Evening: | Dinner-on-the-Town Sign-ups SIGs; Computer Lab Open |
| Friday AM: | Mentor Breakfast Professional Associations; Teaching-Learning: Next Steps by Frank Christ, WI Co-Director |
| Friday Noon: | Farewell Luncheon Parting Comments |
Phase VI: 1998-2003
Phase VI: 1998-Present
The Winter Series, Co-sponsorship by
University of Arizona (Tucson) and
Paradise Valley Community College (Scottsdale)
In 1997, Paradise Valley Community College, a member of the Maricopa Community College District, became a co-sponsor with the University of Arizona of the Winter Institute series. With this addition to its sponsorship, the 19th Winter Institute (1998) relocated to Scottsdale with plans to alternate every other year between a Tucson and a Phoenix location. Dr. Rick Sheets, Director of the PVC Learning Asistance Center, became the 1998 on-site 19th Winter Institute Coordinator.
It was also in this phase that this Winter Institute web site was created. It too is a joint effort with Rick Sheets, Paradise Valley College, as its webmaster and Frank Christ, University of Arizona, as its editor/consultant.
Detailed information for Winter Institute 1998 follows. Click on one of the next links for information on Winter Institute 1999 or Winter Institute 2000.
WI ’98 Mentors/Presenters
The Winter Institute Mentors: 1998
Winter Institute mentors are integral to the success of the Institute. These individuals, recognized leaders in the field of learning assistance, not only provide individual and group mentoring and consultation, but also participate as active learners throughout the Institute.
Mentors begin each day’s program with an orientation and overview meeting during breakfast, continue with daily informal meetings, and conclude each day’s activities with a feedback session. Many will also deliver major presentations at the Institute’s General Sessions with a small group follow-up of participants interested in continuing a discussion with the mentor on her/his presentation.
Listed below are the learning assistance professionals presenting and mentoring at the 1998 Winter Institute. Links to their photos and short biographical sketches are available as indicated.
Frank Christ, Visiting Scholar, U of A: WI Co-Coordinator and Mentor
Gwyn Enright, San Diego CC: Keynote Presenter and Mentor
David Gerkin, Paradise Valley CC: Presenter and Mentor
Gene Kerstiens, Andragogy Associates: Mentor
Georgine Materniak, U of Pittsburgh: Presenter and Mentor
Bill Mathis, South Mountain CC: Computer Lab Mentor & Presenter
Martha Maxwell, MM Associates: Mentor
Sylvia Mioduski, U of A: WI Co-Coordinator and Mentor
Rodger Slater, Maricopa CC District: Guest Panelist
Rick Sheets, Paradise Valley CC: WI Co-Coordinator & Presenter
Guillermo Uribe, U of A, LRNASST Admin: Presenter
Winter Institute 1998 Program
“Next Steps” of participants at the 19th Annual Winter Institute on Student Assessment & Program Evaluation
“Next Steps” is one of ten elements described in the Winter Institute Philosophy that distinguishes the Winter Institute program from most other professional experiences. It is scheduled at the end of the Institute and is designed to convert what Institute participants have heard and experienced into practical actions that can be initiated when participants return to their campus programs. The collection of “Next Steps” below were identified by 1998 Winter Institute participants as professional “steps” they wanted to take as a result of their WI ’98 experience. Five groups, one of which was the Winter Institute mentors, mentioned over 50 actions that they felt were important outcomes of the Institute. Some of the following “Next Steps” were identified by more than one group. Note that “Next Steps” are divided into four categories: professional development, staff development, training, and communication, program evaluation, and program and miscellaneous. You are invited to review the list and identify appropriate “Steps” you may want to implement in your center or at your institution. Please note that with any “To Do” list such as this one, need to consider the following management actions:Share list with staff Establish priorities for the items Convert all “next steps” into objectives List the tasks necessary to achieve each objectiveDetermine what resources are needed to complete the tasks Establish who is responsible for the tasks and objectives Decide on completion dates both for the tasks and the objective Periodically review progress in completing tasks and objectives.
Professional Development Next Steps:
Subscribe to LRNASST Schedule a specific time to browse the WebWrite articles for publication Read and research articles and webDevelop, create, and maintain own web page/web site Update existing web site (set specific time to get it done) Create faculty professional resources web page Add WI’s Definitions of Learning Assistance to own web page Join additional professional organizations using the WI web site list to decide Add URL to business cards as originally suggested by David Arendale Review periodically the WI Web Site Directory of Professional Associations Investigate ways technology can be incorporated into course content and skills instruction Summarize WI for Campus Leadership Team Research database and Scantron resources for data collection and reporting
Staff Development/Training/Communication Next Steps
Organize and meet with staff to share WI highlights, notebook, and “Next steps” Use WI and LAC web sites for staff development Acquire and share CAS standards with staff Acquire tutor training videos Meet with staff to discuss and identify appropriate data to collect; Help tutors understand importance of data collection Develop systematic approach to data collection Automate tutoring scheduling, data collection, and reporting Look into MBO as a management tool Develop and implement a student evaluation or “report card” of materials used Create a notebook, similar to Paradise Valley Community College LAC, for collecting reports Integrate current databases into a system Organize a staff retreat Share student assessment test Study Guide with Placement Testing staff Standardize tutoring program by becoming a CRLA-certified Tutor Training Program
Program Evaluation Next Steps
Gain better access to campus and district data systems Develop formal evaluation of tutors Develop formal evaluation of LAC Staff Research bar code use to collect data Perform overall examination of data systems to determine how we evaluate including their qualitative/quantitative balance, completeness, use, variety of data, and distribution Establish faculty liaisons Put together overall evaluation process/plan with specific objectives Upgrade computer network for tracking students and evaluating program Set up rotating assessment program folders Review assessment strategies and implement changes incrementally Change current assessment instruments to SBI and LTM
Program and Miscellaneous Next Steps
Incorporate tutors as a step before students can retake a test Develop ESL Conversation groups Use community resources as tutorsImplement more faculty involvement in the Learning Center Set up resource library for students having difficulty in high-risk coursesDevelop a newsletter aimed at faculty Have more communication/collaboration with faculty Network with faculty (dept. meetings, lunches, orientation) Set up faculty liaison or advisory committee Initiate impact study of the Academic and Retention units services to students Take and display tutor pictures Look into “volunteer” tutors as a resource
The Winter Institute Participants: 1998
The questions, education, and experiences the participants bring with them make the Winter Institute a memorable learning experience for all: mentors, presenters, and participants. The week-long collegiality and networking are an integral part of the Institute. The participants are often individuals on a quest for knowledge with a unique opportunity to discuss ideas and issues with recognized leaders in the field of learning assistance.
Participants begin each day’s program with an orientation and overview meeting during breakfast, continue with daily informal meetings, and conclude each day’s activities with a feedback session. Many will meet individually or in small groups with the one or mentors on topics of interest. Listed below are the learning assistance professionals attending the 1998 Winter Institute as participants. Links to their photos and short biographical sketches have been created at this year’s Winter Institute by the participants themselves. Please feel free to contact them via their email links on their Winter Institute Participant web page.
John Bloomquist, Arizona State University
Deborah Carley, NH Technical Institute
Suzy Crescenti, Paradise Valley Community College
Laura DeMarais, University of St. Thomas
Ed Dolan, Wm Rainey Harper College
Liz Estrada, South Mountain Community College
Floyd Goodwyn, Washburn University
Karen Guss, Central Arizona College
Carole Hanson, Paradise Valley Community College
Crosby Hunt, Middle Tennessee State
John Hughes, College of Southern Idaho
Barbara Ice, Tomball College
Alison Livingston, Paradise Valley Community College
Barbara McInerney, Cochise College
Georgine Materniak, University of Pittsburgh
Ibrahim Naim, University of Arizona
Patricia Pates, University of Central Florida
Catherine Pomar, Jacksonville University
Yolanda Reynoso, Paradise Valley Community College
Linda Russell, Minneapolis Community
Frankie Yockey, University of Idaho
Phase VII: 2005-2007
The Winter Series, University of Texas/Austin
No further information available.
Winter Institute Evaluations
Winter Institutes are evaluated by its participants.
The evaluations were designed and collated by Dr. Gwyn Enright, San Diego City College. The evaluation form includes open responses for participant reactions to the following four features of the Institute:
1) Tone (learning, structure with freedom, collegiality, recreation, mentors, and mix of participants)
2) Organization (general sessions, mentor and audience feedback, length of sessions, planned breaks, scheduling, other logistics)
3) Overall Program (theme, printed materials, email information, orientation, wrap up)
4) Presentations (strengths of the presenters, suggestions for improvement).
At the end of the ’98 Winter Institute, as has been the custom for previous institutes, participants were asked to evaluate aspects of their weeklong institute experience under the following headings: tone, organization, overall program, mentor group meetings, individual institute presentations, the “next steps” session, SIG activities, special features of the the institute, as well as, institute location, meeting rooms, computer area, and guest rooms and hotel services.
In addition, participants commented on what they considered to be the best part of the institute experience, what institute improvements they would like to be considered, future themes and topics, recommendations for future presenters and/or mentors, and what length an ideal institute ought to be.
Read the participant summaries as compiled by Gwyn Enright.
Winter Institute Photo Albums
This Photo Album collection begins contains pictures from 1998 Winter Institute.
Winter Institute 1998 Presenters and Mentors Photo Album.
Winter Institute 1998 Participant Photo Album
Winter Institute Proceedings
Table of contents and full text of selected presentations reprinted from Winter Institute Proceedings for 1992/1993, 1994/1995, and 1996/1997.
Three issues of the Winter Institute Proceedings: WINTER INSTITUTE 1992 AND 1993, WINTER INSTITUTE 1994 AND 1995, and WINTER INSTITUTE 1996 AND 1997, were published and distributed to institute participants.
Winter Institute Directory of Mentors and Presenters
See a collection of photos and short biographical sketches of many of the mentor/presenters.
The Annual Institute mentors have been integral to the success of the Institutes. These individuals, recognized leaders in the field of learning assistance, not only provide individual and group mentoring and consultation, but also participate as active learners throughout the Institute.
Winter Institute mentors begin each day’s program with an orientation and overview meeting during breakfast, continue with daily informal meetings, and conclude each day’s activities with a feedback session. Many will also deliver major presentations at the Institute’s General Sessions with a small group follow-up of participants interested in continuing a discussion with the mentor on her/his presentation.
A complete listing of mentors at all of the Winter Institutes is available in each section of the History of the Winter Institute.
WI Presenters & Mentors: 1991-2003
David Arendale, University of Missouri, MO: Presenter and Mentor *
Jim Austin, University of Arizona: Presenter
Hunter Boylan, Appalachian State University: Presenter and Mentor
Marie-Elaine Burns, Skyline Community College, CA: Presenter and Mentor*
David Caverly, Southwest Texas University, TX: Presenter and Mentor, T.I.D.E. Panelist
Frank Christ, Visiting Scholar, U of A, AZ: WI Co-Coordinator, Keynoter, Presenter, and Mentor *
Tom Dayton, American River College, CA: CRLA Panelist
Susan Deese-Roberts, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque: Presenter and Mentor
Johanna Dvorak, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee: Presenter
John Earnest, Nassau Community College, NY: Presenter and Mentor
Jim Ellsworth, Fort Huachuca, AZ: Keynote Presenter*
Gwyn Enright, San Diego CC, CA: Keynote Presenter and Mentor
Loyd Ray Ganey, Jr,. Western International University: Presenter and Mentor*
David Gerkin, Paradise Valley CC, AZ: Presenter and Mentor
Tom Gier, University of Alaska: Presenter and Mentor
Robert Hackworth, Florida Junior College: Presenter and Mentor*
Karan Hancock, University of Alaska: Presenter and Mentor
Stacy Hartman, University of Arizona: Presenter
Robert Hashway, Grambling State University, LA: Presenter and Mentor*
Brad Hughes, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI: Presenter and Mentor
Gene Kerstiens, Andragogy Associates, Emeritus, El Camino College, CA: Presenter and Mentor
Corrine Johnson, Mesa State College, CO: Presenter and Mentor*
Alan Levine, Maricopa County Community College District:, AZ: Keynoter
Lucy MacDonald, Chemeketa Community College, OR: Presenter and Mentor
Mark May, Eastern Illinois University:: NCLCA Panelist*
Bill Mathis, South Mountain CC: Computer Lab Mentor and Presenter
Georgine Materniak, U of Pittsburgh: Presenter & Mentor*
Martha Maxwell, Emerita, UC Berkeley, CA & MM Associates: Mentor
Wilbert McKeachie, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, MI: Keynote*
Reed Mencke, University of Arizona: Presenter and Mentor*
Sylvia Mioduski, U of A, AZ: WI Co-Coordinator, Presenter, and Mentor*
Ibrahim Naim, University of Arizona, AZ: Mentor*
Michael O Hear, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne, IN: CRLA Panelist*
Gen Ramirez, CSU Long Beach, CA: Presenter and Mentor
Nadine Rosenthal, City College of San Francisco: Presenter
Rick Sheets, Paradise Valley CC, AZ: WI Co-Coordinator, Keynoter, Presenter, and Mentor
Rodger Slater, Scottsdale CC: Panel Presenter
Karen Smith, Rutgers University, NJ: Presenter and Mentor*
Gretchen Starks-Martin, St. Cloud State U, MN: Presenter and Mentor
Frank Torres, Cal Poly Pamona, CA: Mentor
Guillermo Uribe, U of A, AZ, LRNASST Admin: Presenter and Mentor*
Socorro Vasquez, U of A, AZ: Presenter and Mentor
Linda Thompson, Harding University , AR: NADE Panelist
Tillie Warnock, University of Arizona: Keynoter
Weinstein, Gideon, United States Military Academy: Presenter and Mentor*
William G. White, Jr., Grambling State University, LA: Presenter
Winter Institute Guide for Mentors & Presenters
Welcome to the Winter Institute staff. If you are a mentor or mentor associate, please read the overview and:
- Section One: Winter Institute Philosophy and
- Section Two: The Winter Institute Mentoring Tradition.
- Section One: Winter Institute Philosophy and
- Section Three: Guidelines for Winter Institute Presentations.
You may also want to read the following sections:
- Section Four: Optional Professional Activities,
- Section Five: Socializing and Recreating at the Institute
- Appendix A: Networking Through LRNASST contains useful information to help you to answer questions that members of your group may ask.
- Appendix B: Networking Through Professional Associations
- Overview:A meeting of mentors and presenters is scheduled sometime before the first session of the Winter Institute. Refer to your letter of acceptance as to time and location. Bring your questions, comments, and concerns to that meeting .
Your acceptance as a Mentor or Presenter at the Winter Institute is appreciated. Your value to Institute participants as a recognized leader in postsecondary learning assistance providing individual and group mentoring and consultation for them makes the Institute a unique professional experience. In addition, your weeklong participation in Institute activities, networking with other Institute mentors, presenters, and participants will, hopefully, enrich your professional life. You join an impressive list of past Institute mentors and presenters who served their colleagues at the Winter Institutes of 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997:
- David Arendale (University of Missouri, MO )
- Hunter Boylan (Appalachian State University, NC)
- Marie Elaine Burns (Skyline Community College, CA)
- David Caverly (Southwest Texas University, TX)
- Frank Christ (CSU Long Beach Emeritus, CA)
- John Earnest (Nassau Community College, NY))
- Gwyn Enright (San Diego City College, CA)
- Tom Gier (University of Alaska-Anchorage, AK)
- Bob Hackworth (St. Petersburg Junior College Emeritus, FL)
- Karan Hancock (University of Alaska-Anchorage, AK)
- Eleanor Harner (University of Arizona, AZ)
- Brad Hughes (University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI)
- Robert Hashway (Grambling State University, LA)
- Gene Kerstiens (El Camino College Emeritus, CA)
- Pete Kresan (University of Arizona)
- Lucy MacDonald (Chemeketa Community College, WA)
- Wilbert McKeachie (University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, MI)
- Martha Maxwell (University of California, Berkely Emerita, CA)
- Sylvia Mioduski (University of Arizona, AZ)
- Bob Mittan (Caspar College,WY)
- Gen Ramirez (CSU Long Beach, CA)
- Rick Sheets (Paradise Valley Community College, AZ)
- Socorro Vasquez (University of Arizona, AZ)
- Yvonne Zeka (Gateway Community College, AZ)
SECTION ONE: WINTER INSTITUTE PHILOSOPHY
The Winter Institute philosophy evolved as a way to enhance the learning experiences of Institute participants as they come together in a common location for scheduled presentations, mentoring activities, impromptu Special Interest Group meetings, and hands-on computer activities. At most conferences, participants do not have opportunities for proactive listening, periodic review of notes and sharing of insights with colleagues, time to review their notes to effect closure of their learning, time to crosstalk with colleagues at a presentation, and time to pull together their notes and write action steps.
The Winter Institute philosophy can be reduced to a series of nine phrases that exemplify the increased learning opportunities that are offered during this weeklong professional experience for learning assistance directors and practitioners. The actions associated with these nine phrases are consistent with research findings on efficient and effective learning. These learning enhancing opportunities set the Winter Institutes apart from most professional conferences.
Item # 1: Structure with Freedom. From the start of the Institute, participants are reminded that the Institute is the cooperative responsibility of both staff and participants and that as adult learners they have the right to come and go as they wish and to use their time and energy for the good of their professional careers and usefulness to their institutions. Although there is structure in the scheduling of Institute activities, the freedom also exists to modify this structure when it appears to be in the best interests of participants or when participants decide modifications are in their best interests.
Item #2: Collegiality/Networking/Ongoing Dialogue. Everyone at the Institute is a learner including Institute staff, mentors, and presenters, and all participate equally in the weeklong dialogues. For many participants, the Institute is the beginning of a collegial network that will continue to expand throughout their lives as they dialogue on the Internet, through visitations, and at professional conferences.
Item #3: Collective Intelligence. The 60 to 70 participants, presenters, and mentors that make up each Winter Institute represent a cross-section of learning assistance directors, practitioners, and developmental education specialists from community colleges and four and six year universities. The synergy that evolves from the Institute’s weeklong, live-in interactions creates a dialogue that is very different from conversations that go on at most professional conferences.
Item #4: In-depth Common Learning Experiences. Unlike professional conferences where participants are deluged with hundreds of concurrent presentations having little time between sessions to question the presenters and to explore implications and applications of a session, the Institute schedules all presentations as general sessions and schedules time after each session for participants to reflect, question the presenter, and dialogue with their colleagues from a common experience.
Item #5: Mentoring. Mentoring is a special component of the Winter Institutes. Mentors are chosen for their experience and expertness in learning assistance as well as for their collegial enthusiasm and empathy for the concerns of Institute participants. The Institute ratio of participants to mentors is maintained at six or seven participants to one mentor. Mentors are equally divided between men and women, and represent a multi-ethnic diversity that reflects a similar student diversity that Learning Assistance serves. Participants choose or are assigned a mentor for the five-day Institute. Mentor/participant activities include daily overviews at breakfast meetings, feedback sessions at the end of each day’s presentations, and scheduled consulting sessions with an individual or an institutional team. Frequently, mentors are also presenters, session chairpersons, or Special Interest Group facilitators.
Item #6: Presentation Readiness through Proactive Listening. Each day, participants meet with a mentor at a scheduled group breakfast meeting to preview the day’s schedule and to consider presentations in view of each participant’s institutional and professional needs. Based on the title and an overview of each presentation, participants are encouraged to make up questions that they would like the presenter to answer, hopefully at the presentation or later in the week at a private consultation with the presenter.
Item #7: Presentation Learning through Feedback and Closure. After each presentation, participants have many opportunities to “talk back” to the presenter’s ideas both publicly at the scheduled follow-up session and at the group feedback meeting at the end of each day. In addition, participants can meet privately with the presenter during the week.
Item #8: Currency in Research, Methods, and Technology. Institute presentations focus on the latest information and practices in learning assistance programs and services. Bibliographic handouts complement each presentation.
Item #9: “Next Steps” as Institute Follow-up. One of the features that sets the Winter Institutes apart from almost all other conferences is the “Next Steps” session that is scheduled on the last day of the Institute. At this two-hour session, participants are first allotted quiet time to look over their Institute notes, edit, and summarize them with special emphasis on listing specific actions that they will initiate when they return to their campuses. Then in small groups, participants are asked to share these actions and prepare one or more large wall charts that list the combined “next steps” for each group. When all the groups have made up their charts, a spokesperson for each group then shares its wall charts with the other groups. After all groups have shared their “next steps,’ everyone is encouraged to move around the room and read all the wall charts, adding any relevant “next steps” that they consider useful to their own list.
Item #10: Unfinished Business, A Life-long Learning Process. The Institute dialogue that evolves from presentations, consultations, and group discussions does not end with the Institute. In addition to conventional post-Institute interaction by telephone and mail, participants can also continue to dialogue with each other and with their mentors and presenters through email and on the listserv, LRNASST, created by the Winter Institute at the University of Arizona.
SECTION TWO: THE WINTER INSTITUTE MENTORING TRADITION
Introduction. As you probably already know, the word, “mentor,” had its origin in Greek mythology when the goddess Athene assumed mortal disguise as the Ithican noble Mentor, a friend of King Odysseus and tutor to his son, Telemachus. When King Odysseus went off to the Trojan War, he entrusted his son to Mentor. Today, the word, “mentor,” refers to a trusted advisor or wise teacher.
Mentoring has always been a part of the Learning Assistance Institutes. It began informally at the UC Berkeley Institutes under Martha Maxwell, continued with an increased emphasis at the CSU Long Beach Institutes co-directed by Frank Christ and Elaine Burns, and became an integral teaching/learning component at the institutes sponsored by the University of Arizona and co-directed by Sylvia Mioduski and Frank Christ. It is no exaggeration to state that mentoring is a critical activity of the Winter Institutes and that it contributes greatly to their uniqueness as learning experiences for postsecondary educators in learning assistance programs and services.To understand why mentoring is an integral part of the Winter Institutes, reread “Section One: Winter Institute Philosophy.” In this section are described nine phrases that sum up the teaching/learning philosophy of the Winter Institutes. Note that mentoring is the Institute’s formal introduction to Item #2, “Collegiality/networking/ongoing dialogue.” Mentoring makes Item #3, “Collective intelligence,” a weeklong reality through mentor group interrelationships by offering Institute participants many opportunities to share individual perspectives on Item #4, “In-depth common learning experiences,” since Institute presentations are scheduled as general sessions for all participants rather than as concurrent sessions. The possibilities for learning are further enhanced through daily mentoring activities specific to Items # 5 and #6, “Presentation Readiness” and “Presentation Feedback.” In addition, mentoring assists participants in relating Institute presentations to their post-institute professional activities as stated in Items #8 and #9, “Next Steps” and ” Unfinished Business” since the dialogue that was started at the Institute now can be extended over the Internet, through the learning assistance listserv, “LRNASST,” and through personal emailings, as well as through telephone, mail, and institutional visitations.
Participants are divided into mentor groups generally for the duration of the weeklong institute. Each mentor group has five to seven participants. Assignments are made so that whenever possible a participant’s interests, professional background and position, and type of institution (community college, four-year institution, six-year institution, public, private, or proprietary) are matched with a mentor with similar interests and background. When two or more participants are from the same institution, they are generally not assigned to the same mentor group. Occasionally a participant will request to be assigned to a specific mentor.
Mentor groups meet at an initial Institute get acquainted session, at daily breakfast briefings, at daily wrap-up sessions, and at the concluding luncheon of the Institute.Institute Get Acquainted Session. At the initial get acquainted session, the mentor introduces himself/herself. This introduction can be both personal and professional. Then each participant is encouraged to do the same with an emphasis on what each participant hopes to achieve at the institute. The mentor should explain to the group that it will meet daily before the first session and again after the last session to enhance learning through group questions and discussion.
Daily Breakfast Briefings. At the daily breakfast meetings, each mentor group will have seating at reserved tables in a special area of the hotel garden dining area. Each table can be easily identified by the individual place cards for mentors and participants. Mentors should be seated at their tables as early as possible so that participants can easily find their group. Breakfast is buffet style. Please note that tickets will be collected by the hotel staff and participants should be reminded that they should have their tickets available. Mentors are responsible during this breakfast meeting to get participants ready for the day’s activities by going over the schedule for the day suggesting some questions as “advanced organizers” for the day’s activities and eliciting questions and comments from each member of the group. This readiness exercise can enhance participants’ learning as they make up questions that are stimulated by the titles and descriptions of scheduled activities and as they make connections to these activities from their past experiences.
Daily Wrap-up Sessions. At daily wrap-up sessions held immediately after the last scheduled presentation of the day, each mentor group convenes to go over any questions and problems that have surfaced at the presentations. Participants are invited to relate presentations to their institutional situations. Mentor responsibility involves encouraging participants to look over their notes and share their concerns with the group.
Optional Scheduled Consultations with Any Mentor or Presenter. Mentors will be asked to make up a schedule of times when they can be free to meet with any Institute participant who desires special consulting time.
Farewell Institute Luncheon. The final Institute session is a luncheon on the last day of the Institute. Seating is by mentor groups. Mentors will be given certificates for their group that they will need to sign and distribute at the luncheon. As each group gets its certificates, mentors traditionally make a few brief closing remarks.
Post-institute Collegial Opportunities. Although the scope and nature of these opportunities are decided by each individual mentor, mentors are encouraged to initiate email dialogs with their group members on the Monday following the close of the institute to remind them of the “Next Steps” that they intend to take upon their return to their work place
SECTION THREE: GUIDELINES FOR WINTER INSTITUTE PRESENTERS
Since the Institute is not designed to be a series of non-stop monologues by presenters with little or no time allotted for participant reflection and interaction either with the presenter or with colleagues who have shared the same lecture experience, the following suggestions are made to presenters.
- Before beginning the presentation or as an introduction to the presentation, allow time for participants to do an immediate preparation through questions that you pose and that can be discussed by participants at their group tables. If you prefer, this can be done by your session chair or by an Institute staff member.
- Overview your presentation either with a handout or a visual (slide or overhead) that outlines its main points. You may want to do this as part of participants’ readiness.
- Allow time (3-5 minutes) at the end of a main point for participants to look over their notes and share their insights, past experiences, and concerns with one other colleague. Encourage them to write out questions for the discussion that is scheduled after each presentation.
- If you are using visuals, insure that words can be read easily from any seat at the group table farthest from the screen. If possible, make thumbnail sketches of overheads or slides as handouts so that participants can concentrate on ideas and can annotate the handouts with their questions and comments.
- Meet with the person chairing your presentation to go over any information that you wish emphasized in the introduction to your presentation. This person will also be responsible for signalling you as you come to the end of your allotted presentation time.
- If you have requested special equipment or have brought your own equipment for your presentation, allow time well before the presentation for equipment hookup and testing. Experience at past Institutes indicates a need for presentation rehearsal time especially when using a computer/LCD panel hookup or a VCR with monitors for videocassette viewing.
- Remember that you were requested to bring fifty (50) copies of handouts for your presentation.
SECTION FOUR: OPTIONAL PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES
Among the optional professional activities at the Institute are participant requests for consultation time with mentors or presenters; SIG meetings in the evening, usually scheduled for 8:00 pm thus allowing a reasonable time for a dining-on-the town activity; and open computer lab time as announced by the Institute staff or posted on the Institute bulletin board. During this open lab time, participants may telnet to their Internet site to email, access web sites or newsgroups. The computer lab is staffed by colleagues with those special “mysterious” skills necessary to connect to the Internet.
Another optional activity involves the Institute displays at tables in or near the general session room. Participants are encouraged to bring to the Institute copies of any relevant learning assistance material that they wish to publicize and share. On a separate table, copies of publications relevant to Institute sessions may be displayed as resource materials.
SECTION FIVE: SOCIALIZING AND RECREATING AT THE INSTITUTE
The Institute is designed to allow time and opportunities for socializing and recreation in Tucson and the surrounding desert areas. These opportunities include the evening social gathering before the first day’s sessions; the optional “birds-of-a feather” luncheons; optional Special Interest Group (SIG) luncheons; dinners-on-the-Town after the day’s sessions; a mid-week break for visits to local museums , botanical gardens, and zoos; and shopping at bookstores, boutiques, and southwest specialty stores. In addition to the information listed below for each of these opportunities, check at the Institute registration table and hotel concierge desk for brochures and sample restaurant menus, as well as directions and maps. A brief description of each opportunity follow below.
Evening Social Gathering. In addition to the initial get-acquainted session, the hotel offers its guests a social hour with free drinks and food.
Optional ‘Birds-of-a-Feather” Luncheons. Except for the first day’s luncheon when traditionally participants from similar institutions in size and type meet informally, participants may arrange additional collegial luncheons.
Optional SIG Luncheons. Participants may announce SIG luncheons as they find the need to share information and experiences on learning assistance related topics.
Dinners-on-the Town. Tucson has many interesting restaurants that you may want to try while attending the Institute. Look on the Institute bulletin board for postings of dining opportunities that indicate type of cuisine, price range, driver, and number of passengers.
Mid-Week Break. Traditionally, the Institute offers a mid-week break with time off to take advantage of Tucson sightseeing, shopping, and other local recreational activities.
APPENDIX A: NETWORKING THROUGH LRNASST
During the Winter Institute of 1995, a learning assistance listserv, LRNASST, was created at the University of Arizona to act as an electronic forum for all professionals who are involved in learning assistance centers, programs, and services. In 2002, the listserv was moved to the University of Florida as LRNASST-L.
APPENDIX B: NETWORKING THROUGH PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
During the Institute, time is allotted for an officer or a designated representative of major professional associations to brief participants on the history, objectives, and outcomes of the following associations that are considered relevant to learning assistance directors and practitioners:
- ACPA: American College Personnel Association
- ATP Association of Tutoring Professionals
- CRA: College Reading Association
- CRLA: College Reading & Learning Association
- NCLCA; National College Learning Center Association
- NADE: National Association for Developmental Education
WIFLAP Verse
A tradition initiated by Rick Sheets that provides institute participants with a verse relating the essence of the Winter Institute philosophy.
The WIFLAP Family
(Winter Institute For Learning Assistance Professionals)
Thoughts in verse by Rick A. Sheets 1/96
Some of us are tall, others are short.
Some work from sun-up, others late into the night.
Some are peacemakers, others are rebels.
We come in all shapes, sizes, colors, backgrounds,
ages, and levels of development.
We have different styles in learning, teaching, and
dealing with life, as do our students.
We are at times testy, caring, judgmental, helpful,
tired, concerned, overwhelmed, or enthusiastic.
We deal with balancing a combination of ideas, skills,
abilities, biases, visions, needs, and demands
of ourselves, our students, friends, and colleagues.
We can and do make a difference,
as we are all merely children in this reality.
We can change our perceptions and our attitudes.
Each day can be a new beginning and a new adventure.
Be kind to yourself, have fun, and most of all
Carpe Diem!
Where to Start in LSCHE If Your Role Is
Don't Miss
Site built with Foundry for Rapidweaver
All LSCHE website pages have all rights reserved under Creative Commons License:
