Resources

Information, web links, and videos explaining "A Domain of One's Own," the University of Mary (Washington) initiative whereby students craft their own web presence into a portfolio that they control and can take with them after graduating.

The developer of the University of Mary (Washington) project "A Domain of One's Own," explains the program’s innovative and expansive understanding of student e-portfolios in a TEDx talk.

Creating effective and engaging learning experiences has too often been viewed as an uninspiring task. Shouldn’t this be where our passion as teachers comes through? Could it be we are focusing on a limited aspect of learning?

Diverse teams of faculty and other academic and student affairs professionals from a wide range of institutions has drafted and revised institutional-level rubrics (and related materials) to correspond with the AAC&U "Essential Learning Outcomes." Each VALUE rubric contains the most broadly shared criteria or core characteristics  considered to be critical for judging the quality of student work in a particular outcome area, including: intellectual/practical skills (such as critical thinking and  communication), personal and social responsibility (such as civic engagement and ethical reasoning), and integrative and applied learning.

Scholars have identified the many stories in the Bible that are oppressive to women or other minoritized groups. It is remarkable how common it is that North American undergraduate students remain blind to the oppression that is depicted and that is too often the result of commonly accepted interpretations of these texts. Three brief essays collected here, originally presented as part of a panel at the Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting (Atlanta, 2010), present various teaching strategies for exposing the oppressive elements in the biblical text and showing how the oppression operates (an aspect of ideological criticism). What are good strategies for communicating these hard points to students in a way they can hear them and work with them? Why is this important to do?

This discussion of the goals and methods of teaching biblical literature is an edited transcription of a panel recorded at the 2010 Society for Biblical Literature conference. The panelists were asked to reflect on William Placher’s recently published theological commentary on Mark as an example or test case of how one might use a biblical commentary as a classroom resource. Karl Barth wrote that insofar as their usefulness to pastors goes, most modern commentaries are “no commentary at all, but merely the first step toward a commentary.” What value might commentaries have for our students, whether future pastors or undergraduates in the liberal arts? While the panel consisted of teachers of undergraduates as well as theological students, the emphasis of the presentations and subsequent discussion focused mostly on theological formation.

A growing interest in the communication to students of the mission and identity of a higher education institution prompted this study about the presence of Catholic, Jesuit values in the introductory religious studies course at a faith-based university. To conduct this study a survey instrument was developed, piloted, further refined, and then administered again to about four hundred and fifty students. The study's results showed that the introductory course had a positive effect on the majority of students surveyed, namely, those who had no Catholic schooling or only had a Catholic elementary school education. Statistically significant advances in several areas of knowledge about Catholic teachings endorsed by Catholic bishops and the pope occurred. Although less extensive, knowledge of Jesuit values also advanced in the course.

What is the relationship between the academic knowledge of the guild and the formation of students in the classroom? This Forum gathers four essays originally presented at a Special Topics Session at the 2009 conference of the American Academy of Religion (Atlanta, Georgia), with a brief introductory essay by Fred Glennon explaining the genesis of the panel. Douglas Jacobsen and Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen clarify some of the issues at stake in undergraduate liberal arts classrooms by distinguishing between four dimensions of what they refer to as “the (in)formation teaching matrix: institutional context, course content, faculty roles, and student outcomes. John Thatamanil argues that all learning necessarily presupposes formation. Amanda Porterfield argues against using the word “formation” because it complicates and undermines her teaching goals to historicize religion and narratives about it through open-ended inquiry. And, finally, Mary Elizabeth Moore explores the interactive processes linking formation, information, reformation, and transformation.