•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Elements of what we are calling a “hopeful pedagogy” emerged when faculty reflected on the question - Do you think your current approach to develop CT in students is successful? Faculty across disciplines and institutions used the word “hope” to characterize the outcome of their efforts. While attempting to disentangle the “hopeful pedagogy”, we found answers in (a) how faculty defined CT in disciplinary and non-disciplinary contexts; (b) a misalignment between faculty and institutional approaches to CT; (c) a disconnect between faculty and their own approaches to CT, and (d) logistical and curricular issues within general education programs that placed constraints on the ability of faculty to adequately focus on CT. The “hopeful pedagogy” brought to the forefront the serious implications of a misaligned system for student learning, faculty engagement, institutional improvement and accountability.

ref_ijsotl2016100203.pdf (271 kB)
Supplemental Reference List with DOIs

Share

COinS