Initial Publication Date: October 14, 2007

Leaders Wiki

To edit this page:

To edit the page you can either go directly to the url for this page and replace /dev with /edit or you can go to serc.carleton.edu/admin. The pages are in the module call POD Affective Domain Workshop.

To get to the editing window click on Main Page Text. You will then see the editable part of the page. It is formatted with basic html tags.

There is good help at the link at the top of the editing box. I've put some stuff in the wiki page which shows the basics of formatting.

Be sure to save the changes at the bottom of the box. If you want to make new sections. Just copy an existing section into the place where you want it and change the guts.

Note that you can edit in one window and view in another--just refresh to see your changes. If you get stuck and the help is no help call/email me or Karin (please do this before you get frustrated :)).

Following call on 9/28

  • Cathy and Jeff will work to put together the dilemma piece.
  • James and Ed will iterate their components based on the phone call and post resources to their web pages.
  • Forward knowledge survey items to Ed


Workshop Logistics


Pre-workshop meeting at 2:30pm on Wednesday, 10/24 for final preparations. Meet in the hotel lobby.

Cathy is unavailable from 10/12-22; plan accordingly!

To do on website by 10/16 (so that we can send link to participants):

  • Make sure our individual pages are complete. Ed taking lead on his page ("self reflection") and working with communicating with James about his page. James can send text for his page to Cathy and Jeff to be put up on his page. Jeff and Cathy are responsible for the dilemma pages.
  • Make sure workshop overview page is ready to go with workshop goals, description, etc. (Jeff)
  • Complete workshop program page by adding short descriptions of the workshop components to the page. (Jeff)
  • Make the site live (Cathy / Karin)

Pre-workshop email will ask participants to: (Jeff will send this out on 10/17)

  • Bring a laptop (and then to let us know if they plan to do so).
  • Complete Ed's self-reflection exercise and knowledge survey.
  • Review materials and think about dilemmas.

Supply list:

  • Extension cords and power strips

Workshop follow-up

  • email list?
  • How do we want to collect feedback from participants following the workshop? Specifically as to whether or not they anticipate using strategies introduced in the future.
  • set a date for people to post information about some action they have taken as a result of our workshop.

Comment from proposal reviewer


I concur with the idea that the affective domain is worthy of greater focus in teaching and learning, and some of the rationale early in the proposal could be quite convincing. I commend the proposer(s) for the important reminder and for the attempt to ground the proposal in the early literature on the affective domain. I also think that the advanced self-introspection exercise sounds as though it might provide an important form of pre-assessment and save steps during the actual session.

Despite those strengths, I can also identify some areas of the proposal that concerned me:
  • For one thing, it is grounded only in the earlier literature and, thus, can be perceived as dated. I know more recent literature has identified a variety of ways in which affect is significant in teaching and learning; and although the proposer(s) mention(s) some of those ways, she/he/they has/have not pulled in some of the more current literature that is so relevant.
  • Second, although the goals were stated quite clearly and some of the proposed activities seemed engaging, I was unclear how the activities linked directly to the goals. For example, in this short proposal, it is not sufficiently clear how the conflict resolution activity or the dilemma writing format will allow participants to study the influence of the affective domain or incorporate the affective domain more fully in their own work.
  • Perhaps grounding the overall proposal more fully in an overriding framework would have helped to clarify the relationship between goals and activities and would have provided a way for thinking about the relationships among the various topics/issues to be discussed during the session: philosophy, the influence of the affective domain, the dilemmas participants face in working with the affective domain, and ultimately how they will work with other faculty as a result of all of these factors. The relationships may be clear in the mind of the proposer(s) and just not as clear to the reader. If on the other hand, they are not clear in the mind of the session facilitator, I encourage some greater consideration of an overall framework and a way of achieving coherence among the various issues to be examined during the session.
  • Finally, although the topic provides ample opportunity for discussion of issues of inclusive teaching and learning and of thinking about who is included and who is left on the periphery when the affective domain is ignored, I do not see places in the proposal where the proposer(s) has/have given thought to how some focus on diversity might enhance (and even update) what she/he/they have to offer through this session.

I hope these comments can be useful in thinking about how to structure the session, should the proposal be accepted. I wish the proposer(s) the best of luck!

Important Links