Yesterday, Wednesday, September 9th, nearly 50 new faculty gathered at Federation Hall to attend this year’s New Faculty Welcome Event. The program for this annual half-day orientation event features a series of information sessions designed to acclimatize our new faculty to the University of Waterloo and to provide opportunities to meet one another and members of the larger University of Waterloo community.
After a brief welcome from Ian Orchard (Vice-President, Academic and Provost), the day got underway with a presentation entitled Navigating Your Roles at UWaterloo which provided an overview of the roles new faculty will have to assume in their academic careers. Donna Ellis (Director of the Centre for Teaching Excellence), John Thompson (Associate Vice-President, University Research) and Tim Kenyon (Arts Associate Dean, Research) addressed the faculty triumvirate of teaching, research and service.
Next came the Getting to Know Waterloo session which provided a big-picture overview of our institution and what defines the Waterloo Way. Logan Atkinson (University Secretary & General Counsel) spoke about the university’s structure and governance and made extensive reference to the Secretariat and Office of General Counsel website particularly when referring to some the key university policies. Sue Grant (Assistant Director, Organizational and Human Development) discussed the culture at Waterloo and highlighted our Basic Principles. The FAUW (Faculty Association of the University of Waterloo) President, Sally Gunz, talked about the organization of the faculty association and the support services available through their office. Scott Davis (Faculty Relations Manager for Arts, Environment, and Accounting) rounded out the session with a presentation about co-operative education and how it interfaces with all aspects of university activity.
The morning concluded with the Adjusting to Waterloo panel discussion where peers spoke openly about their own experiences as new faculty members and shared thoughts and insights with the audience. This year we were joined by Joanna Garcia (School of Accounting and Finance), Simron Singh (School of Environment, Enterprise & Development) and Mark Smucker (Management Sciences). The post-session Q & A period allowed new faculty to seek answers to a variety of questions ranging from academic (What types of tenure and promotions considerations do I need to be aware of?) to broader community interest inquiries (Where do I find the best craft beer?).
Incorporated into the program were opportunities for new faculty to explore the Academic Support Units Resource Fair showcasing services and resources available across campus. There were 21 academic support units represented this year and such a gathering of resource material represented a unique opportunity for new faculty to pose those questions that were in need of answers to the very people that could provide those answers.
The morning was capped off by a luncheon with the Chairs, Directors and Deans accompanied by more conversation and an informal information exchange.
What’s next on the new faculty calendar? Later this week, on Friday, September 11th, new faculty and their families have been attended to attend a BBQ at Steckle Farm in Kitchener. This annual event is co-sponsored by the Faculty Association of the University of Waterloo (FAUW) and the Centre for Teaching Excellence (CTE) and will be hosted by University President, Feridun Hamdullahpur, and FAUW President, Sally Gunz.
These welcoming activities were intended as a brief introduction to faculty life at the University of Waterloo and to provide a forum for our incoming class of 2014-2015 new faculty to share experiences and start making connections with their colleagues and the broader University of Waterloo community. These two marque events were planned and hosted by the New Faculty Committee which is composed of representatives from the Centre for Teaching Excellence, the Faculty Association and Human Resources.
Most educators regard peer assessment and peer grading as a powerful pedagogical tool to engage students in the process of evaluating and grading their peers while saving instructors’ time. This process helps improve students’ understanding of the subject matter and provides an opportunity for deeper reflection on the subject matter, accessing higher levels of Bloom’s thinking taxonomy.
Designing and distributing tasks and assignments for peer assessment should be as easy as assigning a few papers to each student and wait for the magic to happen, right? …. Not really!
As instructors, we care about the fairness of our evaluation methods and providing effective feedback. Yet, throwing this crucial responsibility to the shoulders of novice students who (hopefully) have just learned the new topic seems like an awfully risky behavior. There are two major concerns when it comes to peer grading; inflated (or deflated) grades and poor quality feedback. Both of these issues seem to be originating from the same sources of insincerity of the graders and the lack of effort each student invests on grading the peers [2]. To address these issues, recently researchers have raised the question of whether we can design a peer-grading mechanism that incentivizes sincere grading and discourages any type of secret student collusion.
The simplest possible design is to evaluate the quality of the peer reviews or simply put by “reviewing the reviews” [1, 3, 4, 5]. This procedure is bullet proof since no student can get away from a poor-quality feedback or deliberately assigning insincere grades. However, even though this technique may help us achieve the goal of involving the students in the higher levels of learning, in most situations this mechanism is either costly in terms of TA-Instructor time or simply impossible in large classes. In fact, this fully supervised approach defeats one of the main purposes of using peer grading by doubling or tripling the required grading effort: each marked assignment has to be reviewed by one or two TAs for quality.
As a partially automated solution, the system may randomly send a subset of graded papers to the Teaching Assistants (TAs) to perform a sanity check (instead of doing this for every single paper). In contrast, fully automated systems provide a meta-review procedure in which students evaluate the reviews by rating the feedback they have received [1, 3, 5] or by computing a consensus grade for assignments that are initially graded by at least two or three peer graders [5, 6].
In a different approach, students are treated as potential graders throughout the term and only those who pass certain criteria will be take the role of independent graders [6]. The premise is that once an individual reaches a level of understanding, he or she can now act as a pseudo-expert and participate in the assessment procedure. Of course, to ensure fair grading the system randomly chooses a subset of graded papers to be reviewed by the instructor.
Peer assessment is still in its infancy; nevertheless a number of researchers in various disciplines are developing new techniques to address the critical issues of efficiency, fairness, and incentives. Each of the above methods (and many others that exist in the peer-grading literature) could potentially be adopted depending on course characteristics and intended outcomes. I do believe that such characteristic, to very least, must include the following:
Skill/knowledge transferability: Do marking skills and the knowledge of a previous topic automatically transfer to the next topic? If so, are they sufficient?
For example, an essay-based course may contain similar marking guidelines in all its assignments and training students once could be sufficient in transitioning students to effective peer graders.
Course material and structure: How are the topics that are covered in the course dependent on one another? Is the course introducing various semi-independent topics, or are the topics all contribute to building a single overarching subject.
What do you think? Have you ever used peer-assessment in your classes?
References
Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system.Computers & Education, 48(3), 409-426.
Carbonara, A., Datta, A., Sinha, A., & Zick, Y. (2015) Incentivizing Peer Grading in MOOCS: an Audit Game Approach, IJCAI.
Gehringer, E. F. (2001). Electronic peer review and peer grading in computer-science courses.ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(1), 139-143.
Paré, D. E., & Joordens, S. (2008). Peering into large lectures: examining peer and expert mark agreement using peerScholar, an online peer assessment tool.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,24(6), 526-540.
Robinson, R. (2001). Calibrated Peer Review™: an application to increase student reading & writing skills.The American Biology Teacher, 63(7), 474-480.
Wright, J. R., Thornton, C., & Leyton-Brown, K. (2015). Mechanical ta: Partially automated high-stakes peer grading. In Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 96-101). ACM.
Confidence in the classroom is a quality in teaching that some people may struggle with as an instructor. Despite having a high level of knowledge and experience, new instructors can battle this perception of ability. This is a quality that I personally have struggled with for a number of years during my time as a graduate student. The thought of having to speak in front of a group of people was always something that terrified me and as result influenced my confidence. When I began graduate school it was clear that public speaking was not a task I could avoid and this fear was something I would have to face.
Naturally, my uneasiness of public speaking crept into my confidence in the classroom as a teaching assistant. I found that during my teaching assistantship I would be nervous talking in front of the class and interacting with students. In order to improve my confidence in my teaching I sought out support from the Centre of Teaching and enrolled in the Fundamentals of Teaching certificate program and began my journey into improving my teaching skills.
Upon attending my first few workshops I was amazed at how confident the facilitators were while standing up speaking at the front of the room. I was impressed with their communication skills and how at ease they were with presenting and I wondered to myself if this was something I was also capable of. A component of the fundamentals program is the completion of three microteaching sessions. A microteaching session consists of giving a short 15 min talk delivered to your peers, followed by immediate constructive feedback. Following my short talk I was pleasantly surprised by the positive feedback I received from my small audience. It turned out I actually was not terrible at pubic speaking and my peers found my presentation quite engaging. This validation of my efforts was remarkable and I immediately could sense a difference in my self-confidence. It felt as though a switch had been turned on in my brain, all of sudden I felt little more confident in my abilities at speaking in front a group of people. By the time I completed my third microteaching session I wasn’t fearful of public speaking and felt confident to present a talk. I also found that during my teaching assistantship I was feeling more comfortable talking in front of the class and providing instructions.
Overall, I found the fundamentals program to be a positive experience and I was encouraged to begin the next certificate program, Certificate in Undergraduate Teaching. Participants of this program are expected to complete two guest lectures within their discipline. In the past, the thought of giving a guest lecture to a 100 undergraduate students would have been terribly frightening, but I found that I was actually excited to complete this task. By the time I competed my two guest lectures I was very confident in my teaching abilities and was looking forward to the future of new teaching endeavours and speaking opportunities.
Confronting my fear of public speaking has allowed me to gain significant confidence in my communication skills. By exploring the teaching programs at the Centre for Teaching I have not only increased my knowledge of post-secondary education but also learned specific strategies that allow me to feel comfortable in front of a class and confident with presenting. The feedback I gained from these experiences was greatly constructive and allowed me to reflect on my performance and gain insight into my communication skills.
Based on my experiences at the Centre for Teaching of Excellence I learned three main things about confidence in the classroom:
1. Expand your Pedagogy Knowledge
The greater understanding you have of teaching and the learning environment will translate into demonstrated confidence in your knowledge of the classroom. Also, by exploring new teaching ideas and methods you will find you are inspired and this will give you a sense of courage in the classroom.
2. Push Yourself to New Heights
Even though there may be certain elements of the teaching environment that are new and may make you feel unsure of your abilities, be sure to push past those fears. By taking risks and pushing forward you will find over time these fears will disappear and your confidence will increase.
3. Explore Alternative Opportunities
Exploring new opportunities that fall outside your teaching assistantships or sessional teaching will allow you to expand your knowledge and ultimately increase your confidence in the classroom. Focusing on new challenges and opportunities, such as speaking at an academic conference, will allow you to build your self-confidence and gain valuable perspective that your fears can be conquered.
Sydney Harbour Bridge https://www.flickr.com/photos/gramarye/132249724
There’s been a lot of discussion in media and higher education about the skills, or lack of skills, our students have when they graduate from our universities. Politicians, the public, and even some of our colleagues have questioned whether universities are the best vehicles to help post-secondary students bridge the gap between high school and the working world of the 21st century.
Many of the arguments centre around what they call ‘the skills gap’ and claim that today’s graduates do not have the skills necessary to meet the needs for the 21st century work environment. For example, CareerBuilder.ca released results from a national survey which found that only 1 in 5 employers (19 per cent) believe academic institutions are adequately preparing students for roles needed within their organizations.
Of course, there are others who have argued that there isn’t a ‘skills gap’ to bridge. In 2013, for example, leading economist, Don Drummond, reported that he couldn’t find “a shred of evidence that Canada has a serious mismatch between skills and jobs” contradicting what Prime Minister Stephen Harper has declared as “an urgent national priority.”
Whether a skills gap exists or not, we do know two things:
Students and parents have their eye on post-graduate job prospects, regardless of the degree.
Employers report that they look for specific skills when hiring new graduates and these preferred skills are common across most, if not all, occupations.
A report by the Canadian Association of Career Educators and Employers (2013) identified communication, teamwork, analytical, strong work ethic, and problem solving as the top 5 preferred skills that employers seek when hiring new grads. These same five skills have been consistently identified in a number of similar surveys conducted across Canada and in the United States with slight variations in the order. Employers, then, appear to be looking for, what we call Professional Skills / Essential Employability Skills/Transferable Skills regardless of the degree designation.
Now, we might ask ourselves, “What does this have to do with me? It’s not my job to get students jobs”. And that’s true. And we also might say, “Well, I teach cutting edge research and best practices in my discipline.” And that is fine, too. And we might even say, “We don’t have time to ‘cover soft skills’ – it’s not our job to teach these.” Well, that’s not entirely true. Because, in 2005, the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents (OCAV) developed a set of Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (UDLEs) for all universities in the province. The UDLEs are a set of guidelines that “elaborate the intellectual and creative development of students and the acquisition of relevant skills that have been widely, yet implicitly, understood. At their most basic, the six UDLEs articulated by OCAV are as follows:
Depth and breadth of knowledge
Knowledge of methodologies
Application of knowledge
Communication skills
Awareness of limits of knowledge
Autonomy and professional capacity
The University of Waterloo has added two more UDLEs:
Experiential learning
Diversity
Take a look at what the undergraduate degree level expectations are for UDLE 4 and UDLE 6.
Baccalaureate/Bachelor’s Degree
Baccalaureate/Bachelor’s Degree: Honours
UDLE 4. Communication Skills
… the ability to communicate accurately and reliably, orally and in writing to a range of audiences.
… the ability to communicate information, arguments, and analyses accurately and reliably, orally and in writing to a range of audiences.
UDLE 6.Autonomy and Professional Capacity
a) qualities and transferable skills necessary for further study, employment, community involvement and other activities requiring:· the exercise of personal responsibility and decision-making; · working effectively with others;b) the ability to identify and address their own learning needs in changing circumstances and to select an appropriate program of further study; andc) behaviour consistent with academic integrity and social responsibility.
a) qualities and transferable skills necessary for further study, employment, community involvement and other activities requiring:· the exercise of initiative, personal responsibility and accountability in both personal and group contexts;· working effectively with others; · decision-making in complex contexts;b) the ability to manage their own learning in changing circumstances, both within and outside the discipline and to select an appropriate program of further study; andc) behaviour consistent with academic integrity and social responsibility.
These expectations are the very skills that top the list of skills that employers are looking for, those Professional Skills / Essential Employability Skills/Transferable Skills, regardless of the degree designation.
I’d say we do a good job addressing UDLE 1, 2, 3, & perhaps 5 – those UDLEs that focus on dissemination of knowledge. Through tests, exams, essays, projects, and for some students, theses or capstones and presentations, we provide opportunities for students demonstrate gains they are making in these knowledge-related areas. We explicitly ask them to demonstrate these gains, and we give them grades for demonstrating achievement in these areas. Assigning grades lets students know that these things are valued and worth learning.
What we might not do as often, or as well, is let students know that the skills and attributes outlined under Autonomy and Professional Capacity (UDLE 6) and Communication (UDLE 4) are also valued.
Communication to wide audience (not just the instructor!)
Exercise of initiative
Personal responsibility and accountability to self and others
Decision-making
Effective teamwork
Problem-solving
These are the competencies and skills that we presuppose student have or are acquiring while they are working on what we will eventually mark. We expect students to value these things, but if we looked at what gets marked in courses, which in turn translates to what gets valued by the students, I think we’d agree that these transferable/professional skills often are not assigned marks, or if they are, they count for a small portion of the overall grade.
This doesn’t mean that students do not develop or acquire these skills. But, because we don’t explicitly draw students’ attention to the fact that they are developing these skills, they often remain invisible to our students. And yet, these invisible, often unacknowledged or undervalued skills are precisely the extra-degree skills that employers want to hear about.
To help bridge the skills gap, we need to expose these transferable skills to our students. Make them visible. Make them count.
So the question is how do we make these visible and valued to students? The first step is to make them explicit and visible to ourselves. Then we are better able to make them visible to our students.
Here are some tips that can be used to help bridge the skills gap. [If some of these sound familiar, you may have seen a presentation that Jill Tomasson Goodwin and I gave at the OND conference this past April, or you may have seen blog posts by James Skidmore, Shannon Dea and Mary Power.]
Make the transferable skills visible and explicit to yourself
Review the UDLEs – Review the bulleted list within each category, and determine if you could turn it into a learning outcome for your course or program. Pay particular attention to UDLE 4 & UDLE 6.
Review your existing course syllabus – Determine what UDLEs you are making visible to the students. What is it that you mark?
Review your existing course assignments – What communication skills, or elements listed under Professional Capacity and Autonomy are you expecting your students to use or develop in order to complete the assigned tasks, but are not making explicit to your students? What transferrable skills are students expected to use, but remain invisible and not counted?
Make these professional/transferable skills explicit and visible to your students. Make them count.
Talk to your students about the UDLEs –show them what the undergraduate degree level expectations actually are and what that means in terms of your discipline, program or course. Review relevant UDLEs with your students and show how they map to the relevant Essential Employability Skills/Transferable Skills or Professional Skills (whatever you are calling them) that employers are looking for. Some instructors have assigned the reading ‘It takes more than a major’ to help students see the relevance these skills have in the workplace.
Discuss the syllabus – take some time in class, or online, to explain what the learning outcomes for your course really mean and how these outcomes fit into the bigger picture. Explain the differences between the skill being taught or acquired in the course and knowledge being imparted. Explicitly state which UDLEs your course activities are addressing, and how particular course activities will help students develop them. Throughout the course, as you review activities and assignments with your students, ask students to identify which skills they believe they will need or will be developing as they complete the course activities.
Add a question to an assignment or on an exam- provide students with the opportunity to reflect on what they are learning in the course, and how that connects to the bigger picture. This can be done by asking student to add an extra paragraph to an assignment where they explain how a particular assignment helped them meet a particular UDLE, or how might they transfer or apply what they’ve learned to another course or another context. Helping students see the relevance also helps them recognize that spending time learning how to articulate how they might use a skill beyond the course is important and not just ‘busy work’. If your students are working on team projects, have each student articulate how the experience has helped them develop communication skills (UDLE 4) or skills outlined under Autonomy and Professional Capacity (UDLE 6).
Provide opportunities for students to perform ‘authentic skills and tasks associated with their field’ and explicitly state why this skill is valued outside the classroom. In a philosophy class, students peer review each other’s articles because it is the kind of activity that philosophers do.
Provide opportunities for students to connect transferable skills to co-op/work and co-curricular experiences. See how Jill Tomasson Goodwin used ePortfolios in her DAC 309 course to help students make this connection
Discuss with your colleagues or at department meetings how to intentionally integrate into the curriculum opportunities to help students develop and reflect upon how they might apply these professional/transferrable skills to new contexts.
Utilize Existing Resources
Contact Katherine Lithgow – Senior Instructional Developer, Integrative Learning Centre for Teaching Excellence (CTE)
Review the Centre for Teaching Excellence “Teaching Tips”
Share your ideas and strategies – How are you or a colleague bridging the gap and re making these skills valued and visible to your students? If you’re teaching a large class, and have examples to share, I’m especially interested!
On the centennial anniversary of the First World War, high school students from across Waterloo Region gathered at the Centre for International Governance Innovation’s (CIGI) sixth annual Global Youth Forum to commemorate WWI and to place its composite events in historical and global context. Students from the University of Waterloo’s Political Science department led 120 participants through three role-playing simulations to learn about the decision-making processes and major players involved in difficult situations.[1] In this post we explore the potential of simulations to support high school students in understanding complex security themes.
In each of three simulations—the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914, the Easter Rising in Ireland in 1916, and the detention of Omar Khadr in 2002—students were faced with the reality of making difficult choices in time-sensitive scenarios in which they had incomplete information. The simulation characters had diverse roles—a soldier, a civilian, a Central Intelligence Agency operative etc.—and each choice a participant made would have consequences for themselves, their community and their country’s security. Students grappled with questions of ethics and national security (who is considered a terrorist? what is the role of civilians turned militants in a conflict? what is an appropriate state response to a security threat?) and became more keenly aware of the inter-play of interests, behaviours and decisions.
By including both historical and contemporary scenarios, the simulation worked to show students the weight, magnitude and complexity of security decisions. The simulation presented challenging ideas to students in a way that they were able to concretize. This bridge between ideas and understanding was empathy. One tool to encourage empathetic reasoning this was the use of profile cards which provided a narrative of each simulation character. This prompted participants to think about their decisions through a particular lens—whether ideological, normative or through their character’s personality traits—particularly when they did not have complete information or intelligence. As the simulation progressed, students became increasingly invested in achieving their character’s objectives and ultimately in their character’s outcome.
There were, however, limitations to students’ ability to conceptualize the scenario. In the case of Omar Khadr, students found it challenging to consider the real or perceived conflict between security and civil liberties. Decisions were often based on consequences for an individual character, rather than on their mandate, an ethical code, or the population they represented.
Through two years of creating and running simulations with high school students, we have learned several lessons. Inclusion of the following elements can increase the relevance and success of the simulation:
Multiple facilitators with a strong grasp of the simulation’s characters, decisions and outcomes, and who can guide or challenge students and their decisions when necessary;
Commensurate educational materials that give greater historical context for the simulations and a foundational knowledge of key themes that can be taught before or after the simulation;
An incentive—such as a participation grade—to encourage students to treat the simulation as realistically as possible, and to invest in their character; and
Post-simulation discussion questions with adequate time to allow students to reflect on their experience. This is an opportunity for students to consider their decisions, help develop their own thought processes, and apply the simulation’s learnings to present day socio-political phenomena.
By commemorating the anniversary of WWI using simulation, students realized in more concrete terms the decisions that catalyzed the war. The simulation encouraged students to empathize with their character, make decisions based on the supplied information, and allowed to students to understand challenging concepts perhaps more quickly or fully than in the classroom alone. The simulation was also a valuable recruiting tool as it provided students an opportunity to reason through complex issues with the University of Waterloo students at the facilities of the Balsillie School. A coordinator’s package—based on the Guidelines for Ontario High School Curriculum—is available to high school teachers interested in using these simulation exercises. For more information about security simulations and for additional resources, please contact Dr. Veronica Kitchen.
About the authors: Zainab Ramahi recently graduated with her Bachelor of Knowledge Integration from the University of Waterloo. Amy Wood has a Master of Arts in Global Governance from the Balsillie School of International Affairs. Together with Dr. Veronica Kitchen, they developed the security simulations discussed here. A CTE Teaching Story on Dr. Kitchen is available here.
[1] The simulation is also suitable for undergraduate classrooms and it was first conducted in a second year World Politics course taught by Dr. Veronica Kitchen.
Social engagement is front and centre in today’s teaching and learning environment, and the proliferation of technological applications makes it easier than ever for students to connect with one another.
As a Centre, we encourage instructors to engage students. This often involves some form of peer learning activity where students work together to share ideas, debate, solve problems, provide feedback, reach consensus on test questions, create a project, etc. Even with introspective reflective activities, we encourage students to share their reflections and provide feedback to one another. These highly social activities take place in the face-to-face classroom and in online spaces alike, through the learning management system and/or through one of the many social media tools designed to connect large groups of people in a dedicated online space. I think it’s safe to say that the academy values sharing and collaboration in teaching and learning. There is much evidence to suggest that students also value sharing and collaboration in learning.
Judging from students’ widespread use of applications such as Facebook, Piazza, Snapchat, Instagram, QQ, Yik Yak, and others, it seems that a great many students are comfortable in a culture of connecting virtually with fellow students to share their opinions, ideas, and knowledge. I’ve recently learned that for many students, participation in these online forums is driven by prosocial values. In this day and age where wide-spread sharing is easy and immediate, several issues concerning academic integrity arise.
One issue is that we sometimes see excessive collaboration on assessments and assignments that were meant to be completed individually. But when we encourage peer learning and even peer evaluation, how do students know when they’ve crossed the line? Indeed, how do students know where the line is when that line is not explicitly defined in the first place, and shifts from one course to another? How do we help students determine what “original work” looks like when they’ve discussed their ideas with peers and their peers have provided feedback? When we promote peer learning, how do we define excessive collaboration?
Another issue is that it has become common to see course assignments, class notes, lecture recordings, lab reports, midterms, and essays can be quickly and easily shared, traded, bought, and/or sold on the internet. In fact, some websites use prosocial language to attract students who are looking for “study resources” to help them “build a better learning community” in order to “excel” (https://www.coursehero.com/). Awareness of these shared “resources” may be common knowledge among students. Are they common knowledge among instructors? Are instructors aware of the backdrop of sharing that happens outside of the course learning management system? If so, how does this awareness influence their decisions around course design? Is there anything that instructors can do to prevent their teaching materials from being posted publically? What do we tell students who worry that their original work will be posted publically (or worse, sold) by a peer with whom they have shared it in a peer evaluation activity?
These are just some of the concerns that affect those of us who teach and learn at university today. Perhaps students, administrators, and instructors can, and should, connect with one another to share their thoughts about how to navigate teaching and learning in this culture of sharing.
Nearing the end of high school, students are pressured to select an academic path, one which they will be on for the next three to ten years (depending on program and level). I was lucky enough to have a relative who was enrolled into a co-op program at the undergraduate level to guide my decision making. She explained to me that co-operative education (co-op) provides a structured way of learning that incorporates in-class learning with periods of work placements. In addition, she shared personal experiences from her co-op terms to help me get a better understanding of how co-op can kick start my career. As a result, she strongly influenced me to enroll in a program that offered a co-op option.
Now having completed two co-op terms and nearing the end of my third term, I can proudly say that I have benefited greatly from my co-op experiences. In this blog post I will share some benefits that I have experienced from being enrolled into a co-op program.
Additional source of income while gaining valuable work experience:
Through co-op most students have the opportunity to bring in a source of income while gaining work experience. I’ve used the money that I earned to help pay for housing/living expenses, tuition fees, and textbooks. As a result, I have reduced the total amount of funding needed from student loans.
Networking and identifying the right industry and work environment for you:
Co-op provides students with a platform to network and meet new individuals. In addition, it is also an opportunity to work in different industries and work environments; this may allow you to determine which setting is the best fit for you. For example, I had the opportunity to work for a mental health clinic, an oil and gas company, and now a teaching centre; next I am hoping to land a placement in a governmental sector or a placement that requires extensive field work. As a result, when I complete my required co-op terms, I will be able to identify which industry and which work environment best complements my skills and interests.
Learning new processes and software, while developing a diverse skill set:
Depending on the assigned task in your placement you may be given training on various organizational processes and software. The newly learnt processes and software can potentially provide you with a competitive advantage over other job applicants upon graduating. Likewise, co-op also provides the opportunity to enhance your skill set. For example, in my past co-op role, in order to improve my oral communication skills, I volunteered to present various topics to new clients. Furthermore, you can also schedule a performance evaluation with your supervisor(s) in order to gain feedback on your progress and continually improve your skills and performance.
Exciting opportunities:
During your co-op term you may be presented with many exciting opportunities. In my past co-op term, I was able to attend two Toronto Raptors basketball games and visited Ripley’s Aquarium for the first time. Here at the Centre for Teaching Excellence, I have the chance to complete the Fundamentals of University Teaching certificate program, which is only offered to graduate students. Furthermore, my friends who worked for other organizations as co-op students have attended car shows and even got to travel parts of Canada. The opportunities that can arise throughout a co-op term largely depend on the organization itself and your role in the organization.
In short, being enrolled into a co-op program has many benefits. However, it is entirely up to you to decide if a co-op program aligns with your goals and interests. If you want to know more about co-op at the University of Waterloo visit the Co-operative Education website.
Yesterday, Wednesday, September 9th, nearly 50 new faculty gathered at Federation Hall to attend this year’s New Faculty Welcome Event. The program for this annual half-day orientation event features a series of information sessions designed to acclimatize our new faculty to the University of Waterloo and to provide opportunities to meet one another and members of the larger University of Waterloo community.
