The document discusses Student Learning Communities (SLCs), which are groups of students who take courses together that are connected in a meaningful way. SLCs aim to create a sense of community, influence, and fulfillment for students. They can vary in how integrated the courses are and how much faculty collaborate. SLCs seek to improve integrative learning and increase student engagement, motivation, satisfaction, and retention. They require consideration of design principles, types, implementation strategies, and assessment of student learning and program outcomes. Overall, the document advocates for SLCs as an effective approach to 21st century learning.

1. Creating Meaningful Learning
Environments with SLCs
Dr. Patrick Blessinger
HETL Association & St. John’s University (NYC)
Plenary Keynote
6thAnnual University Learning andTeaching Showcase
Montclair State University ResearchAcademy
May 8, 2015

2. What are Student Learning Communities
(SLCs) and Why areThey Important?
• A SLC is any purposely designed
curricular program where the same
group of students take a common set
of courses together, which are
connected in same meaningful way or
share a common curricular experience
(improve curricular coherence).
• In short, a SLC is a curricular-based
learning-centered peer-to-peer
social network (community) that
extends beyond the classroom.
• SLCs are most common for first-year
students. Image by Niall Kennedy, “Community”, CC BY-NC 2.0

3. What are Student Learning Communities
(SLCs) and Why areThey Important?
• Create a sense of community:
• Membership identity (what core
shared values and goals form the
group’s identity? Do members have a
sense of loyalty to the group that
motivates them?)
• Influence (to what degree do
members actions affect the group’s
outcomes – locus of control?)
• Personal fulfillment and meaning (are
members’ intellectual, emotional,
and social needs being met? Are
members able to make the curricular
connections?) Image by Niall Kennedy, “Community”, CC BY-NC 2.0

4. What are Student Learning Communities
(SLCs) and Why areThey Important?
• Course integration may be loosely coupled,
with little or no coordination between
instructors, or tightly coupled, with instructors
collaborating (e.g. via Faculty Learning
Communities) on SLC design.
• SLCs operate on a continuum - the degree of
integration or connectedness indicates the
level of collaboration among instructors, staff,
and students.
• Connected courses may be from different
disciplines or the same discipline but they are
connected by common theme(s) or
overarching set of question(s) or common
learning goal(s). Image by Enokson, “Learning Required”, CC BY-NC 2.0

5. SLC Exemplar
https://youtu.be/mVFWVOpYfsA

6. Main Goals of SLCs
• Increase holistic, integrative learning
(cognitive, affective, social).
• Increase student-student and student-
faculty interactions.
• Increase academic achievement and
motivation in students.
• Increase student satisfaction and well-
being.
• Increase student engagement and
retention.
Image by India Edu, “Learn”, CC BY-SA 2.0

7. Three Key Principles of Learning
Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (1999)
• People have preconceptions about the way the
world works to their learning experiences.
• To develop competence in inquiry, people must:
• develop deep foundational knowledge,
• be able to apply a conceptual framework to that
knowledge, and
• de able to organize knowledge in such a way that
facilitates application of that knowledge.
• Metacognitive learning can help people develop
strategies for:
• taking control of their own learning (self-regulation
and personal agency),
• define their personal learning goals, and
• monitor/assess their own learning progress.
Image by KrissyVenosdale, “Learning”,CC BY-
NC-ND 2.0

8. SLC Benefits
• Students (and faculty) who participate in SLCs
are more engaged and academically motivated.
• Students learn to collaborate and work in teams.
• Student are more likely to integrate concepts
from one course to other courses.
• Learning occurs across all domains: cognitive,
affective, and social.
• Learning becomes more meaningful for students.
• Students’ first experiences in college are very
important in influencing persistence and
retention, and ultimately graduation.
Image by Nazareth College, “Embrace the Inner
Kid”, CC BY 2.0

9. SLC Challenges
• Students may focus too much on socializing and
not enough on the academic tasks.
• Personality and scheduling conflicts may arise.
• But these phenomena may arise in any group or
community.They are not exclusive to SLCs.
• If college is a place where students are supposed
to learn how to work with and get along with
others, then SLCs provide a relatively safe place for
them to develop these skills.
• SLCs require more maturity from students because
the teaching-learning process is more complex.
Move from isolated learning to collaborative learning
Images by CollegeDegrees360, “College Students”, CC BY-SA 2.0

10. Key SLC Design Principles
Lenning, et al (2013)
• Purpose and Goals (aligned with institutional mission, vision, values)
• Purpose, intentionality, and sense of identity.
• Well defined shared goals and objectives.
• Appropriate funding, resources, and leadership.
• Collaborative Community
• Caring, respectful, open, fair, and celebrative.
• Respect for diversity, inclusion, and shared learning.
• Cooperation, reciprocity, and team-oriented.
• Culture of Learning
• Encourage active, engaged, and inquiry-based learning.
• Encourage integrative, experiential, and meaningful learning.
• Encourage deep learning and higher order thinking and creativity.
• Standards and Responsibility
• Foster personal agency and self-regulation.
• Foster self-discipline and respect for rules and for others.
• Foster leadership and negotiation skills.
Image by Lynne Hand, “The Ultimate Learning
Tool”, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

11. Learning CommunityTypology
Lenning, et al (2013)
• Learning communities go beyond basic
team projects or simple cohorts.
• Learning communities focus on the
integration of teaching and learning and
building community across the curriculum.
• Learning experiences moves from isolated,
disconnected learning to social, connected
learning.
• What SLC type and structure is appropriate
depends on the purpose and context in
which it functions. Image by theunquietlibrarian, “Seeds of Change:
A Compass”, CC BY-NC 2.0

12. Four Main Forms of LCs
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• By membership format
• SLCs, FLCs, and ILCs
• By delivery format
• F2F, online, blended
• By duration format
• long-term, medium-term, short-term
• By disciplinary scope format
• intra-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-
disciplinary
• More than 81 different combinations possible.
• SLCs are not...just a course project or just another
instructional method.
Image by Chris Halderman, “Structure”,CC BY-
ND 2.0

13. Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary and
Transdisciplinary
https://youtu.be/y7cN8NW0ZEs

14. TwoTypes of SLCs by degree of coupling
between courses, assignments, etc.
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• Curricular (intra-institutional– on-campus). Students, as a group, taking the same
courses, which are integrated in some way, within the institution’s curriculum.They
integrate coursework jointly.The below forms may be combined in innovative ways.
• integrative cohort seminar (seminar determined by the institution wherein specific groups of
students – cohort – co-register for same courses but courses not explicitly integrated and faculty
teaching the courses do not collaborate on syllabi, assignments, etc. But an integrative seminar is
provided for the cohort to help them to make the intellectual connections).
• linked course clusters (courses are determined by the institution wherein specific groups of students
– cohort – co-register for the course cluster but faculty teaching the courses loosely collaborate on
syllabi, assignments, etc. Students are expected to make the connections across courses).
• coordinated studies (where students and faculty work together in active learning. Students are
required to apply concepts from one course to the other courses. May involve team teaching,
common assignments across courses, common themes, common questions, etc).
• Co-curricular (extra-institutional – off-campus)
• internships
• international study
• service learning

15. Key Principles for Collaboration
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• Build collaborate partnerships where everyone
benefits, where everyone creates meaning
from the experience, and where everyone
contributes in her/his own way.
• One effective way to achieve this is to create
advisory boards as a forum for expressing diverse
opinions and contributions.
• Creating clear and concise policies, procedures,
and guidelines/rules is important to establishing a
structural framework for working together to
achieve common goals.
• Build collaborate partnerships between
academic affairs and student affairs.
• Build collaborate partnerships between
institutional research and student assessment.
Image by Ron Mader, “CollaborateTool”, CC BY-
SA 2.0

16. Learning Community Planning Framework
Create a Project Plan
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• ANALYSIS PHASE
• Develop a clear purpose for your learning community
• How did the idea for a learning community come about?
• Why do you want to form a learning community?
• What are your main goals for the learning community?
• What is your mission (purpose) statement for the learning community?
• Conduct a situation analysis (environmental scan)
• Who are the key stakeholders impacted by the learning community?
• What resources are available to support the learning community?
• What challenges might you encounter in forming a learning community?

17. Learning Community Planning Framework
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• DESIGN PHASE
• Determine the type(s) of learning communities needed
• What type of membership format do you need?: SLC and/or FLC (topic and/or cohort based)
• What type of delivery format do you need?: F2F or online or blended
• What type of duration format do you need?: Short-term or long-term
• What type of disciplinary format do you need?: Intra or inter or trans
• How will you select members for your learning community?
• What are the specific goals and objectives of the learning community?

18. Learning Community Planning Framework
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
• Determine how the learning community will be implemented
• How will you build the learning community?
• How will you develop a culture of learning?
• What are the core values and group norms needed?
• What are the key roles and responsibilities of the members?
• What resources are needed to be successful?
• What legal and ethical issues must be addressed?
• What institutional policies must be addressed?

19. Learning Community Planning Framework
Adapted from Lenning, et al (2013)
• ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION PHASE
• How will student learning (cognitive) be assessed?
• Formative and summative
• Research-based evidence of learning
• Research strategies and methods
• Learning Assessment Report
• How will student well-being (affective, social) be assessed?
• How will the learning community, as a program, be evaluated?
• Learning goals and objectives
• Program Evaluation Report

20. Thank you for your time!
Learning Communities
are
21st Century Learning

21. References
• Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s
taxonomy of educational objectives. NewYork, NY: Longman.
• Angelo,T. A. (1997).The campus as a learning community: Seven promising shifts and seven powerful levers. AAHE
Bulletin, 49(9), 3-6.
• Blessinger, P., Cozza, B., & Cox, M. (2015). Principles of Effective Faculty Learning Communities in Higher Education: A
Qualitative Analysis of Faculty Participation. Learning Communities Journal. (manuscript in press).
• Blessinger, P. (2015).The future of higher education: towards a democratic theory of higher education. Chapter in P.
Blessinger & J.P. Anchan (Eds) Democratizing higher education: International comparative perspectives.
• Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J.M. (2014). Innovative approaches in teaching and learning: An introduction to inquiry-based
learning for faculty and institutional development. Chapter in P. Blessinger & J.M. Carfora (Eds) Inquiry-based learning for
faculty and institutional development: A conceptual and practical resource for educators. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
• Blessinger, P. (2013). Improving pedagogical performance through learning communities. Proceedings of the International
Research and Science Conference. Pedagogical education: Current problems, concepts, theories and practice. St.
Petersburg, Russia. RAE IPAE, 2013, 184-193.
• Blessinger, P., & Kovbasyuk, O. (May, 2012). Higher education needs to build global learning communities. The Guardian.
See http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/may/23/global-virtual-learning-environments
• Bloom, B. S. (Ed). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives:The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: cognitive
domain. NewYork, NY: McKay.

22. References
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). Learning: From speculation to science. In J. Bransford, A. Brown, &
R. Cocking (Eds), How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (pp. 39-66).Washington, D.C: National Academic
Press.
• Boyer Commission of Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate
education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook, NY: State University of NewYork at Stony Brook.
• Brooke, C., & Gruenewald, D. (2003). Building bridges between academic affairs and student affairs: Learning communities
at Iowa State University. Paper presented at the North CentralTeaching Symposium. Minneapolis, MN.
• Cox, M. D. (2004). Building faculty learning communities: New directions for teaching and learning, no. 97 (pp. 5-23). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student
achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Dunlop, L. & Pettitt, M. (2008). Assessing student outcomes in learning communities:Two decades of study at
community colleges. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 15(2), 140-149.
• Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, R. S. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among
students, faculty, and disciplines: New directions for teaching and learning, no. 41. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

23. References
• Huber, M.T., & Hutchins, P. (2005). The advancement of learning: Building the teaching commons. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Kouzes, J. M. & Possner, B. Z. (1987). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Kovbasyuk, O., & Blessinger, P. (2013).The nature and origins of meaning-centered education. Chapter in O.
Kovbasyuk & P. Blessinger (Eds) Meaning-centered education: International perspectives and explorations in higher
education. NewYork: Routledge Publishing.
• Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2010). Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
• Lenning, O.T., & Ebbers, L. H. (1999). The powerful potential of learning communities: Improving education for the
future. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, vol. 26, no. 6. Washington, D.C.:The George Washington Graduate
School of Education and Human Development.
• Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, R. S. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections
among students, faculty, and disciplines: New directions for teaching and learning, no. 41. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
• Huber, M.T., & Hutchins, P. (2005). The advancement of learning: Building the teaching commons. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Kouzes, J. M. & Possner, B. Z. (1987). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

24. References
• Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2010). Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
• Lenning, O.T., & Ebbers, L. H. (1999). The powerful potential of learning communities: Improving education for the
future. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, vol. 26, no. 6. Washington, D.C.:The George Washington Graduate
School of Education and Human Development.
• Mentkowski, M., & Associates. (2000). Learning that lasts: Integrative learning, development, and performance in
college and beyond. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Mezirow, L. (2003).Transformative learning as discourse. Journal ofTransformative Education, 1(1), 58-63.
• Ortquist-Ahrens, L., & Pratt, K. (1999).The role of the facilitator in faculty learning communities: Paving the way
for growth, productivity, and collegiality. Learning Communities Journal, 1(1), 29-62.
• Shapiro, N. S. & Levine, J. H. (1999). Creating learning communities: A practical guide to winning support, organizing
for change, and implementing programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Soven, M., Lehr, D., Naynaha, S., Olson, W. (Eds). (2013). Linked courses for genernal education and integrative
learning: A guide for faculty and administrators. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
• Zhao, C., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement. Research in Higher
Education, 45(2), 115-138.