It is important that each learner understands the learning process in a very personal way since each person’s journey will be different. If there are mismatches in understanding of the learning process and in individual learning styles, then academic success suffers as a result because of those mismatches rather than the academic skills of the individual. The good news is that those mismatches can be mended, and growth is always possible. In order to better evaluate the mismatches and gaps in understanding that many incoming college students bring with them to the world of higher education, I have outlined a set of foundational processes and skills to support learning and reading processes. They work with the executive brain functions to mend those mismatches and bridge those gaps in order to create balance in the overall learning process. Those foundational processes and skills are as follows: Industry, Self-Regulation, Understanding and Making Connections, Critical Thinking, Communication and Application. Foundational processes and skills are a part of the overall learning process which is a lifelong endeavor; therefore, they should be included in classrooms for individuals of all ages. “As we gain a better understanding of the learning process, we can make more informed decisions about how to structure teaching and learning” (Pringge, 2002). There are many students entering higher education with below average reading scores. Reading is a performance and must be connected to the learning process. In order to be able to read effectively at higher academic levels, students must have the necessary foundational processes and skills to support learning and reading across disciplines. This workshop will focus on how to strengthen those foundational processes and skills in the classroom environment.

The prediction of job growth through the year 2020 states that 65 percent of all available employment will require postsecondary education and training beyond high school. More and more United States citizens are heeding this warning and enrolling in postsecondary institutions. In 2016 over 20.5 million students attended American colleges and universities resulting in an increase of approximately 5.2 million students since fall 2000. One would think that the increase postsecondary enrollment will bridge the gap between available employment and career ready students. Unfortunately, it is also predicted that the United States labor force will fall short by 5 million qualified workers by the year 2020. The question becomes why so many college students are failing to complete degrees or taking longer than expected to obtain a degree. To answer that question, one has to ask if today’s college students are truly college ready. This workshop explores the changing definitions of college readiness, the attributes of a college ready student, and how to transform students into collegiate learners.

Over the last 12 months, a series of investigations have occurred to strengthen students capacity in learning chemistry by creating two experiences - one for students not ready for the general chemistry course and a second for students who were unsuccessful during the 1st half of the 1st term of general chemistry. Learning to learn Chemistry became the focus of each of these courses to strengthen student learning capacity for learning chemistry. The components of this investigation include: 1) the numerous specific risk factors that inhibit learning chemistry; 2) the cultural change used to focus on Learning to Learn Chemistry that can counteract these risk factors; 3) a model of a chemistry learning process; 4) a model of a chemistry collegiate learner; and 5) measuring and improving chemistry learning capacity. We believe that every student will be more successful in learning chemistry if the chemistry education community embraces "Learning to Learn Chemistry."

Engineering by its nature is the application of science and mathematics to solve problems. Preparing students to study engineering is a challenge in that the primary and secondary educational systems do not introduce the concept of multiple (even infinite) possible solutions to problems or the process of design. Students entering a four-year program in engineering have preparation in mathematics and the sciences, however they are very unlikely to have preparation in the application of those fields to solve problems. Therefore, the need for preparing the students to study engineering through a specialized “Learning-to-Learn” camp experience would be highly desirable. This paper presents common characteristics between the prospective engineering student and the students of mathematics and science. The paper also addresses important differences in the engineering students preparatory needs – in particular the needs related to engineering analysis and design. These include the numerous specific risk factors that inhibit learning engineering and the cultural change focused on Learning to Learn Engineering that can counteract these risk factors.

Over the last 5 years, a series of investigations have occurred to strengthen students capacity in learning mathematics by using the Learning to Learn camps to improve the capacity for learning math and STEM. The components of this investigation include: 1) the numerous specific risk factors that inhibit learning mathematics; 2) the cultural change used to focus on Learning to Learn Mathematics that can counteract these risk factors; 3) a model of a mathematical learning process; 4) a model of a mathematical collegiate learner; and 5) measuring and improving mathematical learning capacity. We believe that every student will be more successful in learning mathematics if the mathematics education community embraces "Learning to Learn Mathematics."

Based upon the research on Traditional and Transformation educational culture using the Transformation of Education framework, the workshop will provide a structure to look at all 14 aspects of the institutional culture to determine where and what type of focus an institutional effort to increase equity through change in values, mindsets and practices. Each team will have opportunity to develop an implementation approach to cultural change by identifying the top 10 values to change, 10 faculty mindsets to shift, and 20 new best practices which will alter student mindsets leading to greater success and equity.

While the traditional culture of education has led to many students entering college with "risk factors" leading to many equity issues, future directed Higher Education culture can transform the learning environment and learners' behaviors which increases equity through empowerment. A learning to learn growth oriented culture develops where 14 transformative educational aspects align with positive support for equity. The top 100 Learning to Learn and Self-growth "best practices" of teaching and learning will be analyzed to determine which of these practices are the most effective to increase both equity and empowerment. The participants will help to determine a top 10 to 25 best equity practices that empower learners.

Participants will gain hands-on experience accessing resources and forums on the Academy of Process Educators member site. They will also experience protocols for productive online meetings with process education colleagues across the globe. Session will also introduce opportunities for collaboration on curriculum design, professional development, scholarship of teaching/learning, and Academy outreach activities.

The purpose of this workshop is to develop a research program around the impact of the recovery course in higher education. After two iterations of delivering the recovery course, it is time to investigate the impact on the institution, student success, on faculty, and the reason why students end up in the course (risk factors), and what is the process and the cause and effects of the process on transformation of the learner - i.e., the learning outcomes measurement.

This workshop provides a framework to analyze how to incorporate Learning to Learn in a disciplinary context. The workshop is broken into 4 components each being about 15 to 20 minutes in length to investigate the adaptation of a framework developed in mathematics to your own discipline. 1) What are the unique risk factors for your discipline; 2) What does transformational learning look like in your discipline; 3) Learning Process Methodology adapted for your discipline; 4) Additional Learner Characteristics built on top of the Profile of a Quality Collegiate Learner that are needed for success in college and in their career. The 15 minutes will be spent on comparing and contrasting these adapted frameworks.

Carol Dweck argues growth mindset changes the meaning of effort and difficulty for students, and this new meaning unleashes learning and unlocks equality even in the most at-risk environments. “It becomes a basic human right to live in places that create growth, in places filled with yet.” As faculty how well have we developed methods to unlock this mindset? What planning, pedagogy, and in class facilitation methods empower students to engage in learning and embrace challenge? The focus of this workshop will be to explore the opportunities for realizing student growth and equality through process education and team-based learning methods, with special emphasis on classroom facilitation.

This session will review results from a study on Reading Logs in a freshman course. This will set the stage for surveying audience concerns about reading issues across the disciplines as well as levels in the curriculum. Opportunities for applying reading logs in other contexts will be considered as well as alternative strategies for student preparation through reading assignments.

The Learning Process Methodology provides a powerful and universal model for the learning process and lies at the heart of Process Education theory. Since the goal of instructional design is to guide someone through the learning process, the LPM is inherently tied to the design of learning activities. Classic and contemporary studies of Learning and Instructional design have developed their own corresponding models, most of which are subsets of the LPM. Finding connections between their models and ours opens an essential dialogue between Process Educators and other schools of thought. In this workshop participants will

• Review the Learning Process Methodology and its connection to the design of learning activities
• Learn about other models of the Learning Process and Instructional Design Process
• Understand how these other models overlap with the LPM

This workshop will share best practices used by the facilitator in faculty development workshops held at Madison College over the course of the last twenty-seven years. Practical advice will be given for creating a safe space for students, faculty, and staff that includes the following equity components: (1) a college wide commitment to sustaining a safe, accessible and healthy campus, (2) a secure, accessible, and comfortable environment for all faculty development participants to interact (regardless of their cultural background, physical conditions, or special needs), (3) a consistent, well-articulated cultural competency training for all members of the community that underlies workshop specific outcomes, and (4) a supporting multi-cultural center that nurtures learning as well as exploration of issues of racial, ethnic, and culture.

Come join three presidents of the Academy and review principles of program assessment, leading to the production of an annual assessment report that can be used to assess quality and inform planning for the next year. The session will provide an inventory of past Academy accomplishments, familiarization with strategic plan goals, writing performance criteria, and opportunities for professional engagement. Resources used in the workshop will be the program assessment methodology, the Academy strategic plan, and a draft of the 2016-17 annual report prepared by Academy leaders. The session will conclude with an exploration of the Academy operating plan for 2017-18. This session will be especially engaging if you are interested in finding and defining a meaningful role for you within the Academy as well as growing your leadership capacity.

In competency-based education, or CBE, students master competencies, take the time needed to learn and then demonstrate mastery through evaluations. Public Agenda’s Shared Design Elements (2015) identifies ten elements that guide but do not prescribe solutions that institutions need to consider as they implement CBE. Process Education (PE) offers CBE designers a knowledge-base and an approach from which to build CBE programs. This workshop engages practitioners to adapt and link elements with existing PE approaches to support learner and program success. Participants will create designs for the learning component and contribute to PE-CBE Design Matrix.

A quality classroom has many characteristics, but a critical important component is that every student must have equal access, support, and challenge, but also be treated as unique and special. This implies that the way that teachers interact with each student will be different. This workshop will help faculty to discover principles for equity in the classroom based upon what the students want and desire. The workshop will be facilitated by two students, one in high school and one in college, advocating for highly important equity issues from the students perspective. Participants will gain new insights about how faculty perspectives are received by students and fresh thinking about how alternative faculty perspectives could realize higher levels of classroom equity and student empowerment.

At CSU, we have implemented two types of Learning to Learn Chemistry Courses. The first one is for students who want to get better at learning Chemistry before they take their general chemistry course. The other is a recovery course where by mid-semester, students who recognize that they are not performing at the level they would like to achieve, can supplement or replace the general chemistry course. This workshop will provide a model for half-semester Learning to Learn Chemistry preparation and recovery courses offered for students who are dissatisfied with their performance and preparation for succeeding in the general chemistry course. The workshop will look at the course schedule, syllabus, sample activity facilitation plans, and recommended reflective writing products. Participants will brainstorm opportunities and challenges for creating such a course at their institution, how to recruit students, and learn the key principles for implementing the course.

A missing ingredient in effective learning or problem solving performance is the ability to effectively generalize knowledge so that it can be fluidly transferred to new learning or problem solving situations. The important role that generalizing plays within the learning process, the problem solving process and especially as the interface between the two processes will be identified, described, and its dimensions clarified. Additionally, a set of strategies and techniques for increasing the growth of this learning skill, generalizing, are provided along with an activity that can be used in faculty professional development as well as in a cognitive sciences course. The skill generalizing will be practiced within disciplinary context and the result produced will become part of a research paper that is being developed.

Most universities require that undergraduate students satisfy a range of requirements that prepare them to prosper as well as to participate responsibly and thoughtfully in the broader world. Given the nature of the academy, it should not be surprising that there continues to be substantial debate about what these General Education (GE) requirements should be. The American Association of Colleges and Universities has played a significant role in that debate, and many institutions have adopted their “essential learning outcomes” as the basis for the GE curriculum. The Profile of a Quality Collegiate Learner (PQCL) is being explored by at least one institution as an alternative. Although the two systems overlap, the PQCL adds a significant dimension: that students not only CAN act, for example think critically, but that they are also DISPOSED to do so. This workshop will engage participants in the structured dialogue, “Should achievement of the Profile of a Quality Collegiate Learner serve as the outcome for a quality GE program and can it used as the basis for GE Program Assessment?” The goal of structured dialogue is to be constructing a position paper on the role of the PQCL in GE that is concise, accurate, explanatory, defensible, and powerful through collaborative interaction.

Educational research confirms that students who are actively engaged, in the learning process are more likely to undertake challenging activities, to enjoy and adopt a deep approach to learning, and to exhibit enhanced performance, persistence, and creativity. Although attributes of the online environment (e.g., self pacing, flexibility, interactivity) can enhance student engagement, online learning presents special challenges with regard to eliciting and maintaining engagement, particularly among online learners whose intellectual, behavioral, emotional or physical characteristics amplify their learning challenges. Vital to ongoing engagement of these learners are: (a) the ability to self-regulate their learning, (b) the interaction relationships available in the online experience, and (c) the accessibility of online course content. This session will features evidence-based practices for creating and sustaining online learner engagement. Session content will also support a deeper understanding of the instruction practices and interaction as they relate to online instruction.