A Professor of the Practice in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience and Director of Undergraduate Studies for Psychology, Bridgette brings a distinguished record of leadership in teaching, mentoring, and faculty development. Her work centers on helping educators strengthen their teaching and mentoring while building communities in which teaching is valued as a meaningful, rewarding, and intellectually engaging part of academic life.

Throughout her career, Bridgette has been committed to advancing teaching as both a scholarly and collaborative practice. She has developed innovative approaches to teaching introductory psychology, mentored hundreds of undergraduate and graduate students in the art and science of teaching, and contributed to national conversations about pedagogy through her scholarship and leadership of educator conferences, including the Psychology One Conference and the National Institute on the Teaching of Psychology (NITOP).

“Bridgette is a respected teacher, mentor, scholar, and community builder whose work reflects the values at the heart of the CTL,” said Joseph Salem, Vice Provost for Duke Libraries and University Librarian. “She understands that our greatest opportunity is to connect people, ideas, and expertise across Duke. Her experience advancing teaching excellence at both the local and national levels, combined with her deep understanding of Duke’s culture and aspirations, will help us build a center that strengthens teaching and mentoring while supporting faculty as they navigate a rapidly evolving educational landscape.”

As Faculty Director, Bridgette will help shape CTL’s academic vision and guide our faculty development efforts. Her priorities include supporting instructors across all career stages, strengthening partnerships with schools and departments, fostering cross-disciplinary conversations about teaching, and helping faculty thoughtfully navigate emerging opportunities and challenges in higher education, including the evolving role of AI in teaching and learning.

“Duke is home to extraordinary teaching innovation already occurring within schools and departments,” Bridgette said. “I see the CTL as a convener and amplifier of that work that can strengthen cross-school learning, reduce duplication, and foster a culture of reflective practice and continuous improvement.”

Bridgette will officially join the CTL on July 1. We are excited for the leadership, expertise, and enthusiasm she will bring to the CTL and to Duke’s ongoing commitment to teaching and mentoring excellence.

The CTL is grateful to the following members of the Faculty Director search committee for their time and insights:

• Scott Dyreng (Search Chair) — Senior Associate Dean of Innovation; Professor of Accounting, Fuqua School of Business
• Owen Astrachan — Professor of the Practice of Computer Science; Associate Director of Undergraduate Studies Trinity College of Arts & Sciences
• Charlie Cox — Associate Professor of the Practice of Chemistry, Trinity College of Arts & Sciences
• Rosa Gonzalez-Guarda — Professor, Duke University School of Nursing
• Andrew Janiak — Professor of Philosophy, Trinity College of Arts & Sciences
• Remi Kalir — Associate Director, Duke Center for Teaching and Learning
• Cameron Kim — Assistant Professor of the Practice in Biomedical Engineering; Associate Director of Undergraduate Studies, Pratt School of Engineering
• Maria Wisdom — Assistant Vice Provost for Faculty Advancement; Adjunct Associate Professor of the Practice, Program in Education

The post Welcome our new Faculty Director: Bridgette Martin Hard appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

“What this space allowed for was for faculty to really think, with both curiosity and caution, about the implications of generative AI for their teaching,” Ahern-Dodson said. “Faculty are learners too, and they need an opportunity to think about what difference it makes for them and for their teaching.”

Unlike a one-time workshop or training session, the FLC emphasized sustained engagement and trust-building among participants. Faculty from the humanities, professional schools, and sciences brought different disciplinary perspectives to the table, helping one another navigate rapidly evolving questions around AI use, student learning, and course design.

“Conversations about AI with colleagues from different academic units broadened my perspective on the many dimensions of its use,” said Andrea Larson, instructor in the Department of German Studies. “The small and informal setting of the FLC created space for open, nonjudgmental dialogue that helped us better understand how AI is affecting disciplines beyond our own in both positive and negative ways.” 

“My perspective on AI in teaching has changed to a more proactive versus reactive approach, to learning about the pros and cons of using AI, and ensuring that I am explicit about practical ways AI can be used in the classroom and in clinical practice.” said Tomeico Faison, Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Director of Innovation in Professional Pathways.

The FLC was both a sense-making space and a practical laboratory for teaching innovation. Participants were encouraged not only to experiment in their own classrooms, but also to carry those conversations back to their departments and broader campus communities. That broader engagement was especially visible this spring when Duke hosted the AI in Education at Duke Summit, where several FLC members contributed as planners, presenters, speakers, and workshop leaders. Their involvement reflects one of the FLC’s central goals: building a network of faculty leaders who can help guide Duke’s evolving conversations about AI and teaching.

Top: At the AI in Education at Duke Summit, Caitlin Donovan (far left) moderates a panel discussion on “Critical Cases in AI and Education” that includes Ahern-Dodson as a panelist. Middle row (left to right): Siobhan Oca presents about “New Fundamentals in Teaching;” Tomeico Faison and Kerry Ossi-Lupo present during the “AI Across the Disciplines: Lightning Talks.” Bottom: The lightning talks presenters, including Andrea Larson (second from left). Photos by Blythe Tyrone.

“The Summit showcased the power of sustained faculty engagement around AI,” said Aria Chernik, Assistant Vice Provost for Academic Innovation at the Duke Center for Teaching and Learning. Chernik served on the program and planning committees for the AI in Education at Duke Summit. “The FLC participants didn’t just reflect on how AI is changing teaching and learning; they helped lead campus-wide conversations about what thoughtful, nuanced, and human-centered education can look like in this moment of rapid technological change.”

The FLC also benefited from contributions and support from CTL staff, including Chernik and Remi Kalir, who joined early meetings to share what they were hearing from both students and faculty about generative AI. Their insights helped frame the role teaching centers can play in supporting faculty as they navigate complex pedagogical questions around AI.

For Ahern-Dodson, one of the most important outcomes of the FLC has been the opportunity for faculty to learn alongside one another in a rapidly changing environment.

“If you’re going into [an FLC], it’s not a dissemination model,” she said. “Instead, it’s focused on idea exchange — reciprocity — learning from each other and with each other. This is uncertain ground for all of us. Our work together this year offers a model for faculty support that prioritizes thoughtful deliberation, collaboration with and connection to faculty across disciplinary contexts, and values-driven practical experimentation. These FLC priorities stand in intentional contrast to an AI-driven culture that prizes speed and productivity.”

As AI tools and practices continue to evolve, participants said communities like the FLC offer something increasingly valuable in higher education: time and space for thoughtful, human-centered conversations about teaching.

“Universities will distinguish themselves through their commitment to human-centered education, critical thinking, discussion-based learning, and meaningful faculty-student engagement,” Larson said. “To do this well, institutions must equip faculty with the pedagogical training, resources, and support necessary to adapt their teaching effectively in an AI-driven landscape.”

The FLC would like to express gratitude to the following guests who shared their expertise and experiences with them throughout the year:

• Aria Chernik, Center for Teaching and Learning
• Eileen Chow, Asian and Middle Eastern Studies
• Alec Gallimore, Provost
• Jennifer Hill, Office of Assessment
• Remi Kalir, Center for Teaching and Learning
• Hannah Rozear, Duke Libraries
• Elizabeth Romage, Public Policy ‘26
• Kristin Stephens-Martinez, Computer Science
• Vic Szabo, Art, Art History, Visual Studies and the AI at Duke Steering Committee
• Hannah Taylor, Thompson Writing Program
• Aarthi Vadde, English and the Duke Initiative for Science and Society

The post From Community to Campus Impact: A Faculty Learning Community’s Journey Through AI and Teaching appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

When Tyson Brown teaches Medical Sociology at Duke, his students wrestle with big questions: Why do some communities experience worse health outcomes than others? How do systems like housing, food access, and education shape who gets sick and why?

This year, those same questions were asked and answered far beyond Duke’s campus.

Through a partnership with the National Education Opportunity Network (NEON), Brown adapted his course for high school students across the country, bringing a full, credit-bearing Duke class into classrooms serving 255 students who might not otherwise have access to college-level coursework.

Behind the scenes, the Duke Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) helped make that leap possible.

Bridging the Gap Between Talent and Opportunity

NEON’s work is grounded in a simple but powerful premise: talent is everywhere, but opportunity is not. So what if students in under-resourced high schools could take a college course during their regular school day, at no cost, and for college credit?

NEON has built an innovative model around that concept. College courses are embedded directly into the school day, with instruction led by university faculty and Teaching Fellows, while high school teachers (“co-teachers”) provide critical on-the-ground support to help students fully engage and succeed in the course.

“As someone who’s worked in academia for a long time, academia is confusing, and NEON is trying to actively dismantle that hidden curriculum while these students are still in high school,” said Hannah Rogers, CTL learning experience designer. “Ensuring students know about Duke and pathways to get into college, period, as well as giving them the opportunity to earn real college credit, can make a huge difference.”

Reimagining a Duke Course (Without Lowering the Bar)

When NEON connected with Brown, his course stood out to learners immediately. 

“Students are really interested in thinking about medicine and health in ways they haven’t before,” said Cobren Greer, a NEON course success manager. “Tyson’s course covers such a wide variety of topics that students are able to see themselves in the material and connect what they’re learning to their own lives and experiences.”

From the start, one principle guided the work: this would be a Duke course, not a simplified version of one.

Students would engage with the same core material, complete similar assignments, and be held to the same high expectations. But delivering that experience to high school classrooms across the country required rethinking how the course would work. 

Designing that experience while preserving the integrity of the course became a deeply collaborative effort.

Enter: The CTL

Working closely with Brown and NEON, CTL learning experience designers Hannah Rogers and Megan Lancaster helped translate the course into a format that could function across dozens of classrooms, time zones, and learning contexts.

They helped shape everything from the structure of the Canvas site to the design of assignments and assessments. They co-developed weekly quizzes, built out course modules, collaborated on a redesigned capstone project, and created detailed guides for the co-teachers and Teaching Fellows.

In other words, they designed for the entire learning environment – not just the course content.

“It was a holistic approach where, as a learning experience designer, we’re not only supporting the learner’s journey, we’re supporting the teachers and the Teaching Fellows that are supporting their learners’ journey,” said Lancaster.

That kind of design work proved critical. NEON’s model depends on many moving parts – students, teachers, Teaching Fellows, and faculty – all working in sync. The CTL’s role was to help ensure that the course felt coherent, navigable, and engaging for everyone involved.

“A true partner at every step.”

For Brown, the impact of that partnership was clear.

“The CTL has been absolutely essential to launching the NEON course. We could not have done this well without them, full stop,” said Brown. “They’ve helped with logistics and technology, and they’ve also helped us think carefully about what it means to create a rigorous, engaging Duke course for high school students across the country… The CTL has been a true partner at every step.”

From structuring the course in Canvas to refining assignments and supporting student engagement, the CTL was involved at every stage. This work helped ensure that the course was not only rigorous, but also organized, accessible, and meaningful to students encountering college-level material for the first time.

For NEON, having the CTL embedded in the process meant they weren’t adapting the course on their own—they were working alongside the team that understood its design and intent from the inside out. That collaboration made it easier to bring Brown’s vision to life in a new context.

“Partnering with Duke’s [the CTL’s LXD] team has been incredibly valuable,” said Katie Sullivan, a NEON learning designer. “Their deep, intimate knowledge of Duke’s courses and close connection to the content and professor brought a critical level of insight to the development process.”

The CTL was not the only Duke unit supporting Brown’s NEON course: the Academic Media Services team handled video production, including an introduction video (below) that helped NEON students feel more connected to Duke.

Learning Flows Both Ways

One of the most striking outcomes of the project is how much the experience has shaped Brown’s teaching back on campus.

As Brown worked with the CTL and NEON, he began rethinking aspects of his Duke course, experimenting with new approaches to assessment and incorporating elements of the flipped classroom model. What started as an effort to expand access outward also became an opportunity to innovate inward.

It’s a reminder that partnerships like this don’t just extend the reach of a university, they can also sharpen and enrich what happens within it.

A Model for What’s Possible

The Duke-NEON partnership is still growing, with additional Duke courses already in development for future terms. But even in its early stages, it offers a compelling example of what collaborative teaching and learning can look like.

It shows how a research university can extend its impact beyond campus, how thoughtful instructional design can make rigorous learning experiences accessible to new audiences, and how partnerships can turn ambitious ideas into real opportunities for students.

For the CTL, the project reflects a core strength: working alongside faculty and partners to design learning experiences that are not only effective, but expansive.

Because sometimes, the most meaningful classroom isn’t defined by where it is, but by who it reaches. 

Contact us today if you would like to reimagine what your teaching could be and who your courses could reach.

With Gratitude

In addition to the many teachers and Teaching Fellows who have made the course successful this term, we want to recognize the following for their contributions to the NEON course development:

• Tyson Brown, Professor of Sociology, Duke
• David Gonzalez Chavez, Lead Teaching Fellow, Duke
• Mich Donovan, Academic Media Production Manager, Duke OIT
• Cobren Greer, Course Success Manager, NEON
• Anna Hiltner, Lead Teaching Fellow, Duke
• Michael Hudson, Learning Experience Designer, Duke CTL
• Megan Lancaster, Senior Learning Experience Designer, Duke CTL
• Jill Powell, Academic Project Manager, Duke Research & Innovation
• Hannah Rogers, Learning Experience Designer, Duke CTL
• Katie Sullivan, Learning Designer, NEON

The post Expanding Access, Extending Impact: How the CTL Helped Bring a Duke Course to High School Classrooms Nationwide appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

At Duke, the Innovative Grading and Assessment (IGA) Community of Practice (CoP) was created to explore exactly that question. Bringing together instructors across disciplines, the CoP became a space for reimagining assessment, fostering collaboration, and generating practical resources for other instructors. The video below explains the motivation of some of the CoP participants to change their grading and assessment practices, as well the impact on their classroom. 

Why Does Innovative Grading and Assessment Matter?

Innovative grading and assessment shifts the focus from measuring performance to supporting learning. Innovative approaches center learning outcomes as the primary driver for grading, allowing students to be agents of their own learning since the assessment practices are inherently flexible and iterative. In practice, it can look like implementing new grading schemes like mastery-based or contract grading, rethinking participation policies, encouraging self assessment, and allowing assignment revisions.

The impact in the classroom can be profound, as illustrated in the graphic below. These changes don’t just alter grading—they reshape the entire learning experience, making it more inclusive, transparent, and growth-oriented. We have created an overview of innovative grading and assessment to learn more.

Why Was the Community of Practice Formed?

The origins of the IGA Community of Practice trace back to a planning retreat in August 2024, when the Teaching Innovation team identified innovative grading and assessment as a topic that instructors often wanted to discuss. To better understand instructor needs, the team conducted interviews in Fall 2024. A clear theme emerged: faculty wanted not just resources, but also a space to share ideas, learn from one another, and experiment with new approaches.

The Community of Practice model was a natural fit. By design, a CoP brings instructors together around a shared topic, encourages collaborative learning, and positions participants as both learners and leaders. The IGA CoP officially launched in early 2025 with a cohort of 11 instructors selected from 27 applicants.

What Did the Community Do Together? 

The strength of a Community of Practice lies in its structure and collaborative energy. This CoP met throughout Summer 2025 to discuss their experiences and expand their knowledge. The CoP ended with the fellows creating their own products to share with the wider Duke community. 

Collaborative Learning and Discussion

Regular meetings blended asynchronous pre-work, interactive discussions, and actionable takeaways. Topics included:

• The mechanics of innovative grading
• Participation and attendance policies
• Maintaining rigor
• Building student buy-in
• Designing and communicating course materials

An external speaker, Dr. David Clark, further enriched the experience with a session on what works—and what doesn’t—in alternative grading.

Hands-On Project Work

Beyond discussion, participants actively developed projects to share their knowledge with the Duke community.

Team ‘Academic Discourse’ focused on expanding the conversation around innovative grading at Duke. Their outputs included:

• A virtual panel: “Innovative Grading and Assessment: Stories from the Classroom”
• A zine highlighting the benefits of IGA

Team ‘Faculty Support’ concentrated on helping other instructors adopt these practices. They created:

• Programming for new faculty orientation
• A workshop titled “Squash Grades: Transforming Assessment Practices for Deeper Learning”

Get Help with Innovative Grading and Assessment

Center for Teaching and Learning staff are available to help you rethink grading and assessment for your courses. Email us at dukectl@duke.edu or stop by our open online office hours for one-on-one help.

The post Rethinking Grades: Inside the Innovative Grading and Assessment Community of Practice appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

As part of Duke’s mission to expand access to education and promote lifelong learning, the university has a long-standing partnership with the open online course platform Coursera. The CTL’s LXD team collaborates with Duke faculty, staff, and researchers to translate their teaching and expertise into engaging online learning opportunities, including Coursera. Coursera learners from across the globe then access these online, self-paced courses to gain new skills and explore diverse fields at their convenience. 

Taught by the Nicholas School of the Environment’s Prasad Kasibhatla, Professor of Environmental Chemistry, Climate Science for Everyone explores the causes and impacts of climate change and empowers people of all ages, educational levels, jobs, and interests to consider how climate change affects their own communities and careers.

Kasibhatla shared, “What was obviously valuable for me was the ability to reach more people with my message about climate science.”

Ann Stephenson, Director of Professional Development and Xavier Larkin, Senior Program Coordinator at AED’s Lifelong Learning team were key to organizing this cohort experience. 

Stephenson said Climate Science for Everyone was chosen for both how its material is designed to be understandable without previous knowledge as well as its evidence-based approach.

“The curriculum breaks down complex scientific concepts into digestible modules without oversimplifying the science,” Stephenson said. “It also emphasizes both understanding and action, which aligned well with our goal of empowering alumni not just to learn about climate change, but to feel equipped to engage with it constructively.”

Rather than being fully self-paced, the alumni course was structured as a cohort, creating a shared space where participants could learn together and benefit from a more collaborative learning experience. Each week for four weeks, about 60 actively participating alumni worked through a module of the course on their own time, then gathered together through Zoom for two synchronous learning opportunities: a question and answer session with Kasibhatla and then guest speakers, which featured alumni working in climate.

Planning the course 

To ensure that the Climate Science for Everyone alumni experience was relevant and engaging for Duke alumni, AED’s Lifelong Learning team worked with the CTL for eight months.

“The primary goal in creating an alumni cohort around Climate Science for Everyone was to build a shared foundation of climate literacy while also strengthening alumni connections,” Stephenson said. “We wanted to create a space where alumni could engage deeply with climate science, ask questions openly, and connect the science to their personal and professional lives.”

Further goals that guided our design team were to:

• Engage alumni in discussions about climate change relevant to their lives, demonstrating Duke’s prioritization of climate education
• Strengthen participants’ connections to the Duke community and alumni network
• Introduce alumni to Coursera, so they can utilize the resource to enable lifelong learning

These goals were reflected in the course design. For example, the live sessions provided additional learning opportunities for learners to see how learning about climate science is career relevant and interact directly with a Duke professor and other alumni. Additionally, at the end of the course, learners were provided with suggestions about how they could continue learning on Coursera for free with Duke.

We wanted to mirror the inclusive nature of the course content and discussion design with how the course functioned through accessible design practices. What this meant for this course was paying attention to digital accessibility throughout the design of every course component — videos, course documents like syllabi, and using captions in Zoom meetings. Our teams worked together to ensure course materials followed best practices such as:

• Using headings on web pages to correctly organize information
• Sharing links through meaningful link text 
• Providing instructions to learners to request accommodations, if needed

Following best practices like these enables all learners to participate and feel welcome in the course. Online courses like those on Coursera also have built-in accessibility benefits, such as the ability to review video lectures as many times as a learner needs to understand the content. 

Engaging with the alumni community

Alumni joined the program based on their varying experiences and interests.

For instance, Duke alumna Rebecca Beavers, Ph.D., ‘99, had recently participated in the Duke Billions to Trillions Summit, which inspired her to connect with other Duke alumni on climate change concerns. A retired federal employee, Beavers had employed her geological training from Duke on projects that engaged with climate change, such as coastal geology and coastal climate adaptation programs for the U.S. National Park Service and policy work at the Department of Transportation.

“When I decided to retire early, courses like this one took me back to the basic fundamentals of climate science and helped me more fully ground my understanding in the current literature,” Beavers said. “Discussions with fellow alumni helped me connect with the non-federal sector and, honestly, take a course that was enjoyable at a critical time in our country’s history.” 

Alumnus Rich Herbst, B.S.E., ‘88, joined the course to supplement his initial Duke education in electrical engineering with climate science knowledge to help his current career. In April 2025, Herbst returned to Duke as the Senior Director of Alumni Industry and Professional engagement, and a goal of this role has been to build alumni industry groups that are aligned with the priorities of the Duke Campaign: Climate and Sustainability, Health and Technology. 

“So, one of my main goals in joining the cohort for this class was to increase my knowledge in the foundational issues, and proposed solutions, for the climate challenges we face today,” he said. “ In gaining this knowledge, I hoped to become a more informed leader for the Duke Alumni in Climate and Sustainability group, which I launched in August [2025].”

The design of the course helped create a community of intergenerational and interdisciplinary alumni who brought diverse perspectives to the discussion, Larkin and Stephenson said.

“Their participation reflected a strong sense of knowing and belonging: they wanted to ensure that what they were asking was meaningful, and that the material they engaged with would support them as they move into the foreseeable future with the practical takeaways provided,” Larkin said.

Beavers highlighted that this environment created “a sense of optimism that people truly care about climate change and are concerned about how we are impacting our air, lands, and waters,” and emphasized how the addition of the guest speakers to the alumni experience enriched the course content. 

“The work that alumni speakers came to highlight showed so much innovation and unique ways to apply the science to societal problems,” Beavers said.

Herbst also found learning about the “solutions and innovations” to climate change interesting, as well as other components of the course material, including the historical perspective on climate change.

“The knowledge I’ve gained on the causes of climate change, and the efforts required to keep our carbon footprint in check, will hopefully make me a better steward of the earth’s environment,” he said.

Recognizing the impact 

By the end of the cohort, many alumni had completed the course — but the impact of the course went beyond earning a certificate. 

Stephenson and Larkin saw evidence throughout the program that participants were learning together.

“Participants demonstrated increased confidence in discussing climate science topics and often connected course content to their own fields and communities,” Stephenson said. “Additionally, the shared experience of moving through the material together strengthened relationships among participants. The cohort model created accountability and community, which enhanced both engagement and retention.”

Larkin said that the original goals of the teams were “exceeded for this inaugural private alumni cohort. Each participant was engaged, enthusiastic, and eager, bringing thoughtful questions, real-world perspectives, and a genuine passion for climate science.” 

For Herbst, the experience has encouraged him to continue his lifelong learning journey with Duke, especially when programs with other alumni are offered.

“I would recommend this to all alums. It’s really a great way to engage with the Duke alumni community, to learn together and share relevant perspectives and experiences,” he said.

Beavers agreed that reengaging with Duke was a meaningful experience and helps alumni “to continue your education at more stages in your life” and shared about the possibilities learning can provide.

“The most valuable takeaway from this experience was that we can all make a difference when we care enough to inform ourselves about important topics like climate change,” she said. “After a career focused on climate change adaptation and policy, I am amazed at the innovative work that is underway in finance, energy, mitigation, engineering, and more.”

Learn More

Are you interested in taking the public version of the Climate Science for Everyone Coursera course? 

If you’re a Duke staff, faculty, student member or a Duke alumni, you can sign-up through Coursera for Duke or Coursera for Duke alumni programs to take the course for free on Coursera. 

If you’re not affiliated with Duke, please view the public Climate Science for Everyone link. This is the first course in the series Healthcare Leadership for Climate Change, if you’re interested in diving further into climate education. 

You can learn more about the work of the Lifelong Learning Team’s work by exploring Duke’s Forever Learning Institute and the Forever Learning Summer Academy.

This blog was planned, drafted, and edited with contributions from Xavier Larkin, Ann Stephenson, and Michael Hudson.

The post Duke Alumni Engage with Lifelong Learning through ‘Climate Science for Everyone’  appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

This post explores the pedagogy and techniques needed to successfully engage students with polls. Duke subscribes to Wooclap, a polling tool that can be used in Canvas or independently at no cost which has 20 different question types (including fill-in-the blank, image labeling, find a number, and sorting). Plus, you are able to deliver the polls anonymously or track student responses for points toward their grades.

Knowledge Checks Reveal What Your Students Understand

Polls can help you understand whether your students have mastered the knowledge and skills needed to be successful. The poll results help you tailor your teaching and provide students with immediate feedback about their own learning. Starting your class with a poll about readings or problem sets is a powerful way to encourage homework completion (especially if you award some points toward their grades). You can also launch a poll to break up or complete a lecture for students to work on with partner(s) or alone to check if they are able to apply the knowledge. 

It is key to respond to the poll results at that moment for learning gains. The way you approach the discussion depends on the course content and level of understanding displayed in their answers. If there is a wide difference of opinions, the students could pair up to discuss their answers and then vote again to see if consensus is found. You might give a mini-lecture or explain a difficult concept. Students could volunteer to explain the correct (or incorrect) answer. To use these knowledge checks successfully, it is best to hide the answers until all students have voted and then reveal them to the class. There are a number of question types in Wooclap that you might take advantage of depending on the content, including multiple choice, short answers, find a number, matching, or label an image.

Competitions Spark Interest and Engagement

You can require students to share their names or work as a team and enable competition mode in Wooclap. In teams, students must discuss their answers before voting, adding another dimension to their participation. Competitive polls work best for discrete answers that can be identified quickly, such as distinguishing concepts, providing key facts or formulas, identifying the next step, definitions, dates or vocabulary. Try to provide answer options that are plausible to increase discussion. 

Competitions can be especially effective as exam preparation or cumulative review. You can add a timer to inspire more robust participation, choose when the leaderboard is displayed, and decide how many places to reveal. However, to reduce stress be sure the competition is low-stakes and focused on improvement, not embarrassment. 

Specialized Settings Allow Students to Ask for Help

Wooclap offers several ways for students to anonymously report they are confused about a topic or ask questions. There is an option to indicate that they are confused about a specific question as they are voting. A message wall can also be added to a poll, which allows students to ask questions for clarification of the polling results or it can be kept open for them to ask questions during lecture. With the addition of the anonymous questions, you’ll get a better understanding of students’ pain points and misconceptions before graded work and improve their learning overall.

Brainstorming and Discussions Become Easier

Wooclap offers question types and settings to allow students to provide their opinion on topics or brainstorm ideas more easily than a standard open discussion in class. Along with polls, multiple choice and word cloud questions, answers can be supplemented with student comments to explain their answers for more clarity and nuance. Short answers can be upvoted to get a sense of the class’ general thinking on a topic. To start conversations about the relative merit of ideas, instructors can create SWOT frameworks, ratings, or prioritization questions. 

Resources

• Get Started with Wooclap: Instructions for using Wooclap independently, in Google Slides and PowerPoint, plus adding it to Canvas for automatic grading integration.
• Active Learning with Wooclap: CTL post with more information about various question types and their pedagogical uses. 
• Wooclap Templates: Explore existing examples to get inspiration for your own polls

The post Increase Student Engagement with Polling appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

The Faculty Director is an important new academic leadership role at Duke, created to ensure the Center’s work remains grounded in the priorities of Duke’s schools and the real challenges and opportunities faculty encounter in their teaching. Working in close partnership with Joe Salem, the Rita DiGiallonardo Holloway University Librarian and Vice Provost for Library Affairs, and CTL leadership, the Faculty Director will help shape faculty development efforts and strengthen connections across Duke’s academic units.

“Great teaching is at the heart of Duke’s academic mission. As we continue to evolve how we teach and learn, the Faculty Director will help ensure CTL’s work remains thoughtful, evidence-informed, and deeply connected to the lived experience of our faculty,” said Salem.

This role is intended for an actively serving Duke faculty member who can help keep the Center closely aligned with evolving school priorities, faculty needs, and the learning experiences of Duke students. This is a half-time (0.5 FTE), term-limited administrative appointment for a three-year term, with the possibility of renewal following review.

The ideal candidate will have the following qualifications and characteristics:

• High-credibility Duke faculty member with demonstrated teaching excellence and peer respect across disciplinary boundaries.
• Proven faculty developer with real experience mentoring faculty or leading teaching/learning/mentoring-related initiatives (not just interest in pedagogy).
• Clear, evidence-informed philosophy of teaching and mentoring, with the ability to articulate, operationalize it, and defend it.
• Strong cross-school collaborator who can work with deans, departments, and faculty communities without defaulting to a one-size-fits-all model.
• Strategic judgment and scope discipline – able to align CTL work to Duke-wide priorities while resisting mission creep into revenue, digital growth, or tech-first agendas.
• Trust-builder and facilitator with the interpersonal skill to convene faculty, surface tensions productively, and maintain credibility as a peer.

Particular interest will be given to faculty who bring prior leadership or service in teaching and faculty development, familiarity with emerging pedagogical practices and/or digital and future-oriented teaching approaches, and/or scholarship in teaching and learning.

See the full job description for more information about the role and application process. Please consider applying or nominating a colleague who would bring thoughtful leadership to this role. Applications are due by the end of the day on Sunday, March 15.

Questions may be directed to the search committee chair, Scott Dyreng (scott.dyreng@duke.edu) or Stefany Sanders, Chief of Staff for CTL (stefany.sanders@duke.edu).

The post Call for Applications: Faculty Director of the Duke Center for Teaching and Learning appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

Duke University is taking an important next step in strengthening excellence and innovation in teaching and learning. As part of a university-wide effort to elevate the educational experience for all Duke learners, Learning Innovation & Lifetime Education (LILE) is transitioning into the new Duke Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). The CTL will serve as Duke’s central hub for pedagogical innovation and digital education strategy partnership.

A New Chapter for Teaching and Learning at Duke

In announcing the new center, Provost Alec D. Gallimore highlighted the intentional restructuring behind the new center:

“This new structure reflects our strategic effort to align our people and resources with our mission. Refocusing these important teaching and learning support services will enable stronger coordination and collaboration and enhance our ability to meet the evolving needs of our students and faculty,” wrote Gallimore.

The CTL will focus heavily on engagement with faculty to ensure the center launches with both faculty and learner needs at its core, but remain home to several functions housed within LILE, including:

• Faculty-centered teaching and learning programming
• Pedagogical support services
• The digital education strategy team, which partners with Duke’s schools and Trinity College on online, hybrid, and Coursera program strategy and development
• Support for faculty use of core tools such as Canvas
• The Osher Lifelong Learning Institute (OLLI)

Joe Salem, the Rita DiGiallonardo Holloway University Librarian and Vice Provost for Library Affairs, will oversee the center as a standalone unit.

“Through this initiative, we are underscoring Duke’s commitment to support outstanding teaching and mentorship throughout the university,” said Salem. “The center will also play a key role in expanding global access to Duke courses and programs, extending the reach of our faculty’s teaching and the university’s impact far beyond campus.”

What This Means for LILE

As the new CTL takes shape, LILE will sunset. This transition involves several structural shifts to more closely coordinate these services with Duke’s academic units.

Programs and Services Transitioning to Other Units

• Summer Session will move to Duke’s schools and Trinity College for more direct academic alignment.
• Pre-College programs will transition to Academic Affairs for Summer 2026. For more information, visit Duke Pre-College Programs 
• Continuing education and professional programs will be revisited in collaboration with the schools. Learners already enrolled or registered will be able to complete current programs.
• Core services, such as finance operations and student information systems, will be centralized at the university level for greater efficiency and coordination.

The Future of Lifetime Education at Duke

As Duke strengthens its academic and professional learning portfolio, the University is adopting a school-based model for developing lifelong learning programs that reinforce Duke’s academic strengths and mission. Many programs historically managed by LILE will be redesigned in partnership with schools, while others will wind down as part of this transition.

The center will serve as a strategic partner to schools in shaping and executing their digital education strategy—supporting program design, guiding development, and ensuring high-quality learning experiences.

Together, these efforts expand access to Duke’s academic excellence and create meaningful learning pathways for a broader community of learners.

Educational Technology Integration

Staff who support Duke’s educational technologies and back-end systems have transitioned to the Office of Information Technology (OIT) and Student Information Services and Systems (SISS). This integration will realize a collaborative support model across CTL, OIT, and SISS, integrating pedagogical, technology, and university systems expertise in helping faculty use technology in their teaching. The CTL will continue to advise faculty on use of educational technologies in the classroom.

Looking Ahead

Changes to the CTL’s branding, organization, programs and services will continue to roll out across Spring and Summer 2026; subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates and opportunities.

If you have questions, need support, or would like to share feedback during this transition, please contact us at ctl@duke.edu.

The CTL will continue LILE’s commitment to delivering high-impact services that matter most to Duke educators and learners, guided by a spirit of collaboration, discovery, and excellence. We look forward to partnering with the Duke campus community as we build this next chapter together.

The post From LILE to CTL: Announcing the Duke Center for Teaching and Learning appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

On September 26, a group of Duke faculty representing several disciplines gathered in person for the first meeting of the new “Teaching in the Age of AI” Faculty Learning Community (FLC), led by Jennifer Ahern-Dodson, Associate Professor of the Practice in the Thompson Writing Program, and supported by CARADITE. Attendees exchanged introductions and reflected on their attitudes toward generative AI — a mix of excitement and caution — and their motivations for joining this new venture.

“I felt truly enlightened and inspired,” Yan Liu, Associate Professor of the Practice of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, shared about the first meeting. “The conversations in both our small groups and the larger discussions opened my eyes to the many ways AI can be understood and applied, offering perspectives I hadn’t considered before. I especially appreciated connecting with colleagues from other language programs and across disciplines—it created a genuine sense of community and reminded me of the value of learning together.”

A Community of Contrasting Views

The FLC is not an endorsement of AI; rather, it invites faculty to engage in critical and creative exploration of generative AI and teaching. As a result, cohort members represent not only a variety of disciplines but also a spectrum of attitudes toward AI.

“From this cohort, I hope to share my experiences and gain further insight into the skills students will need to effectively utilize AI as a partner. I am hoping to create scenarios that help students learn foundational concepts, better explore nuances to deepen their understanding, and iterate solutions to give them confidence in justifying their choices. I am also looking forward to different perspectives on how to transform our courses by balancing the use of traditional pedagogy with AI,” said Robert Duvall, Senior Lecturer of Computer Science. 

Not every member of the cohort is as eager to incorporate AI into their teaching.

“To be honest, I’ve been hiding my head in the sand when it comes to AI. My inclination is to resist it, not only because it demands so many human and material resources but also because it is presented as the Next Great Technology in a world straining under the ‘advancements’ of past technological ‘achievements.’ I worry about students out-sourcing their critical thinking and writing skills in a way that undermines their ability to develop creative responses to the many problems and joys that await them,” said Jennifer Knust, Professor of Religious Studies. “But I know that I need to find ways to work with the technology that supports student creativity and learning, and it’s clearly past time for me to learn to do that. What could be better than a seminar for learning something new together?”

A Year of Inquiry, Experimentation, and Sharing

This FLC is built around active, scaffolded exploration and design. Over the course of the academic year — from fall 2025 through spring 2026 — the FLC’s 16 participants will:

• Meet monthly, engaging with focused themes, guest speakers, and emerging research on AI in higher education.
  
• Design a pedagogical experiment, such as a revised assignment, new course component, or new course design proposal that takes AI into account.
  
• Implement and assess that design in the spring (in collaboration with students and a project researcher).
  
• Reflect and share by publishing or presenting their teaching artifact (such as a syllabus, assignment, or AI policy) and reflections on how generative AI shaped the student learning experience.
  
• Convene for retreats to deepen conversation, reorient perspectives, and build momentum.
  
• Share across disciplines — the cohort is intentionally multidisciplinary, so faculty in engineering, humanities, social sciences, languages, and beyond will intermingle and cross-pollinate ideas.

Whether participants begin the year with enthusiasm, skepticism, or somewhere in between, the structure encourages inquiry, iteration, and collective reflection.

Why This Work Matters

In many classrooms today, AI feels at once inevitable and elusive. The FLC gives faculty time and space to wrestle with the following questions together:

• What’s the relationship between our own understanding, practices, and beliefs about generative AI and our teaching?
• What do we most want students to learn and to experience in our classes? Why?
• How does generative AI challenge us to articulate and align with our core values and mission?

“If we want students to have a learning orientation around generative AI and its implications,  then we should have it for faculty as well. This project provides an opportunity for faculty to learn alongside each other as they consider GAI both creatively and critically for their own work and fields, and for their teaching,” said Ahern-Dodson. “Students don’t experience the university in one class or one department, and as a multidisciplinary group we learn from each other’s perspectives and gain an appreciation for how students experience GAI policies, practices, and pedagogies across our campus.”

Collaborating with CARADITE

The FLC is supported by CARADITE as part of its Emerging Pedagogies Research Grant program, which supports and facilitates Duke faculty who are conducting early-stage research projects about emerging pedagogies and related student learning practices. Duke senior Liz Rommage (Public Policy ‘26) is a co-researcher on the project, and faculty participants will invite students in their spring courses to share their reflections. 

Ahern-Dodson’s vision — to have faculty partner with students as learners — positions this FLC not as a one-off experiment but as a creative space for lasting pedagogical growth. Aria Chernik, CARADITE’s Faculty Director, is optimistic that this new model for collaborative pedagogical development and praxis can lead to more scalable and sustainable support for teaching excellence across Duke. 

“This model allows us to collaborate authentically and deeply with faculty participants to understand their needs and hopes pertaining to GAI in education, which in turn will allow us to develop further programming and iterate responsive supports,” Chernik said. “Collaborative co-design is at the heart of CARADITE’s mission. Just as faculty are learning about teaching with GAI, we are learning about how we can best support that teaching.”

Meet the Cohort

Representing a wide range of disciplines — from engineering and environmental science to language studies and the humanities — the FLC reflects Duke’s commitment to exploring AI’s educational implications across fields:

• Betsy Albright – Nicholas School of the Environment, Environmental Social Systems Division
• Laura Bilanceri – Romance Studies, Italian Language Program
• Caitlin M. Donovan – Master of Arts in Teaching (Program in Education)
• Robert Duvall – Computer Science
• Tomeico Faison – Occupational Therapy-Ortho-School of Medicine
• Ana Fernandez – Romance Studies
• Jeff Glass – Electrical and Computer Engineering and Institute for Enterprise Engineering
• Jenifer Hamil-Luker – Sociology
• Wesley Hogan – History, Franklin Humanities Institute
• Emma Howell – Romance Studies 
• Robin Kirk – Cultural Anthropology, Duke Human Rights Center
• Jennifer Knust – Religious Studies 
• Andrea Larson – German Studies
• Yan Liu – Asian & Middle Eastern Studies (AMES)
• Siobhan Oca – Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science
• Kerry Ossi-Lupo – Nicholas School of the Environment, Environmental Social Systems

Stay Tuned

There will be a public sharing of the FLC’s work with the larger Duke community in late spring. We hope their work will inspire others across disciplines and experience levels. This FLC is a model for how, together, we can explore how teaching and learning can evolve in generative AI’s wake: carefully, creatively, and collaboratively.

The post Teaching in the Age of AI: A New Faculty Learning Community Takes Root at Duke appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.

The answer lies in authentic assessment, which prioritizes learning, builds trust, and calls on higher-order thinking.

Is AI even triggering cheating?

The good news is that, despite what some headlines may lead us to believe, there’s little evidence that GenAI has triggered a surge in cheating. Turnitin’s own figures, drawn from over 200 million assignments, show that 1 out of 10 submissions contained “some” AI-produced text, while only 3 out of every 100 assignments are “mostly” generated by AI. These numbers have held steady since 2023, not long after ChatGPT first hit the scene. 

Researchers from the Stanford Graduate School of Education report that the share of students admitting to cheating in some capacity has stayed flat (about 60-70%) both before and after ChatGPT’s release. AI hasn’t produced a new cheating epidemic like many believe. What it has done is make a longstanding integrity issue more visible. 

Findings from this study conducted by researchers from the University of the Basque Country in Spain further undermine the claim that tools like ChatGPT cause plagiarism. The study found that while using ChatGPT slightly increases the risk of students cheating by 3.9%, a lack of motivation and “cheating culture” are stronger predictors of plagiarism than generative AI tools. 

Tech crackdowns don’t deliver

Lockdown browsers may seem to provide a barrier, but they don’t necessarily make tests more secure. These tools cannot guarantee test security or prevent determined students from using workarounds, the most common of which is to use a second device out of camera view. 

AI detectors veer into even thornier territory. Multiple analyses have documented high false positives, especially for multi-lingual writers and non-native English speakers, alongside false negatives on well-prompted AI text. Even OpenAI, the inventor of ChatGPT, shut down its own AI detector due to its rates of inaccuracy. The use of these tools can lead to inequity and mistrust between educators and their students. 

Advocates of AI detection stress that these tools, at best, provide us with a signal, not proof, of AI use, meaning they should not ever be the basis for punitive measures in isolation.

The bottom line is that when an instructor takes an enforcement-first approach to managing AI in their classroom, it’s both unreliable and corrosive to relationship building. Authentic assessment offers a better path: it strengthens trust between instructors and their students while also effectively measuring content knowledge.

Authentic assessment = more engaging, harder to fake

Authentic assessment asks students to apply what they know in ways that prioritize critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and communication over recall. It mirrors the ways people use knowledge in their daily lives by offering students learning opportunities that they find meaningful, especially when linked to real-world applications. Research shows that when academic work connects to students’ lives, they are more likely to find learning more relevant and engaging. At its core, authentic assessment is a type of relational pedagogy that signals that instructors trust students as learners, and that trust is often reciprocated with deeper course engagement. 

Here are some (though certainly not all) forms of assessment that both reduce incentives to shortcuts and engage students in relevant work:

• Performance tasks and projects – Ask students to build or analyze something that matters to them (a prototype, policy memo, data story, mini-exhibit, PSA, political campaign), with public-facing deliverables.
• Case studies and simulations – Give students context-rich problems with incomplete information that require justification.
• Guided investigations – Have students deeply explore scientific, cultural, or historical topics, and then showcase their understanding through oral presentations, extended writing, or similar in-depth projects. 
• Oral defenses – Have students defend their explanations of choices, trade-offs, and revisions live.
• Process-centered work – Shift the focus from having only the final product hold merit by attaching points to drafts and requiring draft logs, experiment notebooks, and/or version histories (all with brief metacognitive reflections).
• Digital portfolios – Allow students to show cumulative evidence of growth through annotated standards-aligned rubrics.

Want to learn more about authentic assessment? Check out LILE’s page on alternative strategies for assessment and grading.

Authentic assessment alongside AI

You may be wondering how authentic assessment fits with the rise of generative AI. The good news is that it not only works in the AI era, but it can also make your assignments more AI-resilient. 

Start by emphasizing the learning process over final products. Rather than grading only the polished, final submission, give meaningful weight to the iterative steps involved—drafting, receiving feedback, and revising. You may pair a take-home draft with a brief, in-class oral check-in or a low-stakes writing assignment that asks students to explain their choices or connect their outline to course concepts. 

In addition, try to anchor your assignments in local data, lived experiences, or recent class discussions. These details are more authentic, make the work more engaging, and are harder for AI tools to fabricate convincingly. 

You have the discretion to define how, if, and when generative AI may be used in your courses. Your instinct may be to ban AI completely from your curriculum, but you don’t have to choose between “ban it” and “anything goes.” 

Instead, clearly outline what is permitted at each level of the process. You can use the AI Assessment Scale to help you determine the appropriate level. You should also show students examples of how you expect them to attribute ideas or language originating from an AI system. The important thing is to be explicit about your policy and citation expectations. 

Use our guidance on Artificial Intelligence Policies: Guidelines and Considerations.

When you decide AI is permitted, find ways for students to make their cognitive work visible. Try having students write an AI Declaration Statement, which includes: 

• Which AI tool(s) they used and how they used them in the process of completing their assessment (e.g., brainstorming, outlining, code debugging, creating citations).
• The prompts they used. 
• A critique of any limitations or inaccuracies they encountered.
• A clear explanation of how they incorporated the AI-generated material into their assignment.

Practical steps you can take right away

You don’t need to redesign your entire course overnight. Start small this semester by making incremental changes. Here are a few practical ways you can begin:

• Ensure your AI policy is transparent and clear.
• Talk openly with your students about AI (the opportunities and limitations it presents, how you use it in your work, and your expectations for responsible use).
• Break up a single assignment into sections that clearly specify when and how students can use AI, drawing on tools such as the AI Assessment Scale.
• Redesign one high-stakes assessment so that it emphasizes the learning process over the final product and offers students low-stakes practice opportunities.
• Connect your assignments to authentic contexts, cases, and problems that mirror the real world whenever possible. 
• Build reflection into more assignments to make the process itself more visible. Ask students to explain what they tried, what they changed, and what they learned.
• Require students to submit an AI Declaration Statement with an upcoming assignment.

Closing Thoughts

High-stakes finals, browser-locked multiple-choice quizzes, and generic term papers are increasingly untenable in an AI-driven world. Now is the moment to shift your practice toward assessments that put value in authenticity, emphasize process, and prioritize learning. Doing so allows you to move beyond the anxiety of “catching cheaters” while enabling your students to engage more deeply with your course content.

We also recognize that implementing authentic assessment can feel more challenging in large-enrollment and content-heavy courses. While not impossible, it requires rethinking course structures and support systems. If you are feeling overwhelmed, experiment gradually by adapting strategies that feel feasible for your particular teaching context. 

Need support?

If you’d like to talk through your assignments or build out authentic assessments with guidance:

• Schedule a one-on-one consultation with a Teaching Consultant: dukectl@duke.edu 
• Attend our open online office hours

The post Authentic Assessment over Surveillance appeared first on Duke Center for Teaching and Learning.