The Scholarship Committee is excited to announce registration for the Spring 2024 POD Scholarly Reads.

Theme: UDL and Beyond

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework that encourages instructors to design teaching and learning experiences in ways that give students flexibility, choice, and support.  Within post-secondary environments, UDL is frequently presented as a learner-centered approach that supports a diverse student population. As educators and educational developers, we often endorse the application of UDL, and play an active role in helping instructors interpret the basic tenets of “multiple means of engagement, multiple means of representation, and multiple means of action and expression.” While a substantial evidence base supports UDL principles for K-12 education, the evidence for UDL in postsecondary education remains incomplete. Join us this term to explore definitions of UDL, the connections between UDL and learning gains, and what other approaches we might consider to study and promote accessibility in postsecondary education.

Registration Link for Spring’s POD Scholarly Reads

Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:00-2:00 PM EST

King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., Mergen, R. L., Owen, L. S., & Strimel, M. M. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122,

This meta-analysis examined learners’ academic achievement in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) environments compared to business-as-usual conditions. Twenty studies, consisting of 50 individual effects, met the eligibility criteria, focusing uniquely on participants’ learning and treatment/control designs. Academic achievement was analyzed for pre-kindergarten to adult participants. Results yielded a moderate positive combined effect for learners receiving UDL treatments (g 1⁄4 0.43), indicating moderate efficacy of the UDL-based instruction. Five significant moderators were identified. In addition, the UDL Reporting Criteria were employed to assess whether studies included information regarding UDL- based design components. UDL’s emergence as a research-based practice for diverse learners is discussed. 

Tuesday, April 16, 2024, 1:00-2:00 PM EST

Hollingshead, A., Lowrey, K. A., & Howery, K. (2022). Universal Design for Learning: When Policy Changes Before Evidence. Educational Policy, 36(5), 1135-1161.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a scientifically validated framework that has been included in policy like the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 and the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008. However, studies have pointed out the variability in definitions and implementation surrounding UDL. In order to clarify this conversation, researchers collected and analyzed the narratives of experts in the origination and research of UDL. Nineteen experts participated in semi-structured interviews that examined definitions of UDL, its critical components, and identified priorities within the framework. Findings resulted in five themes. Implications for future research, policy, and practice are offered.



POD Scholarly Reads

What is it? 

POD Scholarly Reads is a professional development initiative of the POD Scholarship Committee that aims to:

  • support POD members in meaningful engagement with scholarly literature and
  • provide POD members with low-investment, ongoing opportunities to participate in a scholarly community

How does it work?

Anyone can join the POD Scholarly Reads group, which meets monthly to discuss a scholarly article during a 60-minute Zoom meeting run by the Scholarship Committee. We are often fortunate enough to be joined by the authors of the article, and the group is a great way to engage with research, researchers, and POD members from a variety of institutions.

Our readings focus on one topic for a 3-month series (see previous topics below). Topics and readings are chosen based upon POD member suggestions. Commit to one article or the 3-month series, the choice is yours!

During the Zoom session, the Scholarship Committee facilitator introduces the session, and if present, gives the author of the article a chance to share a bit about the origins of the study. The facilitator then breaks up the larger group into smaller (4-5 participants) breakout rooms to discuss the article. Some of the questions that drive the small group discuss include:

  • What are the primary strengths and weaknesses of this study, in terms of its design?
  • How does this study connect with other work you may be involved in (e.g., questions your faculty have, programs you offer, initiatives at your institution, the broader landscape of higher education)?
  • What else do you want to learn about as a result of reading this study?
  • What questions do you have for the author?

After the small group discussion, the facilitator brings the group back together to ask the author questions.

Who participates? 

We typically have anywhere from 15-20 participants per Zoom session, which include:

  • Scholarship committee members, including:
    • Heather Dwyer, Tufts University
    • Chris Kilgore, UT-Knoxville
    • Kate Hamilton, Harvard University
    • Isabeau Iqbal, University of British Columbia
    • Kimberly Fournier, Florida Gulf Coast University 
  • Article author(s) and/or researchers in the same field as author(s)
  • POD members and faculty members (who may or may not be POD members) from a wide variety of institutions

How do I register for the next session?

For more information and to register, please go to:

Registration Link for Spring’s POD Scholarly Reads

What do participants read? 

Supporting Neurodiverse Learners (Fall 2023) 

  • September 26, Clouder, L., Karakus, M., Cinotti, A., Ferreyra, M. V., Fierros, G. A., & Rojo, P. (2020). Neurodiversity in higher education: a narrative synthesis. Higher Education, 80(4), 757-778.
  • November 2, Zolyomi, A., Ross, A. S., Bhattacharya, A., Milne, L., & Munson, S. A. (2018, April). Values, identity, and social translucence: Neurodiverse student teams in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2018 chi conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-13).
  • December 5, Atchison, C. L., Hawthorne, T. L., Torres, H. R., Visaggi, C. C., Bencivenga, P., Haralson, J., Relyea, D., & Jarrett, O. S. (2022). Designing inclusive community-based geography research experiences across the spectrum of ability. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 46(4), 541–559.

Educational Developer Burnout and Well-Being (Spring 2023) 

  • February 24, Kolomitro, K., and Kenny, N., and Sheffield, S. (2019). A call to action: exploring and responding to educational developers’ workplace burnout and well-being in higher education. International Journal for Academic Development. 25. 1-14. 
  • March 28, Landy, K., Flaming, A. L., Tapp, S., & Kaldor, E. C. (2022), Contexts for agency: A framework for managing educational development work. To Improve the Academy: A Journal of Educational Development, 41(1).
  • April 24, Elue, C. & Howard, L. (2023). “Care for Faculty in Challenging Times: Considerations for Exploring Hope and Healing.” 

Recent Patterns of (Dis)Engagement (Fall 2022) 

  • October 4: Hensley, L. C, Iaconelli, R., & Wolters, C. A. (2022). “This weird time we’re in”: How a sudden change to remote education impacted college students’ self-regulated learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54:SS203-S218. 
  • November 3: DeFelippo, A. M, & Dee, J. R. (2022). Vitality in the academic workplace: Sustaining professional growth for mid-career faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 47:565-585. 
  • November 30: Loi, N. M. & Pryce, N. (2022). The role of mindful self-care in the relationship between emotional intelligence and burnout in university students. The Journal of Psychology, 156(4): 295-309.

Intergenerational Challenges (Summer 2022)

  • June 7 Grayson, J. P. (2021). “Boomers and Generation Z on campus: Expectations, goals, and experiences.” Canadian Review of Sociology, 58:549-568.
  • July 12 Schlee, Regina P., Eveland, Vicki B., and Harich, Katrin R. (2020). “From Millennials to Gen Z: Changes in student attitudes about group projects.” Journal of Education for Business, 95(3):139-147.

Students as Partners (SaP) (Spring 2022)

  • February 8: Felten, P., Abbot, S., Kirkwood, J., Long, A., Lubicz-Nawrocka, T., Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Verwoord, R. (2019). Reimagining the place of students in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 24(2), 192-203.
  • March 8: Cook-Sather, A., Addy, T. M., DeVault, A., & Litvitskiy, N. (2021). Where Are the Students in Efforts for Inclusive Excellence? Two Approaches to Positioning Students as Critical Partners for Inclusive Pedagogical Practices. To Improve the Academy: A Journal of Educational Development, 40(1).
  • April 5: Debelius, M., McGowan, S., Maciel, A., Reid, C., & Eason, A. (2021). “Things are different now” a student, staff, and faculty course design institute collaboration. In Thurston, T. N., Lundstrom, K., & González, C. (Eds.), Resilient pedagogy: Practical teaching strategies to overcome distance, disruption, and distraction (pp. 272-288). Utah State University.

Alternative Approaches in Assessment: Beyond Ungrading (Fall 2021)

  • October 12: Montenegro, E., & Jankowski, N. A. (2020). A New Decade for Assessment: Embedding Equity into Assessment Praxis. Occasional Paper No. 42. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment.
  • November 1: Buckmiller, T., Peters, R., & Kruse, J. (2017). Questioning points and percentages: Standards-based grading (SBG) in higher education. College Teaching, 65(4), 151-157.
  • December 7: Quintana, R., & Quintana, C. (2020). When classroom interactions have to go online: The move to specifications grading in a design course. Information and Learning Sciences.

Ungrading (Summer 2021)

  • July 6:  Guberman, Daniel (2021). “Student Perceptions of an Ungraded Course.” Teaching and Learning Inquiry 9(1).
  • August 3:  Martin, Travis L.; Winslow, Matthew P.; Gremp, Michelle A.; Korson, Stacey J.; Bedetti, Gaby; McMahan, Ellen Hutcheson; Stumbo, David; Short, Elaina; and Morrow, Holdyn (2021). “Ungrading Across the Disciplines: Reflections of a Professional Learning Community.” Pedagogicon Conference Proceedings. 7. 

Centering Underrepresented Experiences in Higher Education (Spring 2021)

Prepared in Collaboration with the POD Diversity Committee

COVID’s Impact on Students, Faculty, and Educational Developers (Fall 2020)

Student Evaluations of Teaching (Spring 2020)

  • February 4: NEW! We are going to change it up and listen to an episode of Doug McKee and Edward O’Neill’s Teach Better podcast with Betsy Barre, focused on an overview of the student evaluation literature:
  • March 3: Linse, A. R. (2017). Interpreting and using student ratings data: Guidance for faculty serving as administrators and on evaluation committees. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 94-106.
  • April 7: Peterson, D. A., Biederman, L. A., Andersen, D., Ditonto, T. M., & Roe, K. (2019). Mitigating gender bias in student evaluations of teaching. PloS one, 14(5), e0216241.

Imposter Syndrome (Fall 2019)

  • Walton, G. M., & Brady, S. T. (in press). The social-belonging intervention. In G. M. Walton & A. J. Crum (Eds.) Handbook of Wise Interventions: How Social-Psychological Insights Can Help Solve Problems, Guilford Press: New York, NY.
  • Rudenga, K. J., & Gravett, E. O. (2019). Impostor Phenomenon in Educational Developers. To Improve the Academy, 38(1), 1-17.
  • Hutchins, H. M. (2015). Outing the imposter: A study exploring imposter phenomenon among higher education faculty. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 27(2), 3-12.

SoED and Technology (Summer 2019)

  • Stephanie Vie (2016). “What’s Going On?: Challenges and Opportunities for Social Media Use in the Writing Classroom” Journal of Faculty Development, 29, no. 2
  • Kayla Morehead, John Dunlosky, Katherine Rawson (2019). “How Much Mightier Is the Pen than the Keyboard for Note-Taking? A Replication and Extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014)” Educational Psychology Review, 31(3), 753-780.
  • Ashley N. Castleberry et al. (2018). “5-Minute University: A Description and Discussion of 5-Minute Faculty Teaching Training Videos” Journal of Faculty Development, 30, no. 2.

Innovative Assessment (Spring 2019)

  • Sarah Boesdorfer et al. (2018) “Emphasizing Learning: Using Standards-Based Grading in a Large Nonmajors’ General Chemistry Survey Course” Journal of Chemical Education, 95(8), 1291-1300.
  • Deborah S. Meizlish, Mary C. Wright, Joseph Howard, & Matthew L. Kaplan (2017), “Measuring the impact of a new faculty program using institutional data,” International Journal for Academic Development, 23(2), 72-85.
  • Carol Hurney et al. (2016) “The Faculty Learning Outcome Assessment Framework” Journal of Faculty Development, 30, no.2.

Resistance to Active Learning (Fall 2018)

Diversity and Inclusion (Summer 2018)

  • David A. Green & Deandra Little (2016). “Family portrait: a profile of educational developers around the world”, International Journal for Academic Development, 21(2), 135-150.
  • China Jenkins & Mary Alfred (2018). “Understanding the motivation and transformation of White culturally responsive professors” Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 24(1), 81-99.
  • Gregory Walton & Geoffrey Cohen (2007). “A Question of Belonging: Race, Social Fit, and Achievement” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82.