Chancellor’s Chair for Teaching Excellence Panel

Presenters: Elizabeth Orr, Nursing; Mohammed Estaiteyeh, Education; Karen Louise Smith, Communications, Pop Culture, and Film; Farhana Madhani, Nursing

Room: RFP214-5

Theme: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)

Presentation Slides: Chancellor’s Chairs​ for Teaching Excellence​

1. An Early Exploration of the Teaching-Intensive Faculty Position at Brock University

Presenters: Michelle Vine, Eduardo Fernandez, Haley Baxter, Taylor McKee, Shannon Welbourn, Anjali Khirwadkar, Lori MacNeil, Dept. of Health Sciences

Brock University is a medium sized post-secondary institution in Ontario’s Niagara Region. With seven Faculties, Brock has 19,000 students and 600 faculty members. At Brock and elsewhere, university faculty positions vary by type and duration. These include tenured faculty, permanent librarians, probationary, limited term appointment, instructional limited term appointment, part-time, and adjunct faculty positions. Teaching-intensive (TI) faculty appointments were introduced at Brock University in 2024, with the expectation of a demonstrated commitment to teaching excellence through a 60 (teaching)-20 (research)-20 (service) workload.

Room: ST103

Theme: Faculty Experiences and Supports

Presentation Slides: An Early Exploration of the Teaching

2. Reflections on Teaching and Learning in Graduate Public Health Education: The 2026 Faculty of Applied Health Sciences Excellence in Teaching Award Recipient

Presenter: Michelle Vine, Dept. of Health Sciences

Background: The Brock University Faculty of Applied Health Sciences (FAHS) Excellence in Teaching Award is given to one faculty member each year to recognize their achievements in teaching and learning. Evidence of outstanding performance is based on pedagogic skill (e.g., effective communication of subject matter, evidence of innovative teaching practices), educational leadership (e.g., scholarship of teaching, evidence of graduate, undergraduate and teaching assistant supervision), and professional development (e.g., committee service devoted to pedagogy, curriculum development, evidence of teaching certifications).

Room: ST103

Theme: Faculty Experiences and Supports

Presentation Slides: Reflections on Teaching and Learning in Graduate Public Health Education

3. CPI on Teaching Dossiers and Teaching Supports

Presenters: Ash O’Neil and Anne Readhead, Centre for Pedagogical Innovation

Members of CPI’s Educational Development Team discussed available supports for curriculum, teaching development, reflective practice, and dossiers.

Room: ST103

Theme: Faculty Experiences and Supports

Poster Sessions

1. “Enhancing Undergraduate Nursing Students’ Competence in Dementia Care through Aging and Dementia Simulation” (Farhana Madhani and Jacklyne Isaak, Brock Department of Nursing and Alzheimer Society, Niagara Region) 
2. “What is Community? Spanish Experiential Learning Project” (Erin Redmond, Modern Languages, Literatures, and Cultures)
3. “Using a Lens of Trauma-Informed Principles: An Approach Towards Equitable Assessment Practices in Teacher Education Programs” (Shannon Welbourn, Anjali Khirwadkar, Catherine Susin, Ruth McQuirter, Faculty of Education) 
4. “Teaching with Trauma-Informed Practices” Educational Development Team (CPI)  
5. “Widening Access & Supporting Pedagogical Innovation with Brock’s OER Grant Program” (Open Education Working Group)

1. Mad Studies in Education: A Mad-Positive Manifesto for Faculty Training, Universal Design for Learning, and Inclusive Pedagogy

Presenter: Mark Castrodale, Student Accessibility Services

In this presentation as a leading scholar in the field of Mad Studies and pedagogy, I drew on my research as editor and author in the recently published book “Mad Studies and Education Critical Pedagogy and Mad Praxis in the Classroom” to offer new ways to consider curriculum, pedagogy, and implications of Generative AI use in relation to assessment practices in Higher Education. I discussed intersections of Mad Studies and Critical Disability Studies, and outlined mad-affirming pedagogies and implications for Universal Design for Learning. The role of university instructors and accessibility case workers were explored in relation to inclusive faculty teaching training and implications for curriculum development and administration of academic accommodations. A significant consideration was to develop increasingly empathetic, trauma-informed pedagogies that drew directly on the voices and knowledges of often marginalized disabled and Mad persons in ways that inform critical and supportive teaching and learning practices.

Room: RFP214-5

Theme: Classroom Instructional Strategies and Inclusive Approaches

2. No Body Left Behind: Strategies for Employing the Body in Service of Teaching

Presenter: Pauli Gardner, Dept. of Health Sciences

In one of the most watched TED talks ever, neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor (2008), explains that although many of us think of ourselves as thinking creatures who feel, biologically we are actually feeling creatures who think. Our brain’s “feeling” neurons react to new information first… and our thoughts come later… which means our higher-level thinking begins with – and is highly influenced by – our felt-sense. This insight has important implications for how students learn and how we teach. When we understand that students feel first, attention to the body is paramount, and employing the body in service of teaching and learning, a superpower. This perspective is echoed in The Extended Mind where Annie Murphy Paul (2021) highlights how the body can serve as a powerful cognitive resource, supporting thinking, creativity, and understanding. In this session, I highlighted the science behind this idea then shared practical strategies I’ve been experimenting with to intentionally employ the body in service of teaching and learning. I concluded by inviting participants to consider: What might change if we designed learning experiences where no body is left behind?

Room: RFP214-5

Theme: Classroom Instructional Strategies and Inclusive Approaches

Presentation Slides: No Body Left Behind

3. Experiential Education in Public Health: Lessons Learned from an Online Master of Public Health Program at Brock University

Presenters: Michelle Vine, Kelly Pilato, Melissa Blair, Dept. of Health Sciences

Background: Online graduate education has grown in popularity over the last two decades, along with scholarship related to the delivery of online teaching and learning at the post-secondary level (Dumford & Miller, 2018). There is a perceived gap between the updated core competencies for public health in Canada and available training and education opportunities in public health curriculum (Ma, Haworth-Brockman & Neil-Sztramko, 2025). Experiential education activities are an integral part of public health education (Lim, Chow & Zheng, 2024), serving as a valuable tool for skills and knowledge acquisition (Pham, Cunningham & Humphries, 2023). The objective of this presentation was to highlight recent experiential learning opportunities embedded within the Master of Public Health program (MPH) at Brock University, including strengths, challenges, and opportunities for improvement.

Reflections: In light of an increase in the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI), and in alignment with the updated core competencies for public health in Canada, our program aims to design innovative experiential learning opportunities to meet the needs of future public health specialists at the graduate level. We aimed to review and reflect on specific teaching approaches that move beyond traditional assignments into experiential education components and activities in three different MPH courses – Quality Health Systems through Collaboration and Partnership, Social Marketing and Health Communication, and Critical Foundations of Public Health. These experiential education opportunities were facilitated by community-based partnerships with public health to facilitate student social marketing interventions, informational interviewing, synchronous interactive oral examinations, written and peer evaluation exercises, and critical reflection essays.

Room: RFP214-5

Theme: Classroom Instructional Strategies and Inclusive Approaches

Presentation Slides: Experimental Education in Public Health

1. Academic Integrity Conversation: Reflecting on Academic Integrity in a Changing Learning Landscape

Facilitators: Natalie Patterson and Rakha Zabin, Centre for Pedagogical Innovation

In response to evolving academic practices and increasing pressures within higher education, this session created space to reflect on the meaning and practice of academic integrity. Grounded in the shared responsibilities of both students and instructors, the session explored how integrity is understood, challenged, and upheld in contemporary learning environments. Participants engaged in reflective dialogue on ethical decision-making, student experiences, and the role of instructional design in promoting honest academic work. Emphasis was placed on supportive teaching approaches, clear expectations, and fostering a culture of trust and accountability. Through these discussions, the session aimed to strengthen collective insight into how academic integrity can be meaningfully sustained and supported across diverse educational contexts.

Room: RFP216

Theme: Academic Integrity

2. The Model-to-Story Approach: A Flexible Framework for Teaching Students How to Integrate Complex Ideas, Identify Knowledge Gaps, and Highlight the Breadth of their Own Knowledge!

Presenter: John Krzeczkowski, Department of Health Sciences

How can we support students in moving beyond memorization to truly understanding how ideas connect across a field? This interactive 50-minute workshop introduces the Model-to-Story Approach, a flexible teaching framework designed to foster deeper learning and support students in integrating complex concepts. Grounded in growth mindset principles, this approach helps students identify relationships among key concepts, recognize gaps in their understanding, and appreciate the breadth of what they already know.

Room: ST103

Theme: Academic Integrity

1. Self-Reported AI Use by Undergrad Students in Two Business Courses

Presenter: Michael Armstrong, Dept. of Finance, Operations and Information Systems

This presentation summarized how students said they used Artificial Intelligence software to help them do homework assignments in two undergrad business courses last fall. Fall 2025 was the first time that my courses included AI policies. I banned AI software use for tests but allowed it for homework assignments. Each assignment asked the student to briefly state what software they had used, if any, and what they had used it for.  One course covered quality improvement. On assignments, students answered story problems by doing statistical analysis of data. They traditionally used Excel. The other course covered applied game theory. On assignments, students answered story problems by defining a game theory model, solving that model mathematically, and then interpreting the math solution in business terms. They traditionally used paper and pencil. In the quality course, less than 10% of the submitted assignments said they had used AI. In the game theory course, 25% of the submitted assignments said they had used AI. The most common software was ChatGPT. The most common purpose was verifying answers the student had already calculated. The difference in marks between assignments that used AI and those that did not was not statistically significant (N = 110 submissions, p = 0.38). The correlation between the frequency of a student’s reported AI use and their overall course grade was also not statistically significant (N = 37 students, p = 0.68).

Room: RFP 214-5

Theme: GenAI

Presentation Slides: Self-reported AI use by undergrad students in two business courses

2. More Than Rules: Using an AI Acknowledgement Statement to Explain Your AI Use Policy

Presenter: Camille Rutherford, Faculty of Education

As artificial intelligence increasingly impacts teaching and learning in higher education, it has become essential for instructors to ensure their syllabus includes their specific policy regarding how AI can or can’t be used in the course. Too often, however, these policies are perceived by students as lists of permissions and prohibitions rather than as expressions of instructional purpose. This brief presentation highlighted how an AI acknowledgement can function as a powerful learning opportunity, helping instructors communicate the rationale behind their AI use policy.

Room: RFP 214-5

Theme: GenAI

Designing Reflection Tasks That Work With, and Without, Generative AI

Presenters: Kate Cassidy, Dept. of Communication, Popular Culture and Film

Reflection is a powerful learning tool but it is increasingly easy to fake with Generative AI. This session offered three adapted frameworks that make reflective tasks more resistant to Generative AI use, focusing on the role of specificity and authentic, personal experience. The session also introduced three prompts that leverage Generative AI as a thinking partner to push reflective thinking even deeper

Room: RFP214-5

Theme: Accessibility

Presentation Slides: Designing Reflection Tasks That Work With, and Without, Generative AI​

A Roundtable Discussion with the Brock Faculty Fellows in Accessibility

Presenters: Shannon Welbourn, Mike Griffin, Ann Gagné, Dept. of Education/ Dept. of Dramatic Arts/ CPI

In this roundtable the Brock Faculty Fellows in Accessibility shared their pedagogical strategies for supporting accessibility in their course designs and how this may interact with practices that are found in their disciplines or in the institutional more broadly. It was an opportunity to hear from the Fellows in terms of what they are doing in their pedagogy and/or research and how this is supporting a more inclusive environment for the learners. It was also an opportunity to reflect on how accessible practices also need to be accessible to instructors, professors, and members of the teaching team. Participants were encouraged to bring their questions and thoughts about how accessible pedagogy is designed in their courses and discipline, and what resources they were looking for to make their pedagogy and research more inclusive.

Room: RFP216

Theme: Accessibility

Collaborative Assessments to Promote Learning and Connection Building

Presenter: Erin Panda, Dept. of Child and Youth Studies

In addition to teaching and assessing student’s learning of course content, an important aspect of our role as educators is creating opportunities for students to work and learn together. These opportunities offer the potential for students to connect with each other, relate course content to their own lives and strengthen communication and teamwork skills to take beyond the classroom. Can we foster these opportunities even in our assessments? How do we go about it with large class sizes?

In this workshop, I shared my experience with three assessment strategies that can be used in a variety of class sizes to promote collaborative learning, communication and connection building: scaffolded peer evaluation of collaborative and creative communications, 2-stage collaborative midterm, and story sharing. We discussed how these approaches can provide a platform for learning and connection building, while also assessing concept understanding and engagement.

Room: ST103

Theme: Assessment

Presentation Slides: Collaborative assessments