« Back to Conference Schedule | Concurrent Session III »
Concurrent Session II
Thursday, June 12, 3:45–4:30 PM
Faculty Members’ (Academics’) Professional Development on Multiple Campuses/Continents through a Common Pathway
Elizabeth Santhanam & Harsh Suri: Monash University, Australia
Monash University has campuses in Malaysia and South Africa, in addition to urban and regional campuses in Australia. Academic staff members who join Monash at any of these campuses are expected to enroll in a common “Graduate Certificate in Higher Education” program. The program consists of four compulsory units (subjects). This session will focus on the innovations in one of the units, in an attempt to provide an equivalent learning experience to teachers working on different campuses and in different time zones. Among the issues to be explored are teaching in real time and maintaining standards in work-based assessment.
The Scholarship of Educational Development: National Unity or Multiple Solitudes?
Cherie Bova & Ros Woodhouse: York University, Canada; Anne-Marie Grandtner: Universite du Quebec, Canada
To speak of a “global scholarship of educational development” suggests a shared, world-wide understanding of terms that are both contested (“scholarship”) and emergent (“educational development”). This session explores the questions of how far we have come toward this shared understanding, what we can learn from our differences, and how a deeper understanding of convergences and divergences across provinces and countries can inform future scholarship and practice in educational development. The presenters will draw upon a framework of issues and perspectives identified through dialogue between developers working in Francophone and Anglophone Canada to guide a wider international inquiry, enriched by the perspectives of participants.
Student Evaluations of Teaching: What Do They Tell Us?
Paul J. Fields & Trav Johnson: Brigham Young University, USA
At many universities, students fill out an evaluation-of-teaching questionnaire each semester for each class. The ratings are provided to faculty at the end of the class in hopes that the information will be useful in improving the teaching-and-learning processes of future classes. However, to interpret the results it is important to know how the students interpreted the questions. We discuss a year-long study at a major university, soliciting directly from students their criteria for evaluating teaching. The results provide guidance on specific actions professors can implement for more effectiveness in the classroom.
Pre-entry Qualifications: Our Assumptions Versus Students’ Reality
Roisín Curran & Sarah Maguire: University of Ulster, Northern Ireland
Working with faculty members (academics) undertaking curriculum development, coupled with research undertaken by Carter (2007) using University of Ulster data on first-year attrition rates, a mismatch emerged between what is expected of first-year students and the reality of their experience. To address this, a workshop has been developed to help lecturers understand the students’ experience prior to their entry into higher education, with a particular emphasis on assessment methods used. Participants have commented on its value in terms such as ‘this should be compulsory for all staff’ and ‘now I understand that it’s not all the students’ fault’.
What Makes an Interdisciplinary Research Team a “Community of Enquiry”?
Brenda Leibowitz: Stellenbosch University, South Africa
Despite the much vaunted value of “communities of enquiry” and “communities of practice,” Warhurst (2006:120) notes that “contrived communities do not become natural learning entities”. What is required in order for an interdisciplinary research team to become a “community of enquiry” (Davidson, 2004)—and how can the community have an impact on teaching and learning via the research outcomes and the professional development of the lecturers who are participants in a research team? This, and related questions, are considered in relation to two studies on collaborative interdisciplinary research projects aimed at improving the quality of teaching and learning in South Africa.
The Impact of Training of University Teachers on Their Approach to Teaching and Professional Development
Marvi Remmik & Mari Karm: University of Tartu, Estonia
During the past three years, the importance and quality of teaching have received increased attention from policy makers, as well as from higher educationalists in Estonia. The training courses for university lecturers are designed to support their professional development, improve their teaching skills, and expand their professional competence. Research shows that some academic-development activities result in conceptual changes among academic staff (changes in thinking and practice, changes in their approach to teaching and learning, etc.). This session will introduce and discuss the university teachers’ conceptions of learning and teaching, using examples from Estonian practice and studies. The investigation instruments were a questionnaire, interviews, and monitoring of the courses.
Principles for Course Improvement: A Case Study in Collecting Feedback
Marne Isakson, John Taylor, Irene Windham, & Richard Isakson: Brigham Young University, USA
Three faculty members and a teaching consultant share general principles for course improvement, drawing upon their experience with an undergraduate student-development course. Various data sources were generated with students, peer faculty, and consultants to identify opportunities for improvement. The key objectives for this session are to 1) describe methods for collecting feedback, 2) discuss the relative merits of each data source, 3) contrast these methods with the rich experiences among session attendees, and 4) supplement academics’ and developers’ toolkit for identifying course improvements.
The Critical Year: Initial and Ongoing Center Success
Dara Fraley: Cedarville University, USA
The first year of a university’s Center for Teaching and Learning is its most critical. This presentation will reflect on that statement as a center’s inaugural director explores the successes and challenges faced by a new faculty-development center. These challenges include organizational culture, administration expectations, faculty perspectives, staff preconceived notions, and project requirements. This session is for anyone thinking of starting a new center for teaching and learning or for those considering a revision of a current faculty—development center.
Academic Developers in Higher Education:
A Professional Development Roadmap
Diane E. Boyd: Furman University, USA; Karen St. Clair: Auburn University, USA
In this session academic developers will reflect on a set of basic knowledge and skills required for their traditional functions in faculty-, instructional-, and organizational-development. Participants will build on a skill set list that was gathered during a roundtable session at the 2007 POD Conference. Through interactive discussions, participants will also map their professional-development experiences and their future plans in order to reveal missing knowledge and skills. This session also includes a discussion of pathways to professional development opportunities to address potential gaps.
Triangulation in Professionalization—Multi-angle Incentives: Scope, Limitations and Impact
Elien Sabbe & Liesje Liagre: Ghent University, Belgium
Academic lecturers in many universities need to balance their research and teaching efforts. Within these boundaries, educational developers are challenged to set up efficient but effective professionalization initiatives for them. Intended to meet various professionalization needs and preferences at Ghent University, a “triangulation” approach is designed to stimulate as many teachers as possible to improve their teaching. Triangulation implies a multi-angle approach which combines a diversity of incentives. This session is made up of a short presentation about these UGent initiatives, followed by a discussion of the scope, impact, and limitations of such initiatives, as well as an exchange of other “good practices”.
Publishing in IJAD, the ICED Journal
Angela Brew: University of Sydney, Australia; Lynn McAlpine: McGill University, Canada; Mieke Clement: Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium
Academic development is a growing field with a literature and theory base that is still emerging. Contributions to journals help to further this process. Yet, knowledge about the writing and publishing process may be invisible to those who might want to contribute. In this session, we unpack this mystery as regards the International Journal of Academic Development (IJAD), the ICED journal that aims to bring a global perspective to academic development. In the session, participants will come to understand the scope, expectations and processes of the journal, as well as how they might publish in it.