Skip to site navigation

Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education - Curry School of Education

In response to the University Faculty Senate initiative on teaching, the Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education devoted its January faculty meeting to the topic of teaching. Twenty-six faculty participated in the discussion held January 24, 1997. The following description summarizes the major points and issues.

TEACHING EVALUATION

  1. There were a number of ways instructors gather information from students in addition to the standard end-of-the-course form:
    1. Students write goals for course at beginning (i. e., what do you want to get/learn/understand from this course?).
    2. Instructors pass out index cards near end of class session asking items such as "what do you remember hearing?" or "what could have made this session better?"
    3. Instructors use pre-post checks in variety of ways at beginning and end of course (measuring attitudes toward math, changes/surprises from course, etc.).
    4. Instructors ask students to describe their role and responsibility in making this class valuable in addition to their ideas about what makes an effective instructor. A couple of instructors have students use self-evaluation, and the instructors themselves model self evaluation, showing how they alter their teaching practices based on self and student evaluation.
    5. Several people talked about the limitations of using student evaluations only at the end, and urged greater use of early and continuous student evaluations.
  2. A few junior faculty talked about having peer observations in their classes, and one in particular invited everyone to visit anytime unannounced. Most of the comments about peer review made note of the fact that our culture has not made that a regular, frequent part of the teaching process. Team teaching is a method of insuring peer observation.

TEACHING DEVELOPMENT

  1. The advantages and disadvantages of an "official" versus an informal mentoring program were discussed. One junior faculty made the point that the senior faculty she approached for help had been extremely generous with their time and assistance, but would have probably not volunteered to help before being asked.
  2. Providing guidance for the junior faculty who wouldn't know they should ask was discussed. One instructor said, "If they know to ask, they probably don't need a mentor."
  3. More publicity and encouragement should be given to using the Teaching Resource Center including partaking of its services (i. e., videotaping), its numerous topical workshops, and its literature (articles, handbooks, etc.).
  4. Teaching development should be targeted at senior faculty as well as junior faculty.
  5. The isolation in teaching is the reason many burn out or go stale. Mentoring and collaboration must be structured within the system to combat the isolation in teaching.
  6. It was suggested that we create teaching partnerships or teaching groups to foster collaboration on teaching in the way we do on scholarly activities.
  7. The use of technology in teaching, such as putting courses up on the web and constructing chat groups, can open the process up and make it less solitary and isolated.

TEACHING INCENTIVES

  1. Team teaching (not serial teaching) that is planned and conducted as a team should be rewarded and counted as if each team member were the sole instructor.
  2. Several faculty commented that the best incentive for the excellence and improvement of teaching comes from the students themselves. Others said seeing the growth in students was more rewarding than anything. One person said that awards for teaching were artificial and not based on merit as much as on circumstantial and political data.
  3. Teaching should always be a part of the annual evaluation and the determination of merit salary increase. Deans and department chairs need to be as explicit as possible in communicating to faculty the role that teaching plays in the salary decisions. When outstanding teaching is being rewarded, it should be noted as widely and clearly as possible.
  4. Supervision should be recognized, evaluated, and rewarded as part of teaching.
  5. Incentives can be seen as the removal of barriers. Barriers we have that would reward us by their removal are items such as scheduling restrictions to fit other schools of the university, and inadequate classroom space and lack of moveable or adequate furniture.