Index
A
AAAS. See American Association for the Advancement of Science
AAHE. See American Association for Higher Education
ABET. See Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Academic advising, 113
Academic freedom
protecting students’, 31
Accountability
calls for, 12-13
Accreditation agencies and boards
revising policies to emphasize quality undergraduate learning as a primary criterion for program accreditation, 7, 127
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) , 49, 109
Active learning strategies
promoting, 29
Ad hoc committees on teaching effectiveness, 93-95
Adjustments
in expected learning outcomes, 73
Administration of forms in class
standardizing procedures for, 143
AERA. See American Educational Research Association
Alumni
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 60
Alverno College, 52n
American Association for Higher Education (AAHE), 30, 48, 61, 65, 109, 119
Campus Program initiative, 123
Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards, 13n
Making Teaching Community Property: A Menu for Peer Collaboration and Peer Review,86
projects of, 86
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 110
American Chemical Society, 46, 109
American Educational Research Association (AERA), 55
American Geophysical Union
Shaping the Future of Undergraduate Earth Science Education,47
American Institute for Biological Sciences, 47
American Institute of Physics, 47
American Mathematical Society, 46
American Mathematics Association of Two Year Colleges, 46
American Physical Society, 47
American Psychological Association (APA), 49, 55
Analysis of particular strengths and weaknesses of the teaching, 93
Answering students’ questions, 28
APA. See American Psychological Association
Application of formative evidence about student learning
to departmental programs, 2
Applications of research, 18-19, 69-127
evaluation methodologies, 18, 71-99
evaluation of departmental undergraduate programs, 18-19, 108-114
evaluation of individual faculty, 18-19, 100-107
into human cognition and learning, 111
recommendations from, 4-8, 115-127
Appropriateness of assessment practices, 30, 103-104
assessing learning in ways consistent with the objectives of a course, 30
data sources and forms of evaluation for evaluating proficiency in, 104
determining students’ knowledge accurately and fairly, 30
knowing whether students are learning what is being taught, 30
for testing student learning of specified knowledge, 73
Assessment Forum: Nine Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning,32-35
Assessment of Student Achievement in Undergraduate Education, 48
Assessment of student learning, 112.
See also Appropriateness of assessment practices
consistent with the objectives of a course, 30
more than grades, 72
nature and quality of, 25
using results to provide formative feedback to individual students, 73
Assignments
appropriateness of, 93
Assistance
to students with academic difficulties, 29
B
Bias
in undergraduate student evaluations, 58-60
Boyer Commission on Educating
Undergraduates in the Research
Brigham Young University, 64n
C
Campus-wide centers for teaching and learning
providing opportunities for ongoing professional development, 5-6, 122-123
Career planning, 113
Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 86
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 47, 77, 86, 123, 145, 147-150
Carnegie Mellon University Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence
Teaching Improvement Form—Discussion Courses, 160-162
Teaching Improvement Form—Laboratory Courses, 157-159
Teaching Improvement Form—Lecture Courses, 153-156
Centers for Learning and Teaching program, 127n
Centers for teaching and learning
providing opportunities for ongoing professional development, 5-6, 122-123
Change, 12-15
in the appearance of higher education facilities, 25
calls for accountability from outside of academe, 12
calls for accountability from within academe, 12-13
challenges of, 14-15
in evaluation and documentation of teaching, 25
Classroom observation
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 63-64
Colleagues. See also Formative evaluation by faculty colleagues
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 61-63
evaluation questionnaires, 95-96
evidence about student learning from, 3
College Student Report 2001, The
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 147-150
Pew Forum on Undergraduate Education, 147-150
Cooperation
interdepartmental, in improving undergraduate STEM education, 114
Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, 47
Course characteristics
considering in interpretations, 142
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement program, 54n
Course materials
evaluation of, 63
Cultures of research and teaching, 18, 40-50
balancing preparation for careers in research and teaching, 43-46
developing and implementing improved means for evaluating effective teaching and learning, 50
increasing support for effective teaching by professional organizations, 46-49
Curriculum design
becoming inseparable from teaching and learning, 25
the collective responsibility of faculty in all departments, 2, 15, 116
D
Data sources for evaluation, 54-67
of course materials, 63
faculty colleagues, 61-63
graduating seniors and alumni, 60
institutional data and records, 66-67
instructional contributions, 63
of knowledge and enthusiasm for subject matter, 102
of professional involvement and contributions, 107
of professionalism with students within and beyond the classroom, 106
of proficiency in assessment, 104
self-assessment by faculty, 64-66
of skill in and experience with appropriate pedagogies and technologies, 103
students in classroom observations, 63-64
teaching assistants, 60-61
undergraduate student evaluations, 54-60
Department heads
providing personnel recommendations containing separate ratings on teaching, research, and service, 7, 125
Departmental and institutional records, 53
number and levels of courses taught and number of students enrolled in each course or section taught by the instructor over time, 53
number of graduate students mentored in their preparation as teaching assistants or future faculty members and their effectiveness in teaching, 53
number of undergraduate students advised, mentored, or supervised by the faculty member, 53
number of undergraduate students guided in original or applied research by the faculty member, 53
Departmental undergraduate programs. See Evaluation of departmental undergraduate programs
Departments. See also Graduate school faculties contributing to campus-wide awareness of the premium placed on improved teaching, 6-7, 125
establishing panels on teaching effectiveness and expectations, 98
evidence about student learning from, 3
periodically reviewing their mission statement to include appropriate emphasis on teaching and student learning, 6, 124
practicing the scholarship of teaching, 88
providing funds to faculty to enhance teaching skills and knowledge, 7, 125-126
supporting faculty moving to greater emphasis on instruction or educational leadership, 7, 126
Disciplinary-focused centers for teaching and learning
providing opportunities for ongoing professional development, 5-6, 122-123
Discussion
encouraging, 29
Diversity
seen as asset-based, 25
E
Educational community
involving representatives from across, 34
Educational Resources Information Center, 54n
Educational Testing Service, 145, 151-152
Educational values
beginning with, 33
Effective undergraduate teaching, 18, 25-39.
See also Teaching effectiveness
challenges to, 32-39
characteristics of, 27-31
engaging students in original research, 38-39
limitations on faculty knowledge of research about, 39
predictions about, 25
principles of good practice for assessing student learning, 33-35
providing engaging laboratory and field experiences, 37-38
teaching a broad range and large numbers of students, 36-37
End-of-Semester Course Evaluation Forms, 164-165, 178-182
Enhancement of teaching and learning, 111-113
applying research on human cognition and learning, 111
assessing student learning, 112
emphasizing improved teaching and learning in introductory and lower division courses, 112
employing effective pedagogy, 111
engaging student interest in the department’s curricular offerings, 111
incorporating advances in the discipline and related subject areas, 112-113
providing academic advising and career planning, 113
Enthusiasm for subject matter, 27-28, 101
conveying infectious, 28
data sources and forms of evaluation for evaluating, 102
genuine interest in what is being taught, 28
Ethical standards
upholding and modeling for students the best in, 31
Evaluation methodologies, 18, 71-99.
See also Implementation of evaluation methodologies;
Self-assessment
addressing the concerns of those critical of undergraduate teaching and learning, 17
advancing and rewarding teaching scholarship, 17
evaluating the scholarship of teaching, 87-89
formative evaluation by faculty colleagues, 83-86, 93-96
formative evaluation by graduate teaching assistants, 83, 92-93
formative evaluation by undergraduate students, 76-77, 91-92
improving teaching by examining student learning, 73-76
using several sets of results, 142
Evaluation of course materials
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 63
Evaluation of departmental undergraduate programs, 18-19, 108-114
ability to enhance teaching and learning in classrooms and other venues, 111-113
efforts to improve teaching laboratories and other undergraduate research experiences, 113-114
interdepartmental cooperation in improving undergraduate STEM education, 114
Evaluation of individual faculty, 18-19, 100-107
involvement with and contributing to one’s own profession in enhancing teaching and learning, 31, 106-107
knowledge of and enthusiasm for subject matter, 27-28, 101-102
professional interactions with students within and beyond the classroom, 30-31, 104-106
proficiency in assessment, 104
skill, experience, and creativity with a range of appropriate pedagogies and technologies, 28-30, 101-103
understanding of and skill in using appropriate assessment practices, 30, 103-104
Evaluation of teaching in STEM disciplines, 18-19, 51-67, 69-127
the collective responsibility of faculty in all departments, 2, 15, 116
of departmental undergraduate programs, 18-19, 108-114
developing and implementing improved means for, 50
general principles and overall findings, 51-54
input from students and peers, 52-53
review of departmental and institutional records, 53
review of the faculty member’s teaching portfolio and other documentation, 54
specific sources of data for, 54-67
Evaluation of the scholarship on teaching, 87-89
adequate preparation, 87
appropriate methods, 87
clear goals, 87
departments that practice the scholarship of teaching, 88
dimensions of the scholarship of teaching, 88 effective presentation, 87
institutions that practice the scholarship of teaching, 89
reflective critique, 87
significant results, 87
Evidence of faculty member’s effectiveness
adaptation of instructional techniques to improve student learning, 54
participation in efforts to strengthen departmental or institutional curricula, 54
Evidence of student learning, 1-4
from combined sources of evidence, 3
from departments and other colleagues, 3
from faculty members being evaluated, 3
from graduate students, 3
from institutional data and records, 3-4
from the instructor’s willingness to seek external support to improve teaching and learning, 3
from student portfolios, 52
from undergraduates and graduate teaching assistants, 3
Expectations
of student learning outcomes for an individual course of study, 73
of teaching assistants, appropriateness of, 93
for those being evaluated to respond to evaluation results, 143-144
F
Facilitation of learning
through metacognitive strategies that identify, monitor, and regulate cognitive practices, 21
through socially supported interactions, 22
when new and existing knowledge is structured around major concepts and principles of the discipline, 20
Faculty. See also Colleagues;
Evaluation of individual faculty;
Graduate school faculties;
Self-assessment
encouraging to develop curricula that transcend disciplinary boundaries through a combination of incentives, 6, 124
evidence about student learning from, 3
expecting to contribute to a balanced program of undergraduate teaching, 6, 124-125
guiding information searches, 28
having a genuine interest in what is being taught, 28
involvement in a larger set of conditions that promote change, 34-35
involvement in enhancing teaching and learning, 31, 106-107
making clear how results of student evaluations will be used, 141
meeting all classes and labs, posting and keeping regular office hours, and holding exams as scheduled, 31
meeting responsibilities to students and to the public, 35
participation in seeking external support for activities that further the teaching mission, 54
publicly recognizing and rewarding those who have excelled in teaching, 6, 123-124
rewarding for consistent improving of learning by both major and nonmajor students, 5, 120-121
supporting and mentoring those working with undergraduates throughout their careers, 2
supporting in their obligation to improve their teaching skills through departmental and institutional reinforcement, 5, 121
using outcomes of effective formative and summative assessments of student learning to improve their teaching, 17
willingness to seek external support to improve teaching and learning, 3
Faculty Code of Conduct Manual,31n
Faculty Information Form for Student Evaluations, 168-169
Faculty teaching portfolios, 54
evidence of adaptation of instructional techniques to improve student learning, 54
evidence of participation in efforts to strengthen departmental or institutional curricula, 54
including in valid summative assessments of teaching, 4-5, 119-120
sharing of, 97-98
showing participation in seeking external support for activities that further the teaching mission, 54
Feedback
for both instructors and students, 72
from graduating seniors and alumni, 98
Formative evaluation by faculty colleagues, 83-86, 93-96
ad hoc committees on teaching effectiveness, 93-95
colleagues’ evaluation questionnaires, 95-96
discussions between the department chair and individual faculty members, 97
observation, 84-85
from other institutions, 85-86
role in “formal” formative evaluation, 85-86
Formative evaluation by graduate teaching assistants, 83, 92-93
analysis of particular strengths and weaknesses of the teaching, 93
appropriateness of the instructor’s assignments and expectations of the teaching assistants, 93
asking teaching assistants to review examinations and quizzes before they are given to students, 83
encouraging teaching assistants to provide information throughout the term about difficulties students may be having, 83
extent to which working with the instructor contributed to the teaching assistant’s own professional development, 93
overall judgment of the faculty member’s teaching effectiveness, 93
soliciting constructive suggestions from teaching assistants, 83
Formative evaluation by undergraduate students, 76-77, 91-92
chain notes, 80
direct questioning of students, 78-79
index cards, 81
informal conversations, 80
minute papers and just-in-time teaching, 79
outside evaluators, 81
repeated measurements of student learning and teaching effectiveness, 77-78
response to students’ concerns, 82
Small Group Instruction Diagnosis,81-82
student study groups, 80
student teams, 79-80
students’ course notes, 80
Formative evaluations, 1-2
Formative evidence about student learning, 1-2
applying to departmental programs, 2
benefits of, 16-17
coupling with opportunities for ongoing professional development, 1
effectiveness for summative evaluation, 17
supporting faculty wishing to explore the scholarship of teaching and learning, 1-2
using for summative evaluation, 17
Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards, 13n
Funding agencies
supporting programs to enable an integrated network of national and campus-based centers for teaching and learning, 7-8, 126-127
G
Global evaluations and estimates of learning for personnel decisions, 142-143
Grade distributions, 66-67
Graduate school faculties
effectively mentoring their teaching assistants and advising them about their duties to undergraduate students, 6, 124
Graduate teaching assistants. See also Formative evaluation by graduate teaching assistants
asked to review examinations and quizzes before they are given to students, 83
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 60-61
evidence about student learning from, 3
providing information throughout the term about difficulties students may be having, 83
Graduating seniors
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 60
Guidelines for the use of student evaluations, 141-144
considering some course characteristics in interpretations, 142
emphasizing global evaluations and estimates of learning for personnel decisions, 142-143
expecting those being evaluated to respond to evaluation results, 143-144
having a sufficient number of students evaluate each course, 142
limiting the use of rating forms, 144
making clear to faculty and students how results of student evaluations will be used, 141
not overestimating small differences, 142
using comparative data, 142
using several sets of evaluation results, 142
using standardized procedures for administering forms in class, 143
using student evaluation as only one piece of relevant information from several sources, 141-142
H
Hampshire College, 178-184
End-of-Semester Course Evaluation Forms, 178-182
Instructor Objectives Report, 183-184
Harvard University Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, 163-165
End-of-Semester Course Evaluation Form, 164-165
Mid-Course Evaluation Form, 163
How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School,14
Howard Hughes Medical Institution, 48
I
Implementation of evaluation methodologies, 96-99
departmental panels on teaching effectiveness and expectations, 98
feedback from graduating seniors and alumni, 98
formative discussions between the department chair and individual faculty members, 97
helpful policies and procedures, 96-97
legal considerations, 98-99
oversight committee to monitor departmental curriculum and instruction, 98
regular meetings between new faculty members and the department chair, 97
sharing faculty-generated teaching portfolios, 97-98
Independent research
encouraging students to engage in, 113-114
Informal conversations, 80
Input from students and peers, 52-53
evidence of learning from student portfolios, 52
faculty from “user” departments for service courses and from related disciplines for interdisciplinary courses, 52-53
informed opinions of other members of the faculty member’s department, 52
summary of professional attainments of undergraduate students engaging in research under the faculty member being evaluated, 53
undergraduate and graduate students, 53
undergraduate and graduate teaching assistants, 53
Institutional data and records, 66-67
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 66-67
evidence about student learning from, 3-4
grade distributions, course retention, and subsequent enrollment figures, 66-67
quality and performance of undergraduate research students, 67
Instructional contributions
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 63
Instructor Objectives Report, 183-184
Integrated learning, 33
Intellectual development of individual students contributions to ongoing, 31
Interdepartmental cooperation
in improving undergraduate STEM education, 114
International Technology Education Association (ITEA), 110
ITEA. See International Technology Education Association
J
Just-in-time teaching, 79
K
Kansas State University IDEA Center, 166-177
Faculty Information Form for Student Evaluations, 168-169
Sample Results of Student Evaluations, 170-177
Student Reactions to Instruction and Courses, 166-167
Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment,15
Knowledge of subject matter, 27-28, 101
answering students’ questions and guiding information searches, 28
data sources and forms of evaluation for evaluating, 102
helping students learn and understand the general principles of their discipline, 28
providing students with an overview of the whole domain of the discipline, 28
staying current through an active research program or through scholarly reading, 28
L
Learners
bringing different strategies, approaches, patterns of abilities, and learning styles, 21
motivation to learn and sense of self affecting what and how much is learned and how much effort is put into learning, 21-22
using what they already know to construct new understandings, 20
Learning process. See also Facilitation of learning;
Principles of learning
as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time, 33
promoting active, 29
viewing as a joint venture with the students, 29
Legal considerations, 98-99
Limitations
on faculty knowledge of research on effective teaching, 39
on the use of rating forms, 144
M
Making Teaching Community Property: A Menu for Peer Collaboration and Peer Review,86
Master Faculty Program, 85
Mathematical Association of America, 46, 109
Mentoring
of faculty by other faculty, 85
Mid-Course Evaluation Form, 163
Minute papers, 79
Miracosta Community College, 81n
Multidimensional learning, 33
N
National Center for Education Statistics, 35
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 12
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), 46, 110
National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), 55
National Institute for Science Education, 30, 72, 76
National Research Council (NRC), 1, 11, 15, 26, 35
National Science Board, 11
National Science Education Standards,35, 37n
National Science Foundation (NSF), 11, 29n
Assessment of Student Achievement in Undergraduate Education, 48
Centers for Learning and Teaching program, 127n
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement program, 54n
Shaping the Future,108
National Survey of Student Engagement: The College Student Report,77
National Teaching and Learning Forum, 81n
NCME. See National Council on Measurement in Education
NCTM. See National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
New faculty members
regular meetings with the department chair, 97
New scholarship on teaching, 25
NRC. See National Research Council
NSF. See National Science Foundation
O
Observation, 84-85
Outcomes assessment, 73-76
adjusting expected learning outcomes as appropriate, 73
benefits of, 75-76
determining when in a student’s education specific knowledge and skills should be developed, 73
developing expected student learning outcomes for an individual course of study, 73
incorporating specified learning outcomes in statements of objectives for courses , 73
scoring, 74-75
selecting appropriate assessment strategies to test student learning of specified knowledge, 73
using to provide formative feedback to individual students, 73
Outside evaluators, 81
Oversight committee
to monitor departmental curriculum and instruction, 98
P
Pedagogical content knowledge, 16n
Pedagogies and technologies
ability to recognize students not achieving to their fullest potential and assisting them in their academic difficulties, 29
contextually appropriate, 29n
data sources and forms of evaluation for evaluating skill in and experience with, 103
enabling teaching, 25
encouraging discussion and promoting active learning strategies, 29
organized and clear communication to students of expectations for learning and academic achievement, 29
persistently monitoring students’ progress toward achieving learning goals, 29
skill, experience, and creativity with a range of appropriate, 28-30, 101-103
viewing the learning process as a joint venture with the students, 29
Peer reviews of teaching
including in valid summative assessments of teaching, 4-5, 119-120
providing both objective and subjective assessment of a faculty member’s commitment to quality teaching , 7, 125
Pew Charitable Trust, 48
Pew Forum on Undergraduate Education, 147-150
Pew Forum on Undergraduate Learning, 77, 145
Portfolio Clearinghouse, The, 65
Portfolios. See Faculty teaching portfolios
Predictions about undergraduate teaching, 25
changes in evaluation and documentation of teaching, 25
changing appearance of higher education facilities, 25
curriculum and program design becoming inseparable from teaching and learning, 25
diversity seen as asset-based, 25
focus of teaching shifting away from content transmission, 25
nature and quality of assessment, 25
a new scholarship of teaching, 25
pedagogies students experienced prior to college changing their expectations about good teaching, 25
teaching becoming more public than ever before, 25
technology enabling teaching, 25
Preparation
adequacy of, 87
of future teachers, 32
Preparing for Peer Evaluation,95
Primary trait analysis
in scoring outcome assessments, 74-75
Principles of good practice for assessing student learning , 33-35
educational values, 33
illuminating questions people really care about, 34
involving a larger set of conditions that promote change, 34-35
involving representatives from across the educational community, 34
meeting responsibilities to students and to the public, 35
ongoing, not episodic, 34
paying attention to outcomes and equally to the experiences leading to them, 33
programs with clear, explicitly stated purposes, 33
understanding learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time, 33
Principles of learning, 20-22
effect of learners’ motivation to learn and sense of self on what and how much is learned and how much effort is put into learning, 21-22
effect of the practices and activities engaged in while learning on what is learned, 22
enhancement of learning through socially supported interactions, 22
facilitation of learning through metacognitive strategies that identify, monitor, and regulate cognitive practices, 21
facilitation of learning with understanding when new and existing knowledge is structured around major concepts and principles of the discipline, 20
learners’ different strategies, approaches, patterns of abilities, and learning styles coming from their heredity and prior experiences, 21
learners’ use of what they already know to construct new understandings, 20
Professional interactions with students, 30-31, 104-106
advising students experiencing problems with course material , 31
contributing to the ongoing intellectual development of individual students, 31
data sources and forms of evaluation for evaluating professionalism with students within and beyond the classroom, 106
demonstrating respect for students as individuals and respecting their privacy, 31
encouraging the free pursuit of learning and protecting students’ academic freedom, 31
meeting all classes and labs, posting and keeping regular office hours, and holding exams as scheduled, 31
upholding and modeling for students the best in scholarly and ethical standards, 31
Professional organizations
encouraging publication of peer-reviewed articles on evolving educational issues in STEM, 7, 127
increasing support for effective teaching, 46-49
offering opportunities to discuss undergraduate education issues during annual and regional meetings, 7, 127
Program design
becoming inseparable from teaching and learning, 25
Programs That Work,47
Project Kaleidoscope, 56
Q
Quality and performance
of undergraduate research students, 67
Quality of teaching and effective learning
ranking more highly in institutional priorities, 5, 122
Questionnaires used to evaluate undergraduate student learning, 19, 145-184
Carnegie Mellon University Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, 153-162
The College Student Report 2001, 147-150
Hampshire College, 178-184
Harvard University Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, 163-165
Kansas State University IDEA Center, 166-177
Student Instructional Report II, 151-152
Questions for conducting peer evaluations of teaching, 19, 185-195
Suggested Form for Peer Review of Undergraduate Teaching Based on Dossier Materials, 186-187
Syracuse University’s Classroom Observation Worksheet, 188-192
University of Texas at Austin’s Checklist of Teaching Skills, 193-195
Questions people really care about beginning with, 34
R
Recommendations for evaluating teaching effectiveness, 4-8, 115-127
accreditation agencies and boards should revise policies to emphasize quality undergraduate learning as a primary criterion for program accreditation, 7, 127
campus-wide and disciplinary-focused centers for teaching and learning should be tasked with providing faculty with opportunities for ongoing professional development, 5-6, 122-123
for deans, department chairs, and peer evaluators, 6-7, 124-126
department heads should provide personnel recommendations containing separate ratings on teaching, research, and service, 7, 125
departments should contribute to campus-wide awareness of the premium placed on improved teaching, 6-7, 125
departments should periodically review a departmental mission statement that includes appropriate emphasis on teaching and student learning, 6, 124
departments should provide funds to faculty to enhance teaching skills and knowledge, 7, 125-126
departments should support faculty moving to greater emphasis on instruction or educational leadership, 7, 126
effective peer reviews of teaching should provide both objective and subjective assessment of a faculty member’s commitment to quality teaching, 7, 125
faculty should be encouraged to develop curricula that transcend disciplinary boundaries through a combination of incentives, 6, 124
faculty should be supported in their obligation to improve their teaching skills through
departmental and institutional reinforcement, 5, 121
faculty who have excelled in teaching should be publicly recognized and rewarded, 6, 123-124
funding agencies and research sponsors should undertake a self-examination by convening expert panels to examine agency policy regarding quality undergraduate teaching, 7, 127
funding agencies should support programs to enable an integrated network of national and campus-based centers for teaching and learning, 7-8, 126-127
graduate school faculties should be required to show evidence they are effectively mentoring their teaching assistants and advising them about their duties to undergraduate students, 6, 124
for granting and accrediting agencies, research sponsors, and professional societies , 7-8, 126-127
individual faculty members should be expected to contribute to a balanced program of undergraduate teaching, 6, 124-125
individual faculty should be rewarded for consistent improving of learning by both major and nonmajor students, 5, 120-121
normal departmental professional developmental activity should include informing faculty about research findings that can improve student learning, 7, 125
one or more senior university-level administrators should be assigned responsibility for encouraging faculty to adopt effective means to improve instruction, 6, 123
only deans and department chairs willing to emphasize student learning and to make allocations of departmental resources in support of teaching should be appointed, 6, 124
peer reviews and teaching portfolios should be included in valid summative assessments of teaching, in addition to student evaluations, 4-5, 119-120
for presidents, overseeing boards, and academic officers, 5-6, 122-124
professional societies should encourage publication of peer-reviewed articles on evolving educational issues in STEM, 7, 127
professional societies should offer opportunities to discuss undergraduate education issues during annual and regional meetings, 7, 127
quality teaching and effective learning should be ranked highly in institutional priorities, 5, 122
scholarly activities focusing on improving teaching and learning should be recognized and rewarded , 4, 118-119
teaching effectiveness should be judged by the quality and extent of student learning, 4, 118
Reflective critiques, 87
Reliability
of undergraduate student evaluations, 55-56
Research. See also Applications of research;
Cultures of research and teaching
education through, 38
Respect
for students as individuals and for their privacy, 31
Responsiveness
to students’ concerns, 82
Role of colleagues in “formal” formative evaluation, 85-86
faculty mentoring faculty, 85
formative evaluation by faculty colleagues from other institutions, 85-86
projects of the American Association for Higher Education (AAHE), 86
S
Sample Results of Student Evaluations form, 170-177
Scholarly activities
focusing on improving teaching and learning, 4, 118-119
Scholarly standards
upholding and modeling for students the best in, 31
Scholarship on teaching, 9-67.
See also Evaluation of the scholarship on teaching
according the same administrative and collegial support as for other research and service endeavors, 2, 15-16, 116
aligning the cultures of research and teaching in higher education, 18, 40-50
characterizing and mobilizing effective undergraduate teaching, 18, 25-39
dimensions of, 88
evaluating of teaching in the STEM disciplines, 18, 51-67
recent perspectives on undergraduate teaching and learning, 11-24
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM disciplines)
interdepartmental cooperation for improving undergraduate education in, 114
professional societies encouraging publication of peer-reviewed articles on evolving educational issues in, 7, 127
Scoring of outcome assessments using primary trait analysis, 74-75
Self-assessment, 54, 64-66, 86-87, 90-91
before-and-after, 90-91
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 64-66
by reports on teaching activities and teaching portfolios, 64-65
teaching portfolios, 86-87, 90
videotaping, 90
Shaping the Future,108
Shaping the Future of Undergraduate Earth
Science Education,47
SID. See Small Group Instruction Diagnosis
Sigma Xi, 47
Skills
determining when in a student’s education these should be developed, 73
Small Group Instruction Diagnosis (SGID), 81-82
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 46
Standardized procedures
for administering forms in class, 143
STEM disciplines. See Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
Student advising, 31
Student evaluation instruments, 19, 139-144
current students, 139-141
end-of-course questionnaires, 139-140
guidelines for the use of student evaluations, 141-144
interviews, 140
measures of learning, 140-141
types of, 139-141
Student evaluations, 54-60
bias in, 58-60
data for evaluating teaching quality and effectiveness from, 54-60
only one piece of relevant information from several sources, 141-142
reliability of, 55-56
validity of, 56-58
Student Instructional Report II,151-152
Student Reactions to Instruction and Courses form, 166-167
Student study groups, 80
Students.
See also Evidence of student learning;
Formative evaluation by undergraduate students
for classroom observation, 63-64
direct questioning of, 78-79
engaging in original research, 38-39
engaging their interest in departmental curricular offerings, 111
identifying those not achieving to their fullest potential, 29
making clear how results of student evaluations will be used, 141
using course notes of, 80
using teams of, 79-80
Suggested Form for Peer Review of Undergraduate Teaching Based on Dossier Materials, 186-187
Summative evaluations, 1
Support
for faculty wishing to explore the scholarship of teaching and learning, 1-2
Syracuse University, 95
Classroom Observation Worksheet, 188-192
T
Teaching. See also Cultures of research and teaching;
Evaluation of teaching in STEM disciplines
becoming more public than ever before, 25
focus shifting away from content transmission, 25
Teaching assistants. See Graduate teaching assistants;
Undergraduate teaching assistants
Teaching effectiveness, 27-31, 111
involvement with and contributing to one’s own profession in enhancing teaching and learning, 31, 106-107
judging by the quality and extent of student learning, 4, 118
knowledge of subject matter, 27-28, 101
professional interactions with students within and beyond the classroom, 30-31, 104-106
skill, experience, and creativity with a range of appropriate pedagogies and technologies, 28-30, 101-103
understanding of and skill in using appropriate assessment practices, 30, 103-104
Teaching Improvement Forms
Discussion Courses, 160-162
Laboratory Courses, 157-159
Lecture Courses, 153-156
Teaching laboratories, 113-114
emphasizing the role and importance of, 113
encouraging students to engage in independent research, 113-114
Teaching portfolios. See Faculty teaching portfolios
Technologies. See Pedagogies and technologies
U
Undergraduate teaching and learning, 11-24.
See also Effective undergraduate teaching
impetus for and challenges to change, 12-15
overview of research on effective assessment of student learning , 23-24
seven principles of learning, 20-22
statement of task and guiding principles, 15-18
Undergraduate teaching assistants
evidence about student learning from, 3
University of California System
Faculty Code of Conduct Manual,31
University of Texas at Austin, 95
Checklist of Teaching Skills, 193-195
Preparing for Peer Evaluation,95
University of Washington, 82, 92
U.S. Department of Education
Educational Resources Information Center, 54n
V
Validity
of undergraduate student evaluations, 56-58
Videotaping, 90
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 75
W
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 64n