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



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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 University, 40-41, 110 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

OCR for page 203
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 ensuring availability for all students, 2, 15, 116 improving the assessment of learning outcomes, 32, 35-36

OCR for page 203
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 methodologies, 18, 71-99 recommendations, 4-8, 115-127 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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203
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 overall, 4-5, 118-121 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

OCR for page 203
aligning the cultures of research and teaching in higher education, 18, 40-50 application of, 18-19, 69-127 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

OCR for page 203
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

OCR for page 203