Recognizing and Evaluating Science Teaching in Higher Education Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief (2020) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Recognizing and Evaluating Science Teaching in Higher Education: Proceedings of a Workshop - in Brief
Recognizing and Evaluating Science Teaching in Higher Education: Proceedings of a Workshop - in Brief
Pages 1-12
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
To begin to frame the national conversation around the reform of teaching evaluation, the Roundtable on Systemic Change in Undergraduate STEM Edu cation convened a 2-day workshop September 11–12, 2019, to discuss issues around recognizing and evaluating science teaching in higher education.1 Participants included experts in the fields of teaching and learning, as well as faculty from a range of institutional types, engaged in evaluation reform. A fundamental goal of undergraduate education is to provide all students, regardless of ethnicity, gender, or age, with an excellent educational experience that will prepare them for success postgraduation.
|
From page 2... ...
As such, the broad changes in institutional culture necessary to support improvements in the teaching evaluation process feed into the larger mission of the roundtable, which aims to collectively move the needle in the direction of effective, systems-level change in several areas of undergraduate STEM education. The discussions at the workshop focused on historical perspectives on teaching evaluation, current initiatives to improve the evaluation process, ways to support systemic change, and future directions that may be appropriate to consider as institutions begin the process of reforming evaluation systems.
|
From page 3... ...
Greenhoot presented the limitations of student ratings as a method of evaluation and the challenges faced in creating new evaluation practices based on current definitions of effective teaching. She remarked that, at many institutions, proposed improvements often do not result in meaningful, systemic changes to the teaching evaluation process.
|
From page 4... ...
PRESENT-DAY INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE TEACHING EVALUATION To highlight current work performed around recognizing and evaluating science teaching at various types of institutions, 14 individuals who are leading efforts on their campuses each gave 3-minute presentations describing useful ideas or methods. (A full list of flash talks with descriptions of each initiative can be found on the workshop's Webpage7)
|
From page 5... ...
remarked that a task force at her institution recommended renaming student evaluations as "student ratings of teaching." As an example of the role faculty members can play in their own review processes, Heather Seitz (Johnson County Community College) described a 5-year portfolio project at her institution, in which the final portfolio contains the faculty member's teaching philosophies, goals, activities to improve teaching, data gathered in support of the goals, and personal reflections on the work (see Figure 3)
|
From page 6... ...
So we just have to jump in and start to chip away at that." SUPPORTING SYSTEMIC CHANGE IN TEACHING EVALUATION A panel of leaders who study and implement systemic change in undergraduate education highlighted some key components to improve teaching evaluation, including the choice of appropriate measures; the value of effective communication; and the institutional, disciplinary, and national actors that can be leveraged by institutions to encourage the change process. Carl Wieman stressed that valid measures of teaching effectiveness are a necessary first step toward promoting systemic change around the way teaching is evaluated.
|
From page 7... ...
) described the role that funders can play in promoting systemic change at undergraduate institutions by promoting campuswide conversations around how to transform the student learning experience.
|
From page 8... ...
Key ideas that emerged from the break-out sessions included establishing a definition of excellent teaching and the associated expectations for faculty members, identifying the appropriate methods and measures to be used for evaluation, championing a commitment to diversity and inclusivity, and recognizing institution-specific factors that can contribute to long-term, systemic change. Definitions and Expectations Throughout the flash talks and panel discussions, several participants commented on the benefit of a definition of excellent teaching as a prerequisite for establishing effective evaluation methods.
|
From page 9... ...
articulated that the process of improving teaching evaluation is a good opportunity for redefining excellent teaching to include learning experiences that are inclusive of all students. Miller affirmed that efficacious teaching practices "create a sense of belonging for students in the classroom, and a welcoming space." Further, Estrada asserted, efforts to improve the evaluation of teaching are opportunities for cultural transformation on campuses, through which existing biases supported by current evaluation methods, such as those against people of color or women in certain disciplines, can be eliminated.
|
From page 10... ...
Box 1 pulls from the flash talks, panel presentations, and discussions to present important questions that institutions of all types could ask as they consider addressing issues around the way science teaching is recognized and evaluated on their campuses. FINAL REMARKS AND REFLECTIONS In closing, Austin reminded participants of the overarching goal encompassing the reform of teaching evaluation to fit within a larger national commitment to student learning.
|
From page 11... ...
The names in parentheses are those who most prominently presented these ideas, but other participants also discussed some of the ideas. warned against the attempt to implement changes to an evaluation system in the absence of underlying systemic change in institutional culture, noting that, if following mandated guidelines for excellence in teaching does not ultimately appear to be valued in decisions of tenure and promotion, faculty will be unlikely to support a new system.
|
From page 12... ...
The statements made are those of the rapporteur or individual meeting participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all meeting participants; the planning committee; the Roundtable on Systemic Change in Undergraduate STEM Education; or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The planning committee was responsible only for organizing the public session, identifying the topics, and choosing speakers.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.