K. Lynn Taylor University Teaching Services The University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2 Assessing Foundations Programs Foundations of University Teaching Colloquium Flinders University, Adelaide, April 10-11, 2003 Acknowledgements: This study is supported by a SSHRC Standard Research Grant (#410-2002-1584) to Schonwetter (PI), Ellis, Griffin, Perry, Taylor & Wright, 2002-2005
Session Objectives • Outline our longitudinal study • Explore selected bench mark data • Seek feedback on the design and findings
University of Manitoba: Program Requirements • Theory: • Credit Course - 129.745 Teaching and Learning in Post-Secondary Instruction (3 credits) or • Extended Workshops & Papers/Research Project • Practice: • TA work reflection and feedback or • Mentor supervised teaching • Professional Development: 20 Hours • Teaching Dossier and Curriculum Vitae (CV) • Optional:WebCT training; Accent Modification.
University of Waterloo:Program Requirements • GS 901: • 6 workshops • 6 reflective response papers • GS 902: • 2 more workshops • 2 more response papers, research paper, presentation on paper, teaching dossier • GS 903: • 3 observed teaching events • 3 reflective response papers
Longitudinal Study: Gaps in the Literature • Gap 1: Lack of research and comprehensive program evaluations based on empirical design(Chism, 1998; Weimer & Lenze, 1997) • Gap 2: Target instructional interventions to specific groups across institutions(Levinson-Rose & J. & Menges, 1981; Weimer & Lenze, 1997) • Gap 3: Inclusion of different kinds of inquiry, including both qualitative methods and quantitative methods(Levinson-Rose & J. & Menges, 1981; Weimer & Lenze, 1997) • Gap 4: Limited models and theories to direct research (Blackburn, Beiber, Lawrence & Trautvetter, 1991; Menges & Svinicki, 1989; Perry et al., 1997;Weimer & Lenze, 1997)
GTA Studies (Abbott, Wulff & Szego, 1989; Carroll, 1980; Chism, 1998; Weimer & Lenze, 1997) Conceptual Framework GTA Development Theories (Abbott, Wulff & Szego, 1989; Marincovitch, Prostko & Stout, 1998; McKeachie, 1997) CHET-CUT Study (SSHRC Grant to Schonwetter (PI), Ellis, Griffin, Perry, Taylor & Wright, 2002-2005) New Hires Research (Boice, 1992; Menges, 1994; 1996; Perry et al., 1997; Smith & Kalivoda, 1998) Pilot Studies of CUT-CHET Programs (Ellis & Schonwetter, 2001;Schonwetter & Taylor, 2000) Control Theory (Bandura, 1986; Perry et al., 1997; 1999)
CHET-CUT Longitudinal Study PROCEDURE Ethical Approval Access to Graduate Students University of Manitoba Control Group(s) University of Waterloo Pre-Test prior to entry into CHET-CUT Post-Test after CHET-CUT completion 18 month follow-up into a tenure track position
Pre-Test • Perceptions of: • Preparation for academic career • Importance to academic career • Perceived control questions: • having to teach a new course this term • Open-ended questions: • How did you come to know about the Program? • What motivated you to sign-up for the Program? • Effects of program on professional and personal development?
Who Has Been Participating in Our Study? (M = Means) • 65 (53.7%) female; 56 (46.3%) males • 20 to 48 years (M = 28.01) • 56 seeking a Master’s degree; 64 seeking a Ph.D. • 1 - 12 graduate courses completed (M = 3.42) • 0 - 9 terms of studying (M = 3.29 terms) • Markers for 0-14 courses (M = 1.98 courses) • TAs for 0 - 14 courses (M = 2.10 courses) • Instructors for 0 - 6 courses (M = .76 courses).
Top 5 Most Important Teaching Items Very Low Very High
5 Least Prepared for Teaching Items Very Low Very High
Difference Between Importance and Prepared IMPORTANCE - LEAST PREPARED
5 Least Important Teaching Items Very Low Very High
What Most Influenced or Motivated you to Sign-Up for the CHET/CUT Program? Frequencies
How will Your Experience in the CHET/CUT Program Contribute to Your Professional Development? Frequencies
How will Your Experience in the CHET/CUT Program Contribute to Your Personal Development? Frequencies
Responses to Data • How can these data be used to inform the development or fine tuning of our programs? • How can research like this be used to enhance the scholarship of faculy development?
References Abbott, R.D., Wulff, D.A., & Szego, C. K. (1989). Review of research on TA training. In J.D> Nyquist, R.D> Abbott, & D. A. Wulff (Eds.), New Dirrections for Teaching and Learning, Number 39, (pp. 111-124). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Bandura, A. (1986) Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Blackburn, R.T., Beiber, J.P., Lawrence, J.H., & Trautvetter, L. (1991). Faculty at work: Focus on research, scholarship and service. Research in Higher Education, 32, 385-413. Boice, R. (1992) The new faculty member: Supporting and fostering professional development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Carroll, J.G. (1980). Effects of training programs for university teaching assistants. Journal of Higher Education, 51, 167-183. Chism, N. V. N. (1998). Evaluating TA Programs. In M. Marincovich, J. Prostko, & F. Stout (Eds.), The professional development of graduate teaching assistants (pp. 249-262). Bolton: Anker. Ellis, D., & Schonwetter, D.J. (2001). Help though the gateway: Assessing teaching certificate programs. Paper presented at the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, St Louis, MI. Levinson-Rose, J. & Menges, R. (1981). Faculty Development and the adoption and diffusion of classroom innovation. Review of Educational Research, 51, 403-434.
More References Marincovich, M., Prostko, J., & Stout, F. (1998). The professional development of graduate teaching assistants. Bolton: Anker. McKeachie,. W. J., (1997). Critical elements in training university teachers. The International Journal for Academic Development, 2, 67-74. Menges, R. J. (1994). Preparing new faculty for the future. Thought and Action, 10, 81-95. Menges, R.J. and Associates (1999). Faculty in new jobs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Menges. R.J., & Svinicki, M. (1989). Designing program evaluation. To Improve the Academy, 8, 81-97. Perry, R.P., Menec, V.H., Struthers, C.W. (1999). Feeling in control. In R. Menges and Associates (Eds.), Faculty in new jobs (pp. 186-215). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Perry, R.P., Menec, V.H., Struthers, C.W., Hechter, F.J., Schonwetter, D.J., & Menges, R.J. (1997). Faculty in transition: A longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived control and type of institution in adjustment to post-secondary institutions. Research in Higher Education, 38, 519-556. Rice, R. E. (1996) Making a place for the new American scholar. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
More References Schonwetter, D.J., & Taylor, K.L. (2000). Identifying critical components of effective instructional development. Paper presented to the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Brock University, St. Catherines, Ontario. Smith, K.S., & Kalivoda, P.L. (1998). Academic morphing: Teaching assistant to faculty member. To Improve the Academy, 17, 85-101. Weimer, M. & Lenze, L. F. (1997). Instructional interventions: A review of the literature on efforts to improve instruction. In R.P. Perry & J. P. Smart (Eds.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 205-240). New York: Agathon Press.