Talking About Teaching: Curricula for Improving Instructors

1UNC SSW, Research to Teaching

Copyright 2004, Strom-Gottfried & Dunlap

Talking About Teaching: Curricula for Improving Instructors’Classroom Performance

Based on the Work of

Kimberly Strom-Gottfried

Katherine M. Dunlap

University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

Presentation developed by Zach Addison, MSW student



Overview

This presentation is based on an article examining the use, purpose, and

effectiveness of teaching circles in university social work programs



Education for Social Work Instructors

• Functions of social work educators

– Teaching

– Research

– Service

• Doctoral programs direct focus to preparation for research

– Few if any courses pertain to

•Teaching skills

•Curriculum development



Background and Experience

• New faculty may be poorly equipped to

– Structure effective courses

– Use instructional technologies

– Address challenging classroom dilemmas

• Instructors experience often consists only of

– Own experiences as student

– Modeling through teaching assistantships



Expectations

• Focus on classroom performance and teaching methods limited by– Expectations for scholarship– Pressure to attain external funding (Pescolido & Aminizade, 1999; Katz & Henry, 1993;

Schoenfeld & Magnan, 1992)• Contract faculty may feel limited by inheriting syllabus and

course design• Expectations for teaching performance are rising

– Can result in denial of tenure or promotion



Inadequate Teacher Preparation

• Can result in

– Lack of student satisfaction

– Lack of attainment of course objectives

– Confusion, frustration, and discomfort

•For both students and instructors

– Unevenness of courses across curriculum



Teaching Circles’ Purpose

Teaching circles (TC) are designed to improve classroom performance by developing the instructional skills and knowledge of instructors.



Scheduling

• Announced in advance of coming academic year

• Consistent with scheduling of other faculty meetings and events

• Held every other month

• 90 minute duration



Groups

• Small groups to foster trust and cohesion

– 8-10 members

• Mix of junior and senior members assigned to each group by associate dean

• May be followed by self-selection to groups by common interest

• Groups meet at same time with common agenda

• Facilitated by faculty member selected by associate dean

– Based on instructional evaluations

• Content determined by associate dean with facilitators

– Some content left to discretion of individual groups



Faculty Committee

• Appointed to develop, coordinate, and present teaching circle content

• Poll faculty for issues of interest in developing the program

• Members make notes from each session for a dossier of resources



Incentives for Participation

• Facilitator planning roles not compensated monetarily

• Elements to induce attendance:

– Selection of compelling topics addressing needs of faculty

– Ample notice of meeting times

– Consistent scheduling and meeting place

– Quality programming

– Peer norms for attendance

– Refreshments



Content

• Sessions divided into three sections– Presentation – Discussion – Problem-solving

• Examples of teaching circle topics include the following:– Supporting minority students– Classroom disruptions– Ethical dilemmas– Use of technology and media– Case-based teaching



Supporting Minority Students

• Issues for discussion include:

– Differing rates of college enrollment and completion for diversegroups

– Cross-cultural classroom dynamics

– Helping differentially prepared students

– Mentorship role

– Encouraging equitable participation

– Fostering a climate of trust

– Use of heterogeneous examples

(McKeachie, 1994; Pla-Richard, 1991; Sears & Ittner, 1996; Vasquez & Wainstein, 1999)



Creating Effective Assignments

• Effective assignments should

– Be clear

– Contribute to course objectives

– Employ diverse assessment approaches

• Use TC to discuss pros and cons of different approaches



Classroom Disruptions

• Disruptions include:

– Hostile students

– Monopolizers

– Silence

– Chronically late/unprepared students

– Cheating

– Classroom coups



Classroom Disruptions cont.

• TC can provide environment to

– Anticipate difficulties

– Prevent difficulties by effectively structuring classroom environment

– Handling disruptions properly when they arise

•Avoid accusations of favoritism or bias

– Normalize feelings and fears



Ethical Dilemmas

• Dilemmas include:

– Changing grades or policies based on compelling student requests (Anderson, 2001; Markie, 1994)

– Consensual sexual relationships (Cahn, 1986; Stamler & Stone, 1998)

– Maintaining student’s confidence when questions of his/her competence are raised



Ethical Dilemmas cont.

• TC can offer:

– Opportunity to explore legal and ethical implications of these dilemmas

– Chance to review university policies

– Setting to surface these issues



Technology-Enhanced Teaching

• New technology – Allows:

•24 hour communication through email•Alternative methods of class delivery via instructional

television or internet•Access to information through electronic databases and

CD-ROM– Adds new dimensions to old problems

• Discussions in TC can help instructors understand and accommodate new technology



Use of Media

• Goals of using media:– Enliven content – Stimulate discussion– Provide new perspective– Deepen understanding (Abels, 1970; Fry, Medsker, & Bonner, 1996)

• Media includes:– Videos– Musical recordings– Literary sources

• Faculty may use TC to share tips and cautions



Authority and Empowerment

• Teacher’s authority in class– concerns

•Structure of class•Content•Interaction with students

(Kurland, 1991)– Gives parallel to social work practice

•Students observe teacher’s model• Use TC to dialogue balancing authority with student

empowerment and self-directed learning



Grading

• Use TC to

– Familiarize faculty with literature on grading

– Facilitate discussion of school’s grading practices

– Explore merits and cautions of alternative strategies

•Effort-based grading

•Grading on a curve

(Ory & Ryan, 1993)



Case-Based Teaching

• Case-based teaching

– Involves faculty creating practical and engaging cases

– Provides contextualized learning (McKeachie, 1994)

• Use TC to discuss

– Options for the case

– Decision-making process



Student Learning Styles

• Preferred learning styles affected by

– Psychological factors

– Cognitive factors

– Social factors

• Controversy over effectiveness of style-differentiated instruction

• Use TC to discuss instructional implications of accommodating preferences



Group Work

• Cooperative learning definition:

– Use of heterogeneous student groups to achieve learning goals

• Research supports value of these teaching models (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991)

• Use TC to discuss

– Apprehensions of students and faculty around cooperative learning

– Threats to its benefits

•Animosity, competition, variation in level of effort

– Issues of grading group work

•Difficulty discerning individual contributions



Self-Directed Learning

• Growing interest in self-directed learning

– Increase in employed students returning to school (Price, 1976)

• Challenges include:

– Measuring baseline knowledge and abilities

– Assessing competence

– Maintaining quality

– Transitioning instructor’s role

•From transmitter of content to facilitator of learning

(Knowles, 1975; Patterson, Crooks, & Lunyk-Child, 2002)

• Use TC to help teachers make transition



Evaluation

• One university requires attendees to complete an evaluation at conclusion of each session – Five questions

•What issues in this session stimulated you to think further about the subject as it applies to your teaching?

•What issues in this session stimulated you to take action to improve your teaching? What action?

•Rate this session (1-5) in the level of interest it generated•Rate this session (1-5) as an effective use of time•Other comments

• Results tabulated by facilitator of session and presented to planning committee to develop further programs



Evaluation cont.

• Another university uses more informal evaluation methods

– Members provide verbal feedback

– Facilitators summarize information to share with associate dean

– Faculty meeting discussion of TC issues at close of academic year



Benefits of Teaching Circles

• Sending message that teaching is valued and deserves attention

• Providing setting to discuss concerns

• Normalizing difficulties and apprehensions

• Socializing new faculty to teaching roles

• Improving instructional capabilities for all faculty

• Increasing familiarity with curriculum



Considerations for Future Studies

• Need systematic study of effectiveness in increasing instructor performance• Student completed course evaluations could be used to assess faculty improvements • Elements to control:

– Attendance at TC– Years of teaching experience– Particular courses– Other variables

• Also measure reduction of – Student discontent – Grievances – Grade disputes– Administrative problems



References

• Abels, P. (1970). Education media and their selection. In M. Pohek(Ed.), Teaching and learning in social work education. New York:

CSWE.• Anderson, D. (2001). Values and ethics. In D. Royse, Teaching tips

for college and university instructors. Needham Hts, MA: Allyn& Bacon.

• Angelo, T.A., & Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Baker, P. (1999). Creating learning communities: The unfinished agenda. In Pescolido, B.A., & Aminizade, R. (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century (pp. 95-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.

• Bianco-Mathis, V., & Chalofsky, N. (Eds.) (1996). The adjunct faculty handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.



References cont.

• Boschmann, E. (1995). The electronic classroom: A handbook for education in the electronic environment. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.

• Brookfield, S. (1999). Building trust with students. In B.A. Pescolido, & R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education (pp. 447-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

• Butler, K.A. (1987). Learning and teaching style in theory and practice (2nd ed.). Columbia, CT: Learner’s Dimension.

• Cahn, S.M. (1986). Saints and scamps: Ethics in academia. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.

• Calhoun, C. (1999). The changing character of college: Institutional transformation in American higher education. In Pescolido, B.A. & Aminzade, R. (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century (pp. 9-31). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.

• Carbo, M. (1984). Research in learning style and reading: Implications for instruction. Theory into Practice, 23(1), 72-76.



References cont.

• Cashin, W.E. (1994). Readings to improve selected teaching methods (Idea Paper No. 30). Manhattan, KS: Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.

• Chambliss, D.F. (1999). Doing what works: On the mundanity of excellence in teaching. In B.A. Pescolido, & R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education (pp. 422-434). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

• Christensen, C.R., & Hansen, A.J. (1987). Teaching and the case method: Text, cases, and readings. Boston: Harvard Business School.

• Congress, E. (1996). Dual relationships in academia: Dilemmas for social work educators. Journal of Social Work Education, 32(3), 329-338.

• Cyrs, T. (1997). Competence in teaching at a distance. In T. Cyrs (Ed.), Teaching and learning at a distance: What it takes to effectively design, deliver, and evaluate programs. New Directions for Teaching and Learning #71. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

• Diamond, R.M. (1989). Designing and improving courses and curricula in higher education: A systemic approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.



References cont.

• Dore, M.M. (1993). The practice-teaching parallel in educating the micropractitioner. Journal of Social Work Education, 29 (2), 181-188.

• Dowd, S.B. (1994). A developmental approach to teaching with case studies. In S. Kadel, & J.A. Keehuer (Eds.), Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher

education (Vol. II, pp. 142). PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

• Doyle, W., & Rutherford, B. (1984). Classroom research on matching learning and teaching styles. Theory into Practice, 23 (1), 20-25.

• Elbow, P. (1999). Embracing contraries in the teaching process. In B.A. Pescolido, & R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education (pp. 455-461). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

• Fry, J., Medsker, K., & Bonner, D. (1996). Teaching methods and strategies. In V. Bianco-Mathis, & N. Chalofsky (Eds.), The adjunct faculty handbook (pp. 55-114). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

• Goodsell, A.S., Maher, M.R., & Tinto, V. (1992). Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.



References cont.

• Gordon, J., Zemke, R., & Jones, P. (Eds.) (1988). Designing and delivering cost-effective training. Minneapolis, MN: Lakewood.

• Hyman, R., & Rosoff, B. (1984). Matching learning and teaching styles: The jug and what’s in it. Theory into Practice, 23(1), 35-43.

• Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1994). Myths about cooperative learning. In D. Johnson, R. Johnson, & E. Holubec (Eds.), Cooperative learning in the classroom. Madison, WI: Magna Publications.

• Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.

• Katz, J., & Henry, M. (1993). Turning professors into teachers. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

• Knowles, M.S. (1975). Self-directed learning. New York: Association Press. • Kulik, J. A., & McKeachie, W.J. (1975). The evaluation of teachers in higher

education. Review of Research in Education, 3, 210-240.



References cont.

• Kurland, R. (1991). The classroom teacher and the role of authority. In R.R. Middleman & G.G. Wood (Eds.), Teaching secrets: The technology in social work education (pp. 81-94). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

• Leashore, B.R. (1995). African Americans Overview. In R.L. Edwards (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Social Work (19th ed.). pp. 101-115. Washington DC: NASW Press.

• Lewis, H. (1991). Teacher’s style and use of professional self in social work education. In R.R. Middleman, & G.G. Wood (Eds.), Teaching secrets: The technology in social work education (pp. 17-29). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

• Markie, P.J. (1994). A professor’s duties: Ethical issues in college teaching. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

• McKeachie, W.J. (1994). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Co.

• McMinn, M.R. (1988). Ethics case-study simulation: A generic tool for psychology teachers. Teaching of Psychology, 15 (2), 100-101.



References cont.

• Menges, R. (1994). Teaching in the age of electronic information. In W.J. McKeachie Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (9th ed., pp. 183-193). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.

• Middleman, R.R., & Wood, G.G. (1991). Helping students learn from each other. In R.R. Middleman, & G.G. Wood (Eds.), Teaching secrets: The technology in social work education (pp. 31-40). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

• Millis, B.J. (1996). Connecting with cooperative learning. In V. Bianco-Mathis, & N. Chalofsky (Eds.), The adjunct faculty handbook (pp. 115-131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

• Murray, H.G. (1987). Acquiring student feedback that improves instruction. M.G. Weimer (Ed.), New directions for teaching and learning: Teaching large classes

well (Vol. 32) (pp.85-96). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. • Ory, J.C., & Ryan, K.E. (1993). Tips for improving testing and grading. Newsbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications.



References cont.

• Palmer, P.J. (1999). The heart of a teacher: Identity and integrity in teaching. In Pescolido, B.A., & Aminzade, R. (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century. (pp. 504-506). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.

• Patterson, C., Crooks, D., & Lunyk-Child, O. (2002). A new perspective on competencies for self-directed learning. Journal of Nursing Education, 41(1), 25-31.

• Pearson, C., & Royse, D. (2001). Teaching students how to learn. In D. Royse (Eds.), Teaching tips for college and university instructors: A practical guide (pp. 121-134). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

• Pescolido, B.A., & Aminzade, R. (1999). Introduction to the changing landscape of higher education. In Pescolido, B.A., & Aminzade, R. (Eds.), The social worlds

of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century. (pp. 6- 8). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.



References cont.

• Pla-Richard, M. (1991). Connecting with difference: Black teacher- white students. In R.R. Middleman, & G.G. Wood (Eds.), Teaching secrets: The technology in social work education (pp. 53-64). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

• Powers, G.T. (1999). Teaching and learning: A matter of style? In B.A. Pescolido, & R. Aminzade (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education (pp. 435-446). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

• Price, H.G. (1976). Achieving a balance between self-directed and required learning. Journal of Education for Social Work, 12(1), 105-112.

• Raudenbush, L.M. (1996). Evaluation of students. In V. Bianco-Mathis, & N. Chalofsky (Eds.), The adjunct faculty handbook (pp. 158-178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

• Royse, D. (2001). Teaching tips for college and university instructors. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.



References cont.

• Schoenfeld, A.C., & Magnan, R. (1992). The teaching challenge. In A.C. Schoenfeld, & R. Magnan (Eds.), Mentor in a manual: Climbing the academic ladder to tenure (pp. 121-189). Madison, WI: Magna Publications.

• Sears, M., & Ittner, P. (1996). Facilitating classroom learning. In V. Bianco-Mathis, & N. Chalofsky (Eds.), The adjunct faculty handbook (pp. 142-157). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

• Silverman, R., & Welty, W.M. (1993). Edwina Armstrong: Teaching note. Case Studies in Education. White Plains, NY: Pace University.

• Stamler, V.L., & Stone, G.L. (1998). Faculty-student sexual involvement: Issues and interventions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Strom-Gottfried, K., & Dunlap, K.M. (2004). Talking about teaching: Curricula for improving instructors’ classroom performance. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 24(3/4), 65-78.



References cont.

• Vasquez, J.A., & Wainstein, N. (1999). Instructional responsibilities of college faculty to minority students. In Pescolido, B.A., & Aminzade, R. (Eds.), The social worlds of higher education: Handbook for teaching in a new century (pp. 137-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.

• Weimer, M. (1993). Improving your classroom teaching. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

• Weimer, M., Keehner, J., Parsley, K., & Wells, H. (1993). Teaching students at risk: An annotated bibliography for faculty. PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

• Whicker, M.L., Kronenfeld, J.J., & Strickland, R.A. (1993). Getting tenure. Oakland, CA: Sage.

• Williams, W.C. (1985). Effective teaching: Gauging learning while teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 56(3), 320-337.

Talking About Teaching: Curricula for Improving Instructors

Documents

Transcript of Talking About Teaching: Curricula for Improving Instructors