I must admit to having a strong preference for skills-based approaches to faculty development. I find university faculty have limited time to put to learning how to teach and they come to teaching and learning centres with real problems that require hands-on answers. They seem to want strategies, practice, feedback and time to discuss teaching issues with colleagues to gain ideas they will use in their classrooms. Often the more theoretical approaches to learning take longer and provide fewer practical take aways (my bias shows here).
From personal experience, I too have studied teaching and learning in a variety of environments, everything from Scouts Canada leader training, St. John Ambulance first aid instructor training, SAIT instructor training, bachelor degree studies in higher education and a Masters' degree in higher education. The majority of the practical, skill-based parts came from the first three sources; the work in high education was helpful, broadening and interesting, and yet much of the content for the courses I teach in the TLC comes from the skills-based programs. I believe we need to consider what our learners need to know to be more successful in their classrooms and in helping their students to succeed, and then how to provide it in a way that fits their constraints. I encourage people who want that deeper understanding to enrole in education programs that are geared to that exploration.
Off my soap box!
Rosalie
Rosalie Pedersen
Posts made by Rosalie Pedersen
Vivian,
I agree. The crux of the matter is attitude. It has been "okay", normal, usual etc. to teach in post secondary when you are a subject matter expert, and have no background in teaching. While some people gravitate to optional teaching programs to develop their teaching skills, the vast majority do not. Since in many universities, research is valued over teaching, and there is little pressure or support to learning to teach more effectively, there is little incentive to attend.
I worked at SAIT (a technical college) for several years, and a two-week course in teaching skills was mandatory for new hires. There was little push back. Yet I think one of the differences between universities and colleges is often the valuing of teaching. I wonder what would happen if a teaching qualification of some sort were similarly mandated in universities. Initially I think a lot of push back in the univseristy sector.
Institutional supports, such as offloads to have the time to take the courses, increases in salary resulting from successful completion of courses, and increased recognition of teaching would be helpful. Still these ideas have financial implications for institutions which makes them difficult to implement., especially in the current situation.
As well, the issue goes beyond the buy-in of instructors. Does senior administration believe the teaching programs are needed? In our case, I am not convinced they see a universal need as opposed to a situational need.
So the next question is how to gain senior administration's full support.
Has anyone experiences/strategies they have found helpful?
Rosalie
I agree. The crux of the matter is attitude. It has been "okay", normal, usual etc. to teach in post secondary when you are a subject matter expert, and have no background in teaching. While some people gravitate to optional teaching programs to develop their teaching skills, the vast majority do not. Since in many universities, research is valued over teaching, and there is little pressure or support to learning to teach more effectively, there is little incentive to attend.
I worked at SAIT (a technical college) for several years, and a two-week course in teaching skills was mandatory for new hires. There was little push back. Yet I think one of the differences between universities and colleges is often the valuing of teaching. I wonder what would happen if a teaching qualification of some sort were similarly mandated in universities. Initially I think a lot of push back in the univseristy sector.
Institutional supports, such as offloads to have the time to take the courses, increases in salary resulting from successful completion of courses, and increased recognition of teaching would be helpful. Still these ideas have financial implications for institutions which makes them difficult to implement., especially in the current situation.
As well, the issue goes beyond the buy-in of instructors. Does senior administration believe the teaching programs are needed? In our case, I am not convinced they see a universal need as opposed to a situational need.
So the next question is how to gain senior administration's full support.
Has anyone experiences/strategies they have found helpful?
Rosalie
Hi,
I am just figuring out how this program works so bear with me! I am the Teaching Enhancement Program Coordinator at University of Calgary. We offer a variety of workshops and certificate programs geared at improving teaching and learning on campus. Our main audiences are faculty members and teaching assistants.
I have worked in this area for the past five years and I believe we need to do more to help those who are experts in their fields to be better able to teach effectively.
Main issues here are that, although are programs are often full, we only reach a small percentage of the faculty and TAs. There is little incentive to be a "great teacher" in terms of tangible rewards and research is often the primary focus and rewarded activity. We also suffer from budget constraints.
I believe we would have trouble following the UK lead and making teaching skills courses mandatory, yet from an ethical point of view, it would seem appropriate to ensuring quality for our learners.
The idea of having more national standards around courses seems a good one to me. An example is the Instructional Skills Workshop program. Many universities and colleges use this program and adapt it to meet their needs. This approach saves time for educational developers as it reduces the need to "reinvent the wheel" and it has a proven track record. It also appeals to participants in that it is well known so the certificate has more recognition, and because the program is setup to demonstrate the value of learer-centered approaches.
A few thoughts - I am looking forward to the discussions,
Rosalie
I am just figuring out how this program works so bear with me! I am the Teaching Enhancement Program Coordinator at University of Calgary. We offer a variety of workshops and certificate programs geared at improving teaching and learning on campus. Our main audiences are faculty members and teaching assistants.
I have worked in this area for the past five years and I believe we need to do more to help those who are experts in their fields to be better able to teach effectively.
Main issues here are that, although are programs are often full, we only reach a small percentage of the faculty and TAs. There is little incentive to be a "great teacher" in terms of tangible rewards and research is often the primary focus and rewarded activity. We also suffer from budget constraints.
I believe we would have trouble following the UK lead and making teaching skills courses mandatory, yet from an ethical point of view, it would seem appropriate to ensuring quality for our learners.
The idea of having more national standards around courses seems a good one to me. An example is the Instructional Skills Workshop program. Many universities and colleges use this program and adapt it to meet their needs. This approach saves time for educational developers as it reduces the need to "reinvent the wheel" and it has a proven track record. It also appeals to participants in that it is well known so the certificate has more recognition, and because the program is setup to demonstrate the value of learer-centered approaches.
A few thoughts - I am looking forward to the discussions,
Rosalie