Disciplinary Differences and the Integration of Technology into Teaching

ABSTRACT

The preparation of teachers involves academics from across the disciplinary spectrum but research on the differences between academic disciplines has revealed that a faculty member's discipline is a major factor in shaping the several aspects of course planning and teaching. The purpose of this paper is to present a model for investigating disciplinary differences as they may relate to teaching with technology, thereby enabling more effective integration of technology into the curriculum. Components of the model include: the structure and ethos of the discipline; preparation for, and experience as, a teacher; faculty assumptions about students; faculty beliefs and perceptions about technology; and the environmental context.     

A Campus-Wide Study of STEM Courses: New Perspectives on Teaching Practices and Perceptions

At the University of Maine, middle and high school science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teachers observed 51 STEM courses across 13 different departments and collected information on the active-engagement nature of instruction. The results of these observations show that faculty members teaching STEM courses cannot simply be classified into two groups, traditional lecturers or instructors who teach in a highly interactive manner, but instead exhibit a continuum of instructional behaviors between these two classifications. In addition, the observation data reveal that student behavior differs greatly in classes with varied levels of lecture. Although faculty members who teach large-enrollment courses are more likely to lecture, we also identified instructors of several large courses using interactive teaching methods. Observed faculty members were also asked to complete a survey about how often they use specific teaching practices, and we find that faculty members are generally self-aware of their own practices. Taken together, these findings provide comprehensive information about the range of STEM teaching practices at a campus-wide level and how such information can be used to design targeted professional development for faculty.     

The Pragmatic Barrier

A small-scale phenomenological study reveals interesting and suggestive insights into the pedagogical technology experiences of late-career faculty with institutional recognition as successful instructors. Referred to in much of the literature as “resistant” and assumed to lack training in pedagogical technology and/or to adhere to passive learning strategies, the faculty in this study described attempts, successful and unsuccessful, to integrate technology into their teaching. Their experiences and perceptions point out the questionable effects of taking a “toolism” approach to faculty development and the risk associated with proceeding with unexamined assumptions about such faculty and their technology use.     

Use of Instructional Feedback and Modification Methods among University Faculty

This study focused on methods used by faculty to gather feedback and how this feedback was used to modify instruction. Data were gathered to determine the degree to which these methods of feedback and modification of instruction were dependent upon variables such as class size, teaching experience, pedagogical training, academic rank and status, gender and academic discipline. It was found that the amount of feedback and modification of instruction did not vary significantly across the variables of teaching experience and class size. The analyses examining the effects of the remaining independent variables (i.e. college of study, pedagogical training, gender, rank, status) did detect statistically significant results. Specifically, those instructors who had received some training in pedagogical methods gathered feedback about their teaching more than those instructors without such pedagogical training. Also, faculty from the Colleges of Education and Liberal Arts used more methods to gather feedback than those faculty from the College of Science and Mathematics. Faculty in the College of Science and Math also did the least in terms of course and instructional modification, significantly less than faculty in the Colleges of Agriculture, Business, Education, Engineering and Liberal Arts.     

Lights,Camera, Action: Facilitating the Design and Production of Effective Instructional Videos

This paper outlines a rudimentary process intended to guide faculty in K-12 and higher education through the steps involved to produce video for their classes. The process comprises four steps: planning, development, delivery and reflection. Each step is infused with instructional design information intended to support the collaboration between instructional support staff and faculty to produce video that will be meaningful to students and support their success in a class. In outlining this approach, the paper also explores technological and pedagogical considerations related to each of these steps that can help faculty and staff determine how best to incorporate video into online classes. Finally, supported by research on best video practices and with examples from our own experiences as instructional designers and instructors, the paper outlines how these steps relate to four broad categories of video: introduce, model, explain/inform and feedback.     

Program-Level Curriculum Planning: An Exploration of Faculty Perspectives on Two Different Campuses

This study explored faculty views about curriculum planning in academic programs. Using a semistructured format, researchers interviewed 59 faculty members at two very different campuses about their assumptions and the influences upon them as they work with colleagues in planning program curriculum. Although many of the same factors influence course and program planning, we observed that, compared to course planning, program planning is irregular (even infrequent), typically responds to a specific catalyst, and is more dependent upon a supportive institutional climate and leadership. We consider ways that institutional researchers can help provide a supportive climate for responsive and regular planning that will link planning and assessment more closely.     

Cases of Science Professors’ Use of Nature of Science

Study provides qualitative analysis of data that answers the following research question: how college science faculty teach science and NOS and incorporate aspects of NOS and the history of science into their undergraduate courses? Study concentrates on four cases and more specifically on three introductory science classes and on four instructors who taught those courses. These instructors were chosen as case studies to explore in greater detail what occurs inside introductory science courses in one particular higher institution in the Northeastern United States. Participants’ teaching styles are presented through a combined and detailed presentation of interview data and classroom observations supported with examples from their classroom activities. Constant comparative approach was used in the process of organizing and analyzing data. Findings revealed that participants preferred to use the traditional teacher-centered lecturing as their teaching style and whose main concern was to cover more content, develop the problem solving skills of their students, and who wanted to teach the fundamental principles of their subjects without paying special importance to the NOS aspects. The study also revealed that other variables of teaching science, such as large class size, lack of management and organizational skills, teaching experience, and instructors’ concerns for students’ abilities and motivation are more important for these scientists then teaching for understanding of NOS.     

REFLECTIONS OF COMMUNITY-COLLEGE STUDENTS REGARDING MENTEE/INSTRUCTOR TEACHING AND LEARNING EFFECTIVENESS

This investigation used data collected from students who assessed their instructors' teaching and learning effectiveness. Instructors were community-college career and technical-education faculty enrolled in the Community College Induction Mentoring Program (CCIM), a jointly sponsored program between Iowa State University and the instructors' respective community colleges. These new faculty were involved in a structured mentor/mentee program in which the mentor was involved in a 1-day mentor training program. The mentor/mentee relationship was designed around annual goals with an action plan developed, executed, and assessed for each goal. One component of the mentor/mentee program involved documentation of an effectiveness plan, including students' perception of their mentored-instructors' teaching and, as a consequence, their own learning effectiveness. Students were asked to complete an evaluation instrument comparing their “reactions” and “learning” in classes taught by mentored instructors enrolled in the CCIM program relative to other nonmentored instructors. A total of 9 hypotheses provided the direction of the research. Student ratings were typically higher for new instructors who received peer mentoring. Mentees and mentors consistently reported a high level of satisfaction about their partnership. Supervisors voiced strong support for the program. This paper shares student survey results of mentee/instructor teaching and student learning effectiveness.     

The Best and the Worst

Faculty workload is based on the amount of time spent on teaching, research, and service. The workload varies according to institutional focus, teaching field, type of course, course level, and instructional format. Compared with traditional face-to-face courses, online courses require a disproportionate investment of time and effort by faculty, necessitating special consideration when calculating faculty workload. The authors examine the workload for faculty teaching online courses in community colleges, specifically, the number of online classes taught per semester, class sizes for online courses, incentives for online instructors and how the workload for online instructors is calculated. Results indicate inconsistent practices within and between institutions; the workload for online instructors based on class sizes is less than, equal to, or more than that of faculty teaching face-to-face courses. Further investigations into common practices at other institutions and dialogue between administrators and faculty to discuss workload issues are recommended.     

Reflecting on teaching: The influence of context

The nature of teaching and learning in higher education is dependent on a complex web of factors: the philosophy and personality of the faculty member, the characteristics of students, the discipline and the course content, the vision and the atmosphere of the institution, and the larger social context within which the teaching takes place. When any one of these factors changes, teaching changes. It is our intent in this paper to describe how faculty experience a change in teaching context, how that change leads to reflection on practice, and how beliefs and assumptions about teaching may be revised.     

Researching the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: An Analysis of Current Curriculum Practices

The purpose of this study was to analyze how instructors designed courses for scholarship of teaching and learning initiatives. The case studies and qualitative analyses of the data revealed that some instructors are approaching teaching as an investigative process. Informed by multiple assessment methods, the participating instructors explored how changes in course designs can improve student learning and development. The results of this study illustrate that these instructors reflected on their course designs and emphasized the quality of student learning and its improvement, which helps to address the public's expectations of higher education institutions as centers of academic excellence.     

Comparing introductory course planning among full-time and part-time faculty

Using data from a nationally representative survey of faculty teaching introductory college courses, this exploratory study compares course planning procedures of full-time and part-time faculty teaching courses in eight academic fields. The choice of variables examined was guided by a general model of course design developed from earlier studies of course planning. To control for discipline-related differences in faculty planning assumptions, separate analyses were conducted for the eight fields. No key differences were found between full-time and part-time faculty on the primary factors under investigation: substantive content-related influences on courses, strength of influence within the instructional environment, and planning steps and content arrangements faculty preferred.     

Teaching the way they were taught? Revisiting the sources of teaching knowledge and the role of prior experience in shaping faculty teaching practices

An oft-cited maxim in higher education is that “faculty teach the way they were taught” because they receive little formal training in teaching before entering the classroom. However, little is known about the origins of faculty knowledge about teaching or the role their prior experiences play in the development of their teaching practices. In this exploratory study, we interviewed and observed 53 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty at three research institutions. Using qualitative analysis methods (i.e., thematic and causal network analysis), we find that faculty do not only model their teaching after previous instructors, but also draw upon a varied repertoire of knowledge and prior experiences. These include knowledge derived from their experiences as instructors (46 respondents), their experiences as students (22 respondents), their experiences as researchers (9 respondents), and from their non-academic roles (10 respondents). In-depth analyses of two faculty members elaborate on the relationship between these varied types of prior experiences and how they interact with other factors including beliefs about teaching, instructional goals, and features of the organizational context to ultimately shape their classroom practice. The results suggest that instead of assuming that faculty lack any knowledge about teaching and learning, professional developers and policymakers should instead acknowledge and build upon their preexisting “craft” knowledge as professional teachers. Future research should focus on relationships between specific types of knowledge and teaching practice and how these varied experiences influence identity formation.     

The Added Value of Conducting Learning Design Meeting to the Online Course Development Process

Do you find it challenging to have discussions with instructors about designing online courses and best practices in teaching? This article will highlight key components to conducting effective Learning Design meetings. It outlines techniques used by this institution that inspires faculty to design coherent courses that lead to meaningful learning experiences. These meetings invite instructors to express their feelings about online formats, inform them about expectations and time commitment, and reassures them of support throughout the process. Learning Design (LD) meetings have proven to be a compelling manner of decreasing faculty resistance, while exposing instructors to best practices in pedagogy, andragogy and online learning. Instructional Designers (IDs), Instructional Facilitators (IFs), and Course Authors (CAs) who work in higher educational online settings should find this information useful. Novices in the field may find these practical techniques particularly beneficial.     

A Systematic Approach in Student Reading

Abstract

The Faculty Writing Fellows Seminar was designed to develop university instructors’ skill in writing instruction: The 2015–16 professional development project offered faculty at Southern Oregon University a chance to read writing-pedagogy research, collaboratively develop their teaching practices, and—most importantly—put themselves in the shoes of student writers. The seminar had a positive impact on instructors’ teaching and students’ writing. Instructors showed growth in confidence, empathy, knowledge, and instruction. Their students’ essays outscored essays by students in nonparticipating instructors’ classes. The study argues for professional development that simultaneously builds pedagogical knowledge and skills and incorporates emotional and psychosocial aspects of teaching and learning.     

Under pressure: How faculty gender and contract uncertainty impact students’ grades

Although rising average grades appear to be common at post-secondary institutions in the U.S., there is still little work examining mechanisms driving this increase in grades. This paper uses data from a public research university to examine one mechanism in particular: instructor level incentives that are linked to gender and contract status. We hypothesize that instructors with more job uncertainty due to their rank will be most incentivized to award higher grades, as this may lead to better evaluations of teaching and an increase in retention probability. Our results indicate that students receive higher grades when their class is taught by a female instructor with more job uncertainty than if the class were taught by a tenured female faculty member. These higher grades appear to reflect more lenient grading rather than better preparation for follow-on courses. However, for students taking classes with male instructors, there is no significant difference across instructor rank in grades received. Our results have important implications for thinking about the role faculty contracts may play in affecting grading distributions.     

Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration

This analysis reviews the research that has been done on the connection between research productivity or scholarly accomplishment of faculty members and their teaching effectiveness (as assessed by their students). On average, there is a very small positive association between the two variables. To understand this relationship better, extant research was explored for factors that might mediate either positive or inverse associations between research productivity and teaching effectiveness and those that possibly could be common causes of them. Pedagogical practices and dispositions of faculty members, as well as certain course or class characteristics (size of class, electivity of course), were examined as potential mediating factors. Potential common causes investigated were academic rank and age of faculty members, their general ability, their personality characteristics, and the amount of time or effort they spend on research activities. The association between research productivity and teaching effectiveness was explored further by considering whether its size and direction varies by career stage of faculty members, their academic discipline, and the type of college or university in which they teach.     

How Do We Train Our Future Faculty to Teach? A Multidisciplinary Comparison of Graduate-Level Pedagogy Courses Offered at a Large Midwestern University

This study examines and documents graduate pedagogy courses offered at a large Midwestern research university. Thirty-three graduate pedagogy course instructors from 32 departments (a majority of those offering courses) completed an online survey. We report on enrollment demographics, preparation of faculty to teach such a course, and how a statement of teaching philosophy is presented to the class. This research connects the analyses of individual pedagogy courses with the few national studies on teacher training, outlines assumptions about an emerging field, and lays groundwork for a comprehensive study of the landscape and outcomes of graduate pedagogy courses nationwide.