University instructors' ratings profiles: Stability over time,and disciplinary differences

This study investigated university instructors' teaching profiles (rank order of teaching behaviors) as they emerge from student ratings. The data consisted of student ratings of all faculty members in the physics and chemistry departments at Tel Aviv University, with no exception, who taught the same undergraduate course over two consecutive years. The ratings of these instructors were taken twice a semester (at mid- and end of semester), during the two academic years of the study, using a short rating instrument. A (4 × 5) × 2 ANOVA was conducted, with time of measurement and item serving as repeated measures, and department as a grouping factor. The same procedure was used for identifying differences between pairs of measurements for each item. These pairs compared the corresponding measures of the first year versus the second year, and separately those of mid-semester versus the end of semester. Findings indicate a very high degree of stability of instructors' profiles across time of measurement and activities to improve instructor performance on weak points; no clear-cut improvement from mid- to end-of-semester ratings except for teachers who undertake special improvement activities; and differences in teaching profiles for the two academic departments.     

Lack of clarity in university teaching: A case study

Correlational studies suggest that clarity in teaching plays a crucial role in student learning and satisfaction from instruction. Other quantitative studies identify low-inference teacher behaviors that are components of clear instruction. The present study used qualitative methods to examine unclarity in teaching of a physics undergraduate course for non-science majors. Teaching clarity was measured both as a high- and low-inference behavior. Evidence of several data sources converge and reveal very low level of understanding of the material presented, strong dissatisfaction with instruction, and a good match between high- and low-inference teacher clarity behaviors. This is explained by the instructor's insufficient pedagogical knowledge, by his inability to apply those pedagogical principles he does know in actual classroom instruction, by his misconceptions regarding teaching and student learning, and by his detachment from his students and the subsequent lack of adjustment of instruction to them.     

CAI versus paper and pencil-discrepancies in students' performance

Differences were identified in students' performance of similar arithmetic tasks in two media: paper-and-pencil (P&P) and computer-assisted instruction (CAI). Performance of elementary school students on P&P was compared with their performance in CAI work in two widely used CAI systems-an Israeli and an American; in two types of practice-either mixed from a variety of types of exercises or of fixed-type exercises; with two types of task arrangement-either strictly or loosely hierarchical; and with two criteria-either level of performance as defined in the CAI curriculum or the percent of correct answers. Results show that for both CAI systems, for both criteria, for both types of task arrangement, and for either type of practice, the majority of students performed with P&P better than in their simultaneously current CAI work. However, there were students who achieved the opposite results for tasks arranged in loose hierarchy. These two contradictory trends are discussed and explained on the basis of prolonged observations of several students working with the two CAI systems involved.