Senior Instructor, Department of Computer & Information Science (DCIS)
|
|
Vat Kam Hou 屈鑑濠 Senior Instructor, Department of Computer & Information Science (DCIS) |
| Article Title |
Article Abstract | Full Article Link |
|||||||||
Active Learning Strategies in Face-to-Face CoursesBarbara J. Millis • The University of Texas at San Antonio |
IDEA Paper #53 As numerous research studies suggest, teachers who desire increased student learning should adopt active learning. This article explores the research, defines active learning, discusses its value, offers suggestions for implementing it, and provides six concrete examples of active learning approaches: Thinking-Aloud Pair Problem-Solving; Three-Step Interview; Think-Pair-Share; Visible Quiz; Value Line; and Send/Pass-a-Problem. |
|||||||||
Considerations in Online Course DesignPaul A. Creasman, Ph.D. • Arizona Christian University |
IDEA Paper #52 With distance and online learning becoming ubiquitous in higher education, the need for faculty to be able to create quality online courses is greater than ever. This article offers practical advice for those faced with the challenge of creating their first online course. Characteristics of the online medium are explored. Then, drawing upon Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) principles of good practice, five principles for online course planning and design are discussed: collaborative learning, connecting course concepts, instructor social presence and interaction, balancing the amount of course information with student commitment and persistence, and matching course outcomes with technological options. The article ends with a short case study showing how the suggestions have been implemented in an online course. |
|||||||||
Using Graphic Organizers to Improve Teaching and LearningKenneth A. Kiewra • University of Nebraska-Lincoln |
IDEA Paper #51 Students often have difficulty learning from texts and lectures because information is commonly organized in blocks or lines that obscure important relationships among ideas. This article introduces graphic ways to display information so that relationships are apparent and easily learned. For example, notice how information about the solar system’s first two planets is displayed in block form in the paragraphs in Figure 1 and how information about the solar system’s next two planets is displayed in linear form in the outline in Figure 2. In these examples, studying blocks or lines of planet information makes it difficult to recognize relationships among planets. Figure 1 • Planet Information Displayed in Block-like, Paragraph Form. Planets
Figure 2 • Planet Information Displayed in Linear, Outline Form. Planets
|
|||||||||
Student Ratings of Teaching: A Summary of Research and LiteratureStephen L. Benton,1 The IDEA Center |
IDEA Paper #50 This IDEA Paper is an update of IDEA Paper No. 32 Student Ratings of Teaching: The Research Revisited (Cashin, 1995). Much of the content of IDEA Paper No. 32 is retained where no subsequently published study has changed its basic conclusions. However, studies or reviews of the literature that provided questions, modifications, or further support for its conclusions were included in this paper. We have attempted to summarize the conclusions of the major reviews of the student ratings research and literature from the 1970s to 2010. That literature is extensive and complex; a paper this brief can offer only broad, general summaries and limited citations.
“Ratings of overall effectiveness are moderately correlated with independent measures of student learning and achievement. Students of highly rated teachers achieve higher final exam scores, can better apply course material, and are more inclined to pursue the subject subsequently.” (Davis, 2009, p. 534) |
|||||||||
Effective Classroom DiscussionsWilliam E. Cashin, professor emeritus • Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #49 What is a discussion? No one seems to define it. Lowman (1995, p. 159) suggested: “(A) useful classroom discussion...consists of student comments separated by frequent probes and clarifications by the teacher that facilitate involvement and development of thinking by the whole group.” In this paper, discussion is defined as two-way, spoken communication between the teacher and the students, and more importantly, among the students themselves.
This paper primarily addresses discussion in small classes that meet one or more times a week, or in smaller classes that meet one or more times during the week as part of a course consisting of one or more large lectures each week. Discussions can take the form of recitation, dialogue, and guided or open exchanges. However, many of the suggestions in this paper should also be useful for shorter discussion sessions as part of a lecture class, since discussions are an effective way to get students to actively process what they learn in lectures (Lowman, 1995, p. 161).
|
|||||||||
Strategies to Improve Student WritingDavid Smit • Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #48 “Language is acquired only by absorption and contact with an environment in which language is in perpetual use.” — Samuel Thurber (1898, paraphrased in Judy & Judy, 1981, p. 18)The Crisis in Writing Of course we want our students to write well. And we know from our own classes, as well as from newspaper articles and television specials, that our students do not write as well as we think they should. The latest report of The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) — which conducts the most careful test of the writing abilities of students in grades four, eight, and 12 — reports that only 16 percent of eighth-graders can write informatively at the level of “skillful” or better, and that only 26 percent of 12th-graders can write persuasively at that level. However, between 60 percent and 70 percent of both groups can produce writing that the NAEP labels “sufficient” (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007, pp. 30, 44). These results may confirm our worst fears.
|
|||||||||
Promoting Deep LearningBarbara J. Millis • The University of Texas at San Antonio |
IDEA Paper #47 As Laird, Shoup, Kuh, and Schwarz (2008, p. 471) point out, “faculty members, as the designers and facilitators of learning activities and tasks, play a key role in shaping students’ approaches to learning.” Bain and Zimmerman (2009, p. 10), for example, define “great teachers as those people with considerable success in fostering deep approaches and results among their students.” This paper provides research-based answers to these key questions: • What is deep learning?• Why should faculty adopt deep-learning approaches? • What does deep learning look like? (examples and applications) |
|||||||||
Effective LecturingWilliam E. Cashin, professor emeritus • Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #46 “Given the recent invention of the printing press, why do college professors continue to lecture so much?”Anonymous Despite the availability of so many other methods to teach and learn, the lecture format is still with us. McKeachie notes, “The lecture is probably the oldest teaching method and still the method most widely used in universities throughout the world” [italics added] (McKeachie and Svinicki, 2006, p. 57). McKeachie’s statement is supported by IDEA student rating data (The IDEA Center, 2009). Instructors, when asked to identify their primary approach to the course being rated, indicated “lecture” in 58.6 percent of the 178,034 classes for which there was complete data. The second most frequently selected option was “discussion,” chosen by 13.6 percent of respondents. However, when asked to identify their secondary approach, “discussion” was chosen first by 27.0 percent of the 149,687 classes for which there was complete data; “lecture” was second, at 14.9 percent. We need to ask exactly what we mean by “lecture.” Perhaps Davis’s (2009, p. 148) description is applicable: “The classroom lecture is a special form of communication in which voice, gesture, movement, facial expression, and eye contact can either complement or detract from the content.” In addition, “lecture” courses certainly may include question-and-answer, if not discussion, along with various media options. |
|||||||||
Assessing Your Program-Level Assessment PlanSusan Hatfield, Assessment Director • Winona State University |
IDEA Paper #45 By now, most academic programs have an assessment plan. Some of these plans were developed after hours of discussion and debate, while others were plucked from the results of a Google search. Some were inherited from previous program leadership. Still others were borrowed from friends at other universities, or adapted (with more or less success) from other disciplines. Regardless of the origin of a program’s assessment plan, all assessment plans can benefit from a periodic reevaluation — ideally before the site team arrives on campus for a comprehensive or focus visit on assessment. This IDEA paper poses fourteen key questions to guide the process of reviewing an assessment plan. |
|||||||||
The Learning Portfolio: A Powerful Idea for Significant LearningJohn Zubizarreta • Columbia College, SC |
IDEA Paper #44 Student portfolios have been widely known and implemented for some time in academic fields such as writing and business. Similarly, portfolios have been a staple form of documentation of performance skills in the fine arts, providing students and teachers with a method for displaying and judging evidence of best practice and samples of the full range of talent. Another popular application has been to provide a device for demonstrating the value of experiential learning or for assessing credit for prior learning. Some portfolios are shared by students and faculty advisors for the purpose of academic advising and career counseling. Also, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) advocates the portfolio model as an effective tool for showcasing a representative breadth of acquired skills for professional success and career preparation. NCATE uses specified licensure competencies and professional standards as benchmarks against which to measure achievements signified by portfolio artifacts. Despite the history of portfolios in certain disciplines, the portfolio approach to gauging student accomplishments and growth in learning was not adopted extensively in higher education until recently. Instead, emphasis on advanced content knowledge acquisition and traditional forms of assessment and evaluation prevailed. In English and a few other disciplines, portfolios and journals have long been employed in college classes with some regularity. But recently -- following the groundswell interest in teaching, course, and institutional portfolios -- learning portfolios began to attract significant attention in college and university settings. Now, the numerous Web sites that exist for online information on portfolios, offering rich and diverse models of how portfolios are used worldwide for multiple purposes, are coming predominantly from colleges and universities around the world. Countries such as Australia, Britain, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Canada, France, Finland, Hong Kong, Mexico, Singapore, and , of course, the United States -- just to name a few -- are home to institutions with student portfolio programs designed to help with systematic, learning-outcomes assessment plans. Though it took time, learning portfolios have clearly become mainstream in higher education. |
|||||||||
The Technology Literate Professoriate: Are We There Yet?Dan Madigan • Bowling Green State University |
IDEA Paper #43 In the late 1980s, when the first signs of digital technology began to infiltrate the college campuses, very few faculty in higher education, outside of computer sciences and some small pockets of innovators, were savvy users of the technology. But in 1989 all that began to change when Tim Berners-Lee invented HTML and HTTP, and basically worked with others to standardize communication and document retrieval through the web. College campuses embraced the web and its potential, and by 1994 educational personnel worldwide were demanding more, better, and relevant technology in which to do their work. That was then, this is now.
Today there are those who argue that universities have poured money into digital technology at the expense of important academic programs. Shouts of technology bankruptcy can be heard from the hallowed halls of academe. Some say that digital technologies have increased the workload of faculty without commensurate gains in productivity or enhancement of student learning. In many cases across campuses, this charge would not be difficult to prove. For example, we see laptop computers being used for connectivity in the classroom, but for purposes not related to the learning outcomes of the subject. And, we see the Internet replacing valuable teacher to student contact. Certainly we have all felt, at one time or another, that the technology has not lived up to its hype. But at the risk of alienating those who hunger for a debate about technology waste, I’ll take a stand. Used responsibly, digital technology is, and most likely will be, an important factor in the higher education equation and its potential for increasing student learning and faculty productivity should not be casually dismissed. Computer Aided Instruction (CAI), for example, has been researched extensively over the years and has shown it can improve test scores and motivate students. To date, however, there has been a dearth of critical research that investigates the value, in regards to student learning, of digital technologies in educational institutions. As a primary and practical focus, this paper addresses the kinds of technology that have the potential for enhancing student learning, the ways in which new technologies can be assessed to determine its impact on learning outcomes and ultimately student learning, and some creative ways that universities can support this judicious use of technology. But before the practical focus in this paper, some important background is necessary. |
|||||||||
Integrated Course DesignL. Dee Fink • University of Oklahoma |
IDEA Paper #42 Teaching is a complex human action. The many tasks that are involved comprise four general components:
The degree to which these tasks are performed well directly affects the quality of the learning experience that students have. We have traditionally relied on graduate schools to instill the needed subject matter mastery. Faculty development programs commonly include efforts to improve communication strategies and the quality of interactions with students. The department or its curriculum committee frequently controls decisions about the purpose and nature of the learning experience. But the problem of designing and managing the instructional event is the responsibility of the faculty member and, in many cases, the area in which he/she is least prepared.
At the same time, this area is probably the most crucial one in determining whether or not students have a significant (rather than a boring or trite) learning experience. To ensure that learning experiences are significant, it is necessary to understand how they are designed and to develop the skills to perform this task. This paper seeks to contribute to those ends. It begins with identifying two general approaches to creating a course (or any other form of instruction). The most common is the content-centered approach, sometimes called the “List of Topics” approach. The teacher works up a list of important topics, often using the table of contents from one or more textbooks, decides how much time to give to each topic, and how many tests will be given. The advantage of this approach is that it is relatively easy and simple; the disadvantage is that it pays virtually no attention to the question of what students might learn beyond content knowledge, the type of learning most easily forgotten. The alternative is to take a systematic, learning-centered approach to designing courses. The heart of this approach is to decide first what students can and should learn in relation to this subject and then figure out how such learning can be facilitated. Although this approach requires more time and effort, it also offers the best chance of ensuring that students have a significant learning experience. |
|||||||||
Student Goal Orientation, Motivation, and LearningMarilla D. Svinicki • University of Texas-Austin |
IDEA Paper #41 Of the factors that influence student learning, motivation is surely one of the most potent. Teachers can affect student motivation in ways that either facilitate or impede learning. This paper describes why this is so, and offers specific suggestions for promoting positive student motivation. Some time ago, Janzow and Eison (1990) wrote a very illuminating chapter in an issue of New Directions for Teaching and Learning about a topic that persists as a thorn in the side of all teachers even today. The topic was student orientation toward grades and the influence of that orientation on all they do in a course. Janzow and Eison asserted that students displayed two basic orientations toward their studies: a grade orientation (working for the grade) or a learning orientation (working to learn). They even described an instrument (the LOGO) that would allow instructors to identify these tendencies in their students. This chapter struck a chord with so many faculty because it reflected the all too often seen “nails on the blackboard” attitude of some students to be interested only in the grades they were getting rather than in learning anything. Actually that’s not totally fair; students are usually interested in learning something from their classes, but they are strategic enough to realize that the real currency of the marketplace is the grade they earn, not what they learn. |
|||||||||
Getting Students to Read: Fourteen TipsEric H. Hobson • Georgia Southern University |
IDEA Paper #40 “Whenever faculty get together to talk about student writing or critical thinking, they inevitably turn also to problems of student reading.” (Bean, 1996, p. 133)
During the late 1970s a ubiquitous national ad campaign championed literacy with the slogan, “Reading is Fundamental (RIF).” Current elementary, middle, and secondary school curricula attest that reading is fundamental to primary and secondary education, a daily presence in and out of class, and the focus of major assessment efforts. It is commonly taken for granted that reading is also fundamental in college courses. But the literature raises doubts about the validity of that assumption. Specific challenges come from research related to both student preparation and compliance with assignments. |
|||||||||
Establishing Rapport: Personal Interaction and LearningNeil Fleming • Consultant on Teaching and Learning |
IDEA Paper #39 The IDEA Report to the Faculty Member includes information about how students perceived 20 of the instructor’s teaching techniques and methods. These 20 items are grouped to form five “Teaching Approach” scales. One of these scales, Establishing Rapport, combines the four items listed below:
|
|||||||||
Enhancing Learning - and More! - Through Cooperative LearningBarbara J. Millis • U.S. Air Force Academy |
IDEA Paper #38 Some of higher education’s most challenging goals include enhancing critical thinking, promoting “deep” (as opposed to superficial) learning, encouraging both self-esteem and the acceptance of others, and improving interpersonal effectiveness (with an emphasis on team skills). This paper describes cooperative learning, an instructional approach designed especially with these objectives in mind.
|
|||||||||
Helping Your Students Develop Critical Thinking SkillsCindy L. Lynch and Susan K. Wolcott • WolcottLynch Associates |
IDEA Paper #37 Students exhibit different patterns of thinking skills and respond differently to what we do in our classes. As the following example demonstrates, even brief moments of conversation can reveal differences among students.
In this paper, we recommend theoretically grounded and empirically supported strategies teachers can use to improve the development and assessment of students’ thinking skills. Our transdisciplinary approach links a series of increasingly complex Steps for Better Thinking to two theories from developmental psychology: Fischer’s dynamic skill theory (Fischer, 1980; Fischer & Bidell, 1998) and King and Kitchener’s (1994) reflective judgment model of cognitive development. We use these theories and relevant empirical data as a map for structuring our efforts to optimize students’ thinking skills. |
|||||||||
Appraising Teaching Effectiveness: Beyond Student RatingsDonald P. Hoyt and William H. Pallett • IDEA Center |
IDEA Paper #36 Evaluating faculty effectiveness is important in nearly every institution of higher education. Assessing the effectiveness with which various functions are performed is essential to a variety of important administration recommendations and decisions. It also provides feedback which influences the faculty member’s self-image and professional satisfaction. And it establishes a climate which communicates the institution’s commitment to professional improvement and confidence that every faculty member will make a valuable contribution to the achievement of shared goals.
There are two types of contributions faculty members make to the programs of a department/institution — indirect and direct. Indirect contributions, while not impacting directly upon the achievement of a program’s objectives (principally student learning, in the case of instruction; new insights and knowledge, in the case of research; assistance to clients in the case of service) make a difference to the program’s success by affecting the environment of the department/division, the appropriateness and quality of its plans, and the attitudes and skills of other members. Direct contributions are those in which the achievement of program goals is impacted by the individual’s personal intervention or involvement. In many institutions, research and service programs are vitally important. Assessing a faculty member’s contributions to each constitutes a serious challenge. However, this paper is concerned only with the instructional program, a focus which is central to the mission of almost every institution of higher education. |
|||||||||
Focusing On Active, Meaningful LearningAnn Stalheim-Smith, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #34 Life in a University is centered around learning. We faculty learn continually as we teach and carry out our scholarly activities. We strive to improve the learning environment for our students so they can learn. As a learning community, we continue to grow in our understanding of what constitutes good learning environments and how our teaching can facilitate learning for our students. In teaching, my goals are to:
In my attempt to do this, I view myself as a coach and my students as a team. On the first day of class, I tell my students that we are in this course together. If they fail, I fail. I will be their coach and help to guide them, but they are the ones that have to "play the game." They are the ones who will be the doctors, physical therapists, dietitians, and athletic trainers making the decisions on their patients and players. The focus of this paper is active and meaningful learning. Within that framework, I will discuss unstructured cooperative learning and critical thinking. First the concepts will be defined, and then I will share my experiences in using these concepts in the courses I teach and in the textbooks I write. |
|||||||||
Developing an Effective Faculty Evaluation SystemWilliam E. Cashin |
IDEA Paper #33 Those striving for perfection in these [faculty evaluation] systems may be on a collision course with disappointment. Or they may have a more subtle, Machiavellian motive, calling for a degree of perfection that they know can never be achieved in order to sabotage the whole effort. (Miller, 1987, pp. 26-27)
Since the early 1970s a substantial literature has developed about faculty evaluation. Two excellent books have been published in the last two years. The first published was Reflective Faculty Evaluation: Enhancing Teaching and Determining Faculty Effectiveness by Centra (1993); it was an extensive updating of his Determining Faculty Effectiveness (Centra, 1979). The second was Assessing Faculty
Work: Enhancing Individual and Institutional Performance by Braskamp and Ory (1994) which represented a significant expansion of their earlier book, Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness (Braskamp, Brandenburg, & Ory, 1984) that only dealt with evaluating teaching. |
|||||||||
Answering and Asking QuestionsWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #31 This paper is concerned with the answering and asking of questions in college-level courses. It makes suggestions regarding questioning techniques that are appropriate for lecture classes as well as for discussion groups. We have adapted the approach used by Hyman (1974) because it has been found by many instructors to be a useful way to understand what goes on in class. Therefore, throughout the paper we will use the terms "question," "answer" (response), and "reaction" as follows:
|
|||||||||
Readings to Improve Selected Teaching MethodsWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #30 While most IDEA Papers have been written for faculty and administrators in higher education independent of using the IDEA System, this paper utilizes the 20 IDEA Teaching Method items as its point of departure. Since there is considerable similarity in the items used -- and the factors covered -- in most student rating forms, it is hoped that these suggested readings will assist most colleges and universities, not just those using the IDEA System.
To help those who do not use IDEA, I will briefly discuss the factor analytic research on student rating items. This research has demonstrated that there is very considerable overlap in the items used on most student rating forms. Therefore, readers should be able to generalize from the IDEA items to similar items on their own forms. |
|||||||||
Teaching Adult StudentsCheryl J. Polson, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #29 We all know who adult learners are. They are the students who sit in the front row of class; the ones who remember when John F. Kennedy was president; the ones who get mad when the instructor doesn't show up for class; and they are the ones whose favorite sweatshirt is older than some of their classmates! Is the "adult learner" a recognizable, single entity for whom there is one best way to teach, or for whom there is one best way to learn? No, There is no agreement in the literature as to what constitutes an adult learner. Is it someone who is eligible to vote? Is it a 25 year old graduate student who still lives with his or her parents? Is it someone who works full time? Is it someone who has been away from a formal learning environment for more than two years? rather than trying to develop a single definition of the "adult learner," I would like to begin by briefly discussing the key variables which might differentiate adult learners from the 18-22 year old student. In reality, adults possess characteristics that are both similar and dissimilar to traditional, 18-22 year old learners. In my opinion, the teaching techniques advocated by adult educators are also effective with traditional age students.
|
|||||||||
Periodicals Related to College TeachingWilliam E. Cashin, Victoria L. Clegg, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #28 Although there is a lot more talk about improving college teaching these days, only a minority of graduate programs offer courses or supervised training in college teaching. For those of us who have already earned our terminal degree, it is even less likely that we had the opportunity for such educational or training experiences. The only recourse has been and still is learning on the job. |
|||||||||
Writing a SyllabusHoward B. Altman, University of Louisville; William E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #27 Etymologically syllabus means a "label" or "table of contents." The American Heritage Dictionary defines syllabus as outline of a course of study. We agree that a syllabus should contain an outline, and a schedule of topics, and many more items of information. However, we suggest that the primary purpose of a syllabus is to communicate to one's students what the course is about, why the course is taught, where it is going, and what will be required of the students for them to complete one course with a passing grade.
Most of this paper will list suggestions from the literature about what information might be included in your course syllabus. It is extremely unlikely that you will include everything listed. We suggest two criteria in deciding what information to include. First, include all information that students need to have at the beginning of the course; second, include all information that students need to have in writing. We believe that any really important information about the course should be in writing. However, it may be better to introduce some information later in the term, e.g., the details of a required project. To attempt to include every single item of importance in your syllabus is to insure that the students will not read much of it. To the experienced teacher, probably few of the items listed in this paper are likely to come as a surprise. However, Lowther, Stark, and Martens (1989) found in their interviews with faculty and in their examinations of syllabi that "obvious" items were often omitted. At the very least we hope this IDEA Paper will provide the reader with a useful organization of what is already known. |
|||||||||
Improving Instructors' Speaking SkillsNancy R. Goulden, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #24 Almost any oral, teacher-directed instruction involves public speaking whether the primary mode is lecture, guided discussion, recitation, or directing small group work (Lowman, 1994). Instructors can enhance the effectiveness of oral instruction through attention to both the verbal and non-verbal aspects of their teaching. Many educators spend a great deal of time and effort in choosing the organization, examples, and words they plan to use in class. (See IDEA Paper No. 14, Improving Lectures; Cashin, 1985). However, this thoughtful preparation may be wasted, or at least undermined, if the content is delivered poorly. Researchers have found that students whose teachers use dynamic, vocally skillful delivery are more successful at both comprehending and retaining information than are students whose teachers have weak presentation skills (beighley, 1952; Centra, 1977; Coats & Smidchens, 1966; Vohs, 1964). |
|||||||||
Student Ratings of Teaching: Recommendations for UseWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #22 This IDEA Paper compliments IDEA Paper No. 20 (Cashin, 1988) which summarized the research on student ratings of teaching and concluded that student ratings tend to be reliable, valid, relatively unbiased, and useful. If you accept those conclusions, then you will want to use that information in developing or revising your on-campus student rating system, or in selecting one that is commercially available. This paper attempts to derive recommendations based on that literature - a literature which, although sometimes based on empirical studies, is more often based on experience in using student ratings. (In some cases the recommendations may be based primarily on my personal opinion; those cases will be noted.)
The recommendations are divided into five sections: general considerations, the overall system, the student rating form itself, its administration, and its interpretation. In order to keep both the length of the text and the number of references manageable. I will presume that the reader is generally familiar with IDEA Paper No. 20. Therefore, I will usually not detail its conclusions and nor cite all of the references. |
|||||||||
Defining and Evaluating College TeachingWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #21 Almost every institution of higher education states somewhere that the primary purpose of the institution is teaching. While commitment to teaching quality certainly varies across institutions, every college or university does evaluate teaching in some way. More and more, higher education's various publics (students, parents, legislators, and others) are insisting that we pay more than lip service to this commitment, that teaching be evaluated seriously and substantively. The time has come for higher education to put its actions where its rhetoric is. I believe that the vast majority of colleges and universities are willing to do this. The problem is: how? This paper begins by reviewing the various kinds of data that have been used to evaluate college teaching both for personnel decisions and for improvement. An examination of those data suggests that the evaluation of college teaching has been based on a very incomplete definition of teaching. I will suggest a more comprehensive definition -- or description -- of college-level teaching. Several aspects or facets will be listed for each area. Possible sources -- mainly people -- will also be suggested, sources that might provide a basis to evaluate each area. |
|||||||||
Student Rating of Teaching: A Summary of the ResearchWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #20 " ... class-averaged student ratings are (a) multidimensional; (b) reliable and stable; (c) primarily a function of the instructor who teaches a course rather than the course that is taught; (d) relatively valid against a variety of indicators of effective teaching; (e) relatively unaffected by a variety of variables hypothesized as potential biases; and (f) seen to be useful by faculty as feedback about their teaching, by students for use in course selection, and by administrators for use in personnel decisions." (Marsh, 1984, p.707) There are more than 1300 articles and books dealing with research on student ratings of teaching. The last IDEA Paper on the subject, entitled Reliability, Validity, and Generalizability of Student Ratings of Instruction, was written seven years ago (Aubrecht, 1981). No major study published since then has challenged that paper's conclusions, but a number of excellent reviews of the literature provide further support. This paper will attempt to summarize the conclusions of the major reviews of the student rating literature from Costin, Greenough, and Menges (1971) to the present. That literature is extensive and complex. Obviously, a paper of six pages can offer only broad, general conclusions. I strongly recommend that the interested reader consult the various reviews and their individual references for details. The ERIC descriptor for student ratings is "student evaluation of teacher performance." I suggest that it is much more useful to think of these student reactions (and peer "evaluations," etc.) as data that need to be interpreted. Using the term "student ratings" rather than "student evaluations" helps to distinguish between the people who provide the information (sources of data) and the people who interpret it (evaluators). Viewing student ratings as data rather than as evaluations may also help to put them in proper prospective. Writers about faculty evaluation are almost universal in recommending the use of multiple sources of data. No single source of data, including student rating data, provides sufficient information to make a valid judgment about teaching effectiveness. |
|||||||||
Improving College GradingGerald S. Hanna and William E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #19 A grade is "an inadequate report of an inaccurate judgment by a biased and variable judge of the extent to which a student has attained an undefined level of mastery of an unknown proportion of an indefinite material." (Dressel, 1983, p.12) It is well known that the level of achievement sufficient for an A in one section of a college course taught by one instructor may well yield a C in a section taught by another instructor. It clearly is undesirable for a student's grade to be an artifact of who taught the course and/or what other students were enrolled in the section. Ideally, grades should be pure measures of achievement, uncontaminated by extraneous factors. This IDEA Paper will first focus on the advantages and disadvantages of two common grading methods. From an analysis of the virtues and vices of these prototypic methods, as set of goals or criteria for grading systems will be derived. Next, the concept of anchor measures will be presented. Finally, three illustrative grading systems will be presented and evaluated by use of the above criteria. Portions of the following discussion are based on the rationale presented in IDEA Paper No. 18 (Hanna & Cashin, 1987). Readers who have not studied this earlier IDEA Paper are encouraged to do so before proceeding. |
|||||||||
Matching Instructional Objectives, Subject Matter, Tests, and Score InterpretationsGerald S. Hanna and William E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #18 "Sometimes there is nothing more practical than a good theory."
Attributed to Kurt Lewin During the past two decades there have been several highly visible developments in education, e.g., behavioral objectives, criterion-referenced test interpretations, the mastery model of instruction, performance-based instructional programs, competency testing, and accountability. This paper is an attempt to weave these various developments into a meaningful model of inter-relationships and to explore the implications of that model for teaching, testing, and grading. The paper treats seven major topics:
|
|||||||||
Improving Essay TestsWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #17 "... it seems clear, even to the casual observer, that essay examinations still are widely used in spite of more than half a century of criticism by specialists in educational measurement ..." Coffman (1971, p.271) Like every assessment technique, essay tests have their advantages and limitations. The position taken in this paper is that essay tests, despite their limitations, have a number of strengths and, therefore, appropriate uses in higher education, as long as we are aware of the limitations. There is considerable agreement in the educational measurement literature about how essay tests can be improved. Many of these recommendations are based on experience; some of these recommendations are based upon empirical research. I have not cited the original research; interested readers can find the references in the standard educational measurement texts identified in the "References and Further Readings" at the end of this paper. |
|||||||||
Improving Multiple-Choice TestsVictoria L. Clegg, and William E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #16 "... the tendency in course examinations is to pose the question 'How much do you remember of what has been covered?' rather than 'What can you do with what you have learned?'" Dressel (1976, p.208) The classroom test is one of the most important aspects of the teaching-learning process, and designing the classroom test is one of the most demanding responsibilities facing college and university instructors. Unfortunately, most of us have had little, if any, preparation in the craft of writing tests: consequently, the process is not only difficult, it is also frustrating and often ineffective. Writing test questions will always be demanding, even for experienced instructors, but it will be less frustrating for those who know the techniques for writing specific types of items and have some guidelines for general test construction. The multiple-choice item has been chosen as the focus of this paper for three reasons. First, multiple-choice items can be written to evaluate higher levels of learning, such as integrating material from several sources, critically evaluating data, contrasting and comparing information. Second, multiple-choice items can be very useful for diagnostic purposes, for helping students see their strengths and weaknesses. Third, multiple-choice items are often used in college and university classes; therefore, it is especially important that instructors write them well. Although these strengths are shared by some other item types, the multiple-choice item is a powerful teaching-learning tool if the instructor has designed the item properly. |
|||||||||
Court Challenges to Tenure, Promotion, and Retention DecisionsPeter Seldin, Pace University |
IDEA Paper #12 Tradition has it that promotion and tenure decisions in higher education are made after careful deliberation and regard to due process. These decisions typically originate at the department level and are made mostly by peer evaluation. Unfortunately, in the real world promotion and tenure decisions are not always based on objective evidence. While no one would deny that academic worth is of core importance in personnel decisions, too often politics and personality also play a part. Not uncommonly a promotion and tenure committee member (even a chairperson) thumbs through personnal files seeking negative information on which to hang an adverse prejudgment.
Change is now in the wind. Promotion and tenure decisions in higher education are no longer private affairs within departments. They are subject to affirmative action guidelines and court scrutiny. Increasing number of discrimination complaints are forcing committee members to justify publicly decisions that were once left to their private discretion. |
|||||||||
A Guide to Clinical Performance TestingNeal Whitman, University of Utah Medical Center |
IDEA Paper #07 College teachers often are faced with the task of evaluating the ability of students to apply knowledge and skills to real or simulated problems. The general term for this type of evaluation is performance testing. Performance tests are used in many areas such as music, art, physical education, foreign languages, drama, and the biological, physical, social, and medical sciences. McBeath and Lassen (1978) point out that the scope of performance testing is broad and far reaching, with applications in many aspects of university education which involves students in intellectual processes beyond memorization. This article addresses performance testing in the "natural setting." Specifically, attention is given to clinical evaluation in the health professionals. Although this discussion and the examples provided relate directly to the health professions, college teachers of other disciplines should find many of the ideas generalizable to their own areas. |
|||||||||
Improving Academic AdvisingThomas J. Grites, Stockton State College |
IDEA Paper #03 Few people in higher education, especially students, would argue that academic advising has been one of higher education's top priorities. In some ways, this is surprising because the majority of higher education's efforts are concentrated on undergraduate programs enrolling students who lack experience with the complexities of academia. Although it has not enjoyed a top-priority status, academic advising has been and continues to be the primary means of helping students benefit from an array of programs offered on most college and university campuses. The literature suggests that good advising programs result in better student attitudes, self-concept, and intellectual and interpersonal development. Increases in academic performance, FTE's, and retention also result (Glennen, 1976; Hadley, 1976; Noel, 1976). Obviously, good advising benefits institutions as well as students. |
|||||||||
Motivating StudentsWilliam E. Cashin, Kansas State University |
IDEA Paper #01 Few college teachers would deny the premise that motivated students are easier to teach, or that the students who are interested in learning do, in fact, learn more. Anyone who has taught a required course can attest to the fact. Studies of the IDEA system (e.g., Cashin and Perrin, 1978) have consistently found that the students' motivation (measured by their response to the statement "I had a strong desire to take this course") has a potent influence on their ratings of how much they have learned. A recent study at Kansas State University using a wide range of courses (Clegg, 1979) found that even though students answer this item at the end of the course, those responses correlate highly (r = 0.93) with their answer to the same question asked the first day of class. This means that student remember their initial level of motivation. This does not mean that teachers need suffer through a course with whatever level of motivation, or unmotivation, that greets them the first day of class. |
|||||||||
Go to: Dr. Vat's FST Homepage | Recommended Articles (Page 1 | 2 )
Kam Hou Vat, PhD
Faculty of Science and Technology
University of Macau
Av. Padre Tomas Pereira, Taipa,
Macau, China
Room: N327C
Telephone: (Office) (853) 8397-4379, (Mobile) (853) 66501747
Fax: (Office) (853) 28838314 or (Home) (853) 28832731
Email: fstkhv
Personal Homepage: http://www.fst.umac.mo/en/staff/fstkhv.html
Downloadable: CV | Short Profile
Visitor Counter: