SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract

(Higher Education Abstracts publishes abstracts exclusively. Therefore, to see this abstract, please click the “View Full Article (HTML)” or “Get PDF” link.)

Gunersel, A. B., Barnett, P., & Etienne, M.Promoting Self-Authorship of College Educators: Exploring the Impact of a Faculty Development Program. Journal of Faculty Development, 2013, 27 (January) pp. 35-44.

At an urban university, a faculty development program, consisting of 12 three-hour sessions, was designed to train the faculty participants to teach graduate-level pedagogy in their disciplines by imparting information on how people learn and research-based teaching practices. Interviews held with 12 faculty participants showed that the program affected the participants' self-authorship as educators by giving them the opportunity to exercise the epistemological, interpersonal, and intrapersonal dimensions of self-authorship. The interpersonal dimension exercised a particularly strong influence on the other two dimensions through interacting with colleagues from different disciplines, engaging with diverse opinions, and sharing experiences on teaching practices. (67 ref)—Teaching and Learning Center, Temple University.

Hamlett, T., & Bold, M.Faculty Development for Online Institutions. Assessment Update, 2013, 25 (September-October) pp. 6 ff.

Faculty members teaching at the American College of Education, an online institution, responded to a questionnaire about whether their developmental needs were being met. The majority of the respondents reported engaging in the required developmental activities, although they were dissatisfied with the activities offered to them. They complained about the absence of mentoring by a more senior faculty member, advice on how to develop a stronger online teaching presence, and developmental activities linked to their specific field. (2 ref)—American College of Education.

Hampton-Farmer, C., et al. Growing a Faculty Writing Group on a Traditionally Teaching-Focused Campus: A Model for Faculty Development. Journal of Faculty Development, 2013, 27 (January) pp. 56-62.

At a comprehensive university with growing expectations for faculty scholarship, faculty writing groups supported tenured faculty who had published infrequently or not at all and new faculty trying to manage a heavy teaching load and the publication expectations for tenure. The writing groups, led by a trained facilitator, featured individual goal-setting, sharing individual productivity, informational handouts, and exchanging written work for peer review. The open-ended responses of the participants showed that they came to view the groups as a site for collaboration and building relationships rather than as a location for impersonal and systematic training. They participants also recognized the importance of the facilitator in creating a cohesive group. The tangible benefit from participation in the writing groups was a sharp increase in the number of publication-ready papers, which showed that the groups provided a bridge between the institution's traditional emphasis on teaching and the emerging research culture. (16 ref)—Findlay University.

Herman, Jennifer. Staffing of Teaching and Learning Centers in the United States: Indicators of Institutional Support for Faculty Development. Journal of Faculty Development, 2013, 27 (May) pp. 33-37.

In a study of 191 higher education institutions in all 50 states, benchmarking data were obtained on full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing levels in dedicated teaching, learning, and development units (TLDUs), which are administrative units that develop and implement faculty development programs. Three questions guided the study: (1) What are the current levels of FTE staffing TLDUs in the United States? (2) What are the ratios of FTE TLDU staffing to both total FTE student enrollment and FTE faculty? (3) How do these ratios differ by institutional control and Carnegie classification type? The results revealed a mean staffing level of 4.4 FTE staff per TLDU. The mean ratios were one FTE TLDU staff per 2,223 FTE students and one FTE TLDU staff per 108 FTE faculty members. The private institutions tended to have more TLDU staff per faculty member than did the public institutions, and the baccalaureate institutions had the lowest ratio of TLDU staff to faculty. (9 ref)—Niagara University.

Pastore, Donna L.Faculty Perspectives on Baldwin and Chang's Mid-Career Faculty Development Model. Journal of Faculty Development, 2013, 27 (May) pp. 25-32.

In a study at a large university in the Midwest, 17 faculty members participated in semi-structured interviews to determine the merit and applicability of the Mid-Career Faculty Development Model. Two questions guided this study: (1) What were the professors' perspectives regarding the three key facets (career reflection and assessment, career planning: short and long term goals, and career action/implementation) of the mid-career faculty development process? (2) What were the professors' perspectives regarding the three key facets (career reflection and assessment, short-term and long-term career planning, and career action/implementation) in the mid-career faculty development process? The findings provided positive support for the model, and the career development participants cited the importance of reflection and assessment, establishing goals, and developing career plans. The faculty focused more on short-term goals compared to long term goals, and they wanted flexibility in developing goals. (7 ref)—Ohio State University.

Sadler, Ian. The Influence of Interactions with Students for the Development of New Academics as Teachers in Higher Education. Higher Education, 2012, 64 (August) pp. 147-160.

In varied higher education settings, 11 new teachers participated in a qualitative, longitudinal study over a two-year period to investigate their development as teachers. The teachers described a shift in their teaching influenced, first and foremost, by their interactions with students. They described critical interactions that shaped their development as teachers. The feedback they received from students was often incidental and came from everyday interactions. (40 ref)—Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, York St. John University, United Kingdom.

Stes, A., et al. Effects of Teachers' Instructional Development on Students' Study Approaches in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 2013, 38 (February) pp. 2-19.

At a Belgian university, students in 42 courses, taught by teachers who enrolled in an instructional development program or similar colleagues not enrolled in the program, completed the Study Process Questionnaire before the start of the instructional development program and three months after its end. The results revealed the experimental group of teachers was not comparable to the control group in that the pretest results for the experimental group showed that the students taught by these teachers already used deeper approaches to study. The training, therefore, may not have produced much incremental improvement. In addition, the difference in the students' study approaches appeared more due to the differences between students with the same teacher rather than differences between teachers. The hypothesis that the students in the experimental group would demonstrate greater gains in deeper approaches to study than those in the control group was not supported. (29 ref)—Institute for Education and Information Sciences, University of Antwerp, Belgium.