1 / 16

BA 9200 Course Overview

BA 9200 Course Overview. Teaching Philosophy. Students Abilities. Course Level and Scope. Desired Learning Levels. Write Course and Topic Objectives. Select Effective Teaching Methods. How Students Learn. The Lecture. Testing and Grading.

egan
Download Presentation

BA 9200 Course Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BA 9200 Course Overview Teaching Philosophy Students Abilities Course Level and Scope Desired Learning Levels Write Course and Topic Objectives Select Effective Teaching Methods How Students Learn The Lecture Testing and Grading Active Learning

  2. Overview Goals of SEs Home Grown Instruments SEI used by RCB Norming Factors/Items Alternatives

  3. Goals • Improve student learning/achievement. • Provide feedback to instructor. • Improve teaching effectiveness. • Evaluate teaching performance.

  4. Questions from GSU “Home grown” Instrument (Circa 1980) Instruments Contained 10-12 Questions. Departments Could Use Their Own Versions. • Did Your Instructor Dress Professionally? • Was Your Instructor Friendly? • Did Your Instructor Arrive on Time? • Did You Like Your Instructor?

  5. ArgumentsAgainst Instruments 1. Only Colleagues Can Evaluate Faculty. • Good Agreement Between Students, Alumni and Instructors As to Effective and Ineffective Instructors. Techniques for Evaluating and Improving Instruction. Edited by L. Aleamoni, San Francisco, Jossey Bass Publishers, 1987.

  6. Arguments Against Instruments 2. Students Cannot Make Consistent Judgments about Faculty. • Test-retest reliability of .83 in 100 courses for two sets of student ratings one year apart. • Test-retest reliability of .60 to .80 five years apart. American Educational Research Journal. 17, 1980, p. 219 237

  7. Arguments Against Instruments 3. Student Ratings Often Popularity Contests. • Not If Questions Taken From Five or Six Factors that Are Consistently Related to Effective Adult Teaching and Improved Student Learning Literature. Centra. J. Determining Faculty Effectiveness: Assessing Teaching, Research, and Service for Personnel Decisions and Improvements. San Francisco, Jossey Bass, 1979.

  8. Arguments Against Instruments 4. Student Ratings Do Not Improve Teaching. • True Even for Reliable and Valid Instruments. • Norming Procedure that Allows For “Fair” Comparisons Among Faculty. • Must Also Have Faculty Improvement Support System in Place. Cohen, P. A. (1980). Research in Higher Education. 13, p. 321

  9. Arguments Against Instruments 5. Extraneous Factors Affect Ratings. • Initial Liking for Subject Has Greatest Impact on Global Evaluation of Instructor (r = .50). • Class Size Effect is U-Shaped with Highest Evaluation for Small (< 20) and Large Classes (> 100). • Expected Grade Has Little Impact on Global Evaluation of Instructor (r = .20).

  10. Arguments Against Instruments 6. Student Ratings Not Related to Student Achievement. • +.60 to +.90 Correlations Between Global Ratings and Performance on Common Final. Frey. “Student Ratings of Teaching: Validity of Several Rating Factors.” Science. 182, 1973, P. 83 85.

  11. Minimizing Objections to SEIs • Instrument Must Be Valid. • Centra Identified Five or Six Factors that Valid Instrument Must Contain. • Cohen Identified Two of Five Factors that Also Affect Student Achievement. • Instrument Must Be Reliable. • Minimum of Four to Five Questions per Factor To Achieve Minimum Cronbach Alpha Coefficients. • Need Norming Procedure.

  12. Norming Method for GSU Instrument

  13. A Norming Method: Item Analysis Output

  14. Final Comments on SEIs • Teachers Should Rate Themselves • Differences in Item Scores between self and student ratings. • Do Mini-Evaluation Weekly. • Use 2 Minute Papers. • Qualitative Feedback is Very Useful. • Formally Evaluate Teaching at Midterm. • Use RCB Instrument or similar one. • Then Seek Advice from “Expert” on How to Improve.

  15. Alternatives to SEI: Self/Peer Assessment Provide Teaching Portfolio that Contains: • Statement of Teaching Philosophy. • Syllabi and Exams from Courses. • Classroom Innovations with Results. • Peer Evaluations. • Attendance at Faculty Development Programs. Seldin. P. The Teaching Portfolio : a Practical Guide to Improved Performance and Promotion /Tenure Decisions, Boston, M.A. : Anker Publishing Company, Inc., 1991.

  16. BA9200 Course Overview Teaching Philosophy Students Abilities Course Level and Scope Desired Learning Levels Write Course and Topic Objectives Select Effective Teaching Methods How Students Learn The Lecture Testing and Grading Active Learning

More Related