Using What Faculty Say about Improving Their Teaching

1. Using What Faculty Say about Improving Their Teaching Presentation at the POD Annual Meeting, Portland, OR, October, 27, 2006 Thomas F. Nelson Laird, IUBJennifer Buckley, IUB Megan Palmer, IUPUI

2. But first…

3. Quiz: Teaching Improvement Activities What percent of faculty members reported participating in workshops? a) 64% b) 54% c) 44% d) 34%

4. Quiz: Teaching Improvement Activities What percent of faculty members reported participating in individual consultations? a) 15% b) 37% c) 59% d) 81%

5. Quiz: Teaching Improvement Activities What percent of faculty members reported participating in at least one type of activity? a) 76% b) 80% c) 84% d) 88% e) 92%

6. Quiz: Teaching Improvement Activities What percent of faculty members reported participating in 3 or more different types of activities? a) 38% b) 47% c) 56% d) 65% e) 74%

7. Overview • Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) • Teaching improvement items from 2006 • Teaching improvement results • How IUPUI is using this information • Where do we gofrom here?

8. AssessingStudent Engagement • National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) • Annual survey of first-year students and seniors at four-year institutions that measures students’ participation in educational experiences that prior research has connected to valued outcomes • Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) • Parallel survey designed to measure faculty expectations for student engagement in educational practices that are known to be empirically linked with high levels of learning and development • Beginning College Survey of Student Engagement (BCSSE) • Survey administered in the fall of students’ first year designed to measure students entering characteristics and the importance they place on student engagement

9. Why FSSE? • Institutions sought ways to include faculty in the discussion of effective educational practices • Several campuses demonstrated success with homegrown faculty surveys that paralleled NSSE • IU Center for Postsecondary Research pilot tested a faculty survey in 2003 and launched in 2004 • It is important to understand faculty expectations and perceptions as institutions seek to target areas of improvement

10. FSSE Administration • Third party administration--IU Center for Survey Research • Faculty surveyed in the spring • Institutions choose faculty to be surveyed • Questionnaire online • Survey options • Course-based questions • Typical student questions

11. FSSE Survey • Faculty perceptions of how often their students engage in different activities • The importance faculty place on various areas of learning and development • The nature and frequency of interactions faculty have with students • How faculty members organize class time

12. Frequency Distributions Item-level frequencies NSSE/FSSE Report Student/faculty frequency comparisons for similarly worded items No institutional comparisons Annual Report (FSSE is a component of the NSSE annual report) FSSE Reporting

13. FSSE 2006 • 131 institutions • 20% doctoral, 45% master’s, 35% baccalaureate • 52% private • Over 21,000 faculty respondents • 46% women • 16% faculty of color • 23% Professor, 22% Associate, 25% Assistant, 22% Lecturer/Instructor, 7% other • Average institutional response rate = 54%

14. Asking Faculty about Teaching Improvement

15. Additional Items in 2006 • During the current academic year, about how many times have you participated in teaching improvement activities of the following types? • Individual consultations • Classroom observations with feedback • Meetings with a small group of colleagues • Workshops • Web-based instructional programs • Campus-wide forums • Conference sessions

16. Additional Items in 2006 • How important is it that your institution provides services for you to improve your teaching in the following areas? • Incorporating active learning strategies • Developing students’ critical thinking/problem-solving skills • Improving student-faculty interactions • Facilitating classroom experiences with diversity • Using technology to improve student learning • Creating a supportive classroom environment • Assessing student engagement and learning

17. Faculty Teaching Improvement Results

18. Importance of Teaching Improvement Services • Faculty who tended to place greater (or less) importance on their institution providing teaching improvement services • Women • African, Asian, and Hispanic American faculty • Faculty from professional fields • Associate (-) and Full (-) professors

19. Importance of Services for Creating a Supportive Classroom Environment by Race

20. Importance of Services for Assessing Student Engagement and Learning by Rank

21. Participation in Individual Consultations • 59% of all faculty participated in individual consultations at least once • Faculty who tended to participate more (or less) • No meaningful differences observed

22. Faculty Participation in Individual Consultations by Course Level

23. Participation in Classroom Observations • 49% of all faculty participated in classroom observations at least once • Faculty who tended to participate more (or less) • Social science faculty (-)

24. Faculty Participation in Classroom Observations by Disciplinary Area

25. Participation in Meetings with Colleagues • 74% of all faculty participated in meetings with colleagues at least once • Faculty who tended to participate more (or less) • Women • Full-time faculty • Faculty teaching more undergraduate courses • Social science faculty (-)

26. Faculty Participation in Meetings with Colleagues by Number of Undergraduate Courses Taught

27. Participation in Workshops • 64% of all faculty participated in workshops at least once • Faculty who tend to participate more (or less) • Women • Full-time faculty • Education faculty

28. Faculty Participation in Workshops by Gender

29. Participation in Web-Based Programs • 31% of all faculty participated in web-based programs at least once • Faculty who tend to participate more (or less) • Faculty from Professional Fields • Education faculty • Faculty from “Other” fields

30. Faculty Participation in Web-Based Programs by Disciplinary Area

31. Participation in Campus-Wide Forums • 48% of all faculty participated in campus-wide forums at least once • Faculty who tend to participate more (or less) • Women • Full-time faculty • Education faculty

32. Faculty Participation in Campus-Wide Forums by Employment Status

33. Participation in Conference Sessions • 54% of all faculty participated in conference sessions at least once • Faculty who tend to participate more (or less) • Women • Full-time faculty • Education faculty • Biological science faculty (-)

34. Faculty Participation in Conference Sessions by Disciplinary Area

35. Teaching Improvement at IUPUI

36. IUPUI vs. National Results No Practical Difference • Individual consultations • Meetings with colleagues • Workshops • Web-based programs • Campus forums Slightly More Faculty at IUPUI Participate • Classroom Observations (IUPUI=63%, National=49%)

37. FSSE vs. IUPUI Institutional Data

38. Implications for IUPUI • Education • Increased web or print materials • Departmental workshops • Collaboration • FACET • Faculty Involvement • Faculty Council • P&T Workshops • Data Collection and Analysis • Record Keeping • Transparency • FSSE and Database Investigation

39. IUPUI Data Collection

40. Small Group Activity

41. Guiding Questions • From the presentation, what’s of most interest to you? • What have the results made you think about? • How is the information from the presentation useful to your practice?

42. Faculty Development Items and Presentation Feedback If you were running the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement, what questions would you ask about faculty development?

43. For More Information • Email: tflaird@indiana.edu jeabuckl@indiana.edu mmpalmer@indiana.edu • FSSE website: http://www.fsse.iub.edu • NSSE website: http://www.nsse.iub.edu Copies of papers and presentations, including this one, as well as annual reports and other information are available through the websites