The MORE model for Faculty Development and Instructional Improvement

1. The MORE model for Faculty Development and Instructional Improvement Walt Wager

2. Purpose: To discuss the diffusion and adoption of instructional innovations

3. Background • Sabbatical research in Fall 2006 – I visited 15 research intensive universities to gather information about their faculty development programs. • Identifying Faculty Development Programs

4. The Universities Chosen 3 western universities: University of New Mexico Arizona State University University of Arizona 6 Midwest universities: University of Wisconsin – Madison Notre Dame Purdue Indiana University Kansas State University University of Kansas 3 Southeast universities: University of Georgia Clemson University of South Carolina 3 Florida universities University of Florida University of Central Florida University of South Florida

5. Reorganized • 3 western universities: ~ staff of Fac. Dev. Unit • University of New Mexico 2.5 • Arizona State University 5 – interim director • University of Arizona 5 • 6 mid-west universities: • University of Wisconsin – Madison (no single unit) • Notre Dame 4 – Newly hired director • Purdue 4 +(2) .5 fac • Indiana University 4 units Lib, Bus, Edu, A&S • Kansas State University 2 • University of Kansas 2 + staff • 3 Southeastern Universities • University of Georgia 4 • Clemson 2 + student assistant • University of South Carolina 4 –Newly hired director • 3 Florida Universities • University of Florida 1 - Looking for director • University of Central Florida 4 • University of South Florida 3 • FSU 4 + GA

6. Best practices NM • What does your faculty development program do that you feel has the most impact on instruction? University of New Mexico – (undergoing reorganization, recently retired director replaced with ½ time director) • We have an International Teaching Assistant Resource Center. Has an eight week curriculum for international teaching assistants followed by a series of non-credit workshops.

7. Best practices ASU • What does your faculty development program do that you feel has the most impact on instruction? Arizona State – • Learner-centered Education Program. Faculty participants receive $1000 salary supplement grants to revise courses making them “learner centered” and to provide a report about their revisions that can be shared with other faculty and grant sponsors (Arizona Board of Regents) • Rookie Camp for new faculty that meets two hours weekly for six weeks, exposing new faculty to a variety of instructional techniques, strategies and ideas to encourage active learning.

8. Best practices UA • What does your faculty development program do that you feel has the most impact on instruction? Univ. of Arizona – • New faculty instructional resources orientation. A campus walk to each of the resource centers – Library, Learning Technologies Center, Disability Resources Center, University Teaching Center, Dean of Students Office and Provost’s Office • ITAs take the “speak test”, and participate in a one semester course College Teaching for ITAs – required.

9. Best practices UG • What does your faculty development program do that you feel has the most impact on instruction? Univ. of Georgia – • Lilly Teaching Fellows Program. Started with a grant in 1984, now university supported. 2-4 Year faculty apply for 2 year experience – 10 fellows and 10 mentor faculty chosen from 30-40 applicants. 1st year Fellows get $2000 per year, mentors $1000 per year. They meet every two weeks. The second year they meet at a retreat and get up to a $2000 project grant. • Senior Teaching Fellows program – 8 faculty are chosen from the senior teaching fellows – they meet for a day and each receives $2500 for one year to support their teaching and research and for participating in the program.

10. Best practices Clemson • What does your faculty development program do that you feel has the most impact on instruction? Clemson, SC • Laptop initiative – Joint effort between Ed Tech Services and Office of Teaching Effectiveness and Innovation, provides faculty with laptop, and encourages them to participate in symposia and learning communities. • Classroom interviews using focus groups. As a part of faculty interim evaluations (upon request), FD conducts focus group with class on what is going well, and what can be improved. Feedback is shared with the instructor. • There are best practices from the other universities I visited and if you would like to read about them you can get a copy of my sabbatical report at: http://mailer.fsu.edu/~wwager/sabreport.doc

11. Conclusions • What is a best practice at one university will not necessarily be a best practice at your college. • Most “best practices” are someone’s pet project. That is they are very motivated to see it succeed, but if it doesn’t you will never know about it. • Very few of the “best practices” are evaluated with regard to how they influenced teaching or learning. • Attendance at most faculty development functions at most universities is low. The faculty development center is a resource for faculty, like a library is a resource for students. As long as faculty feel they are doing “good enough” with their teaching, they won’t seek out the resource. • Four characteristics seem to accompany best practices: Motivation, Opportunity, Resources, and Evaluation

12. M • M stands for Motivation, in this case for the faculty to improve their teaching effectiveness. At most of the universities I visited this is not a very high priority among faculty. Research and publication is a much higher priority. In fact, department chairs will tell faculty they shouldn’t waste their time going to teaching enhancement seminars. A few faculty, hired solely to teach, are more interested in being effective and efficient. • Research on Teaching (SOTL), is not encouraged except at a few universities where it is considered a “Best Practice”. Publication in the discipline, in professional journals indexed in the Science Citation Index is valued more highly. • Incentives for excellent teaching exist, but their are too few, given too infrequently to motivate faculty to seek help to improve their teaching.

13. MO • O stands for Opportunity • Even if faculty are motivated, either intrinsically or extrinsically, they perceive they are simply too busy to spend the time that course development requires. • Opportunity is mostly about time and how you spend it. If given the time, more faculty might choose to spend it on improving instruction.

14. MOR • R is for Resources • Even if motivated, and provided the opportunity, many faculty still need help thinking about what to do and getting the help they need to improve instruction. • The faculty development center staff is a professional resource that can help. Other resources such as materials or equipment might be needed.

15. MORE • E stands for Evaluation • A Faculty Development Center is an expensive resource. The Center has to be concerned with evaluating the results of the services and resources it provides, in terms of instructional and institutional effectiveness. • Evaluation is an important component of action research. You have to be able to measure learning outcomes and determine if the instructional interventions are making a difference.

16. Institution – Best Practice Matrix

17. MORE • Putting all of these elements together gives you more. More chance that effort will be spent on instructional improvement, and that the documented results will support institutional goals. • For a paper on the MORE model go to: http://mailer.fsu.edu/~wwager/more model.doc