Discipline-Specific Compared to Generic Training of Teachers in Higher Education

A recurrent theme arising in the higher education sector is the suitability and effectiveness of generic versus discipline-specific training of university teachers, who are often recruited based on their disciplinary specialties to become teachers in higher education. We compared two groups of participants who had undergone training using a generic post-graduate certificate in higher education (PGCertGeneric) versus a discipline-specific course in veterinary education (PGCertVetEd). The study was conducted using a survey that allowed comparison of participants who completed PGCertGeneric (n=21) with PGCertVetEd (n=22). Results indicated that participants from both PGCertGeneric and PGCertVetEd considered teaching to be satisfying and important to their careers, valued the teaching observation component of the course, and identified similar training needs. However, the participants of the PGCertVetEd felt that the course made them better teachers, valued the relevance of the components taught, understood course design better, were encouraged to do further courses/reading in teaching and learning, changed their teaching as a result of the course, and were less stressed about teaching as compared to the PGCertGeneric participants (p<.05). It is likely that the PGCertVetEd, which was designed and developed by veterinarians with a wider understanding of the veterinary sector, helped the participants perceive the training course as suited to their needs

A cross-cultural comparison of student learning patterns in higher education

Marambe, K. N., Vermunt, J. D., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2012). A cross-cultural comparison of student learning patterns in higher education. Higher Education, 64(3), 299-316. doi:10.1007/s10734-011-9494-zThe aim of this study was to compare student learning patterns in higher education across different cultures. A meta-analysis was performed on three large-scale studies that had used the same research instrument: the Inventory of learning Styles (ILS). The studies were conducted in the two Asian countries Sri Lanka and Indonesia and the European country The Netherlands. Students reported use of learning strategies, metacognitive strategies, conceptions of learning and learning orientations were compared in two ways: by analyses of variance of students' mean scale scores on ILS scales, as well as by comparing the factor structures of the ILS-scales between the three studies. Results showed most differences in student learning patterns between Asian and European students. However, many differences were identified between students from the two Asian countries as well. The Asian learner turned out to be a myth. Moreover, Sri Lankan students made the least use of memorising strategies of all groups. That Asian learners would have a propensity for rote learning turned out to be a myth as well. Some patterns of learning turned out to be universal and occurred in all groups, other patterns were found only among the Asian or the European students. The findings are discussed in terms of learning environment and culture as explanatory factors. Practical implications for student mobility in an international context are derived

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

Background: Research at the secondary and postsecondary levels has clearly demonstrated the critical role that individual and contextual characteristics play in instructors’ decision to adopt educational innovations. Although recent research has shed light on factors influencing the teaching practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty, it is still not well understood how unique departmental environments impact faculty adoption of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) within the context of a single institution. In this study, we sought to characterize the communication channels utilized by STEM faculty, as well as the contextual and individual factors that influence the teaching practices of STEM faculty at the departmental level. Accordingly, we collected survey and observational data from the chemistry, biology, and physics faculty at a single large research-intensive university in the USA. We then compared the influencing factors experienced by faculty in these different departments to their instructional practices. Results: Analyses of the survey data reveal disciplinary differences in the factors influencing adoption of EBIPs. In particular, the physics faculty (n = 15) had primarily student-centered views about teaching and experienced the most positive contextual factors toward adoption of EBIPs. At the other end of the spectrum, the chemistry faculty (n = 20) had primarily teacher-centered views and experienced contextual factors that hindered the adoption of student-centered practices. Biology faculty (n = 25) fell between these two groups. Classroom observational data reflected these differences: The physics classrooms were significantly more student-centered than the chemistry classrooms. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that disciplinary differences exist in the contextual factors teaching conceptions that STEM faculty experience and hold, even among faculty within the same institution. Moreover, it shows that these differences are associated to the level of adoption of student-centered teaching practices. This work has thus identified the critical need to carefully characterize STEM faculty’s departmental environment and conceptions about teaching before engaging in instructional reform efforts, and to adapt reform activities to account for these factors. The results of this study also caution the over generalization of findings from a study focused on one type of STEM faculty in one environment to all STEM faculty in any environment

Investigating the myth of the relationship between teaching and research in higher education: A review of empirical research

Despite the widespread belief in a positive influence of research on education, the empirical evidence is lacking (Hattie and Marsh 1996). Several authors have questioned the appropriateness of the operationalisation of both aspects of the relation between teaching and research. This article takes a closer look at the research questions in empirical studies on the nexus between teaching and research and examines the used variables and their measurement techniques. The study reveals that the used variables and their operationalisation are diverse as well as limited. There is for example a diversity in the investigated population, the level of analysis (individual faculty, department, institutions), the nature of the institutions investigated or the questionnaires used. The rationalisa-tion of both teaching and research is limited. Student learning or the way research is integrated into teaching are virtually absent and the measurement of research is mostly confined to the quantity of the research output. This calls for a more systematic research agenda in which student learning is investigated along with more fine grained measures of teaching and in which the relation of these two indicators and the research proficiency of faculty are looked at.status: publishe