Some Research: Common Characteristics of New Faculty Boice

1
Some Research Common Characteristics of New
Faculty (Boice)

• equated good teaching with good content (cake
  demonstration)
• practiced defensive teaching (to avoid student
  complaints), primarily concerned that students
  would complain about content errors
• received student evaluations that fell below
  their expectations, and blamed results on
  external factors (invalid rating systems, poor
  students, unfavorable class times and sizes)

2
Common Characteristics, cont., 2 of 3

• were slow to reach high levels of comfort,
  efficiency, and student acceptance
• did not seek help
• experienced a sense of loneliness and lack of
  collegial acceptance had difficulty establishing
  productive contacts with supportive colleagues

3
Common Characteristics, cont., 3 of 3

• had time management as a central problem
• admitted to being over prepared (more material
  than could be covered)
• rushed to complete many classroom tasks, often at
  the expense of student participation
• spent 30 hours/week on class preparation
• spent far less time on scholarly writing
  (proposals and papers) than needed for PT

4
Quick Starters
Those new faculty (5-10) who during their
first 2-3 years

• wrote enough proposals and papers for strong
  progress toward PT
• scored in top quartile of peer and student
  ratings of teaching
• scored in top quartile of self ratings of their
  enjoyment and comfort levels as teachers

How did they do it?
5
Unlike most new faculty, quick starters

• reduced time spent preparing courses (after the
  first semester, averaged 1-1.5 hours of
  preparation per hour of class time)
• spent more time on scholarly and grant writing (3
  hours or more per week)
• integrated their research into their
  undergraduate classes

6
Quick starters, cont., 2 of 3

• discussed teaching with their colleagues
• sought support from mentors and faculty
  development programs, averaging 4 hours per week
  on discussions of research and teaching
• were satisfied with supportiveness and competence
  of both their colleagues and their students

7
Quick starters, cont., 3 of 3

• lectured at a relaxed pace
• encouraged student participation

Summary Quick starters were effective,
efficient, and satisfied.
8
Development Model
Adapted from Situational Leadership
D3
Relationship
D2
Starting Point
D4
D1
Information
9
Does this stuff work?

• Do students learn more?
• Are students more satisfied?
• Do faculty teach better?
• Are faculty more effective, efficient, and
  satisfied (quick starters)?
• Do we help faculty succeed?

10
Outcomes Course Evaluation Scores
of Course
of Instructor
11
Quotes from TC graduates
It makes me much more efficient in preparing
lectures. My preparation time was reduced
from 12-15 hours/lecture to 4-5 hours/lecture
with better feedback from students.
12
Quotes, cont.
It gave me tools and confidence to take
charge of my curriculum and my class. It
inspired me to get off the content treadmill
and to enjoy teaching and effectively educating
others in my field.
13
Quotes, cont.
The opportunity to participate in an
atmosphere where issues related to teaching could
be discussed with others who have similar
doubts, fears, and successes was very
beneficial.
14
Quotes, cont.
I am more relaxed. I feel more comfortable in
the classroom. My undergraduate advising has
improved.
15
Summary of Some Outcomes

• ICES scores improved
• ICES scores were better than nonparticipating
  peers
• Participants were more satisfied with their
  teaching (focus groups and questionnaires)
• Participants enjoyed and benefited from
  camaraderie (focus groups and questionnaires)