CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …

Tiêu đề

Measures matter: Evidence of faculty development effects on faculty and student learning

Tác giả

Willett G.; Iverson E.R.; Rutz C.; Manduca C.A.

Năm xuất bản

2014

Source title

Assessing Writing

Số trích dẫn

DOI

10.1016/j.asw.2013.12.001

Liên kết

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84893352187&doi=10.1016%2fj.asw.2013.12.001&partnerID=40&md5=dc42f5255195760352335fb648218aaf

Tóm tắt

In this paper, a team of researchers explores the benefits and challenges of using rubrics for analyzing faculty development influences on teaching strategies and student writing outcomes. Fine-grained rubrics, aligned with local faculty development practices and institutional conditions, proved more successful at identifying particular changes in practice than generic rubrics or holistic analyses of writing. Nonetheless, the complexity of tracing faculty development into student learning calls for a combination of context-dependent methods. The Tracer Project - a collaboration between a Midwestern Liberal Arts College (Carleton College or "CC") and a large State University (Washington State University or "WSU") - applies mixed methods to assess the effects on student learning of programs to teach faculty about writing across the curriculum, quantitative reasoning, and critical thinking.This paper is an invitation to other researchers to learn from the Tracer Project's journey and to continue to develop approaches that will reveal faculty development effects on their campuses. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

Từ khóa

Assessment; Critical thinking; Learning outcomes; Quantitative reasoning; Rubrics; Writing across the curriculum

Tài liệu tham khảo

Condon W., Kelly-Riley D., Assessing and teaching what we value: The relationship between college-level writing and critical thinking abilities, Assessing Writing, 9, pp. 56-75, (2004); Connolly M., Millar S., Using workshops to improve instruction in STEM courses, Metropolitan Universities, 17, pp. 53-65, (2006); Ebert-May D., Batlzi J., Weber E.P., Designing research to investigate student learning, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4, pp. 218-219, (2006); Ervin A.M., Applied anthropology: Tools and perspectives for contemporary practice, (2005); Fullan M., The new meaning of educational change, (2001); Garet M.S., Porter A.C., Desimone L., Birman B.F., Yoon K.S., What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers, American Educational Research Journal, 38, 4, pp. 915-945, (2001); Hamp-Lyons L., Condon W., Assessing the portfolio: Principles for practice, theory, and research, (2000); Haswell R.H., Contrasting ways to appraise improvement in a writing course: Paired comparison and holistic. ERIC ED 294 215, (1988); Haswell R.H., Gaining ground in college writing: Tales of development and interpretation, (1991); Hoellwarth C., Moelter M.J., Knight R.D., A direct comparison of conceptual learning and problem solving ability in traditional and studio style classrooms, American Journal of Physics, 73, 5, pp. 459-463, (2005); Iverson E., Manduca C., McLaughlin J.A., Macdonald R.H., Enhancing your teaching and developing new leadership: Impact of the On the Cutting Edge professional development program, Eos., 86, 52, (2005); Laursen S., Hunter A.B., Seymour E., Thiry H., Melton G., Undergraduate research in the sciences: Engaging students in real science, (2010); Macdonald R.H., Manduca C., Mogk D.W., Tewksbury B.J., On the Cutting Edge: Improving learning by enhancing teaching, Invention and impact: Building excellence in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, (2004); Middlecamp C., Chemistry in context: Evidence, goals, and gaps. Commissioned paper, Promising Practices-Innovations in Undergraduate STEM Education, Board of Science Education, (2008); Rutz C., Condon W., Iverson E.R., Manduca C., Willett G., Faculty development and student learning: What is the relationship?, Change, pp. 42-49, (2012); Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering, (2012); Spellings Commission, A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education, (2006); Rhodes T., Assessing outcomes and improving achievement: Tips and tools for using rubrics, (2010); White E.M., Response: Assessment as a site of contention, Assessment of writing: Politics, policies, practices, (1996); White E.M., Teaching and assessing writing, (1998); Williamson M.M., Pragmatism, positivism, and program evaluation, Assessing writing across the curriculum: Diverse approaches and practices, (1997); Wolcott W., Legg S.M., An overview of writing assessment: Theory, research, and practice, (1998)