Abstract
Higher education is undergoing a major transformation that encompasses both philosophy and practice. Where it was once believed that subject matter expertise alone was a sufficient basis for teaching at the university level, there is now a growing recognition that teaching expertise is also necessary to ensure that students develop a deep, lasting understanding of that subject matter. As a result, institutions of higher education have placed increasing emphasis on professional development to help university faculty members compensate for their lack of specific training in teaching. This book describes one such response—a university teaching and learning center based within a disciplinary unit and focused specifically on teaching within interrelated disciplines.
My real interest in professional development in teaching is ultimately to find new and better ways to engage my students and to help them learn and do better.
The CLFS Teaching and Learning Center has supported my work in improving my teaching. I work closely with the TLC on projects, and have benefited from invited speakers and workshops. I have also had the opportunity to work with faculty in teaching communities… Discussions in these communities have supported and motivated my interest in teaching. I like being involved in a common mission.
Faculty members reflecting on the importance of professional development in teaching and the role of the TLC
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
In 2010, the College of Chemical and Life Sciences merged with the College of Computer, Mathematical, and Physical Sciences to become the College of Computer, Mathematical, and Natural Sciences (CMNS). The TLC continues to serve the four biology and chemistry departments at present, but is beginning to scale up its services to the entire CMNS.
- 2.
By faculty members, we refer to full-time and part-time faculty members, including both non-tenure-track instructional and tenured/tenure-track faculty.
References
Andrews, T. M., Leonard, M. J., Colgrove, C. A., & Kalinowski, S. T. (2011). Active learning not associated with student learning in a random sample of college biology courses. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10, 394–405.
Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Association of American Universities (AAU). (2011). Five year initiative for improving undergraduate STEM education. http://www.aau.edu/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=12590
Austin, A. E. (1994). Understanding and assessing faculty cultures and climates. In M. K. Kinnick (Ed.), Providing useful information for deans and department chairs (New Directions for Institutional Research, pp. 47–63). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Austin, A. E. (1996). Institutional and departmental cultures and the relationship between teaching and research. In J. Braxton (Ed.), Faculty teaching and research: Is there a conflict? (New Directions for Institutional Research, pp. 57–66). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization to the academic career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 94–122.
Austin, A. E. (2011). Promoting evidence-based change in undergraduate science education. A paper commissioned by the National Academies National Research Council Board on Science Education. http://dev.tidemarkinstitute.org/sites/default/files/documents/Use%20of%20Evidence%20in%20Changinge%20Undergraduate%20Science%20Education%20%28Austin%29.pdf
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Rinehart & Winston.
Bensimon, E. M., Ward, K., & Sanders, R. (2000). The department chair’s role in developing new faculty into teacher and scholars. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Bloom, B. S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longman.
Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chu, D. (2006). The department chair primer: Leading and managing academic departments. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowledge: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263–272.
Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogical creed. School Journal, 54, 77–80.
Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243–279.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London, UK: Falmer Press.
Fairweather, J. (1996). Faculty work and public trust: Restoring the value of teaching and public service in American academic life. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Fairweather, J. (2008). Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education: A status report for the National Academies National Research Council Board on Science Education. Commissioned paper for the national academies workshop: Evidence on promising practices in undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education.
Fernandez-Balboa, J. M., & Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 293–306.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of National Academic Science U S A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Freeman, S., Haak, D., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2011). Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10, 175–186.
Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., . . . Wenderoth, M. P. (2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6, 132–139.
Gates, S. J., & Mirkin, C. (2012). Engage to excel. Science, 335(6076), 1545.
Geddis, A. N., Onslow, B., Beynon, C., & Oesch, J. (1993). Transforming content knowledge: Learning to teach about isotopes. Science Education, 77(6), 575–591.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and its impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Golde, C. M., & Dore, T. M. (2001). At cross purposes: What the experiences of doctoral students reveal about doctoral education. Philadelphia, PA: Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from www.phd-survey.org
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., . . . Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304(5670), 521–522.
Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching: W.H. Freeman & Company in collaboration with Roberts & Company Publishers.
Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(3), 273–292.
Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984.
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2008). Physics faculty and educational researchers: Divergent expectations as barriers to the diffusion of innovations. American Journal of Physics, 76(1), 70–91.
Injaian, L., Smith, A. C., German Shipley, J., Marbach-Ad, G., & Fredericksen, B. (2011). Antiviral drug research proposal activity. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 12, 18–28.
Jensen, J. L., & Lawson, A. (2011). Effects of collaborative group composition and inquiry instruction on reasoning gains and achievement in undergraduate biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10, 64–73.
Kitchen, E., Bell, J. D., Reeve, S., Sudweeks, R. R., & Bradshaw, W. S. (2003). Teaching cell biology in the large-enrollment classroom: Methods to promote analytical thinking and assessment of their effectiveness. CBE Life Sciences Education, 2, 180–194.
Knight, J. K., & Wood, W. B. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. CBE Life Sciences Education, 4, 298–310.
Leaming, D. R. (1998). Academic leadership: A practical guide to chairing the academic department. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Lederman, N. G., & Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Reconceptualizing secondary science teacher education. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, L., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Massy, W., Wilger, A., & Colbeck, C. (1994). Department cultures and teaching quality: Overcoming “hallowed” collegiality. Change, 26, 11–20.
National Research Council (NRC). (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies.
Park, S., & Oliver, S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 261–284.
Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York, NY: Routledge.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Available at www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf
Senkevitch, E., Marbach-Ad, G., Smith, A. C., & Song, S. (2011). Using primary literature to engage student learning in scientific research and writing. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 12, 144–151.
Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 3–36). York, UK: Macmillan.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Smith, D. C., & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 1–20.
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Krauter, K., & Knight, J. K. (2011). Combining peer discussion with instructor explanation increases student learning from in-class concept questions. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10, 55–63.
Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus, G. F., & Kellaghan, T. (2000). Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (Vol. 49). Berlin, Germany/New York, NY: Springer.
Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 99–110.
Udovic, D., Morris, D., Dickman, A., Postlethwait, J., & Wetherwax, P. (2002). Workshop biology: Demonstrating the effectiveness of active learning in an introductory biology course. Bioscience, 52, 272–281.
van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–695.
Walker, J. D., Cotner, S. H., Baepler, P. M., & Decker, M. D. (2008). A delicate balance: Integrating active learning into a large lecture course. CBE Life Sciences Education, 7, 361–367.
Wieman, C. (2007). Why not try a scientific approach to science education? Change. http://www.changemag.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/September-October%202007/index.html
Wieman, C., Perkins, K., & Gilbert, S. (2010). Transforming science education at large research universities: A case study in progress. Change. http://www.changemag.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/March-April%202010/transforming-science-full.html
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marbach-Ad, G., Egan, L.C., Thompson, K.V. (2015). Discipline-Based Professional Development. In: A Discipline-Based Teaching and Learning Center. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01652-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01652-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-01651-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-01652-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)