Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consultation for Individuals and Groups of Faculty

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Discipline-Based Teaching and Learning Center

  • 994 Accesses

Abstract

Many faculty members recognize the superiority of student-centered approaches over traditional teacher-centered approaches for teaching and learning, but this awareness has not translated into widespread adoption of student-centered teaching approaches (Dancy and Henderson, Barriers and promises in STEM reform. Paper presented at the commissioned paper for National Academies of Science workshop on linking evidence and promising practices in STEM undergraduate education, Washington, DC, 2008; Henderson et~al, Preliminary categorization of literature on promoting change in undergraduate STEM. Paper presented at the facilitating change in undergraduate STEM symposium, Augusta, MI, 2008) (Marbach-Ad et al., 2014). Many factors impede implementation of these approaches, such as expectations of content coverage, departmental norms, and student resistance, as well as instructor time and resource constraints (Dancy and Henderson, Barriers and promises in STEM reform. Paper presented at the commissioned paper for National Academies of Science workshop on linking evidence and promising practices in STEM undergraduate education, Washington, DC, 2008; Henderson and Dancy, Increasing the impact and diffusion of STEM education innovations. Paper presented at the National Academy of engineering forum – the impact and diffusion of transformative engineering education innovations, New Orleans, LA2011). Personalized consultation can help faculty members overcome these barriers to implement changes in their courses (Hativa, Res High Educ 36(4):377–413, 1995). In the previous chapters, we described large-scale professional development activities, such as seminars and workshops, that familiarize faculty members with recommended practices. However, by its nature, such professional development programming is designed to appeal to a broad audience. Consultation complements these more generalized activities by helping faculty members overcome the idiosyncratic challenges inherent to applying recommended practices in the context of their classes. In this chapter, we describe our approach to consulting for individuals and groups of faculty, including Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen, M. J. (2003). Assessing academic programs in higher education. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2011). Vision and change: A call to action. Washington, DC: AAAS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, D., Brown, C., Kluger-Bell, B., & Hunter, L. (2009). Creating hybrid communities using inquiry as professional development for college science faculty. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(6), 68–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

  • Austin, A. E., & Sorcinelli, M. D. (2013). The future of faculty development: Where are we going? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 133, 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, A. E., Sorcinelli, M. D., & McDaniels, M. (2007). Understanding new faculty: Background, aspirations, challenges, and growth. In R. Perry & J. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 39–89). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwma-Gearhart, J. (2012). Engaging STEM faculty while attending to professional realities: An exploration of successful postsecondary STEM education reform at five SMTI institutions. APLU/SMTI paper 5. Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cathcart, L. A., Stieff, M., Marbach-Ad, G., Smith, A. C., & Frauwirth, K. A. (2010). Using knowledge space theory to analyze concept maps. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 97, 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dancy, M., & Henderson, C. (2008). Barriers and promises in STEM reform. Paper presented at the commissioned paper for National Academies of Science Workshop on linking evidence and promising practices in STEM undergraduate education, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, P. W. (2006). Faculty development opportunities and learning communities. In N. Simpson & J. Layne (Eds.), Student learning communities, faculty learning communities, & faculty development (pp. 63–80). Stillwater, OK: New Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, R. M. (2004). The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(3), 217–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finelli, C. J., Daly, S. R., & Richardson, K. M. (2014). Bridging the research-to-practice gap: Designing an institutional change plan using local evidence. Journal of Engineering Education – Special Issue on the Complexities of Transforming Engineering Higher Education, 103(2), 331–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finelli, C. J., Pinder-Grover, T., & Wright, M. C. (2011). Consultations on teaching. Using student feedback for instructional improvement. In C. Cook & M. Kaplan (Eds.), Advancing the culture of teaching at a research university: How a teaching center can make a difference (pp. 65–79). Herndon, VA: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, N. D., & Pollock, S. J. (2005). Replicating and understanding successful innovations: Implementing tutorials in introductory physics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, R. (2012). Achieving excellence in engineering education: The ingredients of successful change. London, UK: The Royal Academy of Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching: W.H. Freeman & Company in collaboration with Roberts & Company Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hativa, N. (1995). The department-wide approach to improving faculty instruction in higher-education: Qualitative evaluation. Research in Higher Education, 36(4), 377–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C., Beach, A., Finkelstein, N., & Larson, R. S. (2008). Preliminary categorization of literature on promoting change in undergraduate STEM. Paper presented at the Facilitating Change in Undergraduate STEM symposium, Augusta, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. (2011, February 7–8). Increasing the impact and diffusion of STEM education innovations. Paper presented at the National Academy of Engineering Forum – The impact and diffusion of transformative engineering education innovations, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). The use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 8(2), 020104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hora, M. T. (2012). Organizational factors and instructional decision-making: A cognitive perspective. Review of Higher Education, 35(2), 207–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, N. (2003). Does mid-semester feedback make a difference? The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapper, C., & Piccinin, S. (1999). Consulting about teaching: An overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 79, 3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kressel, K., Bailey, J. R., & Forman, S. G. (1999). Psychological consultation in higher education: Lessons from a university faculty development center. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 10(1), 51–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakshamanan, A., Heath, B. P., Perlmutter, A., & Elder, M. (2011). The impact of science content and professional learning communities on science teaching efficacy and standards-based instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 534–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layne, J., & Froyd, J. (2006). Faculty learning communities: Engaging faculty on the topic of learning. In N. Simpson & J. Layne (Eds.), Student learning communities, Faculty learning communities, & faculty development (pp. 81–102). Stillwater, OK: New Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazerson, M., Wagener, U., & Shumanis, N. (2000). Teaching and learning in higher education, 1980–2000. Change, 32, 12–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Briken, V., El-Sayed, N., Frauwirth, K., Fredericksen, B., Hutcheson, S., …Smith, A. C. (2009). Assessing student understanding of host pathogen interactions using a concept inventory. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 10, 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Briken, V., Frauwirth, K., Gao, L. Y., Hutcheson, S. W., Joseph, S. W., …Smith, A. C. (2007). A faculty team works to create content linkages among various courses to increase meaningful learning of targeted concepts of microbiology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6(2), 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., McAdams, K., Benson, S., Briken, V., Cathcart, L., Chase, M., …Smith, A. (2010). A model for using a concept inventory as a tool for students’ assessment and faculty professional development. CBE Life Science Education, 9, 408–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Schaefer Ziemer, K. L., Thompson, K. V., & Orgler, M. (2013). New instructor teaching experience in a research-intensive university. Journal on Centers for Teaching and Learning, 5, 49–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Shaefer-Ziemer, K., Orgler, M., & Thompson, K. (2014). Science teaching beliefs and reported approaches within a research university: Perspectives from faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenna, A. F., Froyd, J., King, C. J., Litzinger, T., & Seymour, E. (2011, February 7–8). The complexities of transforming engineering higher education. Paper presented at the National Academy of Engineering Forum – The impact and diffusion of transformative engineering education innovations, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShannon, J., Hynes, P., Nirmalakhandan, N., Venkataramana, G., Ricketts, C., Ulery, A., & Steiner, R. (2006). Gaining retention and achievement for students program: A faculty development program. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 132, 204–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K. C., Marbach-Ad, G., Thompson, K. V., Shields, P., & Fagan, W. F. (2009). MathBench biology modules: Web-based math for all biology undergraduates. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38, 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penny, A. R., & Coe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of consultation on student ratings feedback: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 215–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quimby, B. B., McIver, K. S., Marbach-Ad, G., & Smith, A. C. (2011). Investigating how microbes respond to their environment: Bringing current research into pathogenic microbiology course. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 12, 176–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redish, E. F., Bauer, C., Carleton, K. L., Cooke, T. J., Cooper, M., Crouch, C. H., …Zia, Z. (2014). NEXUS/Physics: An interdisciplinary repurposing of physics for biologists. American Journal of Physics, 82, 368–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverthorn, D. U., Thorn, P. M., & Svinicki, M. D. (2006). It’s difficult to change the way we teach: lessons from the integrative themes in physiology curriculum module project. Advances in Physiology Education, 30, 204–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S. (2008, June 30). Linking evidence and learning goals. Paper presented at the National Academies of Sciences. Workshop – Evidence on promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) Education, workshop 1, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirum, K., Madigan, D. L., & Klionsky, D. (2009). Enabling a culture of change: A life sciences faculty learning community promotes scientific teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38, 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorcinelli, M. D. (1988). Satisfaction and concerns of new university teachers. In J. D. Kurfiss (Ed.), To improve the academy (pp. 121–131). Stillwater, OK: POD/New Forums Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Addy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Bolton, MA: Anker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tagg, J. (2010). Teachers as students: Changing the cognitive economy through professional development. Journal on Centers for Teaching and Learning, 2, 7–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, K. V., Chmielewski, J. A., Gaines, M. S., Hrycyna, C. A., LaCourse, W. R., & Bauerle, C. (2013). Competency-based reforms of the undergraduate biology curriculum: Integrating the physical and biological sciences. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12, 162–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Gili Marbach-Ad, Laura C. Egan & Katerina V. Thompson

Authors
  1. Gili Marbach-Ad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura C. Egan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katerina V. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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). Consultation for Individuals and Groups of Faculty. In: A Discipline-Based Teaching and Learning Center. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01652-8_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation