Faculty Center for Excellence in Teaching

Exploring the Scholarship of Teaching . . . a booklet in 6 volume

 

For a pdf version of this booklet click here!

Volume 3 -Appropriate Methods
Table of Contents

Introduction to this Booklet by Sally Kuhlenschmidt

Method Selection Worksheet

Active Learning


Critical Thinking


Problem-based Learning


Case-based Learning


Collaborative Learning


Service Learning

Learning Communities Teaching in the New Millennium: Two Enduring Principles by Rob Byrd
Instructional Skills & Mastery Learning
The Roles of the Student in a Project-Based Engineering Curriculum by Joel Lenoir and John Russell
Instructor Methods and the Student Input to Teaching Evaluation (SITE) by Sally Kuhlenschmidt
Evaluation of this booklet --Appropriate Methods

Dear WKU faculty:

 In early fall 2000, we asked Western's faculty to provide us with brief (1 to 2 page) articles with citations discussing the methods they have found to be effective in their courses.  We were overwhelmed by the response. We received enough material not only for this booklet but for a second one as well,  Effective Presentation.

 We are so grateful to the faculty of WKU for their enthusiasm and contributions!
 

 In these pages, written by WKU faculty, you will find articles that represent the breadth of reflection about instructional activities. The articles range from very applied and explicit activities to deeply philosophical expressions regarding the fundamental principles.  Although they appear clothed in particular disciplines, if you read them all you will see general principles and ideas that can work for you regardless of content.  You may also discover how varied our teaching populations and objectives are but that we are united in our passion to involve our students in the learning process.

 This is not a cookbook, but more like a tour guide of all the places a teacher's heart and mind can go in the journey that is teaching.  It is an opportunity for you to connect with others, sharing your approach to instruction.
 
 

 This booklet -- Exploring the Scholarship of Teaching, Appropriate Methods, Vol. 3 --carries on the objectives of the prior two booklets in this series:
   1. to encourage us to be explicit in our choices as teachers
   2. to evaluate the effectiveness of our teaching process against the body of literature and      from our experiences as teachers
   3. to offer options for written reflection on teaching.

          Sally Kuhlenschmidt
          Center for Teaching and Learning
          Spring 2001

Table of Contents

*** "All works of scholarship, be they discovery, integration, application, or teaching, involve a common sequence of unfolding stages.  We have found that when people praise a work of scholarship, they usually mean that the project in question shows that it has been guided by these qualitative standards:

  1. Clear goals
  2. Adequate preparation
  3. Appropriate methods
  4. Significant results
  5. Effective presentation
  6. Reflective critique"
 

Glassick, Charles E.; Huber, Mary Taylor; & Maeroff, Gene I. Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass, 1997.

Table of Contents


Method Selection Worksheet
Use the following selected list of teaching methods to identify your overall approach and possible areas for exploration.  As you read them think of a particular course taught in recent terms. Place an "R" next to those you have regularly used in that course. Place an "A" next to those you have attempted once or twice. Place an "E" next to those you want to explore further.  In which area do you have the most checks? the least? Which one of your "E's" will you explore first?
 
 

_______________________________________________
(Class / Time Period)

1. Active Learning
(For more about these kinds of activities, see: Classroom Assessment Techniques by Thomas A. Angelo &  K. Patricia Cross.  Ask for this book at the Center for Teaching and Learning by this access number:  LB2822.75.A54).

 ___had students write a short response to a question
  and then share their responses with other students
 ___assigned one-minute paper at end of a lesson:
  ___asking for most important thing learned during a lesson
  ___requesting unanswered questions about material
   ___asking for muddiest point in course material
 ___had students complete a note-checking activity
  (See Thad Crew's article )
 ___administered a student background-knowledge probe
 ___had students fill out a misconception/preconception
  checklist
 ___had students complete a pro and con grid
 ___requested an analytic memo from students
 ___explained to students how to create applications cards
  ___administered a classroom opinion poll
  ___had students generate a concept map
  ___required journaling/double-entry notetaking
  ___helped students create focused autobiographical sketches
___had students fill out interest/knowledge/skills checklist
  ___instructed students in ways to self-assess their ways
   of learning
  ___had students create a productivity study-time log
  ___asked for email feedback
  ___administered a teacher-designed feedback form
  ___taught group instructional feedback techniques
  ___taught use of student quality control circle/s
  ___instructed groups in ways to perform self-evaluations
  ___other______________________________________
 

2. Critical Thinking
 ___engaged in Socratic dialogue with students
 ___taught students methods to logically analyze a content problem/question
  (See Joe Glaser's article)
 ___had students use an analysis method to prepare an argument for or against a proposition in an oral or written project
 ___organized student debates on selected content topics
 ___brought complex world questions/problems which relate to content area into classroom for discussion/analysis
 ___had students debate/argue in writing for a position on a content topic or broader topic that  they were not in sympathy/
  agreement with
 ___had students critically evaluate sources of documents (popular media, Webpages, journals, etc.)
 ___other______________________________________

3. Problem-based Learning
 ___used simulations or games to explore concepts
 ___used problem-based questions to generate discussion, papers, projects, etc.
 ___used the Critical Incidents Technique to help students to collect/generate options/information
  (See Elizabeth Shoenfelt's article , under Job Analysis  Project)
 ___encouraged discussion of a problem of an international, national, or regional nature
 ___other______________________________________

4. Case-based Learning
 ___presented case studies to students for discussion/resolution
 ___used case studies of regional, national, or international interest
 ___had students share their answers to problems or assigned cases
 ___used cases to place students in touch with the community (See Lynn Austin's article at:
  http://www.wku.edu/teachingapmeth.htm)
 ___used role-playing to explore concepts such as cause/effect, understanding individual attitudes & motivation
 ___used existing Websites as sources for case studies
 ___used directed case studies to achieve specific learning objectives (See Byron Sleugh's article)

 ___used prepared and student-written scripts to illustrate concepts, explore ways judgements are made, etc.
 ___other______________________________________
 

5. Collaborative/Cooperative Learning
 ___used student group presentations
 ___paired students to discuss questions and then share their responses with other students
 ___formed small groups to discuss questions and then share responses with other students
  (See Johnston A.K. Njoku's article)
 ___interacted with students via computer: email,  discussion boards, chatrooms
 ___paired students for an activity
 ___paired students across regional or international borders using Internet communication tools
 ___used small groups organized only for 1 or 2 lessons
 ___used small base groups organized at the beginning of the semester
 ___used small base groups reorganized at least once during a semester
 ___used peer teachers
 ___other______________________________________

 For what purpose(s) did you use cooperative or collaborative learning techniques?
  ___to discuss questions posed by the student
  ___to work on an assigned project
  ___to serve as study groups
  ___to discuss assigned readings, problems, or cases
  ___other______________________________________
 

6. Service Learning
 ___had students working with community-based projects
  Some examples of community-based projects/activities:
  ___used instructional technology tools to provide a service (e.g., building a Website for a community organization)
  ___had students do a needs assessment of a particular content-related population
  ___had students develop a plan of action from the needs assessment
  ___used student research/fieldwork to expand the knowledge base about a given group/organization (e.g., senior
    citizens in Bowling Green) or location/event (Big Band concerts at Lost River Cave in the forties)
  ___had students schedule time to assist a particular group with an activity/problem
   (e.g., child care essentials for young, single parents given by nursing students)
   (See Beverly Siegrist & Susan Jones' article)
  ___other______________________________________

7. Learning Communities
 ___had students pair with students from another course to complete a presentation/writing/research project
 ___engaged in partnership with teachers and students at other schools using technology to unite them
 ___coordinated assignments with another teacher from a different content area (e.g., writing
  assignments in English paired with research projects in biology)
 ___with the cooperation of administration, entire groups of students channeled through a series
  of courses over a number of years (e.g., a class of Freshman Seminar students all taking
   the same introductory English and biology classes one semester and continuing as a group
   the second semester with an introductory history class and a second biology class, etc.)
  (See Carol Graham's article)
 ___other______________________________________

8. Instructional Skills
 ___created a clear, well-organized syllabus, including
  University requirements  and written learning objectives
  for student activities, shared with students
 ___ (see Syllabus Checklist in CTL booklet--Syllabus Ideas:
  helping students make it to the top. Checklist available
  only in the hard copy of the booklet.)
 ___set desired tone for course in first lesson
 ___prepared and organized materials, handouts, demos in advance
 ___reviewed, in class, material from previous lesson
 ___provided outline/overview of lesson
 ___used legible & well-designed media presentation,
  (such as chalkboard, transparencies, PowerPoint)
 ___prepared students for next lesson, summarizing or
  raising a question to consider
 ___responded effectively to student questions about material
 ___encouraged student-to-student interaction
  ___used expressive voice tone and gestures, personal
  photo on Webpage
 ___offered a variety of learning activities within a lesson (e.g.,
  alternate 15-20 minutes of lecture with discussion or demo)
 ___paused every 15-20 minutes for extended activities such as
  Q&A, ungraded quiz, or demonstration
 ___preceded activity, such as video, with a clear introduction and
  followed it with integration into the lesson
 ___prepared well-constructed exams & other evaluation activities
 ___returned carefully graded work quickly
 ___brought course to effective conclusion
 ___arrived early and waited after for informal conversation
 ___encouraged prosocial behavior in students
 ___responded effectively & appropriately to student misbehavior
 ___paused, when making  a presentation, at least 10-20
  seconds for questions
 ___other______________________________________
 

9. Mastery Learning
 ___used self-paced projects/activities with definite student goals/objectives
 ___used effective evaluation methods
 ___worked with individual students until they learned the material
 ___other ______________________________________
 
 

Other Instructional Types.  If there are teaching techniques you use other than those indicated above, please describe them:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Instructional Change
Compared to five years ago (or for new faculty, the first semester you taught), have you changed the way you teach?       ___yes   ___no
If yes, how?
 
 
 

What prompted the change?
 ___response to end-of semester student evaluations
 ___informal conversations with students
 ___informal conversations with faculty colleagues
 ___collaboration with faculty colleagues
 ___on-campus workshops with outside consultants
 ___on-campus in-house workshops
 ___departmental peer review of teaching
 ___peer review of teaching by someone outside my department
 ___department chair review
 ___off-campus workshop/conference on teaching in my discipline
 ___interdisciplinary off-campus workshop/conference on teaching
 ___my own reading and reflection
 ___other ______________________________________
 

Your Teaching Philosophy.
Look back at the items marked "R."
How representative of your overall teaching
philosophy are the methods you chose?
 ___very representative
 ___somewhat representative
 ___somewhat unrepresentative
 ___very unrepresentative

 Is the class you chose and the way you taught it
 representative of your teaching style?
 ___very representative
 ___somewhat representative
 ___somewhat unrepresentative
 ___very unrepresentative
 

Which one of the items marked "E" will you try next week?
 
 
 

In which area do you have the most checks?
 
 
 

The fewest?
 

Table of Contents


Teaching in the New Millennium: Two Enduring Principles
by Rob Byrd, Computer Science

 

Teaching is a profession. And by definition, a profession is an "occupation requiring advanced training ... and usually involving mental rather than manual work" (Webster's, 1953). Mastering and employing techniques which result in reducing the profession of teaching to a manual skill is not only demeaning for teachers, but ineffective as well. Whether explicitly stated elsewhere in this booklet or not, no teaching method described herein is meant to be mechanically implemented. Without the expertise and wisdom of a qualified professional - that's you and me - a technique is no more than a checklist of how to bake brownies or assemble a bicycle.

Of course, the primary purpose of teaching is not actually teacher teaching, but student learning. In this light, two core principles become visible which, if internalized, will hopefully increase the effectiveness of every teaching method described in this booklet. One core principle I hold to is that, as a teacher, I am a leader of students, not a manager of students or classrooms. The difference may seem insignificant now, but my intent is to demonstrate how their difference is essential in fulfilling the purpose of teaching. And, in an attempt to be completely removed from any educational taxonomy or jargon for which you may already have a preconceived understanding, I will label the other core principle true learning. My goal in teaching is not to simply increase a student's knowledge of a subject, but to increase his/her understanding and capacity for subsequent independent learning of that subject. Without accomplishing this goal I am effectively handicapping the future graduate and not providing to society what it has already paid for, competent and self-sufficient citizens.

Paradoxically there are techniques, or at least guidelines, for implementing these core principles. In Part A: Leadership, not just Management, I explain the difference between leadership and management by introducing transformational/transactional leadership. I then give some quick examples of what leadership may look like in the classroom. Part B: Learning in Spite of Technology contains some probing questions and an illustration of how I have tried to create true learning in a laboratory situation. These articles may at first seem to some readers negative or even antagonistic, but are intended to only make all of us think about how we practice our profession of teaching and to consider ways of making our mission more successful.

Part A: Leadership, not just Management
Managing is about efficiency, resources, and organization. In a classroom all of these are necessary. Any unorganized teacher who has to track grades for 150 students per semester will not last. Leadership, on the other hand, is about people, and inspiring them to do more than they would have done otherwise - more than they thought they could do. The concept of transformational/transactional leadership probably (Bass, 1990) evolved from the Ohio State Studies, where the leadership concepts Task Initiation and Individualized Consideration originated (Seltz & Bass, 1990). While the terms and definitions vary from study to study, transformational leadership is generally considered to have four elements: Charismatic Leadership, Inspirational Leadership, Intellectual Stimulation, and Individual Consideration.

Specifically, Charisma is the aspect of leadership that provides a clear vision and a sense of mission for the follower. It instills pride in the organization, giving a sense of belonging to the followers. Charismatic leaders gain respect and complete trust of their followers. Inspirational Leadership communicates expectations to followers and uses symbols to focus efforts toward the mission. An inspirational leader has the ability to express important purposes in simple ways. Intellectual Stimulation promotes intelligence, independent thinking, rationality, and the development of problem solving skills. Individualized Consideration is the personal attention given just at the right time in order to carry along the follower's interest, understanding of, and commitment toward the vision or mission. Coaching, advising, and showing consideration even for personal/private concerns of the follower are part of this concept as well. Different researchers (e.g., Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Burns, 1978; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Yukl, 1989) have given slightly different descriptions of transformational leadership than presented above, but all present it as a leadership style that encourages cultural change and the adoption of a new mindset.

Transactional leadership includes elements which could be considered as more traditional management styles, namely, Contingent Reward, Management by Exception (Active and Passive), and Laissez Faire. First, the concept of Contingent Reward suggests that contracts (written or not) are required in order to get the follower to perform some task. If the task is performed according to the predefined agreement, then the reward is given to the follower. Leaders displaying Contingent Reward will recognize accomplishments. With the second concept, Active Management by Exception, a leader watches and searches for deviations from rules or standards and attempts to take corrective action. This characteristic will not allow for recognition of unexpected successes or accomplishments. One only looks for defects and the negative side of performance. Leaders practicing Active Management by Exception will, however, try to look for deviations before they occur or at least as they are occurring, and attempt to minimize the cost of the poor performance or incorrect action. Passive Management by Exception is characteristic of the leader who intervenes only if standards are not met. Laissez Faire, often considered a form of non-leadership rather than an element of Transactional leadership, would describe the one who avoids making decisions altogether. This leader would likely be out of the office whenever an important decision needs to be made.

While transactional leadership, including Contingent Reward and Management by Exception (Active and Passive), may not embody all aspects of management, it could generally describe several management roles and affect the outcomes of decisions regarding efficiency, resources, and organization. Researchers have repeatedly found in studies that transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership alone, calling the phenomenon the one-way augmentation effect (Bass, 1997). By leading students and not just managing classrooms, we can be effective as well as efficient. The concept of leadership presented here is not to be confused with the educational term Teacher as Leader, which generally entails taking on school-wide responsibilities, committees, bearing some of the administration's burden, etc. All those endeavors are fine, and I'm sure, constructive, but don't directly address the present discussion of leading students.

Is it necessary or even possible to be a transformational leader in the classroom? If our primary purpose is student learning, I don't see how we have a choice. Almost by definition, we will be practicing this leadership style as we increase understanding and capacity for subsequent independent learning. This can only be realized by changing the student - or more correctly - allowing the student to change and providing support and direction for that change. Some simple examples of how to practice transformational leadership follow.

Managers-only don't see the point in learning all the student's names. Leaders learn them and use them to show consideration for the individual. This small act instills great motivation and self-esteem in the student. Managers wouldn't ask hard, provoking questions during class time. It would only result in "dead air time" and not be efficient. Leaders ask those intellectually stimulating questions and don't get nervous when no one answers until after ten or fifteen seconds of quiet. It is only then that the students really believe the teacher wants a meaningful answer rather than a rote spout. When handled properly these situations often result in complete engagement of the students. Managers prepare lessons and present them: it's called being organized. Leaders also know the material in the lesson and communicate it to the students in whatever fashion necessary, even if it means using unrehearsed analogies to provide a clearer picture of the concept. Similarly, managers may put staying on schedule with their syllabus ahead of making sure the students understand the material. Leaders know that if today's material isn't understood, tomorrow's lesson won't mean anything anyway. Managers look at the clock to make sure they are going to finish their presentation in a timely manner. Leaders look into the eyes of the students to make sure there is still an open communication line, and adjust as necessary to keep the line open. Managers reward accomplishment with grades. Leaders additionally provide praise for effort irrespective of the accomplishment. Managers know they control the reigns because they turn in the grades. Leaders also foster a sense of community, allowing the students to take pride in knowing they had something to do with the success of the course....Well, I hope you get the idea.

There are, undoubtedly, some professors who are very skeptical about this type of charismatic, inspirational, wishy-washy hogwash. I have met them. But in my experience over the past several years, the more I try to become a transformational teacher, the more satisfying my work is, and the more effective college teacher I think I have become. Remember, transformational elements of leadership are to augment those of management, not replace them.

Part B: Learning in Spite of Technology
From the Internet to the electronic chalkboard and from ACT scores to computer lab manuals, technology is a dominant factor in every aspect of education. Is it possible to develop a computer-based computer lab with no direct "instructor" contact? Sure it is. Simply (ha ha) write a set of instructions in a clear enough format that all students can understand (after throwing away the concepts of learning styles and multiple intelligences), develop a software tutoring system to guide the learner through the exercise, and computerize a grading system which simultaneously evaluates the student's work and records a score in the teacher's grade book. But before fully committing to such a mythology methodology we need to determine its possible consequences.

It's one thing to mass produce rifles using an automated assembly line, but quite another to automate an assembly line of students using tutorials on a computer. Has education already gone too far in automating education? Employers expect their workers to think on their feet, yet teachers hand each student a calculator and implicitly say not to be bothered with quick recall or memorization. Managers want supervisors with effective verbal and written communication skills, yet teachers give multiple choice tests and students think word processing spell checkers correct homonym errors and other inappropriate word usage. And I apologize for not having time to joust every academic department, but I personally have been guilty on all charges listed above.

[Surprisingly,] I'm not blaming teachers. One cause for this behavior may be the external pressure for teachers to be more efficient, as opposed to being effective. Pressure to get students with ACT scores of 14 to learn the material just like every other student. Pressure to produce. Produce more research. Produce higher retention. Produce, produce, produce. Another source of degraded education is the evolution of the meaning of learning. Ages ago, learning (at the university level) meant gaining understanding as well as knowledge. That was the distinction between liberal arts schools and technical schools. Now, no matter what is stated in the university's mission statement or the department's degree program, bachelor's degrees are obtained by some students with less than four years of college knowledge and almost no understanding. How do they slip through? Just maybe, technology is not the silver bullet we were looking for to increase the level of true learning on campuses today. Since most of the constraints just described are not about to go away, what is a teacher to do?
Just by recognizing the ensuing technological barrage and its possible effect on true learning is a great start. Although I may have come down hard on technology, I think it is necessary to do so, given the overwhelming attention technology has recently been receiving. Every technology, whether ACT and IQ scores, pencil and paper, or a virtual university, is not either good or bad, but both. And it is impossible to determine the final outcome of a newly unleashed technology. Secondly, by continually refocusing on our core principles of leadership and true learning, we can develop strategies which incorporate technology, yet make the student aware that their true learning is what is important to us.

Here is an example from my computer science lab taught primarily to freshmen and sophomore students. One teaching method could be (and in some schools is) to write specific instructions for the student to follow, down to the specific command or keystroke. By the end of the two-hour lab he/she will have completed the assignment and "learned" the topic. The student passes with an A and thinks the material is understood. It never really was comprehended. Another, less extreme, method would be to explain in great detail the primary operations and algorithmic processes which must be properly coded to complete the assignment in the most efficient manner, even though a class lecture has already been presented on the topic. This may work in some cases, but prevents the student from thinking for him/herself and usually doesn't prepare the student for harder problems unless given the proper algorithm the next time as well. A third method could be to only define the problem to be solved and give total freedom to develop any operations and processes which may (or may not) solve the problem.

The roles of the teacher in the most recently described method would be to empower students to be creative, vigilantly watch as frustration levels get high enough to produce true learning, and to intervene before frustration is high enough to break the student's spirit. When students accomplish something that seems difficult to them there is enormous intrinsic reward, increased motivation, and a craving to be challenged even greater the next time. Students want to be challenged. They also want to be recognized by a real person, not a computerized "_Super job! Bob_." Furthermore they want to know you, the teacher, are in the trenches with them. (Sounds kinda like leadership, doesn't it?) A lab assistant in the computer lab is good, but not the same as a caring professor in the computer lab who will immediately recognize when the student's program works. I don't mean to patronize at all - it's human nature, but they want to be able to say, "Look Dad, I did it." What's really pathetic, I feel like a proud father and all I really did was encourage them when they didn't think they could do it. Sure, this method takes more energy out of a teacher. But the reward is well worth it. It's a phenomenon that technology can't reproduce for the student or for the teacher. I have applied this nontechnical, empowering approach to the other areas originally mentioned (math, multiple choice tests, and writing challenges) with similar success. When we understand that technology is not the cure-all, but a set of tools at our disposal to produce true student learning, our teaching will be effective and our methods will be appropriate.

 Bibliography
(For a complete bibliography on transformational leadership email rob.byrd@wku.edu)

Behling, O., & McFillen, J. M. (1996). A syncretical model of charismatic/transformational leadership. Group & Organization Management, 21, 163-192.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 19 - 31.
Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52, 130-139.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Basu, R., & Green, S. G. (1997). Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: An empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 477-499.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 36-51.
Kuhnhert, K. W. & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. Academy of Management Review, 27, 648-657.
Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.
Seltzer, J., & Bass, B. M. (1990). Transformational leadership: Beyond initiation and consideration. Journal of Management, 16, 693-703.
Tepper, B. J., & Percy, P. M. (1994). Structural validity of the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 734-744.
Wynne, E. A., & Ryan, K. (1997). Reclaiming our schools: Teaching character, academics, and discipline. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Table of Contents


 
 

Instructor Methods and the Student Input to Teaching Evaluation (SITE)
by Sally Kuhlenschmidt, CTL & Psychology

  How do these methods relate to the Student Input to Teaching Evaluation (SITE)? The following are some possible applications.

  Item 1: My instructor displays a clear understanding of course topics.
  Item 4: Performance measures are well-constructed.
While effective use of all the methods requires instructor ability, the Instructional Skills and Mastery Learning Approaches emphasize clarity of presentation. These approaches also give attention to construction and use of performance measures. The Problem-based and Case based approaches may be seen positively because the evaluation is consist with real-world developments.

  Item 2: My instructor displays interest in teaching this class.
 Using a variety of methods not only helps the student learn, but also helps the teacher to retain his/her motivation for loving the material. A change in orientation by using a new method can reinvigorate ones feeling about a course, giving us a new puzzle to resolve.

  Item 3: My instructor is well-prepared for class.
Booklet 2 in this series explored preparation to teach., but it is also pertinent for implementation of any of these methods. Trying these without adequate  preparation and thought will hinder performance in class and may lead to rejection of the method without give it a fair chance.

  Item 5: My instructor is actively helpful.
Implementation of all of the methods is improved  if you help the students adjust to the change. They have been well-trained to listen to lectures passively.  If you chose to implement the more active methods, expect to increase your helpfulness as your students adjust tot he change.

  Item 6: Overall, my instructor is effective.
Active learning approaches (most of the methods presented) are considered by experts and researchers to be the most effective forms of learning. Students learn.

  Item 7: My instructor treats me fairly with regard to race, age, sex, religion, national origin, disability, and sexual orientation.
Offering a variety of learning experiences provides options to meet our increasingly diverse student population.
Table of Contents

Evaluation of this booklet --Appropriate Methods

1. Please circle  below how effective this booklet was in helping you explore effective methods for instruction.
 

Not Effective                                                  Very Effective

1           2           3         4        5         6          7
 

2. What were the two most helpful sections of this booklet?
 
 
 
 
 
 

3. What were the two least helpful sections of this booklet?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

4. What teaching behavior have you changed or plan to change as a result of this booklet?
 
 






Thank you. Please send this evaluation in Campus Mail to:
Center for Teaching and Learning, Cravens Ground Floor

Back to Table of Contents

Volume 1 -- Clear Goals
Volume 2 -- Adequate Preparation
Back to this Booklet Index