The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 2
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
The Graduate Student Teaching
Experience
By Joel Deshaye, Bridges co-editor and program
Assistant
Graduate students are the faculty members of the future. They are valued by
universities not for their tuition dollars (which are meager compared with their more
numerous undergraduate counterparts) but for their contributions as researchers,
teachers, and colleagues in academic departments. University culture has
everything to gain by ensuring that graduate students are at the forefront of
administrator and faculty considerations.
With this issue of Bridges, we focus on the challenges and opportunities facing
graduate students. On the one hand, graduate students are facing increasingly
difficult choices as funding becomes more competitive and job markets continue to
grow sluggishly. Many graduate students are realizing that the outcomes of their
degrees might be very different that what they wanted when they enrolled. On the
other hand, some universities offer remarkable courses and workshop series for
graduate students. Our own Teaching & Learning Centre is proud to offer two of the
best, with a third in the works: GSR 989: Introduction to University Teaching and
The Scholarship of Teaching & Learning Program. They have already attracted the
attention of students who want to cultivate the teaching aspect of their future
careers. The third option is not here yet -- but keep reading for a preview of the
national, online Introduction to Teaching & Learning in Higher Education:
Transforming Teaching, Learning, & Self (ITHEO) course.
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/index.php
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 2
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
Recalculating the Teaching Equation
By Tereigh Ewert-Bauer, program Assistant
My daughter, a math whiz, told me (a particularly numerically-challenged individual)
that if I really applied myself, I could become better at math. I don't disagree with
her, but I did explain why I have so much difficulty with the subject. When I was a
child, my teachers taught me how to complete different mathematical problems, but
no one ever ensured that I understood why I should tackle different problems in
different ways. I could go back now, and try to learn the concepts behind the
formulas and equations, but that would be very difficult, especially since I would first
have to unlearn all the bad habits, strategies, and misconceptions I have for the
subject. To really become better at math, I would need to learn concepts and
process in the right order: I would need to start from scratch, marrying the hows and
whys of mathematics.
Post-secondary level instructors often find themselves in the same predicament I
face: as teachers, they have developed their skills in an illogical order that makes
teaching unnecessarily difficult, unsatisfying, and even unpleasant. For most of their
academic careers, they have become experts in their subject. Eventually, they are
given the opportunity to share what they know in a classroom. Some time after they
start teaching, (and if the resources are available to them), they may start to
investigate and develop tools and practical strategies for teaching. And sometimes
(and often well into their careers), post-secondary instructors realize that what they
have missed are the "whys" behind teaching and learning. At this point, however,
teaching has often become to them what math has become to me: a frightening,
frustrating, and seemingly unmanageable endeavour.
At no point in one's teaching vocation is it too late to explore the whys of teaching,
learning, and student-teacher relationships, but graduate student teachers are in the
optimal position to learn about, embrace, and experiment with instructional theories
and philosophies. Graduate teachers are especially impassioned about their
subjects because they are in the throes of researching and preparing their theses
and dissertations for defense. Their passion for their subject, and their desire to
share what they have worked so hard to learn, not only makes their presence in the
classroom potentially inspiring to undergraduates, but also motivates the graduate
student teachers themselves to find the most effective way to communicate what
they know.
Graduate student teachers are often quite inexperienced as teachers, but this is not
necessarily a disadvantage. Having not spent years teaching by their own devices
(not to negate the innovative and humane teaching practices developed by
countless instructors), these students have not developed poor or defensive
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/recalculating.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
teaching habits, cynical or jaded attitudes toward their students and teaching, and
have not held and reinforced misconceptions about the teaching vocation. Also,
because they occupy simultaneously the position of teacher and student, they have
the potential to empathize with their students.
Numerous post-secondary institutions around the world have recognized the
benefits of investing in their graduate students as future teachers, not only as
researchers. Courses for graduate students on teaching are varied in their length,
breadth, and scope, but all aim to create a generation of academics who are as
informed about teaching as they are about the subjects they teach. The University
of Saskatchewan administration, College of Graduate Studies and Research, and
the Graduate Student Association have enthusiastically invested both
philosophically and financially in graduate student teacher development through
courses such as "GSR 989: Introduction to University Teaching,"and in
programming such as the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning program, Graduate
Student Development Days, and other events at the GMTLC. The focus of these
programs is to support graduate students as they not only explore what tools the
graduate student teachers can use in the classroom, but why they choose the tools
they do, and how those tools are best applied.
Page 2 of 2
September 2004
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
August 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
The graduate students who leave our programs are well-rounded professionals,
knowledgeable about their discipline and sensitive to pedagogical issues. As we
have developed our graduate student teacher programs, we have put more and
more emphasis on the philosophical and reflective aspects of teaching as the
prerequisites for our more practical offerings. Countless times, nervous and
stressed graduate student teachers have come into the Teaching & Learning Centre
asking,"How can I give a good lecture?"or "How can I lead a class discussion?" or
"How should I lead my labs?" While we try to offer workshops and resources that
address these valid questions, we also encourage the new teachers to think about
other questions as well. We might challenge the new teacher to think about the first
question like this: Is a lecture the best way to communicate this information to this
group of students? Who are your students? Are there any students who might not
learn well in a lecture and why? How can you make sure that those students are
learning too? How interactive is your learning environment? How do power relations
play out in your lecture and the way you deliver it? Consequently, the teacher does
not take the "tool" (the lecture) and apply it without careful consideration. After
thinking about these teaching "whys" (instead of just the "hows"), the graduate
student teacher may decide that a lecture is not the best teaching tool for this
lesson. Or the teacher may decide that the lecture is the best tool, but that group
discussion should be included in the lecture. The teacher might rethink standing
behind the lectern (a potential physical and emotional distancing between the
teacher and students), and choose instead to move about the classroom, or may go
one step further and reconfigure the classroom into a discussion circle.
The graduate students who explore the philosophical and the practical aspects of
teaching together venture into their teaching futures with a unique gift: they don't
see teaching as a task (or chore!) to complete with a finite set of tools, but rather
see it as an opportunity to build relationships, and to connect with other human
beings through their shared passion for the subject. Their classrooms are not
prisons, or spaces to dread, but instead are spaces filled with wonder; they are
spaces filled with students. Failed lessons become opportunities to reflect and grow
as teachers, class discussions are not a loss of control but the opportunity to
connect with students and mutually deepen the understanding of a topic, and a
classroom conflict becomes a site for real change in thinking and beliefs. These
graduate students embark on their teaching not only as well-rounded professionals,
but also as well-rounded human beings.
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Room 50 Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A4
Tel: (306) 966-2231 Fax: (306) 966-2242
Copyright ©2005, The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness.
general inquiries | contact the webmaster
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/recalculating.php
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 3
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
Is My Fly Open?
By Ron Marken, former Director of the TLC
Until the fall of 1963, no one had ever called me "teacher." That title was bestowed
on me by the University of Alberta. In fact, I was not a teacher, but a Teaching
Assistant, an utter novice, working on my M.A. in English. The Graduate Chair
called me into his office one morning in September, gave me a syllabus, a class
schedule, and a small stack of textbooks. "Yours is a group of first-year Engineers.
See me if you have any difficulties. Remember, whatever happens, you know more
about English literature than they do." That five-minute meeting was my first and
only "workshop" on university teaching. Like a four-month old baby dropped into the
deep end of the swimming pool, I had to thrash out some instinctive dog-paddle
strokes - or drown. So I dog-paddled.
At some subconscious level, even as an undergraduate, I knew that I would
eventually become a teacher. My family tree boasts no sports heroes, no millionaire
entrepreneurs, no explorers, no lawyers or politicians. Instead the tree hangs heavy
with Norwegian immigrants weighed down by a fierce belief in education. All went to
school. Most became teachers or farmers. My late father, the family genealogist,
loved to keep track of the number of degrees in the family. Going back over two
generations, when the number went beyond 300, he stopped counting. And, as I
said, most were teachers.
My own preparation for teaching consisted of listening to teachers talking outside
the classroom - at our home when I was a child. Then, when I went to university, I
watched my professors, taking note of the tricks of their trade. What worked? What
was a disaster? What had short-term effects? And, as I look back forty years, what
had long-term benefits?
For me, the answer to the last question is the most important. Only two elements in
the practices of all my teachers* had lasting effects: enthusiasm for their subject and
teaching through story-telling. More important than transmission of facts or
"information," enthusiasm is infectious. The passionate professor models a desire to
know more about the unknown and so fosters life-long learning. Storytelling as a
teaching technique is older than history. The richness and complexity of narrative even apparently simple narrative - leaves deep channels in one's mind and psyche
that become more and more telling with each telling. A first-year English student I
knew said that she aced Chemistry once she recognized that the behaviour of the
world's elements and compounds could be seen as a series of richly-coded,
miniature stories.
I don't recall my first year as an Alberta TA with much joy. I over-prepared. I over-
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/is_my_fly_open.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
lectured. My students were in the Faculty of Engineering and they weren't much
younger than I. As an "Artsie," I was probably defensive too. Doubtless, it didn"t
help that I said to them one day, "You should stop calling yourselves 'Engineers.'
You are first-year university students, and before anyone calls you an 'Engineer,'
you will have to get past me." Even though I was technically correct when I said
that, in hindsight - that crystal-clear lens - I was way off base. My enthusiasm was
negligible and my facility with stories was pathetic, even when I tried to teach them.
But I did have a support group. I would meet with half a dozen other TAs from
English in the coffee lounge, or at the Tuck Shop, or for a beer. We would tell
teaching stories, many of the horror genre, or explain how something, inexplicably,
had gone well. Norm was in our group. Norm was from Brooklyn, and he thought
that being sent to Siberia had nothing on living in Edmonton, culturally and
geographically. Before his first class, Norm made it clear that he had no
expectations whatsoever of his students. Coming from Leduc or Lac La Biche, how
could they be expected to know anything?
After his first class with his Engineers, Norm slipped quietly into the coffee lounge.
We were all high on adrenalin, full of ourselves and our initiation as teachers. Norm
was uncharacteristically mute. "Norm," we asked, "How'd it go?" There was a long
pause, with downcast eyes. Then Norm murmured, "I stood in front of them. I
arranged my notes on the lectern. I looked up and saw their eyes. Just their eyes.
Every one of them was staring at me. All of a sudden, my mouth opened, and words
came out. Words I hadn't prepared. Words I still don't think I said. But it was my
voice. 'Is my fly open?' said the voice." That Freudian slip knocked the chip from
Norm"s shoulder, and both he and his students began to recognize Norm as a living
human being. I think in his first year as a TA Norm was more successful than any of
the rest of us.
When I was appointed Director of The Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre
in 2000, I made it clear that I intended to focus some of the Centre's energies on our
next generation of university teachers; newly-hired faculty, graduate teaching
assistants, and Sessionals. I knew from discussions with colleagues at national
conferences on university teaching, with graduate students at the U. of S., and with
departmental Chairs of graduate committees that the lack of teaching preparation I
had experienced in 1962 had changed very little in over thirty years.
With that in mind, the Centre established four distinct programs to help develop
inexperienced teachers. The Graduate Peer Consultation program makes it possible
for TAs and GTFs to seek confidential guidance from experienced peers - graduate
students like themselves. Graduate Student Development Days are half-day
interdisciplinary workshops designed to provide novice graduate student teachers
with pedagogical knowledge, skills, and the confidence to promote student learning.
Each workshop offers practical advice from an excellent presenter and focuses on
specific issues related to graduate student teaching. The Scholarship of Teaching &
Learning Program is an opportunity to reflect upon and build students" teaching
skills. The program includes a range of required and selected TLC workshops and
seminars that help graduate teachers develop the pedagogical knowledge and skills
they need to become more effective university teachers.
The cornerstone of our graduate programs is Introduction to University Teaching
GSR 989, a two-term non-credit course meeting three hours each week. Students
receive a certificate in university teaching and a note on their transcripts after
successful completion of the class. One year of graduate studies experience is the
prerequisite. There is no tuition fee associated with registration. The class is funded
and supported jointly by the College of Graduate Studies & Research, and The
Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre. "Graduates" of this course routinely
report that their successes in finding university teaching positions have turned on
their documented preparation for the university teaching vocation and in their
demonstrated commitment to learn how to be teachers - both of which are offered
by GSR 989.
In addition to our book-stocked resource room cum lending library, we participate in
several cooperative ventures too. Through the Centre for Second Languages, and
with the funding of Graduate Studies, we offer a very popular class for international
students: "Speaking and Pronouncing English." One of our graduate employees,
Tonya Lambert (MA, History), compiled A Handbook for Graduate Student
Teachers in the Humanities. Every year, the Centre joins with Graduate Studies to
mount a symposium, "Best Practices in Graduate Student Supervision."
Our most valuable work with graduate students remains the one-on-one drop-in. For
a host of reasons - scholarly, pedagogical, and personal - students come to 37
Murray Building to chat, to seek advice, and to bask in an environment where the
scholarship of TEACHING is foremost.
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/is_my_fly_open.php
Page 2 of 3
September 2004
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
August 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 3
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
Navigating the course: From Face-toFace to On-line
By Kim West, program Assistant
In September 2001, The Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre introduced the
re-designed course, GSR 989: Introduction to University Teaching, to graduate
student teachers, faculty, and sessional lecturers on the U of S campus. This
interdisciplinary course has been incredibly popular over the last three years
because it speaks to the needs of a growing number of graduate students, faculty,
and sessionals looking to become better university teachers. In the last three years,
teachers and students from the arts, humanities, social sciences, education,
commerce, natural sciences, engineering, law, and medicine have come together.
We have laughed, cried, shared our stories, and voiced our successes and failures
as teachers and students with each other. It has been - and continues to be - the
most rewarding experience of my teaching career.
GSR 989 is now going on-line. This somewhat scares me; I'm fully aware that our
workload will triple in order to successfully implement and facilitate an on-line
version of the class. The funny thing is it doesn't feel like work to me. I am excited to
have the opportunity to discuss, learn, and reflect about teaching and learning with
other graduate student teachers, faculty, sessionals, and college teachers across
Canada. It is an amazing opportunity.
The on-line class, which will be called Introduction to Teaching & Learning in
Higher Education: Transforming Teaching, Learning, & Self will be similar to
GSR 989 in terms of content, but will be more in depth, dealing with a wider range
of pedagogical topics from the philosophical to the practical. Faced with a launch
date of January 2005, the last few months have been spent transforming the class
from its traditional face-to-face format to an on-line environment. As my colleague,
Tereigh Ewert-Bauer and I undertook the challenge, we began to ask: How is
teaching on-line different from teaching face-to-face in a traditional classroom?
What are the needs of our learners? How will content delivery, course preparation,
classroom dynamics, and student interaction change? How will we re-create the
same sense of community in the on-line environment that is inherent in our face-toface classroom? What will students learn from one another?
In recent years, on-line classes have become increasingly popular, partly because
they give faculty and students more freedom to organize and manage academic and
personal responsibilities. Such classes are often more accessible, particularly to
students living in a region far from where a program of study is being offered. When
daily or weekly face-to-face meetings are unscheduled, students and instructors
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/navigating.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
may participate in the class with a greater degree of flexibility, communicating with
each other via asynchronous message boards, group discussions (in chat rooms),
and e-mail. In many on-line classes, the focus has shifted from teacher- to studentcentred, a transition that has allowed students to take primary responsibility for their
learning. For example, when teachers use asynchronous message boards as a
means of discussion, students can learn from each other by reading, reflecting,
discussing, and responding to questions and ideas posted by other students, while
the teacher assumes the role of facilitator (Collinson et al. 2000).
That is not to say there aren't drawbacks. On-line classes may lack the human
dynamic that naturally occurs in a face-to-face classroom ã the connection that
draws the teacher and students together and facilitates a sense of community
between learners. In GSR 989, one of our greatest strengths has been a strong
sense of community in the classroom. To facilitate this, we plan a series of potlucks
every year so that students and instructors can share food, meet each other's
families, and engage in meaningful conversation. These informal gatherings help us
to get to know our students better, build strong relationships between students, and
establish mutual trust, respect, and cooperation amongst students.
Bearing the above in mind, we opted to frame our on-line class with student-driven
discussion, on-line learning activities, and interactive assignments, a format not so
different from the student-centred learning approach we've used in the 989 class
over the past three years. Pedagogical content, in the form of streaming video and
structured activities will play a significant role. In order to build community,
instructors of the class will create an on-line presence, through the use of
personalized biographies, videos, voice capture, and communications; students will
also be encouraged to get to know one another on-line. The presence and expertise
of award-winning teachers (who have visited the 989 class each week) will be felt
just as strongly in the on-line version of the class, as 3M Teaching Fellows across
Canada take on the roles of Participating or Guest Instructors each week. A face-toface meeting, where students meet each other and exchange ideas, is planned to
take place half-way through the class. In the future, we also plan to merge a few
meetings of the face-to-face class with the on-line community. These meetings will
give our on-line learners an opportunity to contribute to our face-to-face class, and
will allow our face-to-face learners to expand their horizons outside of class.
Navigating the course from face-to-face to on-line instruction has provided me with
an opportunity to discover the advantages and disadvantages that both modes of
teaching have to offer. I have come to the realization that on-line learning and faceto-face instruction each represent a type of teaching that meets the needs of
different groups of learners. In the process, I've also discovered a lot about how I
think about teaching. If we make the effort to bring our students together, and if we
put the needs of our students first - then it doesn't matter which style of instruction
we choose to be successful as teachers.
GSR 989 is a non-credit interdisciplinary course on university teaching designed for
graduate student teachers, faculty, and sessional lecturers. Students receive a
certificate upon completion of the course, and a note on their transcripts. The class
is supported by the College of Graduate Studies & Research; and is run by The
Gwenna Moss Teaching & Learning Centre. The course runs from 7:30-9:30 PM on
Monday evenings. Each evening begins with a presentation from an award-winning
teacher on campus, followed by a break, and discussion of class material and
readings. Topics range from the philosophical to the practical. All assignments in the
course led to the development of a teaching dossier or portfolio, which students can
use a tool to further reflect upon their teaching and in applying for tenure, promotion,
or teaching positions.
Introduction to Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Transforming Teaching,
Learning, & Self is also a non-credit interdisciplinary course on teaching in higher
education, designed for graduate student teachers, faculty, sessional lecturers, and
college teachers. The course is a collaborative venture between the Institute for
the Advancement of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education and the
University of Saskatchewan. The pilot version of the on-line course will run from
January to November 2005.
Reference: Collinson, G., Erlbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. Facilitating on-line
learning: effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Room 50 Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A4
Tel: (306) 966-2231 Fax: (306) 966-2242
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/navigating.php
Page 2 of 3
September 2004
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
August 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 2
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
How Does a Nurse Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989 Experience
By Marilee Lowe
I entered graduate school in the fall of 2002 with the goal of becoming an instructor
in the Nursing Education Program of Saskatchewan (NEPS). Even though I planned
my course load to include electives in Education, I was continually bothered with a
nagging question: "how does a nurse become a teacher?" I knew I was a good
nurse, and I knew I enjoyed teaching; however, I had very little opportunity as a
nurse to be taught the discipline of teaching. For me, GSR 989 was one of the
answers to my dilemma. I was encouraged to attend the class by one of my
colleagues who had taken the class the previous year, and I was certainly not
disappointed with my choice to attend.
From the beginning, I found the class to be stretching! The first night we were
invited to describe our personal teaching metaphor. Since I had never given this any
thought I was very glad to be seated at the far end of the room. I m not sure I
heard a lot about other people s ideas that night since I was too busy trying to think
of how I would use a metaphor to describe myself as a teacher.
We were given the opportunity in a written assignment to expand our metaphor for
teaching and this was an excellent opportunity to think about the subject further. In
the final written assignment of the class we discussed our teaching metaphor again,
and whether or not it had changed during the class. This was an excellent
opportunity to reflect on what we had learned in the class and how it had changed
our perspective. I was pleased to find that my initial metaphor of teacher as coach
still fit with my personal philosophy of the role of the teacher, and that I had a better
understanding of how the teacher would function as a coach. I was interviewed for a
teaching position in the College of Nursing shortly after completing this class and
had the opportunity to share my metaphor at that time. I would not have been
prepared for this if I had not taken GSR 989!
Another way in which I was stretched in this class was in being asked to write a
personal teaching philosophy and develop a teaching portfolio. A teaching
philosophy is critical to understanding what I bring to my role as a teacher, so this
assignment gave me a safe place in which to prepare my philosophy and receive
feedback, which helped to strengthen my understanding of my teaching identity.
The teaching portfolio I completed for GSR 989 has been beneficial in assisting me
to identify my areas of strength as a teacher, and also provide me with an objective
view of areas in which I can continue to grow.
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/how_does_a_nurse.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
I would say I gained two things from my participation in GSR 989. As a result of my
participation in this class I have a perspective of the role of the teacher which I do
not think I would have gained in any other way. The course is designed to provide
students with opportunities to view the role of the professor through many different
lenses. The sessions such as "Finding Your Teaching Identity," "Becoming an
Effective Teacher," and "Teaching as a Vocation," served to assist in forming my
teaching philosophy. Those sessions that provided practical information such as use
of technology, designing curricula, and academic integrity were helpful in giving me
some of the "nuts and bolts" which would be needed as I began my university
teaching career.
The second thing which I see that I have gained from GSR 989 is what I would like
to call my "tool kit". My tool kit includes such things as my teaching portfolio, the
feedback on my written assignments which I can use to improve further work, and
the video of my microteaching presentation. More importantly, however, is my
understanding of the resources available to me as a teacher. The professors who
spoke to our class invited us to contact them if we had questions about their subject
or if they could be of assistance to us in any way. The Gwenna Moss Teaching &
Learning Centre is now a familiar place to me, with a wealth of resources to offer. I
have some confidence that if I feel overwhelmed with my responsibilities I know
where I can look for assistance. Additionally, the course manual, readings, and
textbook contain information and ideas about effective approaches to teaching for
the times when I have no idea how to begin!
One thing I would do differently if I were taking the class again would be to take
advantage of the optional assignments. The course is designed with several
required assignments and a number more which are elective. In reflecting on my
participation I now wish I had completed some of the optional assignments such as
designing assignments or writing exam questions, since the feedback I would have
received on these would have been helpful in preparing me more effectively for my
teaching role.
I had the opportunity to teach in the NEPS program during the winter and spring
terms of this year. The increased confidence I received from my participation in
GSR 989 enabled me to be more relaxed in the classroom and more effective in my
interactions with my students. I have already recommended the class to my
classmates in the Master of Nursing program and would encourage any graduate
student who desires to teach to take this class.
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Room 50 Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A4
Tel: (306) 966-2231 Fax: (306) 966-2242
Copyright ©2005, The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness.
general inquiries | contact the webmaster
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/how_does_a_nurse.php
Page 2 of 2
September 2004
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
August 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 3
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of
Introduction to University Teaching:
Taking a Close Look at Your Teaching
Skills
By Kathryn Roberton
All us began our careers as students. When we look back, most of us can think of a
teacher who stands out in our memory. One of the characteristics many of these
teachers have in common is their enthusiasm for their subject that enabled them to
influence us as students. One of the great benefits of GSR 989: Introduction to
University Teaching is that this course enables new teachers to learn how to project
their enthusiasm for their subject to their students. As a novice teacher, I stepped
into my first classroom excited about the challenge I was about to face and
confident in my knowledge of my subject. However, I knew that I needed more than
that knowledge if I wanted to live up to my expectations and the expectations of my
students; GSR 989 provided a forum for investigating, testing, and improving my
teaching skills. The course gives its students an understanding of how to reach their
students, from the crucial first impression to devising a final exam that tests the full
range of relevant abilities. You form a network of peers, who are friends and
resources, but the course also requires a lot of work and you will find that not every
unit will seem relevant to you and your interests or concerns. Introduction to
University Teaching is a course that all graduate students and novice university
lecturers should take if they are thinking about a career as an educator.
My first experience with teaching was as a tutorial leader for a jumbo section of
English 110. Like many other TA's, I initially felt awkward in the position of teacher. I
was not that much older than my students, and I was uncomfortable being the
authority figure in the classroom, even if I only had that position for one out of three
class hours per week. The English department orientation provides tutorial leaders
with a clear understanding of their responsibilities and the situations they will face in
the classroom, and tutorial leaders also have the support of the professor teaching
the section as well as the other tutorial leaders in their group. One of the most
important things that GSR 989 helps student-teachers learn is an understanding of
how to reach their students - how to define your own teaching persona and how to
refine that persona into an effective teaching tool. This was one of the three most
important lessons that I learnt this year, and one of the lectures that I found most
useful in this context was the one given by Pamela Haig-Bartley from the
Department of Drama on the teaching voice and using humour in the classroom. I
initially thought that this would be one of the units that I would not find relevant, but
instead this was one of the lectures from which I learnt the most. The second lesson
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/good_bad_ugly.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Page 2 of 3
I learnt was the need to recognise and use different learning styles to reach
students. Classes on English language and literature frequently involve lectures and
discussion, but GSR 989 gave me ideas of new ways to approach the material that
would appeal to different learning styles. The third lesson is closely connected:
using questioning techniques effectively by learning how to word open questions
and how to create questions that lead to the right answers or force students to use
different levels and types of skills, rather than reiterating stored information. These
three lessons have made a great deal of difference in my teaching persona and
style.
September 2004
It would be easy to write about Introduction to University Teaching and just focus on
the good aspects without ever discussing the bad or the ugly. I found that this class
had two negative aspects. First, it requires a lot of work. The readings and
assignments contributed to this, but I expected to put a great deal of effort into the
process when I joined the class, and I was not disappointed! We had vibrant
discussions on the readings and presentations, both in class and via the Web CT
bulletin board, although the bulletin board discussions died out after the reading
week break. The assignments require a lot of self-assessment, and they are always
challenging. The second negative aspect was that I found some of the presentations
or readings less relevant than I had expected. On some occasions, the readings
would have me eagerly anticipating that Monday night's class, but the issues that
interested me were never addressed. The one that I will discuss is a minor example,
but it represents others more important. It stems from the fact that I would like clear,
specific suggestions for some of the actions that we are advised to avoid in the
classroom. Many of the early classes dealt with how we stand and move; there are
a number of familiar habitual movements that make the list. Teachers, especially
men, should not stand with their hands in their pockets (especially if there is
anything in your pockets for you to play with - like your keys). The item on the list
that is my personal bane was the instruction not to repetitively push your glasses
back up your nose. However, although there was a reasonable list of what not to do,
there was no list of what to do - how to stand, how to move, what to do with your
hands. . . . Although this represents my pet peeve, it also represents the other
lectures and readings that did not appeal or hold relevance for me, and I know that
each of the students in the class had a different list of what they found relevant or
irrelevant.
August 2003
The ugly - this was the hardest part of the class for me to pin down, but as I thought
about it, I realized that the ugliest part of the class for me was the assignment where
we were videotaped as we presented a three-minute lecture to our peers. I
considered my topic carefully and prepared and practised it thoroughly, but the idea
of giving this presentation made me very nervous, despite the fact that I was
teaching groups of nearly forty students for at least an hour every weekday! To my
amazement, when I arrived at class I found out that my fellow students were equally
nervous. The more I think about this assignment, the more I realize why so many of
us considered it the ugly part of the course. Introduction to University Teaching
emphasizes self-assessment as one of the keys to being a good teacher - we have
to look closely at ourselves and analyse what we are doing so that we can improve
our good points and eliminate the bad ones. It is not the assignment that is ugly - it
is the prospect of looking closely at ourselves, and I do not just mean being
videotaped and forced to watch ourselves. As teachers we have to constantly
analyse what we are doing and whether or not we are achieving our goals, but it is
not always comfortable to stare into the looking glass because we are not always
happy with what we see staring back out at us. And yet, the ugly also represents the
most important part of this course. The self-reflective elements have a very positive
result-they enable us to recognise our goals, philosophies, and strengths, and in the
final assignment of the course, we put these things together in our teaching
portfolio, in which we present the most positive achievements of our teaching
careers.
In the final analysis, GSR 989 provided a solid foundation for my future as a
teacher. This course promotes confidence in our skills and teaches us an
awareness of the mechanics of teaching and of ourselves, both of which are
necessary for us to continue building and improving our teaching abilities. In
addition to providing a formal "Introduction to University Teaching," it also teaches
us the importance of student centred education.
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Room 50 Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A4
Tel: (306) 966-2231 Fax: (306) 966-2242
Copyright ©2005, The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness.
general inquiries | contact the webmaster
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/good_bad_ugly.php
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
home
programs
for grad students
teaching awards
Page 1 of 5
resources
search
about us
teaching development days
spring teaching development days
faculty peer consultation
transforming teaching
gsr 989: intro to university teaching
scholarship of teaching & learning program
graduate student development days
graduate student peer consultation
u of s master teacher award
sylvia wallace sessional lecturer award
u of s student's union award
3M fellowship award
alan blizzard collaborative projects award
The Pitfalls and Promises of the Doctoral
Degree For Those Who Want To Be
University Teachers
By Joel Deshaye, program Assistant
People who decide to pursue a graduate degree are a rare bunch. Although the
2001 Census by Statistics Canada shows that six million people over the age of
twenty do not have even a high school diploma, approximately ten million
Canadians have some post-secondary qualification. Based on the most recent data
(from 1994-8), a little less than 4% of those people have a graduate degree.
If swelling enrollments in graduate programs across the country are an indication,
this small percentage is growing. However, recent studies into the state of doctoral
degree programs suggest that pursuing the Ph.D. might often be an uninformed
decision or, at worst, a blatant denial of the required sacrifices and the odds of
success.
An earnest critique of doctoral education began in the 1990s in response to several
frustrations. The academic job market was growing (and still is), but not in pace with
increasing Ph.D. production. Since then, universities have reduced the hiring of
tenure-track faculty, leading to a widespread feeling of disillusionment among
people who achieved the doctorate without finding work as professors.
Since then, in 2002, the Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada (AUCC)
reported that Ph.D. production would not match the faculty renewal needs of
universities (Elgar 3-4). This premise (a promise made to many graduate students in
the last five years) should encourage more enrollments in doctoral programs.
Unfortunately, in the report Ph.D. Degree Completion in Canadian Universities,
Frank J. Elgar shows that the average doctoral program here loses almost half its
students before they graduate.
There are three main reasons for this high level of attrition: time, money, and
expectations. Perhaps the single most troubling problem is that M.A. and Ph.D.
programs combined often require the greater part of a decade to complete. Citing
the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies (CAGS), Elgar reports that "[m]ost
Ph.D.s in Canada are conferred after 7 to 9 years of study after the bachelor's
degree (CAGS, 1997). Median time-to-completion of the Ph.D. has nearly doubled
during the last three decades (from 6.5 to 11 years)" (4). Over the course of many
years of study, student debt increases along with family commitments, eventually
forcing many to quit during their doctoral programs, which require at least 4 to 5
years of study (not including leaves of absences).
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/pitfalls_promises.php
In This Issue
Cover Page
Recalculating the
Teaching Equation
Is My Fly Open
Navigating the
Course
How Does a Nurse
Become a Teacher?
My GSR 989
Experience
The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly of
Introduction to
University Teaching
The Pitfalls and
Promises of the
Doctoral Degree
Index of Issues
January 2007
August 2005
April 2005
February 2005
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
The completion rates for doctoral programs are slightly below 70% for those in life
sciences or natural and applied sciences. The social sciences and humanities
disciplines show the lowest rate at less than 50%. In specific subjects, physics,
biology, and biochemistry had the best rates (nearly 80%) while political studies,
sociology, and philosophy had the worst (slightly more than 40%), with English
scoring the lowest at 39.6%.
According to Elgar, the "[l]ow completion rates deter prospective graduate students,
thus creating long-term staffing and academic consequences, and long times-tocompletion reduce the time graduates may potentially spend in gainful employment,
which is particularly hurtful in an era of crippling student debt loads" (10).
Page 2 of 5
September 2004
March 2004
Janurary 2004
November 2003
August 2003
March 2003
Doctoral students' debt increases as they reach the middle and final years of their
programs. Most universities guarantee doctoral students funding for a term of three
or four years, but the support does not necessarily extend further. Elgar reports that
73.6% of Canadian doctoral students received funding (better than the U.S.A. at
65.7% and the U.K. at 53.1%) (15). Nevertheless, for more than a quarter of
doctoral students in Canada, expense is a serious problem. Even the students with
full funding receive only between $15,000 and $18,000 (with one or two national
exceptions), and not all schools waive tuition. Moreover, this funding is rarely freely
granted for the benefit of the student. Funding, for doctoral students, usually means
employment as teaching or research assistants. These jobs are important learning
experiences (and cheap labour for the universities), but they can distract students
from their own projects and their own completion deadlines.
The third major problem for students is that their expectations and ambitions do not
correspond with the objectives set for them by the administrators of doctoral
programs. According to a 1999-2001 study by Chris M. Golde and Timothy M. Dore,
"[s]tudents are motivated in their career aspirations by a love of teaching, enjoyment
of research, and an interest in doing service [....] They find college campuses
appealing places to work and appreciate the lifestyle of faculty. In short, they are
enthused by an idealized vision of the life of faculty" (11). The students who enroll
want to be professors.
One wonders, though, what doctoral programs do to the current professors who act
as supervisors and advisors. How does student attrition affect the people who
should be guiding those students? According to Phillida Salmon in her 1992 book
Achieving the Ph.D. - ten students' experience, the attrition problem is compounded
as the doctoral supervisors realize that many students will quit: "supervising Ph.D.s
seems, all too often, to be experienced as a thankless task and one which may
frequently prove ultimately unsuccessful" (19). As difficulties mount and completion
seems less certain, students' enthusiasm ebbs and "the supervisory role has
inexplicably been transformed from one of welcomed interest to one of dreaded,
guilt-inducing bullying" (20). Therefore, it's not surprising that in Golde and Dore's
study, approximately one third of doctoral students were not happy with their
relationships with their advisors and were not certain how much time and what
quality of time they could expect to spend with their advisor.
Faced with many students who are drifting or unlikely to succeed, supervisors
themselves might either invest less time in individual students or seek to overly
determine the student's research path and schedule. As Dr. Ron Cooley from the U
of S English department suggested to me in an informal conversation, either course
of action can be harmful, depending on the student's personality and work habits.
Part of the problem, too, according to Golde and Dore, is that dissatisfied students
did not use enough criteria in choosing a supervisor (39). Finding a match based on
a long list of criteria (including compatible personalities, similar research, and a
record of successful advising, as seen at www.phd-survey.org, section three) might
help both students and supervisors avoid a cycle of dissatisfaction, thereby helping
to put students on track to achieve their career goals.
However, despite wanting to be professors, many Ph.D. graduates do not find
tenure-track jobs. For example, as quoted in the University of Victoria English
Department Graduate Handbook for 2004-5, "the Association of Canadian College
and University Teachers of English (ACCUTE) reports, only 50% of graduating
Ph.D.s in English can expect to find tenure-track employment in post-secondary
institutions. Despite the retirements of many professors hired in the expansion
period of the 1960s, these positions are not always filled" (6). The alternatives are to
find non-academic jobs, which employ 60 to 70% of Ph.D. graduates (AUCC, qtd. in
Elgar 3), or to accept sessional or adjunct appointments, which do not offer the
security and salary of the faculty lifestyle. Nevertheless, the attraction of university
teaching is strong.
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/pitfalls_promises.php
February 2003
January 2003
August 2002
April 2002
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
In their study, Golde and Dore reveal that 83.2% of people who enroll with the
intention of becoming professors do so because they enjoy teaching (23). They
surveyed 4,000 students from 11 arts and science disciplines at 27 American
universities. Since their program structure is based on the same model as used in
Canada, the results of this study are probably pertinent here.
Golde and Dore found that "overly specialized research training leaves future faculty
ill-equipped to perform other faculty roles, especially teaching" and that graduates
struggle to adjust to employment outside of academia (4). This is not surprising,
considering the research focus of the doctoral degree. This focus shows a
disjunction between training and careers.
Considering the emphasis on research in doctoral programs, faculty members
actually spend relatively little time doing research. On average, faculty members in
American universities spend 9 hours per week on research or scholarly activities
(not including teaching, presumably, since the authors report a separate statistic for
teaching activities). 58% of faculty members report spending less than 4 hours per
week on scholarly activities; "a quarter report spending no time at all" (22). Instead,
faculty members spend on average 29 hours per week on classroom teaching,
planning, grading, and advising. In addition, they spend 11 hours per week on
service and administration.
Adding the averages for teaching (29 hours) and service / administration (11 hours)
equals a full work week (40 hours) without even including time spent on research
(although how these activities are prioritized will determine what task becomes
homework). Given these statistics, would it not be reasonable to either refocus
Ph.D. programs on teaching or restructure faculty positions for the research
emphasis befitting doctoral training? In the latter case, a new need for university
teachers would emerge as research-oriented faculty members reduced their
teaching duties. This market demand might lead to a better bargaining power for
adjunct / sessional faculty members, and might attract Ph.D. graduates who would
have stayed in academia if faculty jobs were more clearly linked to their original
hopes and expectations. To shift the focus toward teaching would probably entail
incentives such as tenure and merit increases, which are currently granted mainly
for research accomplishments (despite the fact that faculty hiring committees expect
prospective employees to state an equal interest in teaching and research).
The situation is remarkably unusual, almost absurd: we have a large group of highly
educated researchers who want to be teachers, yet the career opportunities pivot on
the edge of research. We seem to have created an environment that will encourage
a begrudging attitude toward research for those who love teaching, because their
interests are not often tangibly rewarded. Similarly, those who pursue research,
especially as it contributes to career advancement, will begrudge the "load" of
teaching and its demands on time and effort. Viewed in this way, the situation is
demoralizing and clearly demands a faculty job description that more appropriately
balances the related works of teaching and research.
Another possibility is that doctoral programs should be redesigned to account for the
fact that most Ph.D. graduates will spend most of their time teaching and in related
activities (not including scholarship). While slightly more than half of doctoral
programs offer teaching assistantships to students, these teaching jobs double as
financial aid. They do not always lead to progressively more responsibility and
teaching independence, especially in the sciences (Golde and Dore 23-4). Rather,
students report that their confidence in teaching comes from observing teachers; the
doctoral programs themselves have had little impact on pedagogical skills.
So, many people with a keen interest in university teaching manage to complete
their graduate programs and enter university faculties. Many of them are hired as
sessional lecturers who have short-term contracts despite the fact that they
sometimes outnumber tenure-track faculty and, as a group, teach large portions of
the undergraduate curriculum, especially in the humanities and social sciences.
These sessionals are hired to teach and to be suitably informed through research to
teach well. However, a widely held perception suggests that they are being
exploited for their usefulness in teaching.
In response, some American universities are attempting to redefine faculty jobs by
splitting them into categories. At Duke University, the people who focus on teaching
are called professors of the practice. According to Piper Fogg's April, 2004, article in
the online Chronicle of Higher Education, "[a]t Duke, professors of the practice are
full-time faculty members who are not on the tenure track. They are evaluated
primarily on teaching and do not have to produce groundbreaking research like their
tenured colleagues." Rather, they have renewable contracts of up to 10 years,
salaries on par with tenured and tenure-track colleagues, and similar benefits
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/pitfalls_promises.php
Page 3 of 5
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
(except for guaranteed sabbaticals).
Duke, which pioneered the model, has influenced New York University to consider a
similar approach. At these institutions, professors are divided into three general
categories: the professor of the practice or teaching professor (whose main job is
teaching), the research professor (whose main job is research), and the tenured
professor (whose main job is research and teaching). However, John W.
Etchemendy, the provost at Stanford University, says that teaching should be as
important as research (qtd. in Fogg). He suggests that the division will harm both
artificially separated categories. Moreover, some people see these divisions as a
way for administrations to reduce the number of tenured faculty, effectively
weakening the academic freedom that tenure is supposed to guarantee. As more
universities adopt a corporate approach to managing academics, safeguarding this
freedom is especially important.
To avoid losing this fundamental freedom, the aforementioned rebalancing and
reintegration of teaching and research expectations would be a wise course of
action. Creating separate categories would almost certainly exacerbate the already
harmful public perception of self-absorbed researchers ignoring the public value of
their works in favor of commercial or esoteric interests, and the perception of lazy
teachers ignoring the current research in their fields. Arguably, the teaching
category would lose the most esteem. Researchers can justify their projects, no
matter how starved for context and public interest, with funding dollars. Teachers do
not have the obvious financial justifications for their jobs, although if you imagine the
money spent on social ills that could be prevented with better education, the value
of teaching is shockingly high.
Regardless, these changes might not happen in Canada in the near future.
Currently, sessional lecturers are associated primarily with their teaching roles;
through this association, university administrators have abused the whole tradition
and profession of teaching by insisting on offering temporary jobs with poor wages,
little security, few benefits, and workloads that are often commensurate with those
of regular faculty members.
Doctoral programs would benefit by including teaching as an equal partner with
research, and universities would be fairer and more equitable if they credited
teaching with the importance it deserves and with the respect graduates have for it.
Certainly, the problems with high doctoral program attrition, a need for doctoral
graduates, the growing reliance on sessional appointments, and the reluctance to
grant tenure are serious problems. Doctoral programs and the profession in general
must change if these conditions are to be improved. Since academic faculties are
among the few professional associations that have some powers of selfgovernment, they should strive to quickly improve the odds for graduate students
and for tenure-track hopefuls.
References
Elgar, Frank J. Ph.D. Degree Completion in Canadian Universities: Final Report.
Dalhousie: Graduate Students' Association of Canada, 2003.
Fogg, Piper. "For These Professors, 'Practice' Is Perfect." The Chronicle of Higher
Education. [online] 50: 32. p. A12. 16 April 2004. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i32/32a01201.htm on 11 August 2004.
Golde, Chris M. and Timothy M. Dore. At Cross Purposes: What the Experiences of
Today's Doctoral Students Reveal about Doctoral Education. Philadelphia, PA: Pew
Charitable Trusts, 2001. Retrieved from http://www.phd-survey.org on 10 August
2004.
Salmon, Phillida. Achieving a PhD - ten students' experience. Oakville, Great
Britain: Trentham, 1992.
Statistics Canada. "University qualifications granted by level, by provinces."
Retrieved from http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/educ20.htm on 31 August 2004.
University of Victoria Department of English Graduate Handbook 2004-05.
Retrieved from http://www.engl.uvic.ca/Grad/ on 31 August 2004.
The Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness
Room 50 Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A4
http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/bridges/sept2004/pitfalls_promises.php
Page 4 of 5