Content Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes Gained in the Teaching Certificate Program at
Vanderbilt University
- A Program Evaluation -
Prepared for the Center for Teaching
Vanderbilt University
Mark Bryant and Christopher Rowe
Peabody College for Education and Human Development
May 2008
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
3
Introduction and Problem Statement
9
Graduate Student Preparation
11
Trends Impacting Graduate Student Preparation
Future Faculty Programs
The Scholarship of Teaching
Comparison of Similar Programs
24
University of Colorado – Boulder
University of California – Santa Barbara
University of Michigan
Princeton University
Michigan State University
Summary of Programs
Teaching Certificate Program Description
33
Assessment Methods
45
Document Analysis of Participant Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
54
Qualitative Assessment of Participant Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
63
Basic Information
Content Knowledge
Program Perceptions
Departmental Expectations
Departmental Values Regarding Graduate Student Socialization
81
College of Arts & Science
School of Engineering
Peabody College for Education and Human Development
Medical Center
Divinity/Graduate School of Religion
School of Nursing
Observations
High/Low Consensus Field Comparison
-1-
Limitations to the Project
111
Conclusions
115
Recommendations
122
Closing Remarks on the Future of the Teaching Certificate Program
130
Bibliography
132
Appendices: A-H
135
List of Appendices
Page
A:
Document Analysis Rubric
135
B:
Participant Email Letter
136
C:
Participant Interview Protocol
137
D:
Participant Matrix
139
E:
Department Listing of Directors of Graduate Studies Interviewed
148
F:
Stakeholder Email Letter
149
G:
Stakeholder Interview Protocol
150
H:
Stakeholder Matrix
152
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1. MSU Framework of Core Competencies
29
Figure 2. Diagram of Teaching Certificate Program
37
Figure 3. Program Enrollment by Stage
42
Figure 4. Program Enrollment by School
42
Figure 5. t-Test Results
55
-2-
Executive Summary
The
purpose
of
this
program
achieve its outcomes.
However, one
evaluation is to provide the Center for
element that sets the Vanderbilt program
Teaching at Vanderbilt University with a
apart from similar programs is the required
comprehensive evaluation of their Teaching
project that highlights the Scholarship of
Certificate program, which is in its third
Teaching and Learning (SoTL). The three
year of existence.
As a joint project
cycles of inquiry, experimentation, and
between the Graduate School and the
reflection increasingly emphasize teaching
Center for Teaching, Vanderbilt’s Teaching
as a scholarly activity as defined by Boyer as
Certificate program aims “to help graduate
one of four domains of scholarship.
students, professional students, and post-
Specifically this evaluation seeks to answer
doctoral fellows develop and refine their
three questions. The questions are:
teaching skills through three cycles of
1. What do participants learn in the
program, including knowledge, skills,
and attitudes?
2. How do they apply what they learn
when teaching at Vanderbilt or in
faculty positions obtained after leaving
Vanderbilt?
3. What knowledge, skills, and attitudes
regarding teaching do Vanderbilt
departments and programs want their
doctoral students to possess upon
graduation?
teaching activities, each consisting of
inquiry, experimentation, and reflection
phases.” (Vanderbilt University) Much like
other
teacher
preparation
programs
described in the body of this document, the
Teaching Certificate program combines
workshops,
teaching
observation
and
feedback experiences, reading groups, a
The deliverable for this project is an
literature review, and reflective essays to
assessment of student learning and of the
-3-
program’s strengths and weaknesses in
information
order to give the Center for Teaching useful
perceptions
information to improve the program and
preparation for their students as well as the
thereby improve the experience for the
departments’ actual efforts or lack thereof
participants. This project consists of two
in preparing their graduate students for
phases:
teaching responsibilities which they may
participant
analysis
stakeholder analysis.
and
The participant
about
stakeholders’
of the value of teaching
encounter as a faculty member.
analysis stage primarily addresses the first
For the participant phase, the
two questions stated above and focuses on
investigators created an evaluation rubric in
documents and interviews with actual
order to examine program documents. This
program participants, both those currently
rubric operationalized four of six stated
in the program as well as the few who had
program objectives.
completed all requirements.
During the
program objectives not evaluated rely on
external
“end-of-pipeline” analysis of participant
stakeholder
analysis
phase,
stakeholders
defined
as
of
performance once they have obtained full-
were
time employment after graduation. Given
interviewed in order to identify skills,
that there are very few program finishers
abilities, and attitudes that they deem as
who have graduated from the university
important for their graduate students. This
and moved into faculty roles, these two
phase
specifically
program objectives were not assessed. The
addresses the third question stated above.
rubric created to assess the four program
Questions
objectives employed a 5-point scale and
Graduate
of
Study
the
were
at
Directors
The remaining two
Vanderbilt
evaluation
used
that
elicited
-4-
was used to gauge the acquisition of
to identify expectations and attitudes of
knowledge, skills and attitudes of teaching
graduate preparation for teaching.
as a scholarly activity.
This quantitative
It is important to note that this
approach allowed the investigators to
program evaluation contains important
assess the magnitude of knowledge gained
limitations that stem from the lack of
regarding the four program objectives being
program
evaluated.
Based on the results of the
operationalized objectives, and the open-
document analysis a common interview
ended electronic portfolio reporting system.
protocol was developed in consultation
In addition, there were inconsistencies in
with the Center for Teaching in order to
documentation from one participant to
extract
another which probably impacted the level
more
information
than
was
obtained from the document analysis. This
finishers,
the
lack
of
of reliability with the outcomes.
qualitative approach sampled participants
Three
of
the
four
objectives
from each of the three cycles and
evaluated in the quantitative analysis
interviewed them in order to establish how
suggest an increase in knowledge, skills, and
participant content knowledge increased
attitudes of participants' learning with
throughout the program. The second phase
regard to the following:
of this evaluation, the stakeholder analysis,
learning, analysis of their own teaching, and
sampled Directors of Graduate Study from
engagement with their own teaching in a
across the campus and interviewed them
community of scholars.
using a common interview protocol in order
objective, which is primarily a Cycle 3
undergraduate
With the fourth
activity, participants showed no significant
-5-
difference at the end of Cycle 2 in
teaching at Vanderbilt.
approaching their own teaching as a
activities on training graduate students to
scholarly activity. Based on these results,
teach vary widely but conform somewhat to
further information needed to be acquired
trends in high and low consensus fields.
by way of qualitative analysis to determine
The applied and natural sciences and some
if the initial results were an accurate
social sciences tend to focus more training
representation of the participants change.
on research skills while many humanities
Based on results from the participant
areas devote more resources to teaching in
interviews, graduate students appear to
addition to that of research skills. However,
fulfill the four program objectives evaluated
many departments base their success on
and are able to approach their teaching as a
student placement after graduation with a
scholarly activity and learn from their own
high desire to be at research-intensive
teaching
universities,
and
from
others'
teaching.
even
Departmental
though
many
Participants self-report that they have
departments see their students at teaching-
gained knowledge and skills from their
intensive institutions or in industry.
participation in the program and the
In
conclusion,
the
investigators
analysis of data demonstrates an increase in
determined that there was a substantial
knowledge, skills, and attitudes as they
increase in knowledge, skills, and attitudes
relate to teaching as a scholarly activity.
in the scholarship of teaching and learning
From
interviews
with
the
by program
participants.
Participant
stakeholders, there is sufficient evidence of
experience tends to vary widely depending
tension that exists between research and
on the department attitudes regarding
-6-
teaching as evidenced from participant
higher education community at large.
interviews and DGS interviews. The role of
concern,
the DGS tends to be marginalized in many
management, which is important for quality
departments as a service duty rather than a
evaluation of participant learning.
professional
to
operationalized objectives, variables should
strengthening graduate student education
be evaluated on the basis of how
in research and teaching. As a result, it is
participants are gaining knowledge, skills,
important that the Center for Teaching be
and attitudes throughout the program.
relied upon to fulfill the need for training in
Inadequate data management threatens
pedagogy in order to fully prepare doctoral
the significance of assessment in this
students for professional employment. In
program. Recommendations resulting from
addition, teaching opportunities should be
this program evaluation are listed below.
increased in many departments in order to
1. Program
objectives
should
be
operationalized in order to provide
consistent evaluation of the increase in
participant knowledge, skills, and
attitudes.
2. When prompting participant reflection,
the use of leading questions in the
portfolio allows for more consistent
reporting of outcomes in the various
program cycles, which leads to greater
validity when evaluating participant
performance.
3. Possibly have participants revise their
teaching statements more regularly
than just at the end of the program,
which should integrate their statements
with every teaching activity undertaken.
role
dedicated
provide graduate students with more
substantive experiences in teaching to
enhance
their
profile
as
they
seek
professional employment. In comparison to
other similar programs across the country,
the Teaching Certificate program is on a
positive
trajectory
to
establish
best
practices in educating and evaluating
teaching as a scholarly activity for the
-7-
however,
is
that
of
A
data
Using
4. Participants seem to enjoy a great deal
of structure in the schedules, thus the
use of soft deadlines or typical times to
complete tasks can aid in efficient time
management.
5. It is critical to effectively track the
progress through the program in order
to measure gains effectively, thus
having students regularly self-report
progress ensures accurate record
keeping.
6. The portfolio system is clearly critical to
evaluate participant progress, which
justifies
having
a
simple
yet
sophisticated system to handle selfreporting, tracking, and evaluation of
participant activities.
7. Stakeholders are important to the
continued success of the program and
key faculty should be identified and
approached as supporters of the
program. Additionally, DGS's deemed
potential supporters should be welleducated on the program in an effort to
continue to have a stream of applicants
who become participants.
8. A possibility could be to modify the
participants' academic transcripts to
note this significant accomplishment
and to add credibility to the program
and its participants with regard to SoTL.
9. The CFT should spearhead a concerted
effort in partnership with the Graduate
School to integrate teaching into the
overall graduate student experience
considering that so many end up in
teaching positions.
10. The population of post-doctoral fellows
is increasing and becomes an area of
interest
for
gaining
program
participants, thus marketing efforts
should
be
increased
to
this
demographic.
11. A major benefit of this program is the
'high touch' approach to participant
activities and this high level of service
should be continued.
12. More consistent program evaluation is
important to maintaining this important
and critical program to the graduate
student experience at Vanderbilt. The
next formal evaluation should occur
when more participants finish the
program and gain full-time faculty
employment in order to evaluate the
two program objectives not assessed in
this study.
The program has a strong foundation on
which to build, and the ongoing efforts of
the Center for Teaching staff to improve the
program will no doubt make it a leader in its
field and a model program for other
institutions to emulate.
-8-
Introduction and Problem Statement
The
at
of the university community, and what
Vanderbilt has designed a program for the
participants are actually learning through
institution’s graduate/professional students
their
and post-doctoral fellows to assist students
Specifically, the Center for Teaching posed
with developing their skills as teachers.
the following questions:
Unlike traditional graduate professional
1. What do participants learn in the
program, including knowledge, skills,
and attitudes?
2. How do they apply what they learn
when teaching at Vanderbilt or in
faculty positions obtained after leaving
Vanderbilt?
3. What knowledge, skills, and attitudes
regarding teaching do Vanderbilt
departments and programs want their
doctoral students to possess upon
graduation?
preparation
Center
for
programs,
Teaching
the
Teaching
Certificate program focuses on training in
pedagogy. Currently, the Center maintains
data on participation and satisfaction;
however, data on participants’ knowledge
gains and skill development is minimal.
participation
in
the
program.
Information on what participants have
The deliverable for this project was an
learned and how they are using the
assessment of student learning and of the
knowledge and skills they have acquired, as
program’s strengths and weaknesses in
well as how well those developments match
order to give the Center for Teaching useful
the
intended
outcomes
of
their
information to improve the program and
departments and programs is lacking. The
thereby improve the experience for the
aim of this project was to assess how well
participants. This project consisted of two
the Teaching Certificate program is meeting
phases:
its goals, how consistent it is with the needs
-9-
participant
analysis
and
stakeholder analysis.
The participant
abilities, and attitudes that they deem as
analysis stage focused on documents and
important for their graduate students. In
interviews with actual program participants,
addition, questions were used that elicited
both those currently in the program as well
information
as the few who had completed all
perceptions
requirements.
preparation for their students as well as the
gauged
The participant analysis
whether
of the value of teaching
departments’ actual efforts or lack thereof
the
in preparing their graduate students for
participants by taking current data on
teaching responsibilities which they may
demographics and satisfaction as well as
encounter as a faculty member.
conducting
its
program
stakeholders’
was
accomplishing
this
about
objectives
current
Using research on graduate student
participants and reviewing their work in
socialization and professional preparation
order to determine whether and/or how
as well as quantitative and qualitative
well
assessments and comparative data from
the
interviews
for
participants
of
are
achieving
proficiency in the stated objectives.
other programs, investigators were able to
During the stakeholder analysis
draw conclusions and make appropriate
phase, external stakeholders defined as
recommendations
Directors of Graduate Study at Vanderbilt
Teaching
were interviewed in order to identify skills,
Certificate program.
- 10 -
for
to
the
improving
Center
the
for
Teaching
Graduate Student Preparation
The importance of the graduate
student
experience
cannot
communicators and leaders within the
be
information
and
knowledge
industries
underestimated. It is significant not just for
cannot be overstated.
what it accomplishes in terms of exposing
students must carry knowledge to those
an individual to an area of study. Neither is
who come after them and they must inspire
it significant just because of the graduate
and educate new generations of scholars
student’s potential contribution to a body
who will do the same.
of knowledge in a particular academic field.
student experience, then, is a powerful
While these two outcomes do represent a
generator of future ideas and it must be
reasonable justification for the importance
valued and developed with deliberate goals
of the graduate student experience, one
in mind.
obvious benefit is still missing.
educational
students
experience
plays
a
key
of
role
These graduate
The graduate
The
When graduate students decide to
graduate
further their education, especially those
in
the
pursuing doctoral level work, they enter
advancement of knowledge as they become
into the graduate experience with certain
responsible for the transmission of ideas to
expectations.
future generations of learners. Graduate
have an intense focus upon their field of
students often become teachers, both in
study which includes the acquisition of new
official capacities in the world of academia
knowledge and hopefully the contribution
and also in the world of industry. Wherever
to the field.
they find themselves, their roles as
hope to receive instruction both formally
- 11 -
Certainly, they expect to
In addition, many of them
and informally which prepares them to
interests can range from a traditional
serve as members of the faculty at an
faculty position to an opportunity to serve
institution of higher education. They hope
in some type of industry to government
to become a part of the departmental and
consulting or program oversight.
institutional culture in their graduate
preparation for their chosen field of study
program in order to learn how to navigate
and their individual expression of that field
the world of academe with their peers
is dependent on their preferences as well as
(Austin, 2002). In a sense, they may enter
the type of institution they attend and the
into their graduate experience with a highly
specific department’s various emphases.
idealistic mindset.
However, the reality
Typically, the doctoral student is preparing
may be unsettling as many experience a
for a future faculty role, and this role
divestiture process (Van Maanen & Schein,
implies a responsibility for teaching either
1979) in which they feel that they are being
graduate or undergraduate students in
asked to change who they are or alter their
addition to other responsibilities which
expectations.
This may be particularly
include research, service, grant-writing,
evident in situations where graduate
departmental leadership, curriculum and
students who want to become faculty
program development, etc.
members expect to develop their teaching
coursework and research required of most
but who find themselves being “recreated”
graduate students may prepare them for
into researchers.
their field of study, what graduate students
For graduate students who decide to
actually
pursue doctoral study, their long-term
gain
from
their
Their
While the
graduate
experience may not prepare them for the
- 12 -
actual position they eventually obtain
emphases in preparing doctoral students
whether it was their primary choice or not
for their careers (Austin, 2002). Teaching
(Austin, 2002).
experience and training in pedagogy are
In graduate programs throughout
American
graduate
academia especially for those who desire to
students are prepared in myriad ways for
work at a teaching institution or at an
their future careers.
In addition to the
institution that balances teaching and
usual academic requirements which include
research, yet the reality is that graduate
course
or
students may not be receiving the training
dissertation, some programs emphasize
in teaching and/or pedagogy that is
professional development and teaching
necessary to prepare them for their first
experience as part of their graduate
faculty appointment.
students’
higher
education,
important for those seeking positions in
completion
preparation.
and
thesis
The
various
Using data from a longitudinal study
emphases of doctoral programs have been
examining the graduate school experience,
studied to determine what faculty in
Ann Austin (2002) draws certain conclusions
graduate programs find valuable for their
about the PhD experience for many
graduates. Differences in preparation are
graduate students. In regards to the many
based on type of institution, area of
opportunities
academic study, and preference of the
students in their development, “roles
individual graduate student. The literature
sometimes are structured more to serve
on faculty roles indicates that research,
institutional or faculty needs than to ensure
teaching, and service seem to be the major
a high quality learning experience for
- 13 -
which can
aid
doctoral
graduate students (p.95). Specifically, she
bigger
notes that teaching assistantships primarily
preparation than some imagine especially
serve the institution’s need for teachers
for research intensive institutions that are
with less intentional emphasis on preparing
dependent on reputation which often
doctoral
results
students
for
teaching
impact
from
on
graduate
publications
student
and
grants
responsibilities. In the same way, research
received. Excellent teaching preparation or
responsibilities
teaching
appear
to
focus
on
experience
as
it
has
been
advancing the institution’s initiatives more
traditionally perceived has not added much
so than developing the graduate student’s
weight to the strength of reputation. With
research abilities. In other words, Austin’s
that in mind, it is easy to understand why
study identifies a disconnect between the
graduate students may be socialized a
academic socialization that many graduate
certain way.
students
receive
and
the
working
The
socialization
process
for
environment into which graduate students
graduate students has been studied and
will find themselves. She states that “much
researchers find that this process is deeply
of the structure of graduate programs
impacted by the attitudes and values of the
serves as much to make the institution work
faculty or academic group they wish to join.
effectively as to prepare graduate students
Both Van Maanen (1976) and Bess (1978)
for future professional roles” (p. 95). This
acknowledged that the socialization process
inherent
preparing
of graduate study is a critical time when
graduate students for faculty roles and
graduate students are defining who they
advancing institutional aims may have a
will become as members of the faculty.
tension
between
- 14 -
Their definitions of themselves and their
The socialization process is broad in
work are impacted in part by the faculty
scope and includes mentoring, practical
members who guide them through the
experience, expectations, role clarification,
graduate program or the lack thereof. In
etc. The graduate student may learn from
her study of graduate student preparation,
her department how certain activities are
Austin (2002) found that “Particularly
valued, what attitudes are acceptable,
noteworthy and a cause for concern is the
which types of work are rewarded, what
lack
professional
roles a faculty member must play, how to
minimal
maneuver in one’s field of study as well as
feedback and mentoring from faculty, and
within one’s graduate program, and many
few opportunities for guided reflection” (p.
others (Sorcinelli & Austin, 1992). Factored
104). Austin’s work supports the claim that
into this experience is the research vs.
graduate students desire more from their
teaching debate that pits one emphasis
graduate experience; however, the faculty
against the other in unfriendly terms.
members may be either uninterested in
Although an emphasis on research does not
developing
have
of
development
systematic
opportunities,
graduate
students
in
this
to
be
detrimental
to
teaching
manner or unable to commit the time
responsibilities, a common perception,
necessary for this level of engagement due
many faculty members focus more on
to the specific constraints and high
research
expectations placed upon them by their
responsibilities (Braxton et. al, 2006), and
departments and institutions.
often the rewards to faculty for research
activities
than
other
are greater than for teaching activities.
- 15 -
Graduate students noted that they often
messages-such as tenure decisions or other
receive
measures
mixed
messages
McDaniels, 2006).
(Austin
&
In the Austin (2000)
of
esteem-often
reveal
a
devaluing of teaching and a valorization of
study, “they observed that statements
research” (p. 22).
made by institutional leaders about the
Also of interest to the investigators
importance of high-quality teaching do not
was the literature that indicated that
coincide with the ways their advisors or
differences in graduate preparation for
supervising faculty spend their time, with
teaching could vary by field of study. In
advice offered in casual hall conversations,
their work on the cultures of the various
or with university reward structures” (p.
academic disciplines, Braxton and Hargens
104). A similar finding was noted in a study
(1996) classified disciplines into low and
completed by Nyquist et. al. (1999) in which
high-consensus fields based on the levels of
researchers found that “the most apparent
consensus that the disciplines showed on a
contradictory
messages
series of issues including proper methods
concern the relative value of the teaching
of research and the importance of research
and research dimensions of academic life,
questions.
particularly
intensive
fields included the physical sciences while
discourse,
low consensus fields were often those
administrators, department chairs, and
found in the social sciences and the
many professors embrace teaching as well
humanities. In regards to the emphasis on
as research as central to the mission of the
teaching, the researchers found that “the
university; meanwhile, observed implicit
degree of scholarly consensus within
universities.
or
at
ambiguous
the
In
research
official
- 16 -
Examples of high consensus
departments serves as a mediator in the
Trends
relationship
Preparation
between
research” (p.58).
teaching
and
Impacting
Graduate
Student
In other words, they
Still, there are several trends that
reviewed studies of both high consensus
are impacting and elevating teaching as an
and low consensus disciplines and found
emphasis in graduate preparation. Austin
that the high-consensus disciplines spent
(2002) notes the following. First, increased
more time on research activities with
scrutiny by external groups, whether
faculty emphasizing research goals more
justified or not, is having an impact.
often while the lower consensus fields of
Taxpayers are calling on today’s institutions
study exhibited a greater orientation to
to enhance undergraduate education by
teaching and improving their practice. This
focusing on the needs of learners.
finding may indicate why some graduate
impacts both the number of teachers
programs would have better or more
needed and the teaching load of individual
intentional teaching preparation for their
professors.
graduate students.
This is important
demographics of undergraduate student
because the distinction between high and
populations requires a renewed focus on
low-consensus fields of study and the
teaching strategies to address the varied
connection to teaching preparation may
learning styles of students who may be non-
provide additional insight into differences in
traditional or even those who may be of
graduate student training rather than
traditional age but may learn differently
institutional type by itself.
than their counterparts of previous years.
This
In addition, the changing
The result is that professors must be
- 17 -
prepared to address these new styles. The
than research universities” (p. 100). In his
introduction
of
new
work, The Future of the Scholarly Work of
advancements
has
become
technological
regular
Faculty (O’Meara & Rice, 2005), Eugene
occurrence in the educational experience,
Rice supports this idea that young faculty
and this requires a continuous learning
members are entering the workforce in
process for faculty members. This is not to
positions that have more of a teaching
say that the traditional “chalk and talk”
focus than the graduates may have
approach is completely useless, but online
intended; therefore, he contends that
learning requires alternative strategies. In
graduate students must be prepared for
addition to these issues, the requirements
multiple forms of scholarship as identified
of the job market appear to be changing.
by Ernest Boyer and later academicians. He
There are essentially only a few research
states that interviews from research studies
institutions that can afford to hire full-time
indicate that “graduate students and early
faculty researchers.
In other words, the
career faculty disclose a serious mismatch
requirement to teach may actually be
between the doctoral preparation that
growing due to fewer opportunities at
most receive and the needs of the
research-based institutions. Austin (2002)
universities and colleges in which they are
states that “It is very likely that many new
likely to be employed” (p. 311)
faculty
members
a
This finding of a lack of preparation
community
for teaching responsibilities is consistent
college, or liberal arts college, each more
with quantitative studies as well. Golde and
oriented toward teaching and public service
Dore (2000) used data from a survey of
comprehensive
will
a
university,
work
in
- 18 -
9645 students in 11 disciplines at 28 major
Graduate students have sought out other
research institutions and they found that
opportunities to gain experience and in
“what students are trained for is not what
some cases have come together with their
they want, nor does it prepare them for the
peers to form small discussion groups to
jobs they take” (p.6). Their training was
reflect and discuss their experiences with
focused
particular emphasis on teaching.
primarily
on
research
and
This
publishing while teaching preparation was
desire by graduate students for regular and
often overlooked or relegated to teaching
guided reflection is a recurring topic in
assistant responsibilities with no organized
Austin’s work.
feedback about their work. The struggle
Future Faculty Programs
then to find a significant place for teaching
preparation
in
has
have developed co-curricular programs that
resulted in graduate students taking the
focus on preparing graduate students for
initiative
their roles as instructors with a particular
to
graduate
address
training
With that in mind, many institutions
the
missing
components of their experience.
For
emphasis on preparing doctoral students to
instance, graduate students in the Austin
become next generation faculty members.
study noted that while they remained
Due to the stringent requirements of
committed
their
doctoral work, this type of preparation is
departments in terms of research activity,
seen as “additional” training. The very fact
they went outside of the set parameters to
that it is seen as an “add on” rather than a
prepare themselves for other aspects of the
core component of the graduate student’s
faculty role, particularly that of teaching.
preparation may indicate its continued low
to
the
work
of
- 19 -
level of importance in the academy. The
Trusts, the National Science Foundation and
sentiment is that graduate students may
Atlantic Philanthropies and were the result
pursue their interest in teaching but not at
of collaboration between Association of
the expense of their academic work or in
American Colleges and Universities and the
many cases not even “on the clock” when
Council of Graduate Schools. Working with
other responsibilities such as research
doctoral-granting
would
the
departments at colleges and universities
preparation of doctoral students for their
that were hiring new faculty, the PFF
teaching roles as faculty members is a side
programs gave graduate students the
issue.
opportunity “to work with a teaching
be
impacted;
therefore,
institutions
and
To find innovative ways to address
mentor, and to teach part of a course,
preparation, in the early 90’s, the Preparing
attend faculty or committee meetings,
Future Faculty (PFF) movement took hold
meet with undergraduate students – and
“to develop alternative doctoral programs
then to reflect on the meaning of these
for preparing graduate students to do the
experiences” (p. 67). The Preparing Future
kind of work expected of faculty at most
Faculty programs were effective at drawing
colleges and universities, namely, to teach
attention to the socialization of graduate
and advise students; conduct and evaluate
students and their intentional preparation
research; and perform service to the
for teaching.
department, institution, and community”
teaching preparation, other aspects of the
(Gaff, 2005, p. 66).
These programs
faculty role were also covered. The PFF,
received funding from the Pew Charitable
then, was a precursor to many of the
- 20 -
While their focus included
teaching certificate programs that are
deliverable from participation which gives
prevalent across higher education today.
the participants something tangible that
As the number of these faculty
can be modified and used for prospective
preparation programs began diminishing
employers to review. In addition, all of the
around 2002, many institutions began to
programs
focus their efforts and significant resources
certificate or transcript notification for
for the training of graduate students as
those who complete the programs thereby
teachers. Institutions such as the University
creating
of Colorado at Boulder, University of
graduate.
California at Santa Barbara, Princeton,
The Scholarship of Teaching
Michigan State, and the University of
Michigan
have
all
created
have
labored
another
to
credential
create
for
a
the
One other significant focus of both
extensive
the PFF programs and the newer teaching-
preparation programs that focus on the
focused programs is on the idea of teaching
teaching component of the faculty role.
as scholarship. For so long, scholarship was
Although particular to their respective
narrowly defined as research conducted by
institutions, these programs have several
faculty members in a field of study on some
similar characteristics. Most are designed
component of that academic field. Ernest
to help future faculty members gain an
Boyer’s work, Scholarship Reconsidered:
understanding of student learning and
Priorities of the Professoriate (1990),
methodologies that lead to learning. They
advocated
also include both observation and practice
scholarship that included not only research
components.
which he termed the scholarship of
The portfolio is the basic
- 21 -
a
broader
definition
of
discovery, but also the scholarship of
Braxton, Luckey, and Helland (2002) state
integration, the scholarship of application
that “scholars generally agree about what
and the scholarship of teaching. This was
Boyer
seen as a challenge to the status quo, and
application, the scholarship of discovery,
this new framework for viewing scholarship
and the scholarship of integration. But the
sparked debates about the merits of
scholarship of teaching has been strongly
Boyer’s work. It is important to note that
contested, with various scholars refusing to
prior to Boyer’s work; however, others had
bend toward consensus” (p.55). The main
advocated alternative forms of scholarship
ideas supporting Boyer’s scholarship of
to the more traditional forms which
teaching suggested that in order for
included publications in refereed journals
teaching to be considered in the same vein
(Miller, 1972, Seldin, 1980, Braxton &
as research it must be assessed from three
Toombs, 1982, and Pellino, Blackburn, and
sources.
Boberg,
these
should be self-assessed, peer-assessed, and
academicians observed opportunities to
student-assessed. He hoped that this level
broaden the idea of scholarship in very
of scrutiny would help elevate teaching to a
similar ways that Boyer ultimately identified
status equal with research. Unfortunately,
in his work.
his work lacked clear articulation of ideas in
1984).
Early
on,
meant
by
the
scholarship
of
Boyer believed that teaching
Of his four domains of scholarship,
the minds of many and Boyer died a few
the scholarship of teaching has probably
short years later. The work on his concepts
received the most attention and has proved
that occurred after his death ultimately
to be the most problematic.
brought them into the full view of the
In fact,
- 22 -
academic world. Hutchings and Shulman
use by other members of one’s scholarly
contributed significant work to this concept
community” (p.9)
and
scholarly
scholarship of teaching has, over time, been
teaching and the scholarship of teaching by
enhanced and it continues to be challenged
stating that the “scholarship of teaching is a
and recreated; however, there is general
process through which the profession of
agreement now according to Braxton et al.
teaching itself advances. It occurs when
(2002)
faculty systematically investigate questions
scholarship of teaching, some form of peer
related to student learning, and it happens
review must take place” (p.65).
with one eye on improving their own
despite continuing discussion about the
classroom performance and the other on
exact meaning, the concept itself has
advancing the practice” (Braxton et. al,
become a hallmark of teaching preparation
2005, p. 61) Hutchins and Shulman (1998)
programs. If nothing else, the scholarship
found that in order for teaching or any
of teaching has been used to validate
activity to be considered scholarly it must
programs as worthy of pursuit for the young
be “public, susceptible to critical review and
or aspiring faculty member.
differentiated
between
evaluation, and accessible for exchange and
- 23 -
that
“to
The definition of the
be
considered
the
Still,
Comparison of Similar Programs
A review of several nationally-
during the program.
While no stated
recognized teaching preparation programs
outcomes are listed specifically for the
provides some insight into the common
Graduate
practices they share.
Graduate Teacher Program which houses
Information about
Teaching
other programs serves as a context within
several
which to examine Vanderbilt’s program and
participants of all of its programs to:
a benchmark for gauging Vanderbilt’s

program objectives and practices.



University of Colorado – Boulder
At the University of Colorado,

Boulder,
for
example,
the
Teacher

Certification program is housed in the

Graduate Teacher Program and supported
by the Graduate School.
Successful
completion of the program was added as an

official notation on the graduate student’s

transcript. At the University of Colorado

Boulder, participation is limited to graduate
students, post-doctoral fellows, and faculty

who have the means to complete two full
semesters
of
teaching
responsibilities
- 24 -
training
Certification,
programs
the
encourages
explore nonbiased and nonsexist
teaching and learning;
plan and implement effective courses;
model and foster academic integrity;
develop a repertoire of research-based
teaching and assessment strategies;
demonstrate fairness in assignments,
test construction, and grading;
benefit from peer, faculty, and student
feedback;
interact with a community of scholars
made up of faculty, graduate students,
and staff from their own and from other
departments and campuses;
expand advising, counseling, and
mentoring skills;
learn to work with diverse student
populations;
create course-enhancing websites;
prepare academic or professional
portfolios; and
integrate and contribute to the
scholarship of teaching and learning
(University of Colorado-Boulder)
It is important to note the emphases
of College and University Teaching. In order
on learning strategies, peer involvement,
to qualify, participants must be in a position
mentoring, and the Scholarship of Teaching
to teach at least one course as the
and Learning.
instructor
The presence of these
of
record.
This
can
be
specific issues in the program demonstrates
accomplished at UC-Santa Barbara or a local
alignment with the current literature on
college or university. In contrast to the UC-
graduate student preparation. In terms of
Boulder program, teaching assistantships
methods or activities, small groups, video-
are not sufficient for participation in the
taped
faculty
program and neither is previous teaching
mentoring and regular evaluation were the
experience completed outside of the
primary methods of helping students to
program.
gain the proscribed competencies.
The
program under the Graduate Division of
main form of assessment is the preparation
Academic Services and it is directed by
of a teaching portfolio that is submitted
faculty
with documents that include teaching
competencies for the program are:
evaluations and faculty assessments. These

lectures,
workshops,
materials are reviewed by a member of the
program staff and a recommendation for
certification is made.

University of California – Santa Barbara
The University of California at Santa

Barbara awards individuals the Certificate
- 25 -
The program is a stand-alone
members.
The
five
core
The ability to successfully plan and
conduct discussion or laboratory
sections, to use a variety of instructional
strategies to promote student learning,
and to evaluate student performance in
section or on exams
The ability to apply appropriate
research, theory, models, and/or
principles of student learning to their
teaching
The ability to appropriately use
instructional technologies through an


instructional design aimed to meet a
specific learning goal, or to challenge
the efficacy of instructional technology
for a specific learning goal within an
academic discipline
The ability to effectively and
independently instruct a class through
the development of a new syllabus or
the analysis of an existing one, to
provide feedback to enhance student
learning, and to appropriately evaluate
student performance
The ability to cogently discuss and
demonstrate both the theory and
practice of their own teaching
(University of California - Santa Barbara)
portfolio, all materials are submitted for
review by program staff before certification
is granted.
University of Michigan
At the Rackham Graduate School at
the University of Michigan, the graduate
school collaborates with the Center for
Research on Learning and Teaching to
deliver a teacher certification course for
graduate students. Only current graduate
students are eligible for this program
The main form of assessment is, once
again,
a
portfolio
review
of
although
work
participate
completed. The portfolio includes a list of
students
training workshops attended, a completed
project
on
instructional
technologies,
successful completion of a teaching course
participate
workshops
on
experience
and/or
page
assigned a faculty mentor to guide them
experience.
must
Graduate
the
in
center
college
teaching
complete
specified
In addition
at the University of Michigan, write a 2-3
the instructor of record. Participants are
particular
workshops.
may
they must complete two terms of teaching
an analysis of the teaching experience as
their
in
fellows
courses for academic credit.
or program offered by the university, and
through
postdoctoral
philosophy
participate
teaching
in
the
of
teaching,
faculty
and
mentorship
program. The program home page states
Upon completion of the
- 26 -
that “This program offers graduate students
graduate students with an opportunity to
at
an
develop as self-reflective teachers who ask
professional
themselves what they want students to
development as college-level instructors
learn and how to promote and assess that
and prepare for the faculty job search. “ It
learning.” (Princeton University)
the
University
opportunity
to
of
document
Michigan
states specifically that participants will:
Requirements
1. develop and refine their teaching skills
2. reflect and obtain feedback on their
teaching
3. receive recognition for their training
and experience
4. prepare and receive feedback on their
teaching philosophy statement
(University of Michigan)
for
participants
include attendance in multiple assistantship
training sessions and McGraw Center
workshops on pedagogy, at least one
semester of teaching as an assistant
instructor, completion of an observation
and feedback experience with a consultant
The University of Michigan uses a
from the center, and development of a
portfolio system as well. Upon successful
teaching philosophy and an original syllabus
completion of all requirements, students
for an introductory course in their academic
are awarded a certificate; however, no
discipline. These final two pieces of written
documentation on the transcript is noted.
expression appear to be the assessment
Princeton University
pieces along with completion of other
At Princeton University, the McGraw
requirements determine certification. No
Center provides a Teaching Transcript to
specific outcomes or competencies are
eligible graduate students who complete
identified in the program’s description
the necessary requirements. The program’s
online.
website states that it “provides Princeton
- 27 -
Michigan State University
experience which includes a graduate
Finally, an initiative of the Graduate
teaching
project.
Participation
in
School at Michigan State University, the
workshops or courses that focus on key
Certification in College Teaching works with
areas is also required. The five key areas
graduate departments on campus to “help
are:
graduate students organize and develop

their teaching experience in a systematic




and thoughtful way, with assistance from
faculty and campus offices and programs, in
a manner similar to that already in place for
research
experience.”
(Michigan
State
In terms of outcomes for the
University)
The program at MSU uses a variety
of activities as the foundation for its
program.
experience,
a
faculty
program,
the
Certification
Teaching
has
outlined
in
an
College
extensive
framework and list of core competencies
These include actual teaching
and
Adult students as learners/creating
learning environments,
Discipline-related teaching strategies,
Assessment of learning,
Technology in the classroom,
Professional
development/understanding
the
university.
and skills for its participants. They are best
mentor
outlined
- 28 -
in
Figure
1
below:
Figure 1. MSU Framework of Core Competencies
Assessment
of
students’
program itself.
Successful completion of
achievement of these competencies is
these items results in a teaching certificate
measured by a portfolio that includes
from the student’s department as well as a
reflective essays on experiences, a teaching
notification on the student’s transcript.
philosophy
(Michigan State University)
statement,
a
thorough
description of the teaching project, student
Summary of Programs
evaluations, and completion of accepted
coursework
and
workshops
An analysis of the programs profiled
within
above suggests several themes and/or
departments as well as those offered by the
commonalities. First, participants in these
- 29 -
programs are required to demonstrate
complete an exit survey or questionnaire
practical experience with teaching whether
prior to receiving their certification.
that be as a teaching assistant or the
This brief overview of programs also
instructor of record. Second, participants
reveals several areas of concern if not
must receive some type of feedback from a
weaknesses for these programs.
mentor or program staff member. Third,
importantly, the assessment of skill mastery
participants
reflect
upon
their
or the development of competencies is
and
then
make
based on completing a check-list of
adjustments or develop plans to include
activities and experiences in addition to a
new strategies and methodologies. Fourth,
subjective review of portfolio materials.
participants must develop a teaching
The
philosophy that guides them in their current
participating in group work does not
and future work. Fifth, they must attend
necessarily imply that there has been value-
either workshops or in some cases actual
added as a result of that participation. This
courses to gain knowledge, particularly in
is not meant to imply that these activities
the area of adult learning styles. Lastly,
are not useful or educational but simply
participants must develop a comprehensive
that attendance may not be an adequate
portfolio that highlights their experiences
method of assessing competency.
and what they have learned from the
The portfolio review has become a more
experience.
In addition, most of the
common approach and has met some
programs also require participants to
success; however, the key to the portfolio
teaching
must
Most
experience
act
of
attending
workshops
or
review is the recognition of specific
- 30 -
evidence of gains in knowledge. This links
the portfolio be more than just a cursory
directly
or
review to see if everything is addressed. An
competencies for each program or the
excellent example of this is the teaching
absence of them in one case. In order to
philosophy
claim
actually
University of Michigan. Professional staff
developing these skills or building this
members have created an instrument for
knowledge
or
reviewing the teaching statements of their
competencies must be clearly defined in
graduate students. The rubric, created by
terms of measurable concepts so that any
Kaplan, O’Neal, Meizlish, Carillo, and Kardia
two reviewers would come to the same
identifies the key components of a teaching
agreement on successful completion.
If
philosophy and defines them. Next they
Michigan State University claims that
develop levels of competency indicating
participants will become knowledgeable
degree, depth, and scope of expressed
about learning styles, then what would that
knowledge. The rubric can be used by the
look like when a reviewer is reading a
different reviewers and because of its
student’s portfolio?
specificity;
to
that
the
stated
participants
base,
the
outcomes
are
outcomes
Must the portfolio
include mention of a specific, recognized
rubric
the
developed
chance
of
by
the
differing
assessments can be minimized.
theory of learning? More than one theory?
Overall, the content of the various
In order to add validity to the program, to
programs seems to be based on graduate
be able to say that participants have been
students’ expressed needs and research.
“changed” by involvement in the program,
First, graduate students have expressed the
then it is essential that the assessment of
need for preparation for teaching. Second,
- 31 -
they have communicated their desire for
that many new faculty members will find
mentoring
themselves
relationships
with
faculty
in
teaching
institutions
members. Third, research points to the fact
regardless of preference for research-
that the reality of first job appointments is
focused appointments.
- 32 -
Teaching Certificate Program Description
The Center for Teaching at Vanderbilt
program
of
preparation
for
teaching
(CFT) contributes to the institution’s success
whereas the institution’s Future Faculty
as a learning community by focusing its
Preparation Program (F2P2) focused on a
efforts on programs “to foster and sustain a
broad array of professional development
culture that practices, values, and rewards
issues such as writing one’s curriculum vita,
university teaching and learning as vital
preparing for job interviews, understanding
forms
the faculty culture, dealing with stress, and
of
scholarship”
(Vanderbilt
University). The mission of the Center for
preparation for teaching.
Teaching at Vanderbilt University is to
research, trends, and student need, and in

an attempt to remain true to the CFT’s


Promote deep understanding of
teaching and learning processes by
helping both individuals and groups of
instructors to gather, analyze, and
reflect on information about their own
teaching and their students' learning.
Cultivate dialogue about teaching and
learning
through
orientations,
workshops, working groups, and other
programs.
Create and disseminate research-based
best practices, models, and approaches
to university teaching and learning -and facilitate access to resources that
support them.
(Vanderbilt University)
In light of
stated mission, the CFT’s leadership decided
that the core mission of helping to prepare
students for teaching roles could be more
deliberately addressed. The CFT created a
program that emphasizes teaching and
learning at its core. In addition, the CFT’s
leadership drew upon the research on
graduate student socialization to guide their
work in creating a program that would be
both theory-based and practical.
The Teaching Certificate program
In
particular, the leadership used the work of
was developed to be a more intentional
- 33 -
Ernest Boyer’s scholarship of teaching to
skills through three cycles of teaching
add a unique element to the program. The
activities,
Scholarship of Teaching as described by
experimentation, and reflection phases.”
Boyer includes a methodical approach to
(Vanderbilt University) There is no specific
studying how students learn and receive
teaching experience required in order to
information in the learning environment,
participate in the program. In other words,
examining specific pedagogical strategies in
students who serve as instructors of record
one’s particular classroom experience and
or those who have teaching assistantships
then taking the findings and making them
or those who simply teach one or two guest
public (Braxton et. al, 2005). This additional
lectures each semester may participate in
focus in the Teaching Certificate program
the program.
was created so that those with a focus on
based on their desire to participate and
teaching could see their work as teachers as
their completion of the application process;
a way to contribute to scholarship. It adds a
therefore, the program is open to anyone
new dimension to the more traditional
who wants to dedicate the time to meeting
preparation for teaching.
the requirements. Like similar programs,
each
consisting
of
inquiry,
Participants are selected
As a joint project between the
those who complete the program receive a
Graduate School and the Center for
certificate from the Graduate School and
Teaching, Vanderbilt’s Teaching Certificate
the Center for Teaching.
program aims “to help graduate students,
The Teaching Certificate program
professional students, and post-doctoral
has six stated outcomes for program
fellows develop and refine their teaching
participants.
- 34 -
1. “By developing and refining your
teaching skills, you'll improve the endproduct of your teaching: the learning
of your current and future students.
You'll do this by better understanding
student learning and what kinds of
teaching lead to it.
2. By approaching your teaching as a cycle
of inquiry, experimentation, and
reflection, you'll develop skills that will
enable you to analyze and improve
your own teaching now and in the
future.
3. Research indicates that new faculty
often find teaching the most challenging
and time-consuming part of their jobs.
By developing your teaching skills now,
you'll be more likely to be a "quick
starter" in your first faculty position.
4. You'll realize ways in which you can
approach your teaching as a scholarly
activity, helping you understand
yourself as a scholar in all areas of your
academic life, not just your research
pursuits.
5. You'll develop a teaching portfolio you
can share with potential employers
when you're on the job market. More
importantly, you'll gain experience in
thinking deeply and intentionally about
your thinking and you'll be equipped to
talk more effectively about your
teaching when you're on the job
market.
6. By participating in workshops and
working groups, meeting with CFT
consultants, and presenting some of
your work in the Teaching Certificate
program in a public forum, you'll
engage with your own teaching among
a community of scholars. This sense of
community, frequently a component of
research endeavors, is often lacking in
one's teaching.” (Vanderbilt University)
Much
like
programs
other
teacher
described,
the
preparation
Teaching
Certificate program combines workshops,
teaching
observation
and
feedback
experiences, reading groups, a literature
review, and reflective essays.
However,
one element that sets the Vanderbilt
program apart from similar programs is the
required
project
that
highlights
the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
(SoTL).
For this project, students must
design and execute a project in which they
develop and/or use a teaching methodology
and then assess the success of it. They
must document and ultimately “go public”
with their findings. This unique aspect of
Vanderbilt’s program lends some credibility
to the program as one that not only directs
- 35 -
students to the research on teaching and
use in teaching students. For most, this
learning but which also asks them to engage
teaching
it in a practical manner. It is the hope of
participant’s philosophy prior to his or her
the professional staff that students will not
engagement with the literature on teaching
only learn about their own teaching from
and learning. In addition, the participant
this experience but that they will contribute
works with a member of the CFT to develop
to the research on teaching through this
a program plan that fits with the students’
project as well as continue to pursue this
schedule and other commitments.
type of research as one expression of their
program is self-paced, so the student can
faculty responsibilities in future jobs.
move as quickly or as slowly as necessary.
statement
captures
the
The
Once participants have applied,
The program uses a three-cycle approach
interviewed, and been accepted into the
and portfolio to capture participants’ ideas,
program, they create an initial teaching
questions, reflections, and observations as
statement.
illustrated in Figure 2 below and described
They are encouraged to
describe their philosophy of teaching and
in
any guiding concepts that they intend to
- 36 -
detail
thereafter.
Figure 2. Diagram of Teaching Certificate program
The
Center
for
Teaching
has
the
conclusion
of
these
activities,
structured its program in such a way that
participants reflect on their observations in
participants advance through the three
written form and post these responses in
cycles in a systematic manner. Each cycle
their online portfolio.
contains an inquiry, experimentation, and
experimentation stage of Cycle 1, students
reflection stage. In Cycle 1, for instance,
find an opportunity to teach which can be
during the inquiry stage, participants attend
on-campus or at a local postsecondary
workshops hosted by the center or those
institution. These could include teaching a
identified by the center as consistent with
class or a portion of one in their
the program.
department or teaching in non-classroom
In addition, participants
observe others teach in real situations. At
setting such as a workshop.
- 37 -
During the
After their
teaching experience(s), participants meet
with other members of the program in
with
Teaching
Cycle 2. The participants of the working
feedback.
group reads literature on teaching and
Many times students are videotaped during
learning and discusses methodologies and
their teaching experiences so they can go
strategies for better teaching.
back and review their experience. In the
experimentation phase of Cycle 2, students
final phase of Cycle 1, students write a
once again find an opportunity to teach and
comprehensive
their
use what they have been learning and then
experience in Cycle 1 from what they
meet with an observer/consultant from the
learned
CFT
a
Center
observer/consultant
in
for
to
gain
reflection
the
workshops
and
their
observations
own
of
to
their
to
discuss
their
In the
strengths
and
teaching
weaknesses. During the reflection phase of
experience. They also update their program
Cycle 2, students reflect on what they have
plan to reflect new or adjusted priorities
learned and once again update their
and emphases.
program plan to identify new priorities and
During the inquiry phase of Cycle 2,
emphases.
students begin exploring the literature on
teaching and learning.
The final cycle of the program, Cycle
They examine
3, emphasizes the Scholarship of Teaching
teaching methodologies and strategies as
and Learning. The focus here is to have
well as research on how students learn and
participants understand that teaching and
how they, as teachers, can facilitate
learning can be legitimate topics of research
learning. In this phase, students can also
that contribute to knowledge and that they
choose to participate in a working group
can perform this research. Based on the
- 38 -
original work of Ernest Boyer’s Four
project this can be accomplished in as little
Domains of Scholarship (Boyer, 1990), the
as a few weeks or as long as several
CFT defines the SoTL as:
months. Upon completion of their project,

participants must find an appropriate outlet


asking questions about student learning
and the teaching activities designed to
promote student learning in an effort, at
least in part, to improve one's own
teaching practice,
answering
those
questions
by
systematically analyzing evidence of
student learning, and
sharing the results of that analysis
publicly in order to invite review and to
contribute to the body of knowledge on
student learning in a variety of contexts.
(Vanderbilt University)
to “go public” with their project and the
corresponding findings. This may include
presentation at a professional conference
or at a graduate student workshop on
campus.
Upon
students
completion
must
revise
of
Cycle
their
3,
teaching
statement based on what they have learned
In the inquiry phase of Cycle 3, participants
and experienced. Staff from the Center for
design a scholarship of teaching and
Teaching then review the participant’s
learning project. The project focuses on
portfolio and conduct an exit interview with
their subject area and is designed such that
the
participant.
Upon
satisfactory
it can be implemented through their
completion of requirements, participants
current teaching opportunities.
This is
receive a teaching certificate from both the
created in consultation with a member of
Center for Teaching and the Graduate
the Center for Teaching staff.
In the
School of Vanderbilt University.
experimentation
phase,
participants
One of the strengths of the program
actually
implement
their
project.
is that it is supported by the research of
Depending on the size and scope of the
- 39 -
Austin, Nyquist, Sprague and others as
their teaching experience. Likewise, in a
evidenced in the various components that
four year qualitative study, researchers
reflect research findings. In their qualitative
questioned graduate students on a variety
study of graduate student experiences
of issues and found that there were few
(1999), Nyquist et al. found that graduate
opportunities
students would like “additional forms of
development,
support for their professional development
relationships, and very few chances to
as teachers.
reflect on their experiences as teachers
systematic
They suggest regular and
lack
of
mentoring
(Austin, 2002). The same study also found
experiences; discussing teaching with other
that graduate students benefited from
TAs; observing and being observed and
interaction with their peers. Anderson and
giving
about
Swayze (1998) also found that graduate
teaching; and more consistent and relevant
students claimed that they “learned more
mentoring and advising about life as a
from each other than from faculty” (p. 6).
teaching scholar – in short, real intellectual
This literature supports the CFT’s emphasis
and emotional engagement with others
on having participants engage their peers
about teaching” (p. 24).
An example of
on ideas related to teaching and learning in
Vanderbilt’s efforts to respond to this
workshops and reading groups. Finally, the
finding is in the program design which
emphasis on the Scholarship of Teaching
includes a recurring reflective component
and Learning acknowledges the significant
and opportunities for participants to engage
place that research and contribution to
with a professional staff member about
knowledge plays in the life of the
receiving
about
a
professional
their
and
self-reflection
for
feedback
- 40 -
academician.
their
Having participants focus
research
teaching
had completed Cycle 1, 12 had completed
methodology as the subject of study is a
Cycle 2, and 3 had completed Cycle 3 thus
win-win situation for the participants.
completing the entire program. Of the 80
Participation and Satisfaction Data
participants, 69 are graduate students, 10
In
terms
skills
of
on
teaching statement. Of that amount, 23
participation
in
are post doctoral fellows and one is listed as
Vanderbilt’s program, as of October 2007
faculty.
when this assessment was initiated, the
therefore, students could be at any point in
program had 80 participants who had
each of the cycles and can complete cycles
submitted applications.
at their own pace. As of the writing of this
Enrollment by
The program is self-paced;
program stage is shown as Figure 3 and
report,
enrollment by school is shown as Figure 4.
successfully completed the program and
Of that amount, approximately 50 had
received
completed their intake interview and initial
- 41 -
three
more participants have
their
certificate.
Figure 3. Program enrollment by stage
Teaching Certificate Participants
by School
October 2007
34
30
21
20
9
10
8
8
School
Figure 4. Program enrollment by school
- 42 -
Education &
Organizational
Development
Medicine
Engineering
Divinity
0
Arts & Science
# of Participants
40
The Center for Teaching staff has also
feedback based on qualitative interviews
collected satisfaction data. In June of 2007,
with randomly sampled participants in
the center staff sent a 10-question survey
various cycles indicated that a main reason
to
After
for enrolling in the program was, in fact, to
approximately 2 weeks, 19 participants had
help them become more marketable when
responded out of a total of 62 participants
seeking a full-time faculty position.
the
current
participants.
who had been sent the survey. Results of
the
survey
satisfaction,
rated consultations with professional staff,
motivation, and usefulness of the program
reading groups, and workshops as most
and its various components.
The most
useful and they also indicated that the
often stated reason for participating in the
program was most helpful in assisting them
program was to help oneself improve their
with
chances at obtaining a faculty appointment.
intentional teachers, with improving the
It
learning of their students, and with
was
indicated
On the other hand, participants
particularly
interesting
that
becoming
more
approaching
least helpful components of the program
endeavor. The data does not, however, tell
was improving their ability to obtain a
us how much they have learned or to what
faculty position. The discrepancy between
degree they have engaged topics.
should be investigated.
section
of
this
a
scholarly
In terms of participant data, the
In a subsequent
document,
as
and
participants also indicated that one of the
these two responses is problematic and
teaching
reflective
Center for Teaching reports that currently
however,
69% of those who complete an application
- 43 -
actually proceed to the next stage which is
no data has been systematically collected.
the intake interview.
The following
Representation in the program may or may
schools/colleges had lower than average
not be evidence of awareness or support;
persistence rates from application to intake
however, since students are not required to
interview:
have advisor approval prior to participation,




there is no evidence that suggests that
Peabody participants – 38%
Engineering participants – 43%
Divinity participants – 50%
Social Science participants – 59%
participants notify their faculty members
that they are involved in the program.
Procuring this data would be valuable in
The participation data analysis suffers from
assessing the actual and potential impact of
incomplete data and the CFT is currently
this program to the Vanderbilt graduate
updating its records to reflect the most up-
community.
to-date information for its participants. The
The participation and satisfaction
self-paced approach that underlies this
program
can
make
tracking
information highlights what is known about
progress
the program and what is unknown. This
difficult at times.
informs the program assessment of this
Finally, in terms of the awareness
project and can be used to support or
and perceived value of the certificate
challenge
program by faculty members at Vanderbilt,
- 44 -
any
findings.
Assessment Methods
In order to address the primary
performance as in knowledge gains can be
questions associated with this project and
difficult; therefore, the decision was made
thus develop a well-informed perspective of
to limit the assessment to the program’s
the strengths and weaknesses of the
stated objectives or competencies.
Teaching Certificate program, the project
assessing participants’ progress in meeting
was conducted in two phases.
The first
the program’s objectives, it is possible,
phase emphasized participant analysis.
then, to draw conclusions about the
Participant analysis was used to address the
program’s effectiveness.
first two questions posed by the Center for
In
The program has six objectives;
Teaching:
however, only four of these seemed

particularly

What do participants learn in the
program, including knowledge, skills,
and attitudes?
How do they apply what they learn
when teaching at Vanderbilt or in
faculty positions obtained after leaving
Vanderbilt?
change.
by
the
Center
knowledge
The four objectives that were
examined were:
In addition to satisfaction data
collected
to
attainment, skill development, or behavior

already
related

for

Teaching, two other methods were used to
assess gains in knowledge and practical

skills by participants of the program,
interview and document analysis. Gauging
- 45 -
Understanding of student learning and
what kinds of teaching lead to it
Development of skills that will enable
participants to analyze and improve
their own teaching
Realization of ways in which they can
approach their teaching as a scholarly
activity
Engagement with their own teaching
among a community of scholars
The two remaining objectives that deal with
order to gain depth of data about
the ability to be a “quick starter” in a
participants’
participant’s first academic appointment
Specifically, the document analysis would
and the ability to talk more effectively
allow the investigators to assess what
about one’s teaching while in the job
participants learn (question 1) and how
market were not easily measurable, and
they apply what they learn when teaching
they reflect a more external expression. In
at Vanderbilt (question 2).
change
or
lack
thereof.
addition, with the relatively small number
This approach was also a good fit
of students completing the program that
with the project because of the data
have entered the job market, assessing
already being collected by the Center for
these outcomes would be difficult and the
Teaching.
results would not yield much for analysis.
description, each participant creates an
Using
a
for
online portfolio which includes an initial
comparison was not feasible due to time
teaching statement, reviews of literature,
constraints as well as other factors. With
and reflective essays on their learning. At
that
investigators
the time that the assessment was initiated,
determined that a panel study was the best
only three students had completed the
approach.
The longitudinal panel study
program in its entirety; therefore, the
allows the investigator to examine a group
decision was made to review documents for
over time. In order to gauge students’ gains
ten participants who had completed Cycle 2
toward
of the program.
limitation,
the
control
the
program’s
group
As noted in the program
objectives,
a
longitudinal document analysis was used in
included
- 46 -
using
The specific process
a
rubric
to
measure
attainment of each objective at three
The ten participants’ portfolios were
distinct points in the participants’ program.
de-identified by the CFT staff. Then, each
In order to accomplish this, a rubric was
participant’s initial teaching statement was
created so that the investigators would
measured against the rubric by the two
have a common framework through which
investigators independently of one another.
they could assess the participants’ work and
Upon completion of this process, the
then assign values to their work. Using the
investigators compared notes and used a
University of Michigan’s rubric for assessing
previously agreed upon protocol to reach
teaching statements as a guide, a rubric for
consensus when necessary.
assessing student portfolios was created
where there was a discrepancy of one or
based on the specific objectives outlined by
more point differences in the ratings, the
the Center for Teaching.
The rubric is
investigators noted this and discussed the
provided as Appendix A. These objectives
differences and came to agreement about
were considered dependent variables and
assigning a value. In all, investigators had
operationalized by descriptions in the
to discuss differences only a handful of
rubric. A 5-point value system was created
times. This process was used in order to
with 1 indicating no evidence of change or
address
gain towards the objective and 5 indicating
reliability.
issues
related
to
Specifically,
inter-rater
significant mastery toward the objective.
Investigators reviewed participants
Use of the rubric provided a common frame
initial teaching statements, their reflections
through which to view the documents using
at the end of Cycle 1 and their reflections at
common language.
the end of Cycle 2. This method was chosen
- 47 -
because it allowed the investigators to see
The second method for participant
change over time as each participant
analysis was the participant interview. The
progressed through the program. In order
purpose of the interview was to once again
to
investigators
gauge students’ knowledge of the subject
examined documents looking for references
matter which directly relates to the first
to specific practices or theories of learning.
two questions posed by the Center for
In particular, the Teaching Certificate
Teaching which asks what
program introduces participants to such
learn in the program, including knowledge,
topics as backward design), Bransford’s
skills, and attitudes and whether and how
learning cycle (citation), as well as specific
they apply what they learn when teaching
techniques that include paired learning and
at Vanderbilt.
determine
1-minute
papers.
change,
In
addition,
the
participants
A secondary issue to study was to
investigators looked for any mention of
determine
if
their
engagement with peers or mentors that
consistent with the literature on graduate
involved discussion of teaching practice.
student socialization as reported by Austin
Finally, use of terminology that is consistent
(2002), Nyquist (1999), and Golde and Dore
with the definition of the Scholarship of
(2000) , Golde and Dore (2001) who found
Teaching Learning was also used as
that graduate students experienced a lack
evidence of knowledge gained. The results
of coherence in their preparation, little
of this analysis are discussed at length in
mentoring
the findings section of this report.
teaching, and conflicting messages about
from
experiences
faculty
about
were
their
the true value of teaching in the academic
- 48 -
profession.
The Center for Teaching
were contacted via email request for an
provided the investigators with a complete
interview.
list of participants and their corresponding
anonymity
progress in the program. The investigators
cooperation. A copy of the email request is
decided to interview 4 students from each
provided in Appendix B. Of the 12 total
cycle. At the time that the interviews were
participants
to be conducted three more participants
interviews, 10 responded.
had completed the program; therefore, 4
created and used a survey script with input
individuals were chosen from each cycle
from the Center for Teaching (Appendix C).
using a random number generator.
The
Main questions and follow-up questions
investigators made a deliberate decision
were designed to gain as much information
not to interview participants who had not
from the student without leading them too
completed Cycle 1 because within that
much.
population, which has substantially more
would allow students to answer “in terms
individuals, participants range from those
of their experiences and knowledge” (Rubin
who sent in an initial application but have
and
done nothing more to those who are
participants’ answers lacked elaboration,
actually in the process of trying to complete
investigators used prompts to encourage
Cycle 1.
greater detail and depth about their
The investigators felt that the
Participants were guaranteed
in
exchange
that
were
for
their
requested
for
Investigators
Investigators used questions that
Rubin,
2005,
When
experience
information that was so varied that it would
Interview questions fell into four categories.
not be useful.
Participants were asked basic information
- 49 -
their
159).
range of experiences would result in
The participants chosen
and
p.
perceptions.
about their academic aspirations and
statements, or generate evidence that
reasons
certificate
learning, or lack thereof, was occurring.
program. They were also asked about their
Interviews were conducted and data were
content
entered into a simple matrix in order to
for
pursuing
the
knowledge.
investigators
wanted
Specifically,
to
know
what
clearly identify common as well as unique
students believed they had learned in the
responses to survey questions.
program and if they could articulate key
spreadsheets were structured based on the
concepts. Third, participants were asked
four categories on which the survey was
about their perceptions of the program, its
constructed. While the first category, basic
usefulness and the feasibility of completing
information, simply provided background
it.
information about the participants and
Lastly, participants were asked to
describe
their
particular
The
department’s
their reasons for participation in the
expectations and perceptions regarding the
program, the remaining three categories
importance of teaching and about their
informed
participation in the program.
Questions
addressed by this project. The second
were generated to specifically address
category, content knowledge, links directly
limitations experienced in the document
to question 1 about knowledge, skills, and
analysis phase.
In order to gain further
abilities as well as to question 2 which asks
depth into what participants were actually
about using that knowledge or skills in real
learning in the program, questions were
situations.
included that could either substantiate
perceptions, and the fourth category,
earlier findings, provide insight into obscure
departmental expectations, both inform
- 50 -
the
three
questions
being
The third category, program
question number 3 which asks what
For the second phase of this project,
knowledge, skills and attitudes are valued
the Center for Teaching wanted to gain
by departments at Vanderbilt.
insight on the perceptions and needs of the
The
common themes that emerged from the
various
participants’ responses are discussed in the
departments toward teaching preparation
analysis sections of this report and are
for their graduate students as well as their
consistent with literature on graduate
perceptions of the services offered by the
student socialization.
Center for Teaching. Stakeholder analysis
The spreadsheets containing the
Vanderbilt
University
was used to address the third question
interview data are located in Appendix D.
posed by the Center for Teaching:
Use of matrices to categorize data as

suggested
by
Patton
(2002)
graduate
made
classification and analysis of data easier in
What knowledge, skills, and attitudes
regarding teaching do Vanderbilt
departments and programs want their
doctoral students to possess upon
graduation?
terms of identifying common themes that
Once again, the hope was that the
are explained in the analysis portion of this
report and which include the following:
interviews would provide insight into

graduate student preparation particularly as



Students can identify specific teaching
practices.
The tension between teaching and
research exists for graduate students.
Students find the program very helpful
in preparing them for teaching roles.
Departments
allow
students
to
participate but are not proactive in
directing their students toward this
program.
it relates to teaching.
expected
to
find
Investigators also
differences
across
academic fields even speculating that these
differences would be consistent with the
work of Braxton and Hargens (1996) who
- 51 -
found differences based on high and low
investigators created an interview survey
consensus fields of study.
Investigators
protocol with input from the Center for
were asked to interview the Directors of
Teaching (Appendix G). Specific concerns
Graduate Study for 30 doctoral programs at
for this part of the project were related to
Vanderbilt chosen by the CFT based on the
how the CFT would be represented to
current program population and the time
faculty members in campus departments.
available to conduct interviews. The list of
With that in mind, deliberate attention was
departments
was
given to wording of questions. In addition,
generated by the Center for Teaching
the interviewees were assured that their
(Appendix E). Wording of correspondence
specific comments would not be identified
with the Directors of Graduate Study was
with
very important because of the sensitive
permission to be identified. Specific topics
nature of the type of information being
covered by the interview included general
requested.
statistics
to
be
interviewed
With that in mind, the
them
on
unless
the
they
gave
particular
program,
investigators sought assistance from the
information
Center for Teaching staff to craft the
preparation
requests for assistance. After agreeing on
familiarity with and perception of the
wording,
an
Center for Teaching and specifically the
their
Teaching Certificate program. Investigators
participation (Appendix F). Of the 30 that
designed their survey to elicit information
were requested only 4 individuals declined
that would create a picture of the
to participate in the interview.
environment in which doctoral students
directors
introductory
email
were
asking
sent
for
The
- 52 -
about
direct
for
their
departmental
graduates,
and
find themselves in regards to the emphasis
programs in the same college or academic
on teaching as preparation for future career
area were grouped together for analysis of
opportunities.
This was intentional since
the area when possible. For instance, all
research on graduate preparation indicates
five directors of graduate study from
that graduate students are not being
Peabody College were interviewed for this
adequately prepared (Austin, 2002; Bess,
project and then their responses were
1978; Golde, 1997). Information gathered
viewed
from the interviews was placed into a
capture
simple matrix for easier analysis of data.
environment that includes common themes
The spreadsheets containing the interview
across the college as well as unique
data from the DGS's are provided as
characteristics from different departments.
Appendix H. Upon creation of the matrix,
- 53 -
together
a
and
picture
of
summarized
the
to
Peabody
Document Analysis of Participant Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
The results of the quantitative
by participants during the program in terms
document analysis described in this section
of knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
demonstrate one method used in order to
determine
what
are
document analysis, the numeric scores for
learning as they progress through the
each objective being investigated were
program. Results of a subsequent method
analyzed using paired t-tests with an alpha
using qualitative interviews are described in
of .05. The range of possible proficiency
the
scores was '1' representing no proficiency
next
the
participants
Using the rubric developed for the
section.
quantitative
In
measures
this
to
to '5' representing mastery of the concepts
attempt to explain the magnitude of
of the objective. Means were taken of the
learning
through
10 participant scores from each program
online
portfolio
cycle and compared.
their
personal
performed comparing mean scores of the
reflections after they completed each cycle.
Intake Interview stage and Cycle 1 which
The numeric scale used was a 5-point scale.
are discussed in this section as the impact
Four of the six program objectives were
of Cycle 1. A second t-test was performed
operationalized
and
on the mean proficiency scores from Cycle 1
documents were evaluated against these
and Cycle 2, which are discussed here as the
four objectives on five distinct levels of
impact of Cycle 2.
proficiency.
The differences explained
performed on the mean proficiency scores
below illustrate the magnitude of learning
of the Intake Interview and Cycle 2, which
by
the
were
section
participants
examination
of
their
documents
including
in
the
used
rubric
- 54 -
A t-test was
The third t-test was
are discussed as program impact through
by showing the change in the means and
the completion of Cycle 2.
the corresponding p-values from those
Significant
differences in numeric scores are illustrated
differences
in
Figure
5
below.
Program Objective
Intake-Cycle 1 Cycle 1-Cycle 2 Intake-Cycle 2
1. Understanding of student
learning and what kinds of 2.5-2.7 (.7)
2.7-4.1 (.021)* 2.5-4.1 (.000)*
teaching lead to it
2. Development of skills that
will enable participants to
2.2-2.7 (.244)
2.7-3.5 (.121)
2.2-3.5 (.001)*
analyze and improve their
own teaching
3. Realization of ways in
which participants can
1.0-0.9 (.343)
0.9-1.1 (.168)
1.0-1.1 (.343)
approach their teaching as
a scholarly activity
4. Engagement with their
own teaching among a
1.1-1.8 (.010)* 1.8-2.2 (.223)
1.1-2.2 (.003)*
community of scholars
Figure 5. t-Test Results. Differences in means and corresponding p-values.
Objective 1 – Understanding of student
to them in order to increase a participant's
learning and what kinds of teaching lead to
effectiveness in teaching. This concept is
it
fundamental in examining how teaching
The
objective
affects student learning and the realization
involves
that there are multiple ways of learning.
understanding student learning and what
Understanding the various ways students
kinds of teaching lead to it. This objective
learn in a course can provide the instructor
requires knowledge of various learning
with valuable information on how best to
styles and the teaching activities that map
present
examined
first
in
this
program
evaluation
- 55 -
course
content.
Maximum
effectiveness can be reached if these
samples related to the rubric increased
teaching methods are geared directly to the
from 2.7 to 4.1 (p≤.05).
ways students learn. From these data, the
comparison participants on average were
document
the
able to describe one or more teaching
no
methodologies directly related to a learning
significant difference in knowledge gained
theory by the end of Cycle 2. It is uncertain
for this objective from intake through Cycle
if this change actually occurred in Cycle 2 or
1. The means of the two samples changed
if the participants simply articulated the
slightly from a proficiency level mean of 2.5
elements of this objective more clearly in
to 2.7. This means that the participants
Cycle 2 documentation.
sampled
somewhat surprising considering Cycle 1
analysis
participants
suggests
examined
on
that
experienced
average
demonstrated
involves
learning, and possibly two theories given
participant’s teaching. Cycle 2 involves a
the proximity to the next proficiency level,
review of relevant SoTL literature and
by the end of Cycle 1 with the inclusion of
engagement in a reading group where a
an example or two. However, a limitation
participant can interact with other scholars.
of this data is that participants may not
The significant difference that occurs as a
have articulated these points in their online
result of completing Cycle 2 may suggest
portfolios. Significant change in proficiency
the influence of a reading group to a
is suggested as evidenced in Cycle 2
participant’s
portfolio
average
combination with content learned from
proficiency levels of the before and after
Cycle 1; however, the ability to determine
where
the
- 56 -
learning
an
This result is
proficiency in identifying one theory of
entries
improving
From this
of
aspect
of
pedagogy
a
in
the interaction of these premises is difficult
their own teaching. Nearly every course
to ascertain with such a small sample size
taught is evaluated on some level whether
using the data available. Reading groups
it
are voluntary so the level of this influence
institutional student evaluations, to name
could be examined further in future
only a couple.
evaluations. Comparing the overall impact
usable information from these types of
of this objective on the participants
evaluations can provide insight into what is
examined,
working in a classroom and what students
participants
the
data
experienced
suggests
a
that
significant
be
by
observation
or
standard
Extracting valuable and
find ineffective.
Methods for evaluating
change in their knowledge and articulation
lectures or class activities and the ability to
of an understanding of student learning and
use that information in order to improve
what kinds of teaching lead to it.
one's teaching adds a new dimension to
This
change occurred from their average intake
mere
interview proficiency level of 2.5 through
instructional process. The data from this
the completion of Cycle 2 with an average
program objective in the rubric suggests no
proficiency level of 4.1 (p≤.05).
significant difference from Cycle 1 or Cycle
Objective 2 – Development of skills that will
2 completion.
enable participants to analyze and improve
impact was an average proficiency level
their own teaching
increase from 2.2 to 2.7 among the samples
The
second
program
skill
and
know-how
to
the
The change from Cycle 1
objective
examined. This small change in proficiency
involves the development of skills that will
level indicates that participants were able
enable participants to analyze and improve
to identify one more personal teaching
- 57 -
practices as a result of Cycle 1, but
suggest
demonstrated little or no analysis of their
completed Cycle 2 have internalized skills to
teaching effectiveness. Proficiency change
evaluate their teaching and are able to
during Cycle 2 was greater than during
improve it. From this quantitative data, it is
Cycle 1 but the paired t-test did not suggest
difficult to determine when this objective is
any significant increase in proficiency with
fulfilled in a specific cycle of the program.
the means increasing from 2.7 to 3.5. This
However, from an analysis of the impact of
result suggests that by the end of Cycle 2,
the program on participants through the
participants were able to identify one or
completion of Cycle 2, there is a significant
more personal teaching practices and
difference in participants’ development of
demonstrate
their
skills that will enable them to analyze and
T-tests
improve their own teaching. As evidenced
used to examine differences from Intake to
in a later section of this document,
Cycle 2 completion suggest evidence of a
participant comments indicate that they
significant difference in participant learning
have realized how to better evaluate and
in the portfolios with average proficiency
extract useful information on how to
levels increasing from 2.2 to 3.5 (p≤.05).
improve their teaching.
Most likely, learning involving this objective
Objective 3 – Realization of ways in which
occurs throughout the first two cycles, but
participants can approach their teaching as
it is not articulated in the electronic
a scholarly activity
some
analysis
personal teaching effectiveness.
portfolios or reflections.
of
As seen in a
that
participants
who
have
The literature on the Scholarship of
subsequent section of this document, data
Teaching
- 58 -
and
Learning
explains
how
scholarship is combined with teaching
evidence that a participant's teaching was
practices, and it is very clear that in order
being approached as a scholarly activity.
for an activity to be scholarly there must be
Quantitatively, there was no statistical
collaboration and dissemination of what is
difference between any of the cycles. The
effective and what is ineffective. The third
proficiency level of the effect of Cycle 1
program objective involves the realization
exhibited very little change; 1.0-0.9. The
of ways in which participants can approach
effect of Cycle 2 also exhibited a small
their teaching as a scholarly activity. This
change in proficiency level; 0.9-1.1.
objective can be considered as what sets
participants’ documents also showed no
this program apart from many others that
significant change in proficiency level from
are similar.
In order to determine if
the beginning of the program through the
participants fulfill this goal, the evaluators
end of Cycle 2: 1.0-1.1. For this objective to
decided that an understanding of the
have no significant difference from any
definition of SoTL would be an important
participant
does
beginning.
participants
did
The
participants
was
not
experience
any
definition of SoTL, then that would be a
prompted for feedback regarding this
good first step in approaching these
objective
concepts in a scholarly manner. Using that
Additionally,
definition
of
operationalized as engagement in SoTL,
and
which is primarily a Cycle 3 activity. Since
would provide adequate
documents were analyzed from all the
providing
effort,
opportunities
a
if
that
learning, but that they may have not been
by
articulate
that
suggest
working
activities,
can
belief
not
The
examples
experiences,
- 59 -
in
portfolio
this
documents.
variable
was
available Cycle 2 finishers, it is plausible
program structure.
that this objective is met toward the end of
multiple opportunities to join a working
the program. Further, there is no evidence
group or reading group in the three cycles.
from
These
this
document
analysis
that
groups
Participants have
become
a
forum
for
understanding of teaching as a scholarly
participants to brainstorm and discuss
activity is not gained by participants. These
teaching as a scholarly activity.
results only suggest that participants did
purpose is the intentional engagement in a
not address this objective through their
scholarly
program
community, regarding learning about SoTL
documentation
or
personal
community,
definition of SoTL.
As described in an
instruction and evaluation. It is no surprise
earlier section, the participant interview
that there were significant differences
protocol was developed to target this
between
objective
demonstration of this objective. Proficiency
probe
participants’
cycles
methods
local
and
the
new
a
reflection primarily by not providing a
and
implementing
albeit
The
in
of
participant
knowledge of SoTL.
scores as a result of Cycle 1 increased from
Objective 4 – Engagement with their own
an average of 1.1 demonstrating no
teaching among a community of scholars
engagement with peers regarding their
The fourth objective examined in
this
evaluation
a
very limited conversation with peers about
regarding
their teaching. Participants who completed
participants’ teaching activities. Activities
the intake interview process through Cycle
to meet this objective are intentional in the
1 showed a significant difference in meeting
community
of
involves
scholars
engaging
teaching to an average of 1.8 suggesting
- 60 -
this objective possibly by anticipating
be because participants did not see the
engaging
the
need to comment or were not prompted to
community could be a motivation for
comment on their involvement with a
participating in the program. This result is
reading group or their experience in it.
interesting, however, because Cycle 1
Mere participation in reading groups or
primarily involves the participant attending
working groups would return a minimum
workshops and working with a Center for
proficiency score of ‘3’ according to the
Teaching consultant on improving a specific
rubric
aspect of his or her teaching. The newness
analysis. The third pair of data analyzed the
of the program and the discovery of the
cumulative impact of this objective on the
community that exists may have led
participant documentation.
participants to comment on engaging the
performed between the intake interview
community of scholars. A result that was
stage and Cycle 2 suggests that participants
not anticipated was that there was no
did
statistical difference in the documents from
engagement in a community of scholars
Cycle 2 finishers.
regarding their teaching with proficiency
in
this
community
or
Average proficiency
developed
realize
a
for
this
significant
document
The t-test
change
in
scores increased from 1.8 to 2.2. This cycle
scores increasing from 1.1 to 2.2.
involves participation in optional reading
difficult to determine at what point in the
groups. As with the previous objective, this
program this change occurred, but the
does not suggest that participants did not
analysis suggests that the participants have
experience any increased engagement in
benefitted
from
the
experience
of
the scholarly community. This result could
interacting
within
this
community
of
- 61 -
It is
scholars.
An interesting observation of
engage
their
faculty
about
teaching
these proficiency scores, which appear to
methodologies and ways they can evaluate
be very low on the 1-5 scoring range,
their own teaching. This is not the case in
confirms a prior conclusion that teaching in
every department.
many departments is considered a lesser
previously and in a subsequent section of
important task than research.
this document, some departments spend
Although
As demonstrated
teaching may be a reason that these
considerable
participants are enrolled in their doctoral
practices and evaluation methodologies;
programs, especially in lower consensus
however, this is repeatedly shown not to be
fields, the observed proficiency scores
a top priority among the vast majority of
suggest that graduate students do not often
departments.
- 62 -
resources
on
teaching
Qualitative Assessment of Participant Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
Based on the quantitative results
survey, and Departmental Expectations
from the participant document analysis, the
designed to validate or challenge the DGS
investigators determined that a deeper
interviews conducted later in the project.
examination of participants' knowledge,
Aside from the Basic Information section,
skills, and attitudes was needed to better
the questions contained in the two protocol
answer the primary research question of
parts of Content Knowledge and Program
what the participants are actually learning.
Perceptions were crafted in consultation
The best way to get at these answers was to
with the Center for Teaching staff so the
interview a representative sample from
investigators could specifically target what
each of the three program cycle finishers.
participants are gaining in order to answer
The investigators used a common interview
the first two research questions of "What
protocol that addressed issues that were
do participants learn in the program,
raised from the document analysis phase of
including knowledge, skills, and attitudes?"
this evaluation. The protocol was divided
and "How do they apply what they learn
into four parts: Basic Information including
when teaching at Vanderbilt or in faculty
biographical
positions
information
and
personal
obtained
after
leaving
motivations, Content Knowledge including
Vanderbilt?"
The fourth section of the
questions specifically geared toward what
interview
protocol,
participants
the
Expectations, was created specifically to
literature, Program Perceptions in order to
confirm or refute information obtained
add validity to the participant satisfaction
through interviews with the DGS's across
have
learned
from
- 63 -
Departmental
the university campus, thus attempting to
finished Cycle 2 and were working on Cycle
answer the third research question of
3.
"What knowledge, skills, and attitudes
information from one Cycle 1 finisher, six
regarding
Vanderbilt
Cycle 2 finishers, and three Cycle 3 finishers
departments and programs want their
(i.e. program finishers). From conducting
doctoral
the
teaching
students
do
to
possess
upon
graduation?"
Therefore,
interviews,
interviews
it
was
contain
noted
that
experiences from previous cycles were
From the information provided by
included in question responses and some
the Center for Teaching, investigators were
content knowledge provided was from
able to interview 12 participants, four from
previous cycles. Given that the experiences
each cycle, at random. Of the 12 interviews
can build through cycles and participants
pursued,
were
may lose sight of details from each cycle, it
difficulty
was decided that these experiences could
only
conducted.
encountered
10
The
was
interviews
greatest
that
many
of
the
be associated to a specific cycle and
participants were writing dissertations and
determined that the information we were
applying for jobs and were simply too busy
gathering was rich enough to use.
or distracted to meet. In addition, some of
Basic Information
the information from the database used to
The average length of time in a
select interviewees was outdated and
degree program for the interviewees was
participants had completed subsequent
about 4 years with the range being 2.5
cycles. For example, two participants that
years
were classified as Cycle 1 finishers had also
represented in the sample contained 4
- 64 -
to
7
years.
The
disciplines
interviews
from
participants
in
low-
field stated that she participated because
consensus fields, two in languages and two
she was always interested in teaching and
in social sciences not considered high-
that her department does not put much
consensus fields.
The remaining six
emphasis on it so she is seeking to fulfill
interviews were from high-consensus fields
that need through the Teaching Certificate
including two from engineering, two from
program.
the sciences and two from medical fields.
interviewed, nine of them are seeking
Of
the
ten
participants
When asked why they chose to
faculty positions. The remaining participant
participate in the Teaching Certificate
is seeking an industry job consistent with
program,
participants
her high-consensus discipline which is what
of
the
most of the graduates pursue from that
professionalization aspect of the program.
department. Half of the respondents are
Two respondents specifically mentioned
looking specifically at teaching institutions
that it would look good on a curriculum
such as liberal arts colleges for positions.
vita. One respondent indicated that she
Four of the remaining respondents want
wanted to “signal an interest” in teaching to
positions
potential employers.
teaching. The remaining respondent from a
half
interviewed
mentioned
of
the
spoke
that
Six respondents
research
and
social science field known at Vanderbilt for
teaching and this program would give them
being research intensive is focusing her
the opportunity to improve their own
search on positions at research intensive
teaching
institutions; however, she still wants to do
gain
really
balance
enjoyed
and
they
that
more
experience
teaching. One respondent from a science
some teaching.
- 65 -
Two respondents from
high-consensus fields, one social science
about it through Center for Teaching
and one natural science, mentioned that
workshops and one heard about it at TA
their advisors recommended they pursue
Orientation. The rest of the participants
the Teaching Certificate program.
The
interviewed stated that other graduate
natural science participant stated that the
students had mentioned it, or they received
recommendation was in response to him
emails or saw a posting for it.
wanting a teaching position at a liberal arts
respondents stated that faculty members
college.
The social science participant
mentioned it to them. One of those faculty
acknowledged that the department puts
members was a DGS in a science field and
little emphasis on teaching even though it
the other was an advisor in another science
claims that teaching is important.
The
field. It is an interesting observation that
to
faculty members in science fields that are
participate in the program supported his
very research focused would mention this
interest in teaching in addition to the desire
opportunity to doctoral students; however,
to primarily do research.
these faculty members may be atypical
recommendation
by
the
advisor
Two
When asked how the participants
advisors when it comes to ensuring their
became aware of the Teaching Certificate
students’ needs are being met with respect
program, the responses varied widely
to career aspirations of teaching over
suggesting that the marketing efforts were
research.
sufficient. Two participants had started the
F2P2 program
program.
and switched
to
It is not surprising that nearly all of
this
the respondents indicated that teaching is
Two other participants heard
very important to their future career plans,
- 66 -
and it is clear that the Teaching Certificate
knowledge in teaching is what motivated
program is fulfilling the goal of emphasizing
them to pursue the certificate program.
the desire for a teaching-focused career.
There is some indication that a few
The one respondent looking to pursue an
departments
industry-related
that
importance of teaching in a variety of
teaching is not that important right now but
faculty positions at a variety of institutions
she may return to academia as a faculty
and are encouraging graduate students to
member later in her career. Her reason for
consider the Teaching Certificate program
continuing with the program, even though
with the goal of becoming more attractive
she is leaving academia is simply to
to potential employers.
complete what she had already started.
Content Knowledge
position
admits
might
understand
the
It is reasonable to conclude that the
In order to determine what students
majority of the participants in the Teaching
are actually learning in the Teaching
Certificate program are primarily interested
Certificate program, questions were created
in seeking positions as teaching faculty
to target specific aspects of each stage of
regardless of the discipline in which they
the program.
are pursuing their degree. More than half
asked to recall the main ideas of the
of the interviews were with participants
participants’ teaching statements. It was
from
somewhat difficult for participants to
science-related
suggesting
that
fields
regardless
further
of
the
remember
Initially, participants were
exactly
what
points
their
department in which they currently study,
teaching statement contained.
their desire to
most recent participant to enter the
gain experience
and
- 67 -
Even the
program stated that she would have to look
addressed most often involved teaching
at
methods
it again
in
order
to provide
a
such
as
presentation
and
comprehensive answer. Overall, everyone
assessment and how to better deliver
was able to state some version of the main
information and knowledge to students.
points of their teaching statement. Much of
The
what was contained in the teaching
knowledge-related
statements, according to the participants,
directly asking the participants what they
addressed their specific area of study and
have learned about student learning and
how to better teach key concepts and
what they have learned about analyzing
present material to their students.
For
their own teaching. In addition, we asked
example, the science-focused participants
them to describe their interaction with
were very interested in promoting scientific
others regarding what they are learning in
thinking and challenging students to carry a
the program. These three questions are
concept beyond what was presented in
specifically geared toward the program
class. The humanities-focused respondents
objectives and the intent was to determine
included concepts on student-centered
if the participants are meeting those
learning techniques and elevating the role
objectives better than what was found
of the student to take control of his or her
using the rubric against the program
own learning as well as evaluating how
documents in the participants’ portfolios.
students are learning what is presented
In
second
response
set
of
questions
to
the
content
involved
question
rather than merely what they are learning.
regarding what the participants have
For all respondents, concepts that were
specifically learned about student learning,
- 68 -
the participants had varied responses. The
the various techniques are that were
responses were centered on methods,
suggested.
techniques
and
The
Inquiry on what participants have
participants mentioned that various types
learned about analyzing their own teaching
of learning could occur depending on the
produced many responses. The readiness
concepts being covered in a classroom and
of the responses may indicate that the
that varying teaching techniques should be
participants keep these concepts very fresh
employed to gain a greater transfer of
in their minds or had recently learned them.
training to their students.
One very
Many responses involved the scholarship of
experienced respondent who had finished
teaching and learning and dealt with
Cycle 2 was not surprised at what the
evaluation and assessment techniques.
literature had to say but was turning his
Four
attention
student
soliciting student feedback on what worked
Another Cycle 2 finisher
and what was not as effective for them
stated that because of what she learned
either through interviews or surveys or
about student learning she was able to “tap
other
into”
by
respondent stated that he uses comparative
promoting group interaction and varying
exam performance between groups of
presentation styles and question formats
students to determine what types of
for more effective teaching. Another Cycle
questions and lecture methods are most
2 finisher stated that she expected to learn
effective.
more about how students learn rather than
respondents to this question involved being
to
engagement.
new
assessment.
techniques
methods
of
of
teaching
- 69 -
of
ten
respondents
evaluation
mentioned
techniques.
One
The general theme from the
very intentional on measuring student
finisher stated that she does not interact
learning as an indicator of their overall
with many in her department regarding
effectiveness in the classroom.
teaching so the working group was very
When asked to discuss interactions
helpful and offered her an outlet to discuss
with others regarding what the participants
the concepts she was learning in the
are learning, respondents expressed a
Teaching Certificate program.
desire for effective engagement regarding
finisher stated that now that she has these
their teaching. The feedback on reading
new skills and knowledge, it can be
groups was mixed. Participants who were
frustrating to try and communicate and
in domain-specific groups seemed to
work with those who do not have the same
benefit more from their groups than those
skills and knowledge. She also stated that
who were in mixed groups. A humanities
her interactions with other participants
participant mentioned that her group was
have
composed
and
thoughtful as well as her interactions with
engineering graduate students, which was
her students. Three participants stated that
frustrating
have
they have interacted with faculty in their
differing definitions of what knowledge is
departments on what they have learned in
and how to handle absolutes versus
the program. Those interactions were also
conceptual subjectivity.
Many reported
helpful because discussion was generated
that the working groups were helpful with
over course design and faculty even offered
regards to IRB applications and other
‘real
process-related activities. Another Cycle 1
conversations.
of
since
largely
the
science
disciplines
- 70 -
more
world’
meaning
advice
and
based
A Cycle 2
are
on
more
those
Overall, however, these
faculty interactions appear to be quite
progress through the various cycles. The
limited, and it could be safely assumed that
Cycle 1 finisher provided a rather weak
they are largely non-existent in many
definition by saying it is “the reflective art
departments.
of teaching but it goes a step beyond…”
Another program objective states
While this is not inaccurate it is most
that participants will grasp the concept of
certainly not complete or very thoughtful;
the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning;
however, this definition should not be as
however, the document analysis showed no
thorough since this participant has only
significant change in the articulation of the
finished Cycle 1, a cycle that is focused on
definition
as
individual results of teaching. The Cycle 2
the
finishers largely had more robust responses
In order to further determine
to this question. In every definition given,
and
participants
program.
its
core
progressed
concepts
through
whether participants were gaining an
respondents
understanding of the concepts of SoTL, we
intentional,
decided to ask them in the interviews to
experimental or investigative, analytical,
define the term and explain how they are
and constant. One Cycle 2 finisher stated
using it as they progress through the
that an important component to SoTL was
program.
the “go-public” aspect; however, the
The participants were able to
mentioned
that
it
was
community-based,
answer the question with varying degrees
participant
of competence. One observation is that the
statement. Several respondents explained
definitions
more
the scientific approach of SoTL, that it
sophisticated and complete as participants
required research, reflection, analysis, and
become
somewhat
- 71 -
did
not
expand
on
that
writing. When Cycle 3 finishers were asked
more finishers, some of whom have taken
about
the
full-time faculty or other positions, the
responses became much more thoughtful
responses indicate that participants are
demonstrating depth and nuance. There
indeed gaining an understanding of the
was a greater incidence of publishing what
concept of the Scholarship of Teaching and
they had concluded from their research,
Learning. Of course this is a small sample
collaborating
at
size from which to draw these conclusions,
conferences through session presentations
which is why this analysis describes just an
or posters, and more statements regarding
indication that knowledge of SoTL is being
the
creating
gained and internalized. In terms of the
research questions and hypothesis testing.
actual objective it appears that participants
One note to the Cycle 3 finishers’
are realizing ways to approach their
statements; two of the three interviewed
teaching as a scholarly activity.
their
definition
with
experimental
of
SoTL,
colleagues
nature
of
were science majors and were pleased at
The participant interview protocol
the scientific approach they could take with
included a question regarding specific ideas
their teaching given that they have been
the participants have encountered in the
trained to work in this manner.
SoTL literature, further referencing the
The
document
analysis
only
rubric from the document analysis.
The
examined Cycle 2 finishers with respect to
responses to this question were varied even
the four objectives being measured because
from Cycle 2 finishers. The Cycle 1 finisher
there were so few Cycle 3 finishers at the
stated that she had not encountered any
time of analysis. Now that there have been
examples thus far.
- 72 -
This response is not
surprising
considering
the
program’s
teaching. Another humanities participant is
structure addresses the SoTL literature in
interested in multi-media as a learning
Cycle 2. The examples obtained from Cycle
technique and the assessment of how
2 finishers of SoTL literature themes are
students change the ways they think with
quite varied and are somewhat associated
regard to the way information is processed.
with the participants’ disciplines.
For
A Cycle 3 finisher stated that assessment is
instance, a participant in a natural science
more than just measuring facts retained,
field has gained an appreciation for
that it is more about determining the level
qualitative inquiry.
of independent thought in which students
A social science
participant was able to take a key concept
are engaged.
such as self-reflection and assessment and
Whether the participants have a
adapt it to teaching about cultural studies
chance to use what they are learning in the
from a student-centered point of view. A
Teaching
humanities participant has realized that
depends
time-honored assessment tools in her field
opportunities, the frequency and freedom
do not necessarily gauge what the students
to teach a course or a class session, and
should be learning and is seeking new
timing in their doctoral program.
methods of assessment. A few respondents
responses were widely varied from teaching
stated that they were able to make more
their own course and using SoTL concepts
effective use of existing evaluation data and
frequently to not teaching at all this
develop ways to obtain more meaningful
academic year and not working as a
data to help their effectiveness in their
teaching assistant. This question did not
- 73 -
Certificate
on
program
their
largely
department
The
provide much information regarding how
stated
the participants’ knowledge is being used
assignment for income purposes only. The
since few are actually teaching when they
level of energy she can commit to teaching
are learning the concepts. Those who are
is intentionally low in order for her to finish
teaching are largely using what they have
the dissertation on time.
learned. The techniques such as minute
somewhat of a surprising response and
papers,
indicates that she may not have fully
think-pair-share
activities,
that
she
the
This was
internalized
concept mapping, new grading rubrics, and
concepts.
problem-based learning concepts are being
residence and has not progressed through
employed
in
the program longitudinally. This example
combination or by themselves depending
could provide some insight into the process
on what and who they are teaching. One
one must go through in order to learn SoTL
participant who is seeking a faculty position
concepts for them to be fully entrenched in
stated that these concepts come up often
a participant’s professional development
while
and practice of teaching.
participants
interviewing
when
either
asked
for
examples of how he implements the SoTL
concepts.
program’s
teaching
backward design in syllabus creation,
by
the
took
goals
and
She is also not currently in
Overall, the participants seem to
Only one participant who is
have little difficulty or personal resistance
teaching her own course stated that she is
to
not using practices learned from the SoTL
techniques in their teaching. Even though
literature; however, she is nearing the
the teaching opportunities vary significantly
completion of her dissertation, and she
by department and by time in the program,
- 74 -
implementing
SoTL
concepts
and
there
is evidence
that
suggests the
“quick starters” when they obtain faculty
participants are using the material they are
positions; a clear limitation of this program
learning in new and creative ways. This
evaluation.
insight
the
Program Perceptions
for
When
combined
acknowledgement
with
of
the
need
deciding
the
participants
experiments with others suggests that
perceptions, it was important to determine
these
to
if there was a correlation between the
continuously employ unique concepts in
results of satisfaction surveys conducted by
their teaching and are socialized to
the Center for Teaching and how the
participate in scholarly activities when they
participants really feel about the program.
obtain full-time faculty employment.
Of
The responses mirrored that of previous
course, it is not possible to state this
survey results that were conducted before
accomplishment with certainty since so few
this evaluation was commissioned. Every
program finishers have graduated and
participant interviewed responded very
obtained faculty employment. An area of
positively about their experience in the
subsequent evaluation would be to track
program with the Center for Teaching staff
these students and examine their practice
and the amount they learned thus far.
in their first year of a faculty appointment
There
continuing through several years of a
suggestion/recommendations provided by
faculty appointment.
One could then
the participants. For instance, while a Cycle
assess if former participants are indeed
1 finisher expressed frustration over using
are
prepared
- 75 -
were
their
ask
publishing or sharing the results of these
participants
about
to
also
program
many
the portfolio system, a Cycle 3 finisher
students.
appreciated it as a tangible outcome of
they did have sufficient time and that the
participating in the program. Those who
ability to work at their own pace was very
participated in working groups enjoyed
important to them. Those who responded
them most when they were in domain-
that they did not have sufficient time to
specific groups rather than heterogeneous
dedicate to the program stated that it was
groups.
An item of concern from these
their own fault that they were so limited in
respondents was that their sense of the
time and that it was no fault of the program
rigor of the discussion in heterogeneous
or the Center for Teaching.
groups was less compared to those groups
participants
containing people of similar disciplines.
departments seemed less tense about the
While this is a programmatic concern, it is
time required to complete the program.
reasonable to assert that groups containing
This response was not expected but is not a
participants of similar disciplines (applied
surprise.
and
sciences, social sciences,
dissertation advisor is supportive then it is
humanities, etc.) may not be possible to
easier to overlap requirements and move
form depending on which participants are
through at a quicker, more even pace. One
in the same cycle in the program. Hopefully
participant stated that timing is significant
this can be remedied as participation
to completing both in a reasonable
increases from all parts of the campus.
timeframe. His advice was to start early
natural
Most respondents stated that
who
had
Those
supportive
As a respondent stated, if the
The time to dedicate to the program
and try to finish the Teaching Certificate
is extremely limited for many graduate
program before thesis writing begins.
- 76 -
Another participant expressed frustration
for this purpose. The recommendation for
that the time she is supposed to devote to
a checklist of items to complete in each
teaching as mandated by the department
cycle was interesting. The participant who
too often gets converted to research time.
offered this suggestion enjoys significant
All respondents were clear that their
structure with his time but also likes to
research program always took precedence,
know what is needed for a specific project
but the flexibility of the Teaching Certificate
such as IRB approval.
program allowed them to progress through
participants interviewed stated that the
both.
program was almost too flexible for them.
One-third of the
A very surprising response from
This response was quite unexpected but it is
many participants was the desire for hard
reasonable to think that with so much
deadlines such as with IRB documents or
demand on their time, flexibility could
checklists
move a task to the bottom of a participant’s
for
accountability.
All
respondents stated that they had adequate
priority list.
support from the CFT and those who
confirmed earlier feedback that they were
experienced problems with the program
pleased with their participation in the
were victims of poor timing with their
program and felt they had the support they
research program.
One respondent had
needed from the Center for Teaching. They
difficulties transferring from F2P2 to the
generally enjoyed working with the Center
Teaching
but
for Teaching. This feedback demonstrates
acknowledged that her issue would be
that the Center for Teaching has a distinct
eliminated when only one program exists
ability to be a welcoming and accepting
Certificate
program
- 77 -
Overall, the participants
environment and a collaborative resource
natural science department that is very
for graduate students, and quite possibly
research intensive and the other is in a
faculty alike, who seek to refine their
social science department that is also
teaching.
research intensive although the department
Departmental Expectations
is in an education-related field which may
Inquiring with the participants about
explain the supportive environment.
their departmental support can provide
Department
perception
of
the
important confirmation of the interview
Teaching Certificate program depends on
process conducted with the sample of
the department, but can be divided into
Directors of Graduate Study conducted later
two main categories:
in this program evaluation.
Stakeholder
supportive. A participant in the humanities
impression and attitude is important to the
stated that the department’s position is
support
Certificate
something on the order of “we already
According to the participants
teach therefore we don’t need the CFT”
interviewed, six of ten respondents stated
while a participant from a social science
their
their
department remarked that the department
Of the six
is very supportive because the program
participants whose advisors know of their
could strengthen a graduate’s qualifications
participation, two stated that their advisor
for full-time employment. As seen from the
was encouraging and very supportive of
DGS interviews, the natural and applied
what they were doing.
It is somewhat
sciences and some social sciences place
surprising that one participant is in a
more emphasis on research over teaching;
of
program.
advisor
the
Teaching
was
aware
participation in the program.
of
- 78 -
insignificant and
however,
the
participants
interviewed
chore to take on in service to the
suggest that those departments either do
department or school.
not know they are participating or if they
natural science department participant who
know they are not acknowledging their
was asked by a faculty member on her
participation. It is reasonable to assume
dissertation committee, “you don’t want to
that as long as the research is being
be a teacher, do you?” A participant from
completed, the department would not have
the same department stated that her
too much to say about their students’ extra
primary instructor was supportive but that
activities.
she was an exception. This further suggests
disapproval
No one mentioned receiving
from
an
advisor
or
the
There was one
that opinions lie with the individual faculty
department in general. One Cycle 3 finisher
members primarily.
stated that “it depends on who you ask…the
approach to marketing is made, there is a
DGS is interested in the dissertation.” This
high likelihood that supportive faculty
statement is not surprising especially since
members who are not points of contact
the DGS is mostly interested in department
could
statistics such as length of time to finish the
department is generalized as unsupportive.
be
If a departmental
overlooked
and
thus
the
degree and how many students are
Similar to departmental support or
recruited each year. They are interested in
lack thereof, department preparation for
those figures because the institution is
teaching varies across departments. There
interested in those figures. This statement
are a few exceptions in the applied and
connects directly to the criticism that the
natural sciences but they are typically more
role of the DGS is not professional but a
focused on research than developing
- 79 -
teaching skill in their students.
Social
effective training in pedagogy as confirmed
science departments seem to vary the most
through a participant interview.
As
with
mentioned
of
some
departments
spending
previously,
the
issue
considerable resources on training in
supporting training in pedagogy is largely
pedagogy, while some take the stance of
dependent
the sciences by not providing any training
member. Most of the respondents were
for teaching. Humanities departments tend
given the opportunity to be a guest lecturer
to spend more time and resources on
in an advisor’s class or other classes in the
helping their students become better
department.
teachers, but these resources are finite.
science participants had to ask for these
Even at a research-intensive university, the
opportunities.
humanities
to
humanities participants experienced more
perform research, and it appears difficult to
institutionalized opportunities such as being
excel on both sides of the argument of
a teaching assistant in preparation for
whether to train researchers or teachers.
taking over their own course or being given
Certainly, there are some exceptions in
their own course at specific points in their
each academic area. Some social science
programs.
programs are very dedicated to training
participant has had the opportunity to
students to be effective professors, likewise
teach a class session or entire course, he or
for some applied and natural science
she stated that they had the opportunity to
departments.
use what they had learned in the Teaching
faculty
members have
Only one medical center
department interviewed seemed to support
Certificate
- 80 -
on
the
individual
faculty
The applied and natural
Social
science
and
In each instance in which a
program.
Departmental Values Regarding Graduate Student Socialization
The secondary purpose of this
Peabody College for Education and Human
program evaluation was to survey a sample
Development, the Medical Center, the
of department directors of graduate studies
School of Nursing, and the Divinity School.
from various departments on campus. This
Twenty-six interviews were performed
purpose was desired by the Center for
using a common interview protocol. The
Teaching in order to answer the third
results of these interviews are below.
research question, "What knowledge, skills,
College of Arts & Science
and
attitudes
regarding
teaching
do
The graduate programs in the
Vanderbilt departments and programs want
College of Arts & Science include a wide
their doctoral students to possess upon
range of fields of study. From history and
graduation?" and for the investigators to
English programs to those in political
determine if the department DGS's and the
science and economics, these programs are
program participants shared the same
less easily grouped in terms of analysis;
goals.
The sample of 30 directors was
however, some themes do emerge from a
provided by the Center for Teaching. It is
review of the interviews with directors of
comprised of a mix of both high and low-
graduate
consensus disciplines, a concept suggested
departments.
by Braxton & Hargens (1996). The sample
The programs have all been in existence for
contains individuals from the College of Arts
several decades although some have
& Science, the School of Engineering,
recently revamped their programs.
study
from
the
various
The
typical size of an entering cohort ranges
Several themes emerged which include the
from 4 students to 12 with most programs
following:
indicating 6-7 doctoral students in each

In
Placement
at
highly
regarded
institutions is the primary measure of
success for graduates.
Faculty members value research
activities over other experiences.
Teaching preparation is assumed to
happen as a result of a teaching
assistantship or through a faculty
mentor as opposed to intentional
training.
To make their graduates more
competitive, graduate students should
publish more.
Teaching is an essential component of
preparation but not primary.
There is little commitment to increasing
the level of engagement with the Center
for Teaching and its programs.
characterizing the breakdown of those who
Placement as a Measure of Success:
pursue research intensive versus teaching
When asked what measures they use to
intensive
determine whether their students were
cohort. As for the length of time it takes for

students to complete their degree, 5-6

years is most common with one program
serving as an outlier due to the field
placement requirement that extends the
program to 9 years.

The number of
students in the programs who pursue

academic positions post graduation is at

least 70% or greater for most departments
with most in the 90% range.
positions,
while
many
respondents said the percentage that
being
pursues research versus teaching intensive
placement at a highly regarded institution is
positions was 50/50, the reality is that more
the primary measure that they used.
students actually attain teaching intensive
Responses implied that success in this area
positions than research intensive positions.
was not based primarily on placement at a
successful,
most
agreed
that
research intensive institution but that
- 82 -
highly regarded liberal arts institutions were
questions, effective use of the latest
also valued. In addition, obtaining a tenure-
analytical
techniques,
engagement
track position is a strong indicator as is
scientific
discussions,
familiarity
contributing to the field of knowledge via
practice
publications.
strong
practices. Teaching as a valued skill was
emphasis on research activity as an
second overall although it appeared to be
indicator of success although not as
more highly valued in the traditional liberal
strongly as placement. Most respondents
arts programs.
assumed the question about success in the
after research they expect their students to
marketplace signified initial success as
be able to “speak, profess, teach” and
opposed to ongoing success.
Reframed,
“communicate with a range of audiences.”
directors may have mentioned research and
In other programs, teaching is regarded as
publications more often.
important; however, the department does
This
implies
a
The Value of Research Preparation:
with
in
and
theory/methods/fieldwork
One director stated that
not focus much of its effort on preparation.
The skills valued by faculty members in the
One
College of Arts & Science center primarily
needed to be able to articulate a teaching
on research activities.
This includes
philosophy but did not elaborate further
publications, attending and presenting at
while another respondent stated that in
conferences
future
that particular field of study, teaching
research. Respondents were very specific in
would not be the skill that causes someone
identifying research skills such as identifying
to obtain a job but it could be the issue that
a research problem and creating a set of
causes them to not get a job. From these
and
identifying
- 83 -
respondent noted
that
students
responses it appears that teaching is
students
important but it cannot be the primary
Teaching’s
focus of graduate preparation.
departments described specific courses on
Teaching
Preparation
attend
the
orientation
Center
and
for
two
not
teaching or practicum that they require for
Intentional: The specific training that these
their students. Another director mentioned
programs offer their students includes
a systematic process for evaluating their
some
teaching
variation
is
do
of
assistants
that
involved
teaching/research/professional
videotaping them as they were teaching
development workshops and seminars. In
and then giving feedback. For the most
addition, the programs depend on faculty
part, responses indicate that while a few
mentoring, both informal and formal, to
departments
train students.
preparing students to teach, most hope
surveyed,
3
Of the 10 programs
have
formal
are
intentional
about
mentoring
that students gain it from a teaching
programs and 8 of 10 have teaching
assistantship experience or from their
assistant experiences for their students.
faculty mentors.
Much of the training in the departments
Graduates Students Should Publish
focuses on professional development and
More: When directors were asked what
writing for publication or grant-writing. In
they could do to make their graduates more
terms of teaching preparation, very few
competitive, they suggested that their
have intentional programs beyond the
students should publish more prior to
occasional workshop. Those with teaching
graduation
assistant opportunities stated that their
presentations). They also stated that more
- 84 -
(including
conference
experience in grant-writing and more
5.”
formalized professional development would
they felt that teaching skill could be learned
be beneficial.
Responses unique to
in the process of teaching and that its
departments included recruiting higher
merits were that it could “tip the scales” in
quality students and increasing the diversity
a hiring position. Most, however, indicated
of the department as well as increasing
that regardless of their level of preparation
funds
of their students that teaching was an
for
conference
travel,
raising
stipends, and creating more opportunities
Only one respondent indicated that
essential component.
for disciplinary work. Increasing teaching
Engagement with the Center for
preparation was only mentioned by one
Teaching:
When asked about their
respondent.
This may imply a lack of
department’s relationship to the Center for
interest in teaching preparation or simply
Teaching, the most common response was
highlight deficiencies in other major areas
that the Center helped them via the
that must be addressed.
Teaching Assistant Orientation.
Others
Teaching Preparation is Essential:
indicated some limited exposure with
When the directors were asked to rate the
seminars and workshops and as a resource
importance of teaching on a scale of 1 to 5
for their students who are having problems,
with 1 meaning “not important” to 5
but few had direct intentional use. There
meaning “very important,” most stated that
was a general consensus that the role the
it is a 4 or 5. One respondent said “teaching
Center should play is already being
is huge” while another stated that it
accomplished as a resource for those
“depends on where they go but should be a
students who wanted to use it and for
- 85 -
preparing
One
department in the School, however, Ph.D.'s
respondent said that the Center for
have been granted under various names
Teaching
in
since the 1960's. Most doctoral students
developing discipline-specific training in
finish their degrees in about 5 years with
teaching while a few others generally
the
indicated that maybe there was more that
Engineering at 3.5 years, although most
the Center could provide, but they gave no
finish in 5 years. Most departments enroll
examples.
10-15 students in a cohort.
Chemical
Teaching Certificate program, most of the
Engineering
graduate
respondents had heard of it but they did
program enrolling 7-8 students per year.
not know much about it.
Several themes emerged as a result of
thought
teaching
might
be
assistants.
more
helpful
As far as familiarity with the
it
could
While a few
help
students’
minimum
include:
faculty in his department perceived it as too

intense. Overall, the respondents showed
little
commitment
to

greater
engagement with the Center for Teaching.

School of Engineering

Doctoral programs have been in
existence
since
the
1960's
for
the
in
smallest
Mechanical
interviewing the engineering DGS's. They
marketability, one respondent felt that the
very
is
being
all
Importance on the placement of
graduates in post-doctoral or industry
positions
Installation of departmental values
through department-centered activities
Moderate value placed on teaching and
high value placed on research ability
Satisfaction and support of relationship
with the Center for Teaching
Placement of graduates:
departments in the School of Engineering.
The
benchmark for determining the success of
Biomedical Engineering is the newest
graduate students in the marketplace is
- 86 -
primarily the type of employment obtained.
of Engineering use the teaching assistant
Most graduate students from the School of
role as their primary way of training
Engineering pursue industry jobs rather
graduate students on how a class works.
than academic jobs. Of those students who
One department indicated that it strongly
go into academia, most are able to find
encourages its students to participate in the
positions at research-intensive institutions
Teaching Certificate program in order to
or institutions who value a balanced role in
further value teaching and instruction and
teaching and research. However, as with
to improve students' communication skills.
many
However,
other
Science,
Technology,
largely
in
the
School
of
Engineering, and Math (STEM) and medical
Engineering there are few opportunities for
center departments, the role of the post-
graduate students to gain experience in
doctoral
teaching.
fellowship
is
increasing
in
All
the
use
presentations
at
importance as the final training ground for
attendance
students
permanent
conferences and publications as their
employment. Skill and ability of graduate
primary means of instilling department
students vary little across departments. All
values in their students.
departments stress communication skills
departments also offer a graduate student
and domain-specific technical knowledge as
seminar series to hear industry experts,
the most important skills and abilities for
present their own research, and offer peer
their graduates to possess.
critiques of research projects.
before
obtaining
Departmental
values
and
departments
Most of the
regarding
The major exception to the lack of
research: All the departments in the School
teaching opportunities in the School of
- 87 -
Engineering
is
with
the
Biomedical
Engineering, which has taken a decidedly
Engineering department. With the support
different approach given the NSF grant that
of a large NSF-ERC grant, Biomedical
provides funding for teaching activities.
Engineering devotes many resources to
Another respondent stressed that the
improving graduate student training in
importance of teaching in the department is
order to encourage graduate students to
tied very closely to communication skills.
pursue faculty positions.
Students are
Much of their work deals with the general
trained before each semester for two and a
public and communication is of utmost
half days on grading and curriculum
importance, thus the decision to use
development.
teaching as a mechanism for improving
Students
are
also
encouraged to take a class at Peabody
communication skills.
College if they are more interested in
Supportive relationship with the
pursuing teaching as a scholarly activity.
Center for Teaching:
This grant has recently ended so there is
departments know of the Center for
much speculation as to how these efforts
Teaching. In fact, the School of Engineering
will continue.
has a long and effective relationship with
Departmental
values
regarding
the
Center
for
All engineering
Teaching.
As
with
teaching: Mainly, the various engineering
Biomedical Engineering, for instance, the
departments value teaching on a moderate
CFT has provided a number of professional
level. Respondents rated their department
development activities and training for the
consideration of teaching as a 3 on a 5-
department's graduate students and faculty
point scale with the exception of Biomedical
as part of the NSF grant. The Center also
- 88 -
helps a wide variety of engineering faculty
are receptive to their students entering the
with improvement in classroom instruction.
program in order to make them effective
With the relatively large numbers of
teachers and believe the program is useful
international students enrolling in graduate
and important.
engineering programs, the Center for
culture;
Teaching provides a critical service in
participation in the Teaching Certificate
training those students to be effective
program should not interfere in graduate
teaching assistants and to help them better
training programs in the departments. To
overcome the limitations of the language
be clear, there have been no instances
barrier.
where a concern was raised over students
All departments were aware of
There is an underlying
however,
that
believes
that
devoting too much time to teaching
programs offered by the Center for
activities than to their research.
Teaching to train graduate students for
departments state that they feel they have
roles involving teaching. All departments,
a solid working relationship with the Center
with
Biomedical
for Teaching and are comfortable with the
Engineering, were aware of the Teaching
role that the Center plays in their
Certificate
departments with their graduate students.
the
exception
program.
of
Biomedical
All
Engineering was aware of the F2P2 program
Peabody College for Education and Human
that has recently been retooled for other
Development
purposes.
One department specifically
An analysis of the responses that
encourages participation in the Teaching
Directors of Graduate Study of Peabody
Certificate program.
College gave regarding their departments’
Other departments
- 89 -
doctoral programs reveals some common
pursue academic related careers. Of those
themes among them as well as some
pursuing
surprising results and comments from an
indicated that at least 50% pursue research
area that focuses on education and human
intensive opportunities in academia and, in
development. These themes include:
fact, one respondent indicated that 100% of

the graduates pursue research intensive




Position prestige is a measure of success
for recent graduates.
Research skills are most highly valued in
terms of preparation.
Training reflects the emphasis on
research.
Graduate
students
are
already
extremely competitive in the job market
so no new emphases are really
necessary.
The current level of engagement with
the Center for Teaching is adequate.
academic
careers,
directors
opportunities.
Position as a Measure of Success:
When directors were asked about what
measures they (and their colleagues) used
to determine whether their students were
successful or not, the prestige of the
university and/or the position obtained
were identified as the key measures that
The typical length of time to degree
is approximately 5 years across all programs
they use.
with an average of 9-10 students in a yearly
placement at a highly respected research
cohort (though the range is 6 students at
institution or a tenure-track position with
the low end to 15 students on the high
major responsibilities at a less highly
end).
respected institution. Both institution and
The directors indicated that their
This could be interpreted as
students were predisposed to pursue
position are important.
academic positions versus those in industry
measure
or some other area. Overall more than 75%
publications.
- 90 -
that
was
This
The second
mentioned
measure
is
was
not
necessarily used initially like the previous
mentioned teaching as a skill in response to
measure. Once individuals have secured a
the question. One director who did not
position, however, his or her ability to
mention teaching specifically stated that
produce scholarly work and contribute to
when their students take positions, the
the field of study something that the faculty
faculty members “cross our fingers and
of the department use as a gauge to
hope they can teach.”
determine success.
Training
Research Skills are Most Highly
Valued:
In
terms
of
Emphasis:
departmental
Reflects
Research
The specific training that the
departments
offered
their
students
preparation and training, directors were
reflected their emphasis on the research
first asked what skills and abilities they
component.
valued.
Overwhelmingly, all respondents
funded research projects with faculty
indicated that research was the primary skill
members, in writing grant proposals, and in
that they hoped their students would
presenting
develop. One respondent stated that their
respondents mentioned that they offer
students should be able “to conduct and
faculty mentors and that these are focused
publish rigorous research to contribute to
on developing the students as researchers
knowledge.” Other respondents mentioned
by allowing them to work with a faculty
the
member
importance
of
their
students
Students are involved in
at
and
conferences.
co-author
A
articles
few
for
understanding how to frame research
publication.
questions and how to write for publication.
question about training to develop the skills
Of the directors interviewed, only 3 of the 5
that are of value, none of the directors of
- 91 -
In response to this initial
graduate study indicated any intentional
programs could do better in order to make
opportunities to assist students with their
their graduates more competitive, many
preparation for teaching responsibilities. In
felt that their programs were already highly
addition, all of the respondents reported
competitive and that they are already
that there would be no difference in the
“doing what needs to be done” to prepare
training received even if students indicated
their graduates.
an interest in teaching.
that their graduates “have no trouble
While one
Another director stated
department admitted that pedagogy may
competing.”
be addressed in a seminar topic, another
that their graduates could publish more
said that students would only be trained in
prior to their graduation as a way to make
this area by example from their faculty
themselves more marketable going into
members. Less than half of the programs
their first position.
actually
assistantship
that their graduates could benefit from
opportunities. One department highlighted
more programmed experiences teaching at
a
the university.
have
specific
completing
teaching
approach
a
which
teaching
included
Still, some respondents felt
Only one mentioned
competency,
The directors were asked to rate
observation, and evaluation program (Their
“preparation for teaching” on a scale of 1 to
students are given the opportunity to teach
5 with 1 being not important and 5 being
a course or to team teach/guest lecture in
very important. Half of the respondents
courses).
rated teaching as a 4 or 5 while the others
Current Preparation is Sufficient:
rated teaching as a 2 overall.
When directors were asked what their
Most
indicated that they rated teaching based on
- 92 -
its importance in helping their students
resource,” “available for consultation” and
obtain positions post graduation.
It is
“it’s up to the student” highlight that the
interesting to note that those who rated
departments believe that their programs
teaching
least
are preparing their students adequately.
intentional preparation for teaching in their
Another indicated that time did not allow
departments. In fact, the respondent who
them to do more since they must focus
mentioned that they crossed their fingers
their students’ attention and energy on
and hoped their students could teach rated
research.
teaching as a 4. This appears to indicate a
program was suggested, 4 out of 5 had
high value but low commitment.
heard of it, but only 2 were interested in it
the
highest
had
the
Role of the Center for Teaching is
Satisfactory:
When the Teaching Certificate
as one respondent stated, “They ought to
The directors of graduate
get that around.” On the other hand, one
studies from the departments all stated
stated that “it wouldn’t be tops on my list”
that they were familiar with the Center for
since this respondent believed that the
Teaching but that there was no formal role
Center teaches techniques and tricks but
with their graduate preparation programs
nothing that is really domain-specific in
except for Teaching Assistant orientation
terms of pedagogy.
for those with TA opportunities.
Medical Center
In
addition, there was no indication of the
Five academic departments were
desire for further assistance by the
interviewed from the Medical Center. The
departments.
Statements such as “it’s
longest running Ph.D. program began in the
doing what we want,” “an identifiable
1930's, and two newer programs have
- 93 -
existed for only about 5-7 years. One of
differ from many other programs at the
these two programs just had their first two
university.
doctoral students graduate in August 2007.
interested in where the students go for
These academic departments enroll as little
permanent employment and the type of
as five (depending on funding) to about 15
institution that hires them. Also important
per incoming cohort. Most of the degrees
in determining their career success is the
from the departments interviewed average
graduates'
about 5-6 years to complete with two
department that does a great deal of
departments having a completion time of
alumni tracking also looks at what the
about 4 years. The themes that emerged
graduates are doing ten years after
from interviewing these five departments
graduation and considers long-term career
include:
activities

department



Tracking of graduates is increasingly
important
Heavy emphasis on scientific training
over pedagogical training
Placement of graduates in academic and
industry research positions
Varying
emphasis
on
teaching
corresponding
to
strength
of
relationship with the Center for
Teaching
program.
fellowships
These
departments
publication
as
rates.
important
develops
in
are
One
how
their
the
current
Whether or not students get
and
the
types
of
those
fellowships are also important in at least
two departments in determining success in
the marketplace.
Heavy Emphasis on Research Skill:
Importance of Tracking Graduates:
When asked what the departments could
Benchmarks used to determine graduate
be doing better to ensure the success of
student success in the marketplace do not
their graduate students, responses were
- 94 -
quite varied. One department consistently
evaluations of students after doctoral
reevaluates their program and makes
committee meetings in order to keep
adjustments as needed.
students on track and effective and
Currently this
department is examining how to integrate
encouraged.
Another department stated
their graduate students into a graduate
that
need
education model; not treating them as
opportunities for students to practice telling
researchers-in-training but taking a holistic
and communicating ideas to others, they
approach to educating their students both
need to implement a mentoring program,
academically and professionally and giving
and create teaching assistant opportunities,
them
which is a need that has recently arisen.
skills
Conversely,
beyond
another
scientific
ones.
department
they
to
create
more
is
Another department stated that it must do
extremely interested in training scientists
a better job of increasing hands-on research
and researchers, thus the department
activities and provide better scholarship
believes it is doing a good job of meeting
direction to its students in addition to
those goals. One department, having been
providing more presentation opportunities.
in existence only since 2000, is still figuring
Grant writing is also a big concern for this
many things out. The department recently
department
instituted a publication requirement for
students.
in
training
its
graduate
graduate students and is working on unique
All departments interviewed stated
formats to qualifying exams and graduate
that scientific skill was most important for
seminars. Their biggest challenge currently
graduates to possess in their respective
is
fields.
how
to
provide
effective
written
- 95 -
Understanding what is happening
across the entire field and in what context is
course size is kept very small in order to
extremely important in these fields of
provide
study. Also considered very important are
students. Students also take an oral and
communication skills.
written communications course, they are
Both industry and
more
directed
encouraged
these skills in order to be marketable and
international meetings to increase their
successful.
to
professional network, and students attend
communication skills is the student's ability
department and medical center seminars in
to write, especially in the area of grant
order to further their professionalization as
writing and fellowship application. In order
scientists
to train students in the areas most
department uses the relationship with
important, the departments interviewed
individual advisors to provide the skills and
provided
abilities to students the department values.
varied
important
strategies.
One
and
attend
national
to
academia require extensive development of
Equally
to
attention
researchers.
The
including a communications course and
mentoring and student collaboration to
devotes the remaining time to bench skill
socialize the students into the discipline.
and individualized research.
Students in
One of the newer departments starts
this department are encouraged to visit the
students on their research very early in
Center for Teaching in order to gain
their graduate career, they are required to
exposure to scholarly activities involving
take a writing course, and take courses in
teaching and communicating with other
other academic areas. The department also
scholars.
provides for travel to conferences and hosts
- 96 -
depends
Another
department only requires four courses
In yet another department,
department
and
on
peer
a seminar series as seen in many other
breakdown.
departments. There is also a student-led
graduates who enter academia very few
journal
take on teaching positions of any kind or
club.
Another
department
In all departments, of the
emphasizes that the program is not just
will end up teaching very little.
about courses, but provides seminars in
exception, one department sees about half
order
of their academicians do some type of
to
provide
instruction
more
and
individualized
bidirectional
teaching.
Training
communication between researcher and
academicians
and
students.
typically
not
The department also provides
assistance with writing grants.
departments.
Placement in research intensive
positions:
do
programs
industry
differ
The
As an
for
scientists
among
the
aforementioned
department encourages its faculty and
Also varied by department is
students to visit the Center for Teaching as
what types of positions students obtain
academicians in order to become savvier in
upon graduation.
teaching techniques.
Two departments see
about half of their students enter academia
As far as training students for any
and industry, clearly due to the demand of
level of teaching, the departments also
research and pharmaceutical companies
varied in techniques and opportunities. The
providing products to the market.
Two
oldest department, and arguably the most
other departments see the large majority of
progressive, relies on mentoring and open
their graduates enter academia. A fourth
communication
department does not track their graduates
faculty.
and are not sure of the academia/industry
provide any training for students as far as
- 97 -
among
students
and
Another department does not
teaching is concerned. One of the newer
feedback.
departments still trying to figure things out
research, communication, and teaching are
relies on the student to express interest in
approached as integrated activities, the
teaching before the department will do
department
anything about it. If a student really desires
teaching as extremely high.
to learn more about teaching, then the
departments that are very focused on
department would be somewhat open-
research consider the role of teaching in
minded; however, this situation has not
their fields as extremely low. In fact, one of
arisen in its brief existence. Because of one
these departments considered pedagogical
department’s recently increased need for
training as incidental and stated that
teaching assistants, the department has
“training scientists was much harder than
increased its interactions with the Center
training
for Teaching in order to provide a greater
attention and resources to training in
level of service to its students. Another
pedagogy. One of the newer departments
very progressive department gives students
interviewed
two semesters of experience as teaching
teaching somewhat unimportant citing the
assistants and an opportunity to teach their
culture of the department focused more on
own class.
research
Varying emphasis on teaching:
In the department where
rates
teachers,”
rated
than
department
the
thus
the
importance
rated
the
Two other
the
lack
importance
instruction.
of
of
of
Another
importance
of
When asked to rate the importance of
teaching quite high. This is consistent with
teaching in their graduate student training,
the graduate student professionalization
the
opportunities provided by the department
departments
provided
interesting
- 98 -
in encouraging teaching assistantships and
A newer department would like to see all of
opportunities for students to teach courses
its students go through teaching assistant
on their own.
workshops.
Another department finds
All departments knew of the Center
value in annual visits from a Center for
for Teaching. Two seemed to have strong
Teaching representative and would like to
links to the Center for Teaching. One of
keep that consistent. The two departments
these utilizes the Center for both students
solely focused on research activities do not
and faculty. A third department uses the
seek any change in status with the Center
Center for Teaching for teaching assistant
for Teaching.
training programs offered.
Two other
All departments except for one have
departments currently do not use the
heard of the Teaching Certificate Program.
Center for Teaching, mainly due to their
Of those departments interviewed, two
intense research focus and that teaching is
reported very positive interactions with the
not as valued of an activity as in other
program. The department who seeks more
departments. One of the more progressive
teaching assistant training understands the
departments would like to see greater
concept, but report that since there are few
visibility in their department with reminders
venues
of the variety of programs offered and
participated in it so far.
when they are offered. The department
students express interest, they would be
would also like to see more creative
receptive to encouraging participation.
programs
geared
toward
for
teaching, they have
not
However, if
creative,
Given that all of the medical center
multidisciplinary teaching methodologies.
departments interviewed are considered
- 99 -
high consensus fields, there is quite a
Divinity/Graduate School of Religion
variation on graduate student preparation.
The School of Religion’s doctoral
This difference appears to be primarily
program has been in existence from at least
dependent on department culture.
The
the 1960’s and is distinguished by multiple
emphasis on research versus teaching
tracks that students can follow. On average
activities is clear and there is no question
there are 15-16 students in an entering
that research skill is the top priority for all
cohort and their time to completion of the
graduate
degree is approximately 7-8 years.
students;
however,
two
The
departments take a more accepting and
percentage of graduate students who
open approach to the holistic development
pursue
of their students. The reason for this is
positions upon graduating is almost 100%.
unclear aside from mere department
This takes into account that many students
culture instilled by department faculty into
pursue positions at seminaries or divinity
their graduate students.
A possible
schools in addition to religion departments
explanation could be the department
at universities and colleges. In response to
prestige and ranking. The two departments
the question of whether the students
with a more holistic approach to graduate
pursue research intensive vs. teaching
education are ranked higher and have
intensive,
leadership that appears to be more
students are “planning for both” but the
visionary; however, that determination
reality is that most are planning to teach at
needs further study and is beyond the
a college or seminary. The program offers
scope of this project.
the same training to students regardless of
- 100 -
academic
the
vs.
director
non-academic
indicated
that
their pursuit of a particular type of position
teachers who can teach in a variety of
after graduation with the exception that the
contexts, and basically “to be good
department has a specific “theology and
colleagues.” The department believes it has
practice degree” for those who want to
a “fairly good TA system” for its students,
teach in religiously-affiliated institutions.
and they gear their training and education
The measures that the faculty
toward preparing students for the academic
members employ to determine if their
job market.
students are successful in the marketplace
their professors and attend faculty lunches
are based on the individual student.
that help prepare them for being a part of
Basically, “if the student is happy” with
the professional environment. In addition,
their position and their work, then the
students engage the Center for Teaching,
department considers the student to be
but this occurs mostly with the Teaching
successful. There was no other indication
Assistant orientation program.
that institutional status or a research
Specific
Students work closely with
training
that
the
position carried any more weight than the
department offers to prepare their students
student’s satisfaction with their placement.
for
teaching
includes
domain-specific
In terms of the skills and abilities
training such as the Teaching of Religion
that the faculty most highly value, the
workshop which helps students with issues
director mentioned that they want their
particularly related to teaching religion.
graduates to be top scholars, to have good
This workshop is held each fall and spring.
research skills, to be able to recognize a
In addition, the department sponsors
good academic question, to be good
faculty lunches specifically on teaching
- 101 -
strategies. Of particular note is the fact
“helpful”
with
useful information
for
that the director mentioned that they try
students.
not to overlap with the work of the Center
Center is “doing what it needs to do” and
for Teaching.
he did not indicate the need for any
Basically, he stated that the
When the director was asked what
additional support. He was aware of the
his department could do to make his
Teaching Certificate program but stated
graduates more competitive, he noted that
that he hasn’t “looked at it that closely.”
they needed to increase monetary support
Overall, the School of Religion
so that students could complete their
appears to value teaching preparation for
degree in a timelier manner and that they
its students, and while research is also very
needed to train their students more in
important; the ability to teach seemed to
preparing for the job market and a variety
weigh just as heavy in graduate student
of types of jobs. When he was asked to rate
training. While the department offers some
the importance of teaching on a scale of 1-5
opportunities for specific training, the
with 5 being very important, he said that
preparation seems to be limited in scope
preparation for teaching is a 5.
and more informal although any student
Finally, the director was definitely
who chooses to pursue further training in
aware of the Center for Teaching and
pedagogy
indicated that the role currently played by
encouraged in his or her efforts by the
the Center included the teaching assistant
faculty.
orientation and some workshops. He also
indicated that he believed the website to be
- 102 -
would
probably
be
greatly
School of Nursing
program. Additionally the School offers two
The School of Nursing's doctoral
courses on how to teach nursing that covers
program has been in existence since 1993.
curriculum and evaluation; however, few
The School enrolls 5-8 new students in the
students currently take them unless they
program each year with a total enrollment
are required to do so due to participation in
of an average of 22.
a certain grant program.
Currently it takes
students about five years to complete the
Nearly all of the Ph.D. graduates
degree program; however, the School is
from
trying to reduce that time.
The school
academic positions with approximately 80%
measures the success of its Ph.D. graduates
finding positions at research intensive
by where they obtain permanent positions,
institutions. Essentially the training is the
the type of position, the amount of
same for those students with an academic
research funding they receive, and their
focus versus an industry focus, but there
publications.
are some differences based on their
The School stresses research as the
the
School
research area.
of
Nursing
pursue
For those who are
primary role for its graduate students.
interested in gaining teaching experience,
Subsequently,
values
students have some opportunity to teach
publications stemming from that research.
seminar sections in the Masters-level
Teaching is valued along with "knowledge
courses. They can enroll in the two courses
of the academic role." In order to instill
focused on teaching provided by the School,
these skills and abilities in the students, the
and they are appointed as a lecturer rather
School introduces the cohorts to the F2P2
than a teaching assistant.
the
School
- 103 -
Essentially,
students in the doctoral program in the
"faculty role" to graduate students.
School of Nursing can decide how much
addition, the School of Nursing is aware of
they want to focus on teaching.
the Teaching Certificate Program and highly
If it is
important to them, there are opportunities
regards it.
they can pursue; however, this is not
Observations
In
necessarily the norm nor does the faculty
As previously stated, a secondary
place a great amount of emphasis on
component of this project was to determine
teaching over research.
what knowledge, skills and attitudes DGS's
In regards to involvement with the
wanted to instill in their graduate students.
Center for Teaching, the School of Nursing
As a result of this component of the project,
has enjoyed a close working relationship.
the investigators were able to construct a
The Center for Teaching is involved with
response to the third research question of
supporting Ph.D. faculty as well as the
the
School of Nursing as a whole. In return,
departments across the University, it
there
and
became apparent that the role of the
encouragement for students to participate
Director of Graduate Study carried little
in the F2P2 program. The role that the
professional status. Most faculty members
Center for Teaching plays with the School of
either
Nursing is considered appropriate as is
department activities because no one else
given the clinically-focused MSN curriculum
wanted it or it was merely their turn to take
and research focused PhD program. The
the job. The role is seen as service to the
Center has done a good job of teaching the
department rather than as a professional
has been
strong
support
- 104 -
study.
In
volunteered
interviewing
to
manage
various
these
role in itself. Few directors interviewed,
teaching undergraduate courses. While this
especially those who rotate in and out of
is a valuable marketing tool to prospective
the job on a regular basis, had an
students and parents, this puts strain on
understanding of the department history or
departments
any demographic trends.
Because of
opportunities for their graduate students to
teaching
teach. One respondent expressed extreme
responsibilities, these faculty members
disdain for the inconsistency in the
have little time to devote to advancing the
enforcement of this policy.
training of doctoral students beyond what is
departments depend greatly on their
currently institutionalized in the specific
graduate students to teach courses on their
departments.
own while other departments are strongly
existing
research
and
Another observation made during
interviews
was
the
tension
discouraged
trying
from
to
doing
provide
more
Several
so.
This
between
inconsistency in the policy is noticed by
teaching and research roles within the
several departments and is a point of
university.
growing
Many of the departments,
concern.
Comments
from
especially in the sciences and medicine, are
Directors of Graduate Study that informed
extremely
these conclusions are included below:
focused
on
their
research
productivity and have little time to explore
the scholarship of teaching.
Through the curriculum which we have
recently revised to get students started in
In addition,
research early…now their first semester,
some of the liberal arts departments
their first work they’re getting involved in a
expressed concern over the university’s
research project.
policy discouraging graduate students from
- 105 -
If you interviewed most of our faculty; they
Teaching is what you do because you love it,
would tell you that ‘we’re not here to teach
not because it pays the bill and therefore
them the teaching part.
We’re here to
we’re gonna train you to do what pays the
teach them the research part and they can
bills and you’ll figure out how to teach
learn to teach the same way I did which was
because you love it.
on the job training.’
harsh but that is sort of the reality.
You know, they’ll
That sounds really
model what they learned here by seeing us
teach but we’re not gonna overtly teach
The key is to get them involved in research
teaching and there’s a real kind of bias in
as soon as possible. We have a program
that direction in the sciences, I think.
where we have an explicit deadline for
getting research projects done that involve
I know the Center for Teaching offers a…you
presentations.
know it lasts over a whole year of teaching,
you now, you sort of join this program and
I think generally when they come in, they
you attend certain things and then you go
are expected to focus on research and then
out and apply them in your own field and all
we go from there basically.
that kind of stuff. You know I can tell you
that the research mentors around here
We no longer use our PhD students very
would see that as, they think that’s fine as
much at all as teaching assistants, the
long as they’re still putting 60 hours a week
reason essentially is they are much too
into their research in my lab. If they can
heavily involved in taking their own
stay awake and do that too, that’s fine.
coursework and in doing research as part of
their learning experience, as part of their
I think that most of the people in this field
stipend. The change in the PhD program
feel like if you can’t get funded to do
has an enormously raised bar in the areas of
research, it doesn’t matter how good of a
methods, statistics and research skills and
teacher you are, you won’t have a job in five
we put them under a great deal of pressure
years.
to learn advanced research skills which
makes our students more competitive than
- 106 -
almost any other group of PhD students in
the country at the moment because they
We never really had much of a need for
are really well-versed in methodology but at
teaching assistants until recently…now that
a cost to the instructional development of
we’re
them as teaching assistants. We don’t do it
clamoring for teaching assistants and yet
anymore.
I’m finding that faculty know students have
growing,
weaknesses
in
you
know
there’s
communication
a
and
We just cross our fingers and hope they are
therefore when they get them as teaching
able to teach…which actually is something
assistants, it’s more trouble than it’s worth
we need to address, I think because it’s
to develop that and so they end up giving
interesting I’ve received inquiries from some
them background work to do.
prospective university employers from time
With many department expressing
to time asking me to address how well this
candidate, one of our graduates, how well
the priority research has over teaching, it
this person teaches…I’m forced to say I have
was clear that many departments, with the
no idea.
exception of engineering and medicine,
Most students in the department are
have graduates entering academia pursuing
working on one or more research grants
more teaching-intensive roles rather than
along with advisors or other faculty
members. And we have a bizarre thing here
which is not quite a course, not quite a
research experience.
research-intensive roles.
This is
interesting
given
observation
an
the
importance placed on research in many of
the departments in the humanities and
A concern of ours has to be that it is not fair
to have the program directors running
social sciences and a few natural sciences.
around like little hens after a whole bunch
These inconsistencies were not present in
of graduate students who are going to
the professional schools, with the exception
disappear after one semester.
- 107 -
of the Divinity School. Some of the social
observation. The main exceptions to the
science departments mentioned their effort
literature appear in two applied science
to improve the placement of graduates at
departments, one at the medical center and
more research-intensive institutions, but
one Arts & Science, where teaching more
demonstration of the success of this plan
than one course is standard for nearly all
was not observed.
doctoral students, especially those seeking
Finally, the investigators noticed
faculty
positions.
In
all
science
that there is not much intentional planning
departments, especially the medical center
for graduate students to teach in many
departments that were interviewed stated
departments. Few exceptions in the social
that if their students expressed interest in
sciences have institutionalized teaching at
teaching then the department would
specific points in the doctoral program with
attempt to assist in fulfilling that desire but
the support of some course work as
it happen either never or very infrequently.
preparation. Applied science departments
Only
such as engineering relegate graduate
institutionalized the value and training of
student teaching opportunities to TA-ships
future teachers seem to fully support
which largely have grading responsibilities
teaching as a professional activity and have
and an occasional guest lecture rather than
formal processes to accomplish this goal.
taking a full course.
The humanities
Other departments either discourage that
departments probably have the most
activity or will only do something when the
intentional planning; however, this is
graduate student expresses an interest in
primarily
teaching. From this analysis there are many
through
mentoring
or
class
- 108 -
those
departments
which
have
supporters of training graduate students in
consensus fields in this study would be
teaching because they realize that teaching
programs
in
engineering,
will be a part of their responsibilities as a
chemistry,
etc.
while
faculty member.
consensus
fields
Those that end up
those
would
biology,
in
be
low-
English,
teaching primarily undergraduates such as
sociology, and history.
in the humanities, social sciences, and some
interest is the finding in response to the
natural sciences tend to focus more
question that asks what skills and abilities
resources on pedagogy, however in varying
are most important for graduates. While
levels of quality. As with the medical center
both high- and low-consensus fields at
departments, those graduates are either
Vanderbilt acknowledged research as the
entering industry or, as faculty members,
primary skill important for their graduates’
will
instructional
success, almost all of the low-consensus
Those who do have
fields listed teaching as the second most
have
responsibilities.
limited
teaching responsibilities will most likely be
important
teaching graduate students.
respondents from high consensus fields
A Word about High- and Low-Consensus
identified teaching at all. When directors
Fields
were asked how they train their graduate
In addition to comparing responses
skill
while
Of particular
only
a
few
students, the results reflected the previous
of Directors of Graduate Study between
responses
colleges and schools, investigators can also
providing more intentional preparation for
identify differences between high and low-
teaching
consensus fields.
focused their efforts on training in research.
Examples of high-
- 109 -
with
while
low-consensus
high-consensus
fields
fields
This does not imply that high-consensus
or that “it’s doing what it needs to do with a
fields at Vanderbilt do not provide any
clinically-focused curriculum.”
training in teaching for their graduate
Overall, then, the responses of the
students. Responses to the question that
Directors of Graduate Study at Vanderbilt
specifically asked what training for teaching
appear
the department provides show that the
suggested
high-consensus fields do, at the very least,
consensus fields of study; however, it is
provide some opportunities for teaching
important to note that those differences
experience if not training in how to teach.
may not be as stark as they might be at
Finally, in response to the question about
other
what role the Center for Teaching should
suspect that this may be related to the fact
play in the departments’ preparation of its
that Vanderbilt is a research-focused
graduate students, the low-consensus fields
institution. In such an environment, even
tended to give more specific suggestions for
low-consensus fields demonstrate a high
increased
high-
commitment to those issues normally
consensus fields were more likely to say
attributed to high-consensus fields such as
that there is no role for the Center to play
research
engagement
while
- 110 -
to
support
between
institutions.
training
the
high-
The
and
differences
and
low-
investigators
publications.
Limitations to the Project
There were several limitations to the
ability to make general statements. This
study that must be noted. First, the fact
limitation was addressed by using multiple
that the program is still in its early stages
methods of analysis to gain as much depth
having only three graduates at the time the
as possible and to consider the project’s
assessment
questions from as many viewpoints as
was
conducted
proved
problematic since there was less reliable
data upon which to draw.
possible.
The smaller
Second, given the nature of the
sample size for document analysis and
Teaching Certificate program and the
interviews of participants affects the power
timeframe within which the assessment had
of the findings in that it decreases the
to take place, the investigators were not
chance that gains in knowledge which have
able to compare findings of participants
occurred will be detected.
with a control group for the document
Although the
documents of the entire population of Cycle
analysis.
2 finishers were analyzed, the small number
participants were compared at various
still limits how far the results can be
cycles, there was no control group from
interpreted. In addition, although students
which to establish a baseline in the
for the interview portion of the project
knowledge, skills, and attitudes of graduate
were
smaller
students not in the program. The closest
number of students in the later cycles
this study could come to establishing an
limited
interviews
initial level of knowledge was by looking at
conducted, and, therefore, also limited the
those who had completed the Intake
selected
the
randomly,
amount
of
the
- 111 -
Because only the program
Interview.
However, even at the Intake
was no consistent understanding of what
Interview, participants have self-selected
constitutes proficiency of an objective. The
into the program and have written a
investigators attempted to address this
teaching statement as the first program
issue by operationalizing the objectives and
activity.
then
These participants were not
creating
a
scale
to
determine
appropriate controls due to the self-
proficiency. Still, there are real concerns
selection and could introduce significant
about the content validity of this approach.
bias for any comparison that required the
Does the rubric created for this project
use of a control. Because of this limitation
adequately reflect the content for each of
paired
the objectives?
t-tests
were
appropriate
This is difficult to say;
measurements to determine whether there
however, it appears to have reasonable
was an increase in overall knowledge, skills,
face validity in that the rubric uses the
and
the
stated objectives and attempts quantify
operationalization of the four program
how much a participant exemplifies or
objectives evaluated. Although comparison
demonstrates knowledge of the objective.
between a treatment group and a control
For example. for the objective that states
group would have been optimal, the main
that participants will understand student
focus of this assessment was to determine
learning and what kinds of teaching lead to
change over time for a particular sample
it, the scale ranges from “participant does
and the findings are still useful.
not identify any theories of learning or
attitudes
as
given
by
Third, the lack of operationalized
methodologies” to “participant identifies
objectives was a limitation because there
one or more theories of learning, describes
- 112 -
one or more teaching methodologies
completed their reviews at the same time
related to the theory, and gives examples.”
under the same conditions. In addition, a
The
to
process was used to address any significant
operationalize the objectives to be able to
discrepancies. If the raters differed in their
assess them but the objectives still need to
assessments by more than one point, then
be more clearly defined so that assessing
that particular item was discussed until
them is more feasible.
consensus was reached. Out of 40 items
investigators,
then,
had
A fourth potential limitation to the
study is the issue of reliability.
instruments
or
Are the
A fifth potential limitation to this
measuring proficiency reliable across the
project is the issue of missing or incorrect
sample
to
data. In some cases, the investigators had
investigator? In this case, specifically, the
to use incomplete files or documents with
issue of inter-rater reliability is important.
missing or inaccurate information.
For
Since two investigators reviewed all of the
example,
for
portfolios independently, there is cause for
interviews that were identified as Cycle 1
concern that their assessments would not
finishers revealed in the interview that, in
be consistent. In other words, how close
fact, they were Cycle 2 finishers. Due to
were
time constraints it was not always possible
the
from
raters
assessments?
in
used
problem in three instances.
for
and
processes
rated, the raters only experienced this
investigator
terms
of
their
To address this potential
participants
selected
to substitute these interviews with others.
problem, the investigators created the
A final limitation of this project is
instrument together and independently
the
- 113 -
lack of
response
or
refusal to
participate. In terms of the interviews with
the ability to draw conclusions and make
directors of graduate study, four faculty
recommendations with the highest degree
members refused to participate. For the
of confidence. Every effort has been made
participant interviews, several students did
to only suggest conclusions that can be
not respond to repeated attempts to
reasonably attributed to the data and the
contact them. While not detrimental to the
literature supporting this project.
findings, this missing data does impact the
addition, recommendations are also based
overall depth of the project.
on data and literature.
The limitations stated above are a
conclusions
cause for concern because they constrict
and
Therefore, both
recommendations are
tempered by the limitations identified.
- 114 -
In
Conclusions
This program evaluation consisted of
from the staff and that everyone they
three research questions:
encountered was helpful and knowledgeable
1. What do participants learn in the
program, including knowledge, skills, and
attitudes?
2. How do they apply what they learn when
teaching at Vanderbilt or in faculty
positions
obtained
after
leaving
Vanderbilt?
3. What knowledge, skills, and attitudes
regarding teaching do Vanderbilt
departments and programs want their
doctoral students to possess upon
graduation?
in their subject area.
As mentioned
previously, this program evaluation suffered
from the lack of participants who had
finished the program and those who had
progressed
significantly
through
the
program. As the program pipeline increases,
more valuable data can be obtained by those
who obtain employment after graduation.
To answer the first question, there is
Tracking former participants in this manner
overwhelming satisfaction experienced by
will allow Center for Teaching staff or future
the
participants
interviewed.
They
evaluators to map content learned and
mentioned the flexibility of the program as a
applied to the two objectives that were not
benefit; however, some mentioned that the
measurable in this evaluation.
program might be too flexible thus putting
Based on research of other existing
their effort to finish the program in a timely
programs, the Teaching Certificate program
manner at risk.
Comments on the
appears well-grounded in theory and is
helpfulness of the CFT staff were numerous.
comparable to other quality programs with
All participants interviewed stated that they
similar preparation goals. Most programs
were very comfortable asking for assistance
use an electronic portfolio system to collect
- 115 -
and
review
relevant
to
required project. The project requirement
determine whether a participant meets the
gives the participants an opportunity to
program goals and earns a certificate. Most
actually put what they know into practice
of these portfolio systems, however, are
and for that application to be evaluated by
aimed at determining whether participants
Center for Teaching staff.
have
or
outcome raises the credibility and legitimacy
programs or submitted certain documents.
of the program as a leading program among
In addition to documenting attendance at
universities.
attended
certain
documents
workshops
This tangible
programs, the Center for Teaching’s program
Given that assessment is critical to
seeks to assess the knowledge and skill
demonstrating that content knowledge has
gained by the participants. Unfortunately,
been gained by participants, clear and
many programs suffer from ambiguous
specific methods must be stated and
outcomes that cannot be measured or they
followed consistently. A key finding of this
lack stated outcomes altogether. The lack of
program evaluation is that the responses
outcomes and assessment protocols is
from the participants in reflections and other
contradictory to the purpose of training in
documentation posted on the portfolio site
SoTL and many learning theories that
do not map directly to the stated program
provide for measurable and specific activities
objectives.
designed
document,
knowledge.
to
assess
The
gains
Teaching
in
content
As stated earlier in this
there
is
evidence
that
Certificate
participants are gaining critical knowledge of
program demonstrates a more intentional
SoTL and concepts related to pedagogy and
commitment to SoTL because of the
evaluation.
- 116 -
The
document
analysis
produced results that suggest where certain
varied greatly in depth, clarity, and content,
areas of participant learning may be
and there appeared to be few guidelines on
occurring. Whether or not a specific type of
what and how participants should write.
learning
most
These inconsistencies threaten the validity of
appropriate time in the program is difficult
the evaluation of content knowledge gained
to determine. If a goal of the program is to
in SoTL.
Keeping track of program
link specific learning to specific activities, it
documents
and
was not evident in this evaluation; but the
requires
desire for such can be argued as a powerful
resources in order to maintain accurate
feature in SoTL programs. Using principles
records.
of backward design, the rubric created for
documents and interview participants was
this evaluation was developed in order to
problematic
operationalize the stated objectives which
incomplete or missing and the cycles some
were treated as dependent variables.
participants were in were not reflected in
was
occurring
at
the
Another conclusion discovered from
participant
interviews
and
participant
significant
time
activities
and
human
The database used to analyze
because
the program database.
records
were
Some of the data
satisfaction
received from the Center for Teaching’s
survey results is that some participants
program database lacked complete data or
stated that the portfolio system was difficult
contained erroneous data.
for them to navigate.
obstacles,
Currently, the
however,
that
This created
were
not
portfolio system is a place for posting of
impossible to work with, but it may have
cycle-based documents and end-of-cycle
obscured some of the results obtained to a
reflections. The quality of the reflections
small degree. A more sophisticated system
- 117 -
that can keep a closer handle on participant
complete definition of SoTL. The document
activities is highly desirable, especially if it
analysis and t-tests performed on proficiency
will automate some of the communications
levels determined by the rubric provided
and other time-dependent but mundane
initial indication of what knowledge the
tasks that are critical to knowing the
participants were gaining at specific points in
progress of all the participants in nearly real
the program.
time.
provided by the t-tests also give insight to
The significance levels
As stated previously a limitation of
where most of the learning for each
this evaluation is that there are not many
objective occurs. There were some surprises
program finishers because of the program
and inconsistencies in how learning may be
being relatively new. The document analysis
happening; however, the interviews were
provided
able to clarify what the participants were
limited
useful
information
regarding learning of SoTL concepts perhaps
actually learning.
because this is a Cycle 3 focus; however,
important in this evaluation in order to
participants
provide
knowledge
interviewed
and
demonstrated
awareness
and
richness
to
the
SoTL
documentation analyzed. As a result, the
definitions and concepts.
Most of the
content knowledge of the participants
participants
had
either
appears to increase as they progress through
completed Cycle 2 and were in Cycle 3 or
the program and the knowledge and
had finished Cycle 3 thus the program. It
experiences are valuable to them.
was clear that participants who had not
question of do the participants learn about
finished Cycle 2 had difficulty providing a
SoTL and are they able to pursue teaching as
interviewed
of
depth
The interviews were
- 118 -
The
a scholarly activity is an almost certain
investigators
found
that
there
is
a
affirmative.
demonstrated tension between the desire
Overall, this evaluation was able to
for research and the need for teaching.
determine with relative confidence that at
Many departments would like graduates to
least four of the six program objectives are
obtain
being met albeit to varying degrees of
institutions, but many non-medical or non-
success. From the document analysis it is
engineering
difficult to determine when objectives are
teaching positions at liberal arts colleges.
being fulfilled; however, from the interviews
Additionally, research shows the number of
it is clear that participants are learning of
tenure-track
SoTL and are able to use the concepts in
institutions is decreasing nationally, thus
their teaching by using various teaching
forcing some graduate students to seek
methodologies and evaluating the impact of
primarily teaching positions in order to gain
those activities in order to gauge student
full-time employment. Some social science
learning
Many
departments are attempting to change
participants reported that they were able to
where their graduates obtain employment
gain
from teaching institutions to research
and
more
engagement.
understanding
from
their
evaluations.
In
positions
at
graduates
positions
research-intensive
primarily
at
seek
research
institutions, but there is no evidence of
determining
program
success of those efforts to date. Generally
participants use what they have learned in
high-consensus fields see their graduates
the Teaching Certificate program to answer
obtain research-based positions or industry
the
positions.
second
research
how
question,
the
- 119 -
There are a few exceptions in
natural science fields.
Primarily low-
level instruction. Upper-level major-specific
consensus fields see their graduates obtain
courses are appropriately taught by full-time
teaching-based
Some
or adjunct faculty members. The graduate
departments, especially in social science
student’s roll in these courses can be better
fields, would like to see their graduates take
defined by the faculty members inviting
more research positions.
lectures on special topics of research while
positions.
In addition to this tension, graduate
giving the graduate student an opportunity
students who pursue teaching positions have
to hone his or her instructional skills.
few opportunities to teach while in graduate
more collaborative approach between all
school given this institution's policy largely
teaching faculty in a department and all the
prohibiting graduate students from teaching
graduate
undergraduate courses.
could
This policy is
students
provide
performing
more
A
research
opportunities
for
enforced irregularly considering the nature
graduate students to lecture in a class and
of certain departments such as English and
provide the undergraduates some variety in
mathematics
heavy
the instruction they receive in their courses
undergraduate course loads and not enough
while allowing faculty members to provide
faculty members to teach them all. Also,
instructional guidance and creating a more
typical
collaborative
which
employment
have
for
these
two
departments’ graduate students is that of a
teaching-intensive position.
holistic
approach
to
undergraduate and graduate education.
The policy is
The third research question focused
domain-specific
on the departmental perception of the role
undergraduate courses beyond introductory
of teaching as it applies to graduate student
appropriate
regarding
- 120 -
education.
One of the major conclusions
resulting from this project is the lack of a
fellows, and faculty members in the
scholarship of teaching.
coordinated effort by Vanderbilt to create a
In many departments, the role of the
common graduate student experience and
Director of Graduate Study seems to be
particularly the teacher preparation of its
marginalized to management of paperwork
graduate students. This was evidenced in
and basic department statistics regarding
the various responses given by graduate
their graduate program. This is not for lack
students.
of ambition and desire to improve graduate
The existence of Center for
Teaching, while positive, does not insure
education on many levels.
that graduate students are having a common
stated that they would be interested in
experience.
While there are many
making positive changes, but they either had
constituents across the campus who are
no time or the effort would be so great
highly qualified to train graduate students in
within their department to affect change.
pedagogy and scholarship of teaching, the
While
Center for Teaching is the most obvious
responsibility of the Center for Teaching, if
choice to coordinate these efforts given their
graduate education is going to be reformed,
existing, centralized resources. Departments
the role of the DGS will have to be elevated
in various schools should not take this
in order to allow time and resources for
training on by themselves but rely on the
faculty to provide opportunities to make
Center for Teaching’s core competencies of
graduate students more competitive for the
training graduate students, post-doctoral
positions
- 121 -
this does
the
not
fall
Several DGS’s
within
department
the
desires.
Recommendations
Based on research reviewed and
demonstrate proficiency? In terms of
data which was gathered and analyzed from
“kinds of teaching,” how many does the
this assessment, several recommendations
participant need to identify in order to
are offered that may assist the Center for
demonstrate
Teaching with improving the Teaching
understand the practice but can use it
Certificate program overall and creating a
effectively? By clearly identifying what
more engaging learning experience for
participants are supposed to gain from
participants.
the program, the CFT can make more
1. Operationalize
not
only
substantive claims about the benefits of
program’s current objectives should be
its program. An example to consider
operationalized such that they can be
may
assessed
as
University whose program has an
subjective methods. For instance, the
extensive framework that identifies
first objective states that participants
specific knowledge areas. The detail of
will have an “understanding of student
the framework is helpful because it
learning and what kinds of teaching lead
helps
to it.” What does an “understanding of
competencies.
objective as
-
they
The
in
Objectives
that
well
be
to
that
of
Michigan
operationalize
the
State
core
student learning” mean? Does it mean
2. Use Leading Questions - In conjunction
the participant can articulate a specific
with operationalizing the objectives, it is
learning theory, and how many does the
important that the participants be
participant need to articulate in order to
prompted with leading questions or a
- 122 -
list of items to address regarding their
participants. Perhaps use the University
experience and what they are learning
of
in each cycle. The review of portfolios
teaching philosophies or develop one
indicated a problem with a lack of
for the program. The rubric designed by
consistent responses in terms of topic
professional staff is comprehensive and
areas.
could easily be altered for use by
Currently, participants are
allowed to reflect on their experiences
Michigan
rubric
for
assessing
Vanderbilt’s Center for Teaching.
with little direction. Mapping directly to
4. Establish Portfolio Standards - Since
program objectives eases evaluation of
portfolio review is a popular assessment
which concepts participants are learning
method for these types of programs, a
and in which cycle they are learning
formal set of guidelines for the actual
them.
review can add credibility to the
3. Focus More Attention on the Teaching
Statement
-
Consider
participants
revise
their
certificate.
having
The program does not
necessarily have to be more rigorous;
teaching
however,
the
assessment
of
the
statement at the end of each cycle. This
portfolio needs to have clearly stated
activity will make them reassess their
expectations such that each participant
philosophy more often and it will give
is being assessed on the same basic
the CFT another manner for assessing
issues. Building in some measures to
gains in knowledge. It will also provide
increase consistency in assessment from
one
participant to participant is essential
more
effort
at
consistency
throughout the program and between
- 123 -
5. Suggest Timelines - Flexibility should not
respond indicating their current status
be eliminated but all participants stated
in the program.
that timing was important in how they
semester checkpoints to document
progressed through the program while
where each participant is currently in
managing
the program.
requirements
of
their
Create monthly or
research obligations. Estimated times
7. Simplify the Online Portfolio System –
of completion for each cycle or a
The portfolio system is the standard
general checklist of activities that each
assessment measure for these programs
cycle requires might be helpful from a
as described in the section of this report
time management perspective.
It
that highlights key programs around the
appears that the participants enjoy a
country. Participants indicated that the
relative amount of structure in their
online system can be confusing and
responsibilities so they would be able to
cumbersome.
choose to start a cycle or even start the
collected by the CFT supports this issue.
program if they have an idea of how it
This system should be easy to use by the
will work with their course and research
participants,
requirements.
technically adept.
Satisfaction
especially
those
data
not
If the system was
6. Build Accountability - Create regular
reworked so that participants were
updates to participants about their
simply responding online to the leading
progress.
This could be a phone or
questions or prompts instead of just
email contact or an automated email to
writing about their experiences, this
all participants that asks them to
might eliminate some frustration.
- 124 -
In
addition, the layout of the electronic
8. Focus on Specific Departments to Build
portfolio could be reconfigured with a
Clientele – Leave the program open to
table of contents rather than everything
any graduate student, post-doc, or
displayed in a table on the page.
A
faculty member but focus heavily on
remind
those academic departments that are
participants occasionally to update their
already interested in the teaching
profiles or upload documents to be
preparation of their graduate students
evaluated or just to see if they are still
in order to build up clientele. Once a
involved
strong base is built, then this may entice
sophisticated
in
system
the
may
program.
The
investigators noticed that there were
those
inconsistencies in the database which
departments to participate as well. This
led to the interviewing of participants
recommendation is based partly on the
who were one or two cycles ahead of
findings in this study that certain low-
where they there thought to be. This is
consensus fields, while still highly
not detrimental to the study, but it did
committed to research training as a
introduce some uncertainty to the
priority, continue to be heavily focused
results.
on training their graduate students as
A fully automated system
would reduce the human resources
from
less-represented
teachers.
needed to track the progress of
9. Educate Directors of Graduate Study
participants through the program and
about the program - Be more proactive
provide more reliable results.
in educating Directors of Graduate
Study about the Teaching Certificate
- 125 -
program – many of those interviewed
University of Colorado-Boulder and
claimed they had heard about it, but
Michigan State University use this
then not all of them.
notation in order to add a level of
Those who
recognized it could not explain what it
credibility to the credential.
contained and another described the
previous F2P2 program.
11. Begin Using Testimonials – Interviews
It might be
with
participants
indicated
that
beneficial to schedule meetings with
although they had suggestions for
individual
them
improvements, they were very pleased
information first hand and answer their
with their experience. Use participants
questions.
who have successfully completed the
directors
to
give
10. Use Academic Transcript Notation - Try
program as testimonials – they can sell
to get the certificate noted on the
the program better than anyone or any
student’s academic transcript – this will
piece of literature. Use their projects to
enhance the program’s credibility.
demonstrate how teaching can be a
If
the institution decides that preparing
scholarly activity.
doctoral students to teach is a priority,
12. Lead Institutional Efforts to Emphasize
then push for a notification on a
Graduate Student Socialization – This
transcript. This will increase the status
may prove to be one of the most
of the program since participants will
difficult recommendations. It can only
know that recognition on the transcript
be accomplished with leadership from
may carry as much weight as a
CFT and the Graduate School working
certificate.
with individual departments. In order
Currently,
both
the
- 126 -
to improve the experiences and quality
helping
of
importance of the service that the CFT
the
graduate
students
in
all
departments, most departments will
education
understand
the
offers.
have to renew their dedication to
graduate
them
13. Build
Ongoing
Relationships
with
and
Individual Faculty Members - Marketing
professionalization especially with a
is a vital aspect of any institution or
commitment to teaching preparation.
functional unit within an institution.
This type of cultural change at the
Exposure of the Center for Teaching to
institution should be initiated at the
the campus at large is quite satisfactory.
highest
and
However, marketing to departments
supported by tangible resources and
may not be the most effective method
required outcomes.
for
administrative
ranks
The DGS is the
appealing
to
stakeholders
to
instrument to accomplish this goal, thus
participate in the Teaching Certificate
the need to professionalize the role
program. From stakeholder interviews
within the department. Departments in
and participant interviews it appears
isolation (but who value research) may
that individual faculty members in
be unaware what the research says
various
about teaching preparation. Publicize
support for the Center for Teaching that
the reality of first faculty positions so
may
that graduate students understand that
departmental
they may actually need training in
professors can be approached who are
pedagogy. This could be an inroad to
considered ‘friends’ of the Center for
- 127 -
departments
be
possess
disregarded
contact.
by
the
the
Individual
Teaching
to
provide
support
for
marketing campaigns for Center for
graduate students enrolling in the
Teaching programs.
program. In a sense, participation can
increasingly becomes the preferred ‘last
become a type of viral effect to reach
stop’
graduate students who may work under
employment in the applied and natural
faculty
not
sciences, this population becomes one
supportive of the Center for Teaching or
of growing interest that should be
the Teaching Certificate program.
solicited by the Center for Teaching. It
members
14. Continue
and
who
are
Increase
before
As the post-doc
obtaining
full-time
Public
is clear from Center for Teaching
Announcements at Events - Further,
documents that post-docs are most
evidence exists that announcements are
certainly welcome to participate in
made at key events such as TA
many programs offered; however, it
Orientation and in workshops about all
may not be clear to the post-docs or
the programs offered by the Center for
published to them that these options
Teaching.
Announcements in these
are available. It is unclear that this is an
venues should certainly be maintained
issue, but it is a need that was
in order to reach as many interested
mentioned by one faculty member at
graduate students as possible.
the medical center.
15. Increase Marketing to Post-Docs - From
16. Continue Providing High-Touch Support
an interview with a medical center
-
department
expressed unanimously that the support
including
the
DGS
post-doctoral
mentioned
fellows
in
The
participants
interviewed
offered by the Center for Teaching
- 128 -
either through print resources or by
at least two years.
individual or group assistance is an
adequate time for current participants
overwhelming point of satisfaction of
to obtain and begin working in their first
the participants. This widely expressed
full-time faculty position.
satisfaction is not easy to achieve and
period should also allow the population
very easy to lose. To this effect, the
in the program to grow in order to
Center for Teaching is best advised to
provide enough participants from more
make every effort to continue to supply
disciplines to enroll.
the high level of service and support to
participants should be more robust and
its clients which has solidified its
better able to be studied to provide
reputation as being a welcoming and
higher quality results. The information
supportive resource across the entire
obtained from finishers should provide
campus.
adequate
17. Continue
Evaluation
with
-
Formal
Program
remaining
Another
program
investigated
evaluation such as this should occur in
- 129 -
data
two
in
This should give
to
This time
The pool of
measure
objectives
this
the
not
evaluation.
The Future of the Teaching Certificate Program
Based
on
the
results
of
this
projects that participants must complete
assessment, the themes suggested in
appear
current literature, and the comparison with
participants achieve the stated outcomes
other nationally known programs with
while also identifying opportunities for
similar goals, it is evident that the
improving the evaluation process for
Vanderbilt Center for Teaching’s Teacher
individual
Certificate Program offers its participants
suggestion is simply intended to strengthen
and the wider university community a
the program’s claim of effectiveness or
resource that is grounded in what may be
impact by allowing the Center for Teaching
considered best practices and which assists
to be able to more clearly identify and
students in meeting the outcomes outlined
describe students’ depth of learning and
by the program.
skill development and link it to their
Vanderbilt’s doctoral
students who participate in the program are
to
be
effective
participants.
at
This
helping
specific
participation in the program.
engaged in a highly interactive experience
In addition, the program appears to
that offers multiple opportunities for
be well-grounded in the literature as
education and practice.
Students feel
evidenced by the terminology used to
prepared when they complete the program
describe the Teaching Certificate program
and move into positions where teaching is
and the multiple resources listed in the
an expected role.
program description that support the
The results of this assessment
program’s structure and outcomes. This is
highlight the fact that the activities and
significant because it signifies that the
- 130 -
program has been established on data and
Teaching has shown itself to be among the
theory as opposed to a “good idea.”
leading programs in graduate preparation
Continued research on trends in graduate
despite the Teaching Certificate program’s
socialization and teacher training will only
relatively recent beginning.
serve to justify the program’s claims and its
The
relevance within the university community.
future
for
the
Teaching
Certificate program at Vanderbilt includes
Finally, when compared with other
challenges both internally and externally;
similarly-focused programs around the
however, with continued intentional efforts
nation, the Vanderbilt program is consistent
to educate others about the need for its
with current efforts to prepare graduate
work, to explain the rationale behind its
students
processes, and to highlight the success of its
for
their
faculty
role
and
specifically to prepare them for teaching.
participants,
As evidenced in the use of the portfolio
contribution can certainly grow and become
method as well as the emphasis on such
a leading contributor to the education of
topics as learning styles, teaching strategies,
Vanderbilt’s
and teaching as scholarship, the Center for
- 131 -
the
program’s
doctoral
overall
students.
Bibliography
Austin, A.E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty. Journal of Higher Education,
73(1), 94-122.
Austin, A.E. (Summer 1996). Institutional and Departmental Cultures: The Relationship Between
Teaching and Research. In J. Braxton. (Ed.), Faculty teaching and research: Is there a
conflict? New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 90, 57-66. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Austin, A.E. & McDaniels, M. (2006). Doctoral education and Boyer’s four domains. In R.K.
Toutkoushian, (Series Ed.) & J. M. Braxton (Ed.), New Directions for Institutional
Research: Analyzing Faculty Work and Rewards: Using Boyer’s Four Domains of
Scholarship. No. 129, 51-65. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bess, J. (1978). Anticipatory socialization of graduate students. Research in Higher Education,
8, 289-317.
Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ:
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Braxton, J.M. (Summer, 1996). Contrasting Perspectives on the Relationship Between Teaching
and Research. In J. Braxton. (Ed.), Faculty teaching and research: Is there a conflict?
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Braxton, J.M. & Hargens, L.L. (1996). Variation among academic disciplines: Analytical
frameworks and research. In J. C. Smart (ed.) Higher Education: Handbook of theory
and research, 11. New York: Agathon Press.
Braxton, J.M. & Toombs, W. (1982). Faculty uses of doctoral training: Consideration of a
technique for the differentiation of scholarly effort from research activity. Research in
Higher Education, 16, 265-282.
Braxton, J.M., Luckey, W., and Helland, P. (2005). Institutionalizing a broader view of
scholarship through Boyer’s four domains. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Braxton, J.M., Luckey, W., and Helland, P. (2006). Ideal and actual value patterns toward
domains of scholarship in three types of colleges and universities. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.)
Analyzing Faculty Work and Rewards: Using Boyer’s Four Domains of Scholarship.
New Directions for Institutional Research, 129, 67-76. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- 132 -
Gaff, J. G. (2005). Preparing Future Faculty and Multiple Forms of Scholarship. In O’Meara, K. &
Rice, R.E. (Eds), Faculty priorities reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of
scholarship. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.
Golde, C.M. (1997, November). Gaps in the training of future faculty: Doctoral student
perceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of
Higher Education.
Golde, C.M., & Dore, T.M. (2000, April). Findings from the survey on doctoral education and
career preparation. Paper presented at the Re-envisioning the PhD Conference, Seattle,
WA.
Golde, C.M. & Dore, T.M. (2001). At cross purposes: What the experiences of today’s doctoral
students reveal about doctoral education. Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts.
Hutchings, P. and Shulman, L.S. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new
developments. Change, 31(5), 10-15.
Michigan State University, East Lansing, The Graduate School. Retrieved on March 1, 2008 from
the Michigan State University Web site: http://grad.msu.edu/teaching.htm
Miller, R.I. (1972). Evaluating faculty performance. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Nyquist, J.D., Manning, L., Wulff, D.H., Austin, A.E., Sprague, J., Fraser, P.K., Calcagno, C., &
Woodford, B. (1999). On the road to becoming a professor: The graduate student
experience. Change, 31(3), 18-27.
Nyquist, J.D., & Sprague, J. (1992). Developmental stages of TAs. In J.D. Nyquist & D.H. Wulff
(Eds.), Preparing teaching assistants for instructional roles: Supervising TAs in
communication (pp. 101-113). Annadale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd Edition). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Pellino, G.R., Blackburn, T.T., and Boberg, A.L. (1984). The dimensions of academic scholarship:
Faculty and administrator views. Research in Higher Education, 20, 103-115.
Princeton University, Princeton, The McGraw Center. Retrieved on March 1, 2008 from the
Princeton University Web site:
http://web.princeton.edu/sites/mcgraw/teaching_transcript.html
Rice, R. E. (2005). The future of the scholarly work of faculty. In O’Meara, K. & Rice, R.E. (Eds),
Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship. Jossey-Bass:
San Francisco, CA.
- 133 -
Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data, (2nd
Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Seldin, P. (1980). Successful faculty evaluation programs: A practical guide to improve faculty
performance and promotion/tenure decisions. Crugers, NY: Coventry Press.
Sorcinelli, M.D. & Austin, A.E. (Eds.). (1992). Developing new and junior faculty. New Directions
for Teaching and Learning, No. 50. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Tierney, W.G. (Ed.). (1990). Assessing academic climates and cultures. New Directions for
Institutional Research, No. 68. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
University of California, Santa Barbara, Graduate Division Academic Services. Retrieved March
1, 2008 from the University of California Web site:
http://www.graddiv.ucsb.edu/academic/ccut/require/index.htm
University of Colorado, Boulder, Graduate Teacher Program and COPFF Network. Retrieved
March 1, 2008, from the University of Colorado Web site:
http://www.colorado.edu/gtp/about/GTP_brochure_07-08_Final.pdf
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Center for Research on Learning and Teaching. Retrieved
March 1, 2008 from the University of Michigan Web site:
http://sitemaker.umich.edu/um.gtc/introduction_to_program
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, The Center for Teaching. Retrieved on March 1, 2008 from the
Vanderbilt University Web site: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/
Van Maanen, J. (1976). Breaking in: Socialization to work. In R. Dubin (Ed.) Handbook of work,
organization, and society (pp. 67-130). Chicago: Rand-McNally College Publishing.
- 134 -
Appendix A, Document Analysis Rubric
Bryant-Rowe Rubric
(for document analysis)
Understanding of
student learning and
what kinds of teaching
lead to it
Participant does not
identify any theories of
learning or
methodologies and no
examples
Participant identifies
one theory of learning
but gives no examples
Participant identifies
one or more theories
of learning and gives
examples
Participant describes
one or more teaching
methodologies directly
related to a learning
theory
Development of skills
that will enable
participants to analyze
and improve their own
teaching
Participant does not
identify a personal
teaching practice
Participant identifies
one or more personal
teaching practices
Participant identifies
one or more personal
teaching practices and
demonstrates some
analysis of the
participant's teaching
effectiveness
Participant identifies
one or more personal
teaching practices,
demonstrates some
analysis of their
teaching effectiveness,
and identifies one or
more specific
strategies to improve
their teaching
Realization of ways in
which participants can
approach their teaching
as a scholarly activity
Participant cannot
articulate a definition of
the SoTL
Participant articulates a
definition of the SoTL.
Participant articulates
a definition of the
SoTL, has a minimal
knowledge of the
literature on SoTL and
considering ideas for a
project
Participant articulates
a definition of the
SoTL and describes a
project idea that
exemplifies teaching
as a scholarly activity
Engagement with their
own teaching among a
community of scholars
Participant
demonstrates no
engagement with peers
Participant has limited
conversations about
pedagogy with peers
Participant interacts
regularly but
informally with peers
regarding pedagogy.
Participant interacts
regularly and in a
formal setting
regarding pedagogy.
- 135 -
Participant identifies one
or more theories of
learning, describes one or
more teaching
methodologies related to
the theory, and gives
examples
Participant identifies one
or more personal teaching
practices, demonstrates
some analysis of their
teaching effectiveness, and
identifies one or more
specific strategies to
improve their teaching,
and develops a personal
improvement plan
Participant articulates a
definition of the SoTL, is
knowledgeable of the
literature on SoTL, and
has completed a personal
project that exemplifies
teaching as a scholarly
activity.
Participant interacts
professionally with
colleagues regarding their
pedagogy as a scholarly
activity.
Appendix B, Participant Email Letter
Dear Teaching Certificate Participant: (name of participant to be included in salutation)
The Center for Teaching has contracted with Peabody College's Higher Education Leadership
and Policy Program for two of its Ed.D. candidates to perform a program evaluation on the
Teaching Certificate program in which you are currently participating. This is a student-run
research project for the Center for Teaching conducted by Christopher Rowe and Mark Bryant
(listed below). In order to perform this evaluation, we are asking to interview a randomly
selected group of participants representing each of the three cycles of the program. It is
reasonable to conclude that as an internal stakeholder, your perceptions and knowledge gained
are very important in determining if the Teaching Certificate program is fulfilling its stated
goals.
You are receiving this letter because you have been selected for the program evaluators to
interview. The interview should last no more than 30 minutes and should be scheduled at a time
and location convenient to your schedule. The purpose of the interview will be to gauge your
program perceptions and your content knowledge as it relates to your progress in the program.
Any identifiable information will be eliminated by the interviewers in order to maintain your
anonymity. Again, the Center for Teaching will not know that you are being interviewed. You
are free to refuse to participate in this interview regarding the Teaching Certificate program with
no detriment to your program standing or reputation in the Center for Teaching. At any point in
the request for interview or interview process itself you may refuse to participate with no
recording of you ever being asked to be interviewed. We also understand you are very busy and
will greatly appreciate any 30-minute time period you could offer.
Please reply to this email if you are willing and available to schedule a time to be interviewed.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Christopher Rowe
chris.rowe@vanderbilt.edu
Mark Bryant
mark.a.bryant@vanderbilt.edu
Ed.D. Candidates
Higher Education Leadership and Policy
Department of Leadership, Policy and Organizations
Peabody College of Education and Human Development
- 136 -
Appendix C, Participant Interview Protocol
Basic Information
What level of the Teaching Certificate program are you currently in?
In which academic program are you pursuing a degree?
How many years have you been in your degree program?
Why did you choose to participate in the Teaching Certificate program?
How did you become aware of the program?
What are your career aspirations after completion of your degree?
Do you intend to focus your job search primarily on research or teaching institutions or some
other industry non-academic profession?
How important is teaching preparation in your future career plans?
Content Knowledge
What are the main ideas in your teaching statement?
What have you learned from your participation in this program?
What have you learned specifically about student learning?
What skills have you developed while in the program for analyzing your own teaching?
Describe your interaction with others regarding what you are learning.
How do you define the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning?
What new ideas have you encountered in the literature on the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning?
How is the information that you are learning being used in your current circumstances?
Can you give examples?
Program Perceptions
Describe your experience with the program.
Do you feel that you have sufficient time to dedicate to this program?
Does the program offer adequate support in helping you complete the requirements?
Is the program flexible enough to meet your needs?
- 137 -
Departmental Expectations
Is your major professor aware of your participation?
What is your department’s perception of the value of this program in your preparation?
Describe your department's role in providing training in pedagogy or any other preparation for
teaching?
Do you currently have opportunities to apply your teaching skills?
- 138 -
Appendix D, Participant Matrix
- 139 -
- 140 liberal arts college
very important
How important in
it is important "although the
teaching in your
department doesn't put a lot
future career
of emphasis on it."
plans?
faculty position
Focus job search
on research or
will focus on research
institution but not a
teaching
"research only" position
institutions or
some industry?
What are your
career
aspirations?
wants to be faculty at a
Research I institution in
higher education
adminstration
How did you
brochures, emails, meeting
become aware of
at the CFT
it?
TAO
extremely high
really wants the
specialized program in
teaching anthropology;
also this participant only
did Cycle 2 due to time
constraints in program
properly prepared
teaching statement is
helpful and lucrative.
Has gotten interviews
by teaching
statement alone
balanced teaching vs.
research
faculty position
very important
small liberal arts
college
faculty position
high
research and teaching
focused
faculty - clinical and
academic
"always really interested in
teaching" "program doesn't put a
lot of emphasis on teaching"
4.5 years
Biology
Cycle 3
Participant #8 - Hannah
haven't decided the balance yet
but definitely want to be faculty
but don't want "all teaching"
"not that important right
very important - "want my own
now" but may "come back
classes some day"
as faculty" later
"started job search in
summer" and applied to 4
teaching institution where she
postdocs initially, and jobs
can do research
in environmental
consulting
wants a job with nuclear
regulation commission
and then go into
industry…I "have gone
away from the teaching
path" but want to finish
what I started
don't remember, "DGS
heard about it somewhere
mentioned it at some point."
and got an email
(specifically to her)
had done a graduate
workshop and thought I
"should probably get
some teaching
experience"
seeking faculty position,
enjoy teaching (it's
motivational), has tutoring
experience, experience in
teaching is seen as a
strengthening aspect to
employment
looks good on CV for
faculty positions;
interested in
talking/learning about
teaching
had started F2P2 and
switched
3.5 years
Engineering
Cycle 3
Sally
4 yrs
Audiology
finished Cycle 2
Cycle 2 Finishers
Participant #7
7 yrs
Anthropology
finished Cycle 2
Participant #6
faculty
department; probably
member/mentor, not
another grad student
advisor
professionalization, recommended by
CV, teaching letter faculty member
Advisor encouraged it,
wanted "to signal an
interest" in teaching to
potential employers
Why did you
choose to
participate in the
TC Program?
5 yrs
Chemistry
English
4.5 yrs
finished Cycle 2
Participant #5
finished Cycle 2
Participant #4
Basic Information
How many years
3 years
in your degree
program?
What level of the
TC Program are Cycle 2
you in?
In which
HELP
academic dept?
Participant #1 - Julie
Cycle 1 Finishers
Participant #2
Participant #3
- 141 teaching institution
extremely important
Focus job search on
research or teaching
institutions or some
industry?
How important in
teaching in your future
career plans?
very important
teaching institutions
she wanted to teach in a
liberal arts school
How did you become
aware of it?
definitely teaching, not sure
what level
found it on the web,
started the F2P2 program
went to some CFT
and then it was changed and
workshops and heard
she heard about this
about it
aware early on…maybe
Patricia, maybe a conference
Why did you choose to
participate in the TC
Program?
What are your career
aspirations?
realized that she wanted to
teach after beginning her
PhD, interested in teaching
because of her TA
experiences
taught for 5 years before grad
school, wanted to demonstrate
that she thought a lot about
teaching; nice to get credit for
thinking critically about
teaching; likes CFT
very important
will focus on teaching
institution but could be
either teaching or
research, stated she is
interested in an
"undergraduate
institution"
long term is teaching,
wants a job weighted
toward teaching but is
currently doing 90%
research
to "gain teaching
experience", "to "have
some validity" use it as
a "lever" for teaching
opportunities
2.5 years
5 years
2.5 yrs - half year in PhD
program
Medicine
Completed Program
How many years in your
degree program?
Completed Program
Biology
finished
Participant #11 - Liz
In which academic dept? French & Italian
What level of the TC
Program are you in?
Participant #9
Basic Information
Cycle 3 Finishers
Participant #10 - Margaret
Participant #12
Content Knowledge
Participant #1 - Julie
Cycle 1 Finishers
Participant #2 Participant #3
Participant #4
Participant #5
Participant #6
focused on teaching
anthropology: critiquing
concepts of students'
cultures, consider world
view on cultures, why
students do what they do
from an anthro perspective;
creating a learning
environment; students
taking ownership of class;
peer learning
Cycle 2 Finishers
Participant #7
Sally
Participant #8 - Hannah
understanding by
design, ethical
practice, motivations
of students, processbased model of
learning
passion and enthusiasm for
teaching, address approach and
style to teaching (methods),
assessment methods and
techniques
What have you
teaching observations
learned from your
have been helpful
participation?
see below…
see below…
see below…
see below…
"students tend to react
more strongly to other
students' opinions"
a lot of practical things,
What have you learned
Bloom's taxonomy,
language such as "novice- from your participation?
expert"
What have you
learned
Cycle 2 reading group
specifically about was not that helpful
student learning?
importance of
curiosity by tapping
into interesting
problems and
questions; importance
of discovering prior
knowledge and
assumptions
already had some experience and
own observations and feelings
and analysis of own teaching
before; not terribly surprised at the
literature, now thinking more
about techniques of student
engagement such as concept
maps, workshop approach to
review sessions and thought
about peer-to-peer learning and
case study approaches
opened up new ways of
tapping into new methods;
group interaction;
presentations; vary
assessment types/question
formats; media in
presentations
able to design lectures,
promote collaborative
learning and taught a
course
"thought I would get more
in terms of students learn
but it turned into more of
what" (techniques)
"not everyone learns the
same way that I do"
What have you learned
specifically about
student learning?
"check-in on yourself"
"look around the room"
when lecturing,
"patience to wait for an
answer" student "can
read what kind of
feedback I'm getting
from students"
SoTL is really useful;
make better use of
student evaluations
how to get beyond student
evaluations; used clicker
questions; compared exam
performance of groups of
students; survey-based
assessment on content
knowledge
employ surveys specific to
interview students to track "how to measure actual
methodology used - mid and
experiences
learning"
end semester
concerning her teaching
she is "better at the
reflection part of it" "write
something…then go back
and review"
What skills have you
developed while in the
program for analyzing
your own teaching?
reading group
participation, I "don't
talk a lot about the
program with peers in
my academic program"
can be frustrated by
peers and faculty who
are not participating or
engaged in these
issues; feel like
opinions have support
not; interactions w/
students are more
meaningful and
thoughtful
faculty members in dept offered
advice, brainstorming, and
feedback; Cycle 2 reading group
and Cycle 3 working group are
good - talk about assessment and
interpret data together to
answer/refine research questions
"reflective art of
teaching but it goes a
step beyond…"
applies skills as
academics (research,
reflection, analysis,
writing) to teaching;
it's very communitybased and interactive
with other scholars
What new ideas
have you
encountered in
the literature on
the SoTL?
"don't know if I have"
encountered any -difficult to find domainspecific ideas about
teaching
would like to read
more about SoTL in
Cycle 3 WG; think
more about things
didn't before - new
objects of inquiry;
measure of evaluation
doesn't match up to
what students should
be learning in English
(essays not always
the answer); currently
exploring new
evaluation models
How is the
information that
you are learning
being used in
your current
circumstances?
Can you give
examples?
used suggestions from
Laura Taylor, used an
exercise called "think,
pair, share", used proscons discussion
not currently teachin
(fellowship) but for
sure in the future;
have created an
alternative syllabus
using material learned
for another workshop
What are the
main ideas in
your teaching
statement?
What skills have
you developed
while in the
program for
analyzing your
own teaching?
Describe your
interaction with
others regarding
what you are
learning?
How do you
define the
SoTL??
"would have to pull it
up" to remember but
wrote something about
the needs of graduates
students being unique
"encourage critical thinking
wants to be a better
on scientifically
presenter; style and clarity
controversial issues" and
of information presented;
the role of science in
being a mentor is important
politics
had to find an example cuz
What are the main ideas
she didn't know, team
teaching approach
in your teaching
compared to singlestatement?
instructor courses
started with Cycle 2;
couldn't wait for workshops
or reading groups;
interviews with CFT and
videotaping of lecture
(which was great)
working groups are key to
sharing your ideas and
critique others' projects;
domain specific groups
seem to help more than a
mix; can corroborate
departmental support;
learning about various
types of student
involvement was important
"the person assigned to me
was great", was in Cycle 3
group but we haven't
talked outside of the group
and always left meetings
with a sense of taking
something away. "My
advisers have been pretty
hands off during the
program." "don't really
have a group in my
program (academic)"
studying different
techniques of teaching and
learning; always striving to
develop better methods
it's a continual learning
process, even teachers
constantly learn and learn
how to best meet students'
needs; more than
delivering information but
how to ensure learning in
students; and collaboration
amongst faculty in how to
accomplish these things
evidence of student
associated with psychology
learning, going public, and
How do you define the
studies and how we take
asking questions about
an analytical approach to
SoTL??
how people learn and how
how students learn
we can enhance that
nothing shocking, was familiar
with some already; obtaining
meaningful data and how to use
effectively - making sense of
subjective data is useful
methods for teaching
anthro; self-reflection in
cultural studies; anthro
concepts applied to own
students' cultures
how to use the clickers;
always changing modalities
to keep students involved
and participating, keeping
students interested in the
"nothing comes to mind."
topic; differing styles of
"interactive weblogs, etc."
presentations; the field of
post-secondary education community of scholars at
conferences, programs,
etc.
currently co-teaching a course
with a professor; in interviewing
for jobs it comes up often; allows
for more independent teaching
not currently teaching not currently using new stuff Cycle 2 small group study
provided helpful feedback
doing research in teaching in
order to be a more effective
teacher - it's not random but with a
purpose (intentional)
currently teaching at a
comm college while
finishing dissertation maybe hasn't fully
internalized concepts since
she doesn't currently use
the new stuff while teaching;
could be a result of not
progressing through the
program longitudinally
- 142 -
"thought about trying to get
an online debate" used
DVD to change my
practices of teaching, used
classroom debate as a
methodology
try to talk with faculty about
being "intentional", talk with
Describe your interaction
CFT staff a lot and in
with others regarding
working groups, encourage
what you are learning?
her faculty to try new
activities
What new ideas have you
appreciation for qualitative
encountered in the
inquiry
literature on the SoTL?
using "minute papers",
understanding by design
for her curriculum
development (has 3
lectures in the spring and 3
in the fall)
How is the information
that you are learning
being used in your
current circumstances?
Can you give examples?
Content Knowledge
Participant #9
Cycle 3 Finishers
Participant #10 - Margaret
principled eclecticism, choosing initially said that she could not
technique based on learning
remember but then she read
needs and goals at hand, student- from her actual statement:
centered classroom, speak just "promote scientific thinking"
above speaking level, movement "facilitate learning
in classroom
experiences"
see below…
Participant #11 - Liz
described a teaching
strategy and referenced
using a "black box
question" and being able
to challenge how far a
student could take a
concept
course design
in Cycle 3 she's researching how
to get students to think to
themselves in second language
while brainstorming
assessment tools,
Bloom's taxonomy and
levels of student learning
SoTL more formally - have
always been pretty reflective;
observed in a non-threatening
classroom assessment
way by CFT; originally part of
techniques
Critical Friends Network at
Princeton at the high school she
taught at
practicing early evaluation
from students and have
colleagues come assess
her
French does a lot on pedagogy
already which is fortunate; took a
methods class in the dept; took a
research class (theory); project
was same as Cycle 3; Cycle 3
WG was informative mainly for
IRB clearance; GTF's and Derek
who led Cycle 3 WG was helpful;
learned well about how to
perform research on a class;
learned from theory class about
publication quality research and
write-up
presented a poster
session at Post Doc
poster symposium, spoke
to and developed
relationship with faculty
mentor who wanted to
use Problem-Based
Learning
shared her ideas with faculty
on course design, and with
other students. She also
shared her final project at a
graduate student presentation
and will present it at the
Indiana Academy of Sciences
national meeting, also
planning to write an article
about it
instructors thinking about how
students learn, performing
research and sharing that info by "approaching teaching as a
publishing, presenting papers or scientist would" by testing
posters at conferences; how to
hypotheses
modify teaching to best serve
students
"opportunity to address
how students learn and
"set up question and carry
it through as an
experiment
theories of second language
acquisition; multi-media in
classroom for Cycle 2; SoTL
professional development
opportunities
none mentioned
"moving students too
independent throught" away from assessing
fact/knowledge
currently TA-ing, not teaching;
most impact - ways to motivate
students to improve writing
(Cycle 1); modified grading
rubric; comparing experiences in
grading essays in English and
French
using backward design for
her courses, tools for
teaching, project on concept
mapping is being used in her
current classes
Used Problem-Based
Learning in teaching
Microbiology at Columbia
State CC
the process of being reflective
about teaching is internalized;
learned from TAO backwards
design in designing own syllabus
- 143 -
Participant #12
- 144 -
Is the program
flexible enough
yes
to meet your
needs?
too flexible
could use more concrete
deadlines like with IRB,
etc. or checklist for
accountability
Does the
program offer
adequate
support in
helping you
complete the
requirements?
"I think so" But they
can't provide teaching
opportunities
think so.
yes, maybe too flexible :)
sure; the text and
website info is very
sufficient and helpful
it's fine in her limited
experience
yes
yes, flexibility helps;
no, but this is a result of but research
yes, stretched it out
personal experience
program always
takes precedence
yes
"not as much as I would
like" half of her time is
supposed to go to teching
but it gets converted to
research
yes, liked the Cycle 3
Workshop, doman
specific information
was more helpful,
very flexible
"one aspect could use
more attention is the
literature part"
yes, transferability
was slightly
problematic from
F2P2 program;
Cycle 2 was tough
but timing was
"oh yeah"
weird; would have
like to have more
help but didn't know
how/who/what to
ask.
yes, fine
Participant #8 - Hannah
overall - enjoyed it,
learned about SoTL,
like self-paced aspect "very positive" "learned a
and the center doesn't lot" "developed contacts"
let you fall through the
cracks
probably not, not CFT
fault; recommends to
others that if you do it,
start early and try to
finish before writing
thesis; timing is key
enjoyed it, good and
bad that it's so openended; Cycle 2
group could have
been better; Cycle 3
workgroup may be
more motivating;
staff very helpful
when asked
great, responsive,
helpful; waiting on
anthro department for
specialized program;
hard to complete
Cycles in one semester
if not in residence
Sally
one critique: intake
interview criteria were
unclear as to who would
be appropriate to
participate; experience
was really positive; AD
Laura observed,
conducted WG and RG;
staff is very well-trained
and well-prepared
Cycle 2 Finishers
Participant #7
very positive experience;
supportive staff who are
engaged and care about
what the participants are
working on; WG
discussion could be more
rigorous (not just
discipline-specific but
maybe by consensus
field); more humanities
people needed since
science and humanities
have different goals and
definitions of knowledge
Participant #6
Participant #5
Participant #4
Program Perceptions
Do you feel that
you have
sufficient time "I do"
to dedicate to
this program?
Describe your
experience in
the program.
People have been
great. "I hate the
portfolio system" due to
its complexity and
documentation is
"treated as an
afterthought."
Participant #1 - Julie
Cycle 1 Finishers
Participant #2 Participant #3
- 145 -
the CFT was very helpful, the
program was very positive
and she was very excited
about it, the tangible benefit
was the creation of a teaching
portfolio, definitely interested
in SoTL and she is going to
"make it a part of the
scholarship I pursue"
Cycle 3 Finishers
Participant #10 - Margaret
very positive, staff is
excellent (they take
initiative) but
disappointed with some
of the other participants
(wanted the certificate
but weren't really
engaging the program -just wanted the
credential
Participant #11 - Liz
"oh yes, definitely"
"yes"
yes, many opportunities to support
interests
flexibility was a significant plus
"yeah, I think it really
does" the flexibility was
"almost intimidating at
first"
"yeah, definitely"
because of flexibility, summer was key;
she feels that she went way over original
CFT expectations; had big Cycle 3
"yes, because my dissertation "it's tough…I made
project; Derek's attention to detail was
adviser was very supportive" time."
good; good also because of dept support
with overlapping projects
mostly very positive; interactions with
GFT and Derek were good; biggest
frustration is it seemed never-ending and
was surveyed to death; program was still
in development and unclear of
expectations and end deliverables;
wanted to end by end of summer but TAO
clogged up staff
Participant #9
Program Perceptions
Participant #12
- 146 -
they "don't think
anything about it" and
"other students do not
participate"
it "comes dow to the
individual adviser" since
there is "no official
stance" on teaching
from the department
What is your
department's
perception of the
value of this
program in your
preparation?
Describe your
department's role
in providing
training in
pedagogy or any
other preparation
for teaching.
teach 1-2 times a
Do you currently
semester as a guest
have opportunities
lecturer in adviser's
to apply your
courses and has taught
teaching skills?
5-6 times thus far
yes, advisor has
"supported and
encouraged" her, and
"he gives me feedback"
(when she teaches a
module in his course)
Is your major
professor/advisor
aware of your
participation?
Participant #1 - Julie
Cycle 1 Finishers
Participant #2 Participant #3
Participant #6
not this year but in
August
minimal, nothing
outside of average
TA appointments - if
you want it you have
to seek it out and be
ambitious making
opportunities more
than they are
two 2-day workshops
(CFT and dept) once
before first time
teaching; assigned
teaching mentor to
observe in first 3
semesters,
twice/semester, but
very unorganized and
unstructured
he does, but not
generally; you have to
yes, teaching as an
be self-motivated in
adjunct for one course
department because
it doesn't do much
nothing structured every prof is different
from role of grader to
giving lectures; TA
begins day 1 first
semester
very supportive; feels
not promoted, not
like program can
sure that many know
strengthen grad's
it exists
qualifications
not currently,
but will be
teaching in fall
08
TA for one or
more courses,
expectation is
to observe as a
TA what works
best
assume it's
supportive they post info
regularly,
generally good
has "guest lecture"
opportunities
they "encourage CFT
workshops and
forward emails." and
"provide opportunities
(to teach) when I
express interest"
3 fall lectures and 3 spring
lectures
none, if you want to give
lectures, "you have to ask
for it", she asked
permission to do the
certificiate program and
her adviser wanted to know
the time commitment
"they expect the program
to make clones of
themselves -- researchers"
if they realized that some
of us were going to areas
other than research"
"someone on my
dissertation committee
said, 'you don't want to be
a teacher do you?'"
they're like "oh great,
that's good…you can
teach some of my
classes", I think they
respect it in helping
students have time to
teach but not in
results…they are "not
sitting down with me"
to talk about it
Participant #8 - Hannah
yes
Sally
yes
Cycle 2 Finishers
Participant #7
advisor has changed a
yes; acknowledged it
couple of times; no,
is good for career
yes
but would probably be
aspirations
supportive
Participant #5
philosophy of "we
already teach
therefore we don't
need CFT"; already
taken care of
not especially
Participant #4
Departmental Expectations
- 147 -
"yeah, pretty much
none" from clinical
department: "if you can
teaching assistant
do good research, you'll
opportunities but nothing else get hired." Her chair
provided her
opportunities to guest
lecture
two courses, weekly
teaching-related
meeting, informal
collaboration with
veteran grad students,
observed by dept chair
or teaching coordinator
and tenured faculty
TA-ing this semester,
grading of writing, guest yes
lecturing several times
"my primary instructor was
supportive - she was an
exception"
depends on who you
ask, DGS interested in
dissertation
Taught at Columbia
State CC for 2
semesters and some
guest lecturing and
may be able to guest
lecturing some more
"I have no idea." the
chair has no idea, but
her mentor seemed "to
understand"
yes
yes, "he was only
partially aware of how
much teaching I was
doing but adviser didn’t
know she was teaching
a 3-hour lecture "didn't
tell him, didn't want to
make an issue."
Cycle 3 Finishers
Participant #10 - Margaret
Participant #11 - Liz
potentially not, dept
chair and teaching
coordinator are
Participant #9
Departmental Expectations
Participant #12
Appendix E, Listing of Directors of Graduate Studies Interviewed
College of Arts & Science
School of Engineering
Anthropology
Economics
English
History
Mathematics
Philosophy
Political Science
Psychology
Spanish & Portuguese
Sociology
Biomedical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Environmental Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Peabody College
Medical Center
Human & Organizational Development
Leadership, Policy, and Organizations
Special Education
Teaching and Learning
Psychology and Human Development
Biochemistry
Biomedical Informatics
Cancer Biology
Hearing and Speech Science
Pharmacology
Divinity/Graduate Department of Religion
School of Nursing
- 148 -
Appendix F, Stakeholder Email Letter
Dear Professor _______:
We are writing to ask you to participate in a brief interview about the doctoral program in your
department. We are surveying Directors of Graduate Study across the university as part of a
project that we are completing as a requirement for the Ed.D. program at Peabody. The project
requires us to work with a client approved by the college faculty and to use analytical techniques
to serve our client’s needs.
For our project, we are working as consultants to the university’s Center for Teaching staff as
they assess and further enhance their programs for graduate students; they have identified
Directors of Graduate Study as important constituents in this process. We will be asking you
questions about the desired and actual career outcomes for graduates of your program, and about
the training and development students receive as they prepare for those careers. We will make
every effort to remove any identifiable information in the comments that you make or we will
ask for your specific permission to use a comment that may be connected back to you and your
department.
We know that you have a demanding schedule, and we will keep the interview to no more than
30 minutes. We will work hard to accommodate your schedule and will be happy to come to
your office or another campus location convenient to you.
One of us will be contacting you by phone soon to set up an interview time. Thank you, in
advance, for your consideration. We look forward to speaking with you.
Sincerely,
Mark Bryant
Ed.D. Candidate
Christopher Rowe
Ed.D. Candidate
- 149 -
Appendix G, Stakeholder Interview Protocol
Stakeholder Interview Protocol
General Stats
1. How long has your doctoral program existed?
2. On average, how many doctoral students do you have in a cohort?
3. What is the average length of time to degree in the program?
4. What are the measures you use in order to gauge your students' successes in the
marketplace?
5. What, if anything, could your department do to make your students more competitive?
Department Preparation
1. What skills and abilities are most important for your graduates to have?
2. How do you train and develop your graduate students to give them the skills and abilities
that you value?
3. What percent of your graduate students pursue academic vs. non-academic careers?
a. For the academics, what percentage of your students pursue research intensive
careers vs. teaching intensive careers?
4. Does what you just said about training and development differ for industry and academic
paths?
5. In what ways do you prepare your students for careers that involve any level of teaching?
a. Are there specific departmental activities that you provide your students?
- 150 -
6. On a scale of 1-5 with 1 being not important and 5 being very important, how important
is your students' preparation for teaching in their chosen career?
Teaching Center Information
1. Do you know there is a CFT?
2. What role does the CFT play in preparing your students for teaching after they graduate?
3. What role should it play in your department in student teaching preparation?
4. Have you heard of the TC program?
5. If yes, what are your opinions of it?
- 151 -
Appendix H, Stakeholder Matrix
- 152 -
- 153 -
interpersonal
more personal contact communications, better
grad student networking
writing skills (maybe
opportunities
need a workshop?)
entry level and
promotions at job,
research progress,
awards, publications
What are the measures
you use in order to
where they go
gauge your students'
successes in the
marketplace?
What, if anything,
could you department
do to make your
students more
competitive?
5 yrs
What is the average
approx. 5 years
length of time to
degree in the program?
early 1960's
7-8
1960's
Engineering #2
On average, how many
approx. 15/yr
doctoral students do
you have in a cohort
How long has your
doctoral program
existed?
Engineering #1
not sure.
employment and
satisfaction
4-5 yrs
5 env'l, 10 civil
40-50 yrs
Engineering #3
~6yrs
~12
since 1934
Med Center #1
General Statistics
increase student
publications and papers
for dissertation, change
in preliminary exam
format
5 yrs
5-15
~50 yrs
Med Center #2
dept consistently
evaluates the question,
curriculum reform,
currently doing a good
integrate grad students
job
into grad education,
increase skills additional
to scientific ones
fellowships - where do
if they get faculty or R&D
they go?, what they do
positions
10 yrs out is key
3.5-4 yrs
12
really long time
Engineering #4
3.5-4 years to 6 years
(becoming more
efficient)
4-5 (depends on
available funding)
5 years (just had first 2
PhD grads in August)
Med Center #4
4 years average (3-5
plus)
15-18
PhD - 30 years
Med Center #5
approx. 5 years but trying
to decrease that
5-8
14 years (since 1993 for
the PhD)
Nursing
just started stating
publication requirement,
weekly 'science hour',
critical review of
presentations; need
written evaluation after
cmte meetings, write
grant proposal as a
qualifier
1)opportunities to
practice "telling,
communicating",
2)mentoring, 3)Teaching
Assistants (never had
much need for them until
recently)
1)"increasing hands on
and direction of scholarly
abilities", 2) "more
presentation
opportunities" 3) "grantwriting"
more practice in grantwriting (although they do
match their students with
a grant-writing professor)
1)obtain employment
1)early indicators are
"getting them connected" 1)employability -- 2)type
publications and type of publication rates, 2)what
once they are working,
of institution -- 3)funded
job - most do a post-doc kinds of jobs and where
2)depends on institution research
they take them
(teaching or research)
5.5 years
avg 12
since 2000
Med Center #3
- 154 -
8 years
Peabody #1
Peabody #3
1)more pressure to
we are "doing what
publish prior to
needs to be done" and
graduation but
are known for "doing the
constrained by costs for
most"
travel
What, if anything, could
you department do to
make your students
more competitive?
4 years
10-12
5 years
8-12
uncertain
Peabody #5
1)sufficient first-author
publications,
2)conferences,
3)coursework
where they go such as
kind of jobs they get
research one universities
4-5 years
8-15
uncertain
Peabody #4
1)more programmed
serious revisions in the
experiences teaching at
last few years (no
the university "They have
graduates yet)
no trouble competing."
1)job at a prestigious
1) # of publications,
university -- 2)movement
2)status of institution
professionally -where they get a job
3)articles for publishing
whether and where they
are employed(don't use
productivity analysis)
5 years since that is how PhD students have full
long their funding lasts
funding for 5 years
PhD - 10-12, EdD - 2025
1980's for PhD & 1970's
for the EdD (since
since 1960's or 50's
Peabldy joined Vandy)
Peabody #2
What are the measures
you use in order to
gauge your students'
successes in the
marketplace?
What is the average
length of time to degree
in the program?
On average, how many
doctoral students do you 6
have in a cohort
How long has your
doctoral program
existed?
General Statistics
- 155 -
1) raising professional
quality of dissertation; 2) 1) # of publications before
applying for fellowships; graduation; 2) emphasis on
3) publishing while in
interdisciplinary work
school
1) type of institution/position;
2)progress toward tenure; 3)
publications
What are the measures
you use in order to
1)finding academic job;
2) having good
gauge your students'
placement
successes in the
marketplace?
What, if anything,
could you department
do to make your
students more
competitive?
5-8 years
What is the average
5 years
length of time to
degree in the program?
uncertain - prior to 60's
5-7
uncertain - 70's?
A&S #2
On average, how many
7
doctoral students do
you have in a cohort
How long has your
doctoral program
existed?
A&S #1
travel for unique
experiences
quality of dissertation,
satisfaction of student
placement, ability to
contribute
6-7 years
has been talk of
professionalization
seminars using
CFT…covering
professional issues,
academic careers,
hierarchy and
boundaries, attire, grant
proposals. Also, internal
and external grant writing
assistance, just started
brown bag series by grad
students to improve
presentation skills.
decades
A&S #6
approx. 5 years
more publications and
presentations at
more post-doc positions
conferences, but this
obtained
usually happens at postdoc level
primarily sent to teaching
institutions, starting to
push research intensive
with first step to post-doc
(all in last 3 yrs)
5 yrs.
6-12 (double with
approx. 8-9
Peabody branch, 12-20)
decades
A&S #5
General Statistics
clinical track practitioners, combine
practice with scientific
placement, kinds of jobs,
issues; nonclinical track publications
faculty position @
research intensive
universities
approx. 9 yrs.
typically 4-5, but this year
12 (in order to fill the
4-6
pipeline)
A&S #3
A&S #4
decades of history but
since in receivorship, the
20 yrs.
new program is only 4
years old
formal professional
seminars need to begin;
currently do a lot of
informal things; could
use more co-authorships
with students
employment is a
common indicator, T/Tk
positions and job
satisfaction
approx. 8 years
4-6
approx 50 yrs
A&S #7
7 years
3-7
uncertain
A&S #9
6 years
5-6 becoming 8-9
uncertain (25 plus years)
A&S #10
there is a lack of real
teaching experience and
a general lack of courses
to teach, grad students
could always have more
publications
1)improve recruitment of
quality students -2)diversity of department
(students) -3)professional
development -4)research ways to do
research without
teaching
1)wide range of courses -2)professional training
(seminars and job
interviewing) -- 3)training
in grant writing
quality of hiring
institution, T/Tk or temp,
tenured-track position in
(doesn't have to be
1)get a job or postdoc
research institution or
research intensive (kind of job is important)
liberal arts college
could be liberal arts
institution)
5-5.5 years
9
~30-40 years
A&S #8
- 156 -
On a scale of 1-5 with
1 being not important
and 5 being very
important, how
important is your
students' preparation
for teaching in their
chosen career?
4-5
3
4 - tied to
communication skills
5 - emphasis is on all
3 types of teaching in
all situations
see above
no
TA for a year
*Are there specific
departmental activities
see above
that you provide your
students?
see above
TA for at least one mentoring, open
semester, attend communication with
CFT seminars
students and faculty
no
NSF-VaNTH research
center has provided
significant capital to train
In what ways do you
grad students for teaching
prepare your students (this grant has ended, so
enter as TA, but don't encourage TC
conduct class
participation
for careers that involve only speculation how this
any level of teaching? will continue), there is also a
class at Peabody they can
take if they are
academically inclined
training is geared
toward academic
path - all need 3 or
more publications
no
50-60 academia
4 req'd courses incl.
communications
course, encourage
visiting CFT,
dependent on timing
in program
Does what you just
said about training and
no, advisor specific
no, the post-doc determines
so they are socialized
development differ for
specific training role
slightly differently
industry and academic
paths?
more go to industry
few academics, many
more go to
and consulting, few in
more to industry
industry
academia
grad student
seminar series,
annual progress
report and advisor
statement,
training is largely
advisor specific
not many teach
60% industry, 40%
academia
integrate writing and
communication into
coursework at all
levels, grad student
seminars, group
meetings for
research, attend
meetings and make
conference
presentations
conference
presentations,
industry is seeking
computer saavy,
broad training in
some theoretical
biology
and experimental
skill
Med Center #1
only on oral
presentation skills
none
not sure
not sure
not sure
1
classes are kept
small, students take
oral and written
communications
course, thesis
research, attend nat'l
and int'l meetings,
department and med
ctr seminars
technical/experimenta
tion, scientific writing grants, publications,
oral presentation
skills
Med Center #2
Departmental Preparation
Engineering #4
*For the academics,
what percentage of
your students pursues
many go on to be post-docs balanced or teaching research universities both
research intensive
careers vs. teaching
intensive careers?
What percent of your
graduate students
pursue academic vs.
non-academic
careers?
Engineering #3
communication, work
communication - writing and
with others, science
presentation; diverse lab
research area - depth
and engineering
methodologies and greater and breadth
knowledge,
diversity in experience
interpersonal skills
Engineering #2
TA Orientation plus 1-day
BME training run by Grad
How do you train and
Student Council, and 2.5
develop your graduate
send to good
day workshop for all TA's on
conferences in 3rd
students to give them
teaching; also a common
and 4th years
the skills and abilities
curriculum is being
that you value?
instituted involving lab and
conceptual courses
What skills and
abilities are most
important for your
graduates to have?
Engineering #1
1) "tolerance for
ambiguity" in research,
2)"dedication to a
lifetime of selfeducation", 3)critical
thinking, 4)grant-writing
Med Center #5
current grads (90%/10%),
pipeline (70%/30%)
75-80%
academic/clinical
1)curriculum, 2)do research
early on, 3)writing class,
4)dissertation, 5)courses in
"not just courses",
other academic areas, 6)
seminars, helping them
conferences, 7)seminar
write/direct grants
series, 8)student-led journal
club, 9)research
development
1)methods in the field, who
is doing work in what
methodological set, 2)ability
to apply across other
problems, 3)communicate
what they know, 4)write well
Med Center #4
subject matter may
differ but not the
process
2 - "I would have a hard
1 time with my faculty
proposing….."??????
4
none other than model
but some students and
faculty go to CFT
2 semesters of teaching
Increasing the need for
experience as TA,
TA's, interactions with CFT
teaching a course on
(someone came last year)
their own, etc.
no difference
instructor critiques of
research, seminar
no
series for jr grad
students to 3rd year
student has to really
want to do it and
request to do it,
otherwise nothing
no
largely due to funding teaching component is 20%
environment max so they pursue
50/50
changes
research-intensive 100%
50/50
individual labs cover
most of this, science
hours, student
collaboration, peer
mentoring
bench skill, how to
problem solve,
communication to sell
ideas,
encouragement to
apply to own
fellowship
Med Center #3
it depends on what the student
wants
none
1)can do some teaching of
master's classes -- 2)3
teaching courses -- 3)lecturer
rather than a TA
they have the same training
but it depends on their focus
of research and research
practica
80/20
99% academic
1) talk to students about F2P2 - 2)3 courses on how to teach
nursing (curriculum,
evaluation, clinical teaching)
but these are not required and
most do not take them except
for some students who are
required because they receive
a federal grant.
1) "research, research,
research, research -2)scholarly publications -3)some teaching -- 4)
"knowledge of the academic
role"
Nursing
- 157 would not differ
TA positions and
some use the CFT
In what ways do you
prepare your students for
careers that involve any
level of teaching?
4 -- even though
2 in terms of getting a job,
they don't
polling faculty would be 3 and
prepare them for
students might rate it higher
it
On a scale of 1-5 with 1
being not important and 5
being very important, how
important is your students'
preparation for teaching in
their chosen career?
some go to center for
teaching, "occasionally a
student teaches on their own" none
(less than 10%), don't have
TA's very much
none
5 -- "it really is
important"
student population chosen for
academic emphasis so no
the same
difference
50/50
5 2 but should be 3
Teaching Assistants
1)complete teaching
competency,observation, and not systematically "talking
evaluation, 2) college
about it", some teach, "some it is a topic in a seminar
teaching course 3) 2 guest
students do it"
lectures vs. team teaching
*Are there specific
departmental activities that none
you provide your students?
only by example
the same training
except they
not really an "industry" path
gravitate to
so no difference
faculty with
interests
Does what you just said
about training and
development differ for
industry and academic
paths?
probably research-intensive
(for those in the pipeline)
100% research
intensive and we
over 50% go research"cross our fingers
intensive
and hope they
can teach"
*For the academics, what
percentage of your students
pursues research intensive 60/40
careers vs. teaching
intensive careers?
50/50
no graduates yet from the
new program
1)frame research questions,
2)competence, 3)teaching
ability
Most go into
academic careers
while a few go
75-80% academic
into
consulting/govern
ment
1)Research, 2)Teaching,
3)Publications, 4) Prepared
to begin…
Peabody #5
What percent of your
graduate students pursue
100% thus far
academic vs. non-academic
careers?
1)research (conceptually…),
2)writing grant proposals,
3)writing for publication
Peabody #4
not a class-heavy program
1)1st and 2nd year research
1)involvement in research
programs, 2)yearly review,
early, 2)dissertation
3)major area paper, 4)grants,
5)research group "hotbeds"
1)methods -2)statistics -3)advanced
research skills
Peabody #3
Departmental Preparation
Peabody #2
1) 20 hrs/wk on research
1)all involved in projects, 2)faculty mentor
funded research -- (insures they do research),
2)co-author
3)1st year project that should
papers
be publishable, 4)conference
presentations
How do you train and
develop your graduate
students to give them the
skills and abilities that you
value?
1)presentations -- 2)
grant proposals -3)internship -- 4)work
with faculty in a
"research
apprenticeship"
1)"conduct and
What skills and abilities are publish rigorous
research to contribute
most important for your
to knowledge"--2)
graduates to have?
teaching
Peabody #1
- 158 -
A&S #2
"for the most part they are
getting the same
preparation"
no difference
mentoring and teaching
Does what you just said
about training and
development differ for
industry and academic
paths?
In what ways do you
prepare your students for
careers that involve any
level of teaching?
On a scale of 1-5 with 1
being not important and 5
being very important, how
important is your students'
preparation for teaching in
their chosen career?
*Are there specific
regular meetings re:
departmental activities that
teaching issues
you provide your students?
50/50 but only about 20%
get research positions
*For the academics, what
percentage of your students
50/50 (initially more
pursues research intensive
teaching related)
careers vs. teaching
intensive careers?
5 "teaching is huge" even if
their goal is research or
5 industry teaching is still
significant to their
preparation
none
A&S #8
no graduates from
new program yet
no graduates from
new program yet
no
no
5...but not enough in
the pipeline to see
what potential the
department can do
still in development
4
see above
training program run
by faculty member
(Staples)
3, prep for teaching when in
the teaching position, skill
can be extracted from job
4-5
talk, demonstrated skill only
might tip the scales for an
applicant
no
graduate teaching
assistantship
supported for
teaching
no
see above
give seminar
presentations for faculty
and in preparation for job
interviews, some are TA's
but there is a need for
more positions
no
1)coursework -- 2)oral
exam -- 3)teacher training
as TA's -- 4)present
papers to others -- 5)get
grants -6)workshops/events
1)writing -2)speak,profess,teach -3)communicate with a
range of audiences
A&S #10
same program but
researchers don't have to
pursue as many teaching
opportunities
almost all teaching
5
teachin mentoring
program but informal and
encouraged to use CFT
1)teaching
practicum and
presentations -2)"shadowing
teaching course in year 2
professors" in class of the program
(financial support is
contingent upon
teaching)
same training
50/50 "we tend to
emphasize
research"
expectation is 100%
almost 100%
academic
1)workshops to
prepare for
conference where
they learn how to
get jobs -- 2)grantwriting
3-4, regret the lack of
exposure to teaching,
depends on where
4, typical teaching vs. those who do teach see a
they go but "should
research argument
benefit from teaching
be 5"
experience (especially int'l
students)
see above
offer a workshop
involving video and
CFT fellow to
present, most
students teach at
least one course and
maybe in summer
no
most want research
oriented positions, but
teaching intensive or
most don't get one, but
mid-range balanced
nearly all seem to publish
inst.; few research
research papers
intensive inst.
regardless of the type of
school
teaching institutions
primarily - regional
but now moving to
research intensive
positions at
universities
60% academic
90% academic
70-80% academic
divided: contract or
state archeology but
primarily academia, if
few in industry, mainly
mainly oriented
industry could risk
clinicians, majority of
toward academics,
lack of faculty support
nonclinical go to academia
some NGO or foreign
gov'ts
~20% research intensive,
~50% balance teaching and
research, rest are teaching
only
A&S #9
demonstrate well-tooling in
indentify a research latest analytical
problem and create a techniques, currently grad
set of questions;
students are a little weak 1)research -quant/qual analysis; on empirical analysis
2)teaching
writing; self-discipline; which is needed for postteaching skills
doc positions, conference
presentations
A&S #7
some teach in the summer
and 1 class during the
year (reserved for only the
primarily advisor's
teaching workshop;
best), classroom training
responsibility, has a faculty and sr grad
(but no research methods
professional
students mentor first
class), summer
development
years; faculty
competition to write best
seminar, required
research
research paper, active
teaching in year 4 as collaboration and with
seminar program (2
with post-docs
other students
external speakers/week) in
3rd and 4th years with
refereed report
social theory,
methods,
ethnography,
fieldwork
A&S #6
publications - publish
to dissertation,
evidence of teaching
ability (won't get
someone a job on its
own, but it could keep
someone from getting
one)
A&S #5
papers, experimental
methods, presentations,
engage in scientific
discussions. teaching is not
a priority - grad students
should be able to articulate
a philosophy but not a top
priority
Departmental Preparation
A&S #4
students are in labs before
Day 1, they know who to
collaboration with
coursework,
work with before they start
faculty (RA/TA),
conference papers
the program, course work is
informally by
(via grad school travel light - only 24 hours, rest is
socialization, studentfunds), seminars
research; students present
run speaker series
at least 1/yr in academic
colloquia
writing
monographs/books,
measured teaching
portfolio
A&S #3
students are
encouraged to do TC
program, CFT invited
department does not to present to dept.,
in addition to listed above, all
provide for this
heavy discussions on
attend the teaching center
don't
outside of normal TA- grad student
workshop for TA's
ships
involvement in
teaching (currently
considered a
weakness)
80%+ academic
What percent of your
graduate students pursue
80% academic
academic vs. non-academic
careers?
How do you train and
develop your graduate
students to give them the
skills and abilities that you
value?
1)teaching and research
seminar during 1st year; 2)
Teaching Assistantship
1) teaching mentoring
(meeting and workshop prior
program (different each
to TA opp.; 3) Teaching
semester) 2) teaching 6-7 Superviser dedicated to all
courses
students' systematic review
of teaching(a faculty
member); 4) incentives such
as writing competition
1) research and teaching;
What skills and abilities are 2) competitive
1) teaching; 2) research
dissertation; 3) teaching
(writing papers for for
most important for your
100-level courses
conferences and journals
graduates to have?
(autonomy and oversight)
A&S #1
- 159 -
Other
advertising is an
issue…something like
a brief to students and
faculty of what is
offered
students are
encouraged to seek out
various teaching
opportunities, if they
are intersted, then dept
sends them to CFT
yes
Have you heard of the
no
TC program?
*If yes, what are your
opinions of it?
encourage more
involvement by those
who are interested in
teaching
What role should it
play in your
department in student
teaching preparation?
yes
attend programs
offered
yes
Engineering #2
What roled does the
CFT play in preparing
see previous…close
your students for
partnership
teaching after they
graduate?
Do you know that
there is a CFT?
Engineering #1
fantastic
yes
dept. encourages TC
participation, helps with
teaching improvement
in the classroom
yes
Engineering #3
if students are seeking
faculty positions, they
are encouraged to see
the CFT about the TC
program, the
department enjoys the
flexibility of the CFT
and likes that the
campus image of CFT
has changed
yes, but not much
good the way it is
Med Center #1
very positive
yes
higher visibility, more
opportunities for
creative,
multidisciplinary,
leadership
yes
Med Center #2
Med Center #3
none currently
yes
dept culture is such that
they are set up to train
scientists, not
educators; maybe 1 in
10 might be interested
in teaching and "there's
nothing wrong with
that" but it's the
student's responsibility
to say something;
learning how to teach
might be a distraction
to learning how to do
research; DGS thinks
it's much easier to train
a teacher than it is to
train scientists
no
activities are tricky
because of who pays
for what a student
does, could be seen as
a major distractor,
support would be
necessary, department
may be open-minded if
the need arose
yes, some
none except for the few has never been an
that are interested in
issue…no perceived
teaching
need
small minority think
teaching could be
useful
yes
Teaching Center Information
good for int'l students in
languate development,
1 student in TC
program, donate grad
student to talk to new
TA's, 1 grad fellow
yes
Engineering #4
1)we use it with
doctoral faculty -2)CFT has worked with
the School of Nursing
as a whole -3)"encourage students
to participate in F2P2
program"
yes
Nursing
"heard of it"
"good idea"
it integrates with those
students who are teaching
as part of their training and
we would point any student
who really wanted to teach
but there is no real venue
for teaching
"great program" (in
contrast to federal
program requirements)
yes
"it's doing what it needs
to do with a clinicallyonce a year a person from CFT
focused curriculum" the
came to department level
idea of the "faculty role"
is taught
"good resource" for students
and faculty
yes
Med Center #5
yes
"Put all of our students
through the workshop"
utilized for the TA
workshops
yes
Med Center #4
- 160 -
yes
Other
"junior faculty…have used
the center for teaching."
*If yes, what are your "they ought to get that
around."
opinions of it?
no opinions
up to the individual student
yes
Peabody #5
don't know about it, "wouldn't be
tops on my list", they teach tricks
and pedagogy should be domain
specific
yes
vaguely familiar, would be
interested in it
1)available for consultation,
no idea since they are "not in our
2)up the level of
field"
involvement
nothing systematic
yes
Peabody #4
opinion of the CFT is that it is their students are trying to teach
"would fit well"????
"helpful"
"performance not knowledge"
no opinions
yeah, I've heard of it
yes
Have you heard of the
No…may have heard
TC program?
no formal role
"still discussing this" re: the
informal role "that's about
right", not much to be done
none
yes, they "are excellent" and
yes
have helped new faculty
Peabody #3
Teaching Center Information
Peabody #2
What role should it
play in your
"it's doing what we want" "an
if we had time
department in student identifiable resource"
teaching preparation?
What roled does the
CFT play in preparing
orientation for teaching
your students for
assistants
teaching after they
graduate?
Do you know that
there is a CFT?
Peabody #1
- 161 -
Other
*If yes, what are your
opinions of it?
none
Have you heard of the TC
"heard of it"
program?
none
"heard of it"
helping students to
design their own
more discipline-specific
individual first courses
workshops
including syllabus
development
What role should it play
in your department in
student teaching
preparation?
A&S #5
don’t know, Derek
came over once for a
first-year seminar
yes
A&S #6
heavy involvement in
training for teaching
yes
dept would like constant
reminders of CFT programs and
activities, DGS time is
constrained so he suffers from
lack of his own follow through,
also wants a grant writing class
for Ph.D.'s
could be a big bonus for Ph.D.'s
only barely aware
yes
students need more
practical applications
but debate as to what
extent in the dept?,
another challenge is
training students in
practical, day-to-day
roles of dept and
student and faculty
having a teaching
statement could be
good in applying for
positions but TC could
work against
students…perceived as
less time on research.
Dept has general lack
of knowledge of what
CFT offers. It is a
different story to
practice what the
university preaches on
teaching vs. research
pretty intensive, some
enhances effectiveness
in dept feel it's good
and marketability
and some feel it's not.
yes
probably should talk to
JoAnn Staples about
the details of teacher
training in the
department
no major opinion
yes
post-docs are a part of
"should probably play a role",
conversation
students participate if
the equation and they
mentorship of students in making happening on this topic
they want and
are left out a lot…offer
transition to a classroom is impt currently
supported if they do
services to them
the teaching superviser
send students who are
having problems to the TA Orientation & International TA it is important and
teaching center and the Orientation
expanding
DGS has some joint
projects with CFT
A&S #4
1) AXEL program?; 2)
"orientation
workshops"; 3) "we call
on them when needed"
yes
Teaching Center Information
What roled does the CFT
play in preparing your
students for teaching
after they graduate?
sort of
A&S #3
yes
A&S #2
Do you know that there is
yes
a CFT?
A&S #1
A&S #7
no major opinion
yes
all students are
encouraged to
participate but it is
optional
microteaching,
lecture/discussion/test
construction; employ
teaching fellows
yes
A&S #8
department culture is
supportive of CFT
efforts and students
desire to gain teaching
training only to the point
that it complements
departmental training;
CFT is especially good
for senior grad students
(4th & 5th years)
no
good as-is
send students to
workshops and
seminars - students
see benefits in
retrospect
yes, used extensively
yes
don't know much about
it
"language is a hurdle"
"we teach in Spanish"
"The other hurdle is
time." "needs to be
apparent benefit"
1)more -- 2)help in
developing mentoring
program
maybe work with
teaching seminar?
yes
A&S #10
no
it's important to have
CFT to "give pointers"
have corresponded in
the past re:
international students
teaching undergrads
yes
A&S #9