Hi Timothy,
This is a very interesting piece of work and I have to admire your positive
and scholarly collation of possible measures. I think this is a really
useful document - but not necessarily in the way it is currently presented!
I have some serious concerns about the assumptions in it. I'd strongly
recommend you read A. Skelton (2005) _Understanding Teaching Excellence in
HE_. His persuasive observation, based on research into reward schemes for
teaching, is that 'teaching excellence is a contested, value-laden concept
which is historically and situationally contingent'. He suggests there are
many varied models of what constitutes excellent teaching and that we need to
expose and discuss their underlying assumptions before even seeking to define
criteria. He offers a convincing critique of the performative, managerial
model of teaching excellence, a less convincing critique of the psychologized
'approaches to learning' model, but a compelling argument for a critical,
emancipatory model of teaching excellence.
I wouldn't want to speak for Skelton but I think he'd share my concern about
whether 'demonstrably objective measures' of teaching quality are possible or
even desirable. The underlying assumptions of such measures often emphasis
performative, managerial models of good teaching, measure those things that
are most easily measured, and ignore both the wider structural determinants
and the critically-aware human beings at the heart of it all. Perhaps,
rather than attempting to define measures for staff, it would be better to
invite staff to present their own individual cases for their excellent
teaching [based on their own explicit selection from the variety of models
and measures] and to establish that these cases will be judged, not on
whether they comply with management objectives but on their academic merits?!
cheers
John
Dr John Peters
Learning and Teaching Centre
University of Worcester
01905 855506
-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Timothy Murphy
Sent: 08 January 2008 16:31
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Summative Assessment of Teaching and Learning Protocol
Dear Colleagues,
As a postdoctoral researcher at the National
University of Galway Ireland I have constructed draft
protocols (SALT 1 and 2) for the Summative Assessment
of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. It is
proposed that SALT 1 will be completed during the
academic’s probationary period, i.e. first 3 years.
SALT 2 is a further development of SALT 1 and has a
particular focus on what is referred to as
research-informed teaching. It recognises the
centrality that is accorded to research in higher
education today.
As this is a preliminary draft in an effort to develop
a Summative Assessment of Teaching and Learning
Approach for Higher Education, any thoughts or
comments or indeed recommendations that you may have
would be very much appreciated.
Thanking you sincerely for your time and
consideration.
Respectfully,
Timothy Murphy
Postdoctoral Researcher
National University of Ireland
Galway
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1214 - Release Date: 08/01/2008
13:38
|