Since the 1990s there has been a focus on raising the profile of teaching to match that of research. Teaching awards have been introduced in the UK and beyond as one approach to valuing excellent teaching (Chalmers 2011, Jackson 2006, Skelton 2004). Whilst the number of schemes has increased over the years the awards tend to be decided by senior staff or peers not by those who are the recipients of the teaching. However, recently UK Universities have started to introduce student nominated awards. Their importance is recognised by the continued support provided by NUS Scotland and HEA (2011) in the Student Led Teaching Awards (STLA). Given the importance of the student experience within all Universities vision statements and the increased emphasis as fees rise it is essential that those who experience the teaching first hand can participate in the decision about who gains awards and what factors should be taken into account.
Our workshop provided an opportunity for the four presenters to outline their schemes and then ask the participants about schemes and experiences. We then finished with a what next for each of our schemes.
City University London scheme has been running for 3 years and is completely run by the student union. Any member of staff who has impact on the student experience can be nominated and there was originally one award per school and one for central services last year there were four additional awards added. Themes that the data has focused on for the last three years includes: Teaching, technology and teaching, personal development. Assessment and feedback, lecturer attributes. The awards are given at the learning and teaching conference. What next – raise the profile of the award further, collect case studies from winners, use the data in the teaching programme, have ongoing nomination throughout the year.
Sheffield Hallam University scheme started 2 years ago staff are nominated by students but staff choose the winner. Each faculty nominates 15 award holders and these go forward to the University inspirational teaching awards where there are usually 20 -25 plus 5 inspirational research supervisor awards and 5 outstanding student support awards. The analysis of last year’s data provides the following themes: Student engagement with learning, rapport and relationships with students and vocational. The awards are all given out at a dinner. What next – start group awards, the winners and their bios will be displayed in public, encourage the winners to share their teaching activity.
University of Worcester aimed at outstanding practice the awards focus on the module not the individual. Nominations are via blackboard and the nominations are sorted through by the SU with support. There is one award per institute and 7% of the modules were nominated which incorporated about 30% of the teaching. No module gained more than 7 nominations. What next – SU to be the main driver, move to google docs for nominations, review whether to include individuals and SU to organise celebration.
Ball State University USA scheme had been running for 23 years and the nominations were made by students but the winners were decided by staff. Three teachers each year can win and when making the decision the panel explore creation of learning experience that stimulates and extends learning, innovative use of resources, supporting student learning, helping students use research with their learning and providing helpful feedback and support for students. What next – increased students participation and improve faculty proposals.
The workshop part of the session focused on schemes the participants had in their institutions and the varying processes and thoughts around this including should we recognise some lecturers what does this say about the others? Should the focus be on how lecturers have enhanced my learning rather than excellent teaching? Good discussion around these issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment