Spheres of Influence: Ventures and Visions in Educational Development*3-6 July, 2002 AbstractEducational innovation and faculty's professional development: A two-way linkAnn Stes, University of Antwerp, Belgium Over the last decades the understanding of student learning has profoundly changed. Nowadays it is generally accepted that students are responsible for their own learning as they construct themselves meaning in an (inter)active way (Shuell, 1988). The consequences of this socio-constructivist view on learning for teaching seem obvious. One can no longer claim that the teacher is the expert who decides what and how students should learn. On the contrary, the plea is made for student-centred teaching in which the teachers' main responsibility is to create an empowering learning environment and to act as coaches who guide students in their learning process (Marton, Hounsell & Entwistle, 1997). In line with this evolution all Flemish institutions for higher education and universities have embraced teaching concepts and methods that clearly refer to the notion of student-centred teaching. Most of them are also very conscious of the fact that in order to put these concepts and methods into practice, it is necessary to create some support for faculty members. Indeed, the implementation of a new teaching concept seems to be impossible without faculty's professional development (Fullan & Stiegelbauer, 1991). At the Higher Education Institutions of Limburg as well as at the universities of Antwerp and Leuven, a system was created to support faculty's educational professional development. These systems encompass individual coaching on demand as well as formal training programs for beginning faculty and teaching assistants, one day symposia about specific educational topics (counselling first year students, an electronic learning environment, assessing competencies, ...) and workshops, that give the participants the opportunity to exchange ideas and experiences. All of these activities clearly are focused on the acquisition of teaching skills that are necessary if one wants to put student-centred teaching into practice. They support the faculty members to implement the notion of student-centred teaching in their daily teaching practice. As such these initiatives correspond to the need of faculty for practical teaching tips (see eg Isaacs & Parker, 1997), giving them ideas on 'how to do things' in a student-centred way. Yet, at the same time, the staff development initiatives mentioned transcend this practical level, by putting the concepts behind the notion of student-centred teaching to discussion. Consequently, not only the 'how to do things' question is raised, but also the 'why' question. This offers the participants the opportunity to gain insight in issues such as the influence of teaching style on learning behaviour, the importance of feedback and the necessity to set minimum goals for their students to reach. It also opens the discussion about the participants' instructional beliefs and the compatibility of these with the notion of student-centred teaching. The argument to explicitly deal with these instructional beliefs refers to research findings which indicate a relationship between teachers' instructional beliefs and their teaching approach (Kember & Kwan, 2000; Martin, Prosser, Trigwell, Ramsden & Benjamin, 2000; Trigwell, Prosser & Taylor, 1994). In general these findings show that faculty who conceive teaching as transmitting knowledge are more likely to use content- or teacher-centred approaches, whereas those who conceive teaching as facilitative tend to use learning - or student-centred approaches. So it seems important to take faculty's instructional beliefs into account when designing staff development programs to support the implementation of student-centred teaching. In addition to that, a thorough reflection on the qualities and 'foundations' of one's own teaching practice is also believed to be fundamental for faculty to develop a critical attitude towards teaching (their own teaching and teaching in general) that will enable them to develop beyond the faculty development initiatives. Faculty who do not only know how to put student-centred teaching into practice, but who can also argue why they do so in that particular way, have become critical professionals. They do not only have a greater control over their teaching. They can also account for their teaching practice and they have acquired more flexibility. They become more capable to react in a flexible way to new demands, unexpected circumstances and so on (Clement & Vandenberghe, 2000). One can expect them to give impulses to educational innovation in turn as they are able to evaluate the impact of their approach on students' learning. Thus, by combining a practical and a more theoretical approach in our faculty development programs, we create a two-way link between educational innovation and faculty's professional development. The programs empower the faculty to implement the new concept of student-centred teaching. At the same time they develop the critical attitude faculty need to take this innovation further. During the seminar, the contributors will illustrate the two-way process referring to their own experiences as staff developer. Participants will be asked to comment on the conceptual model and on the related challenges. Topics that will be put to discussion are: how to reach an ideal mix of theory and practice in staff development programs; how to launch and sustain the discussion about the 'fundamentals' (why do faculty teach the way they teach?, what instructional beliefs does one hold? ...); what about the differences between faculty's actual teaching practice and their espoused theories (in the sense of abstract opinions about 'best practices'); how to let the department take advantage of faculty's professional development?; what about the influence of faculty's innovation on the staff development programs?; ... Key words: Objectives, outcomes and activities: Three years ago Ann Stes, licentiate in education science, was recruited for the co-ordination of the project 'A one-year training for beginning university teachers' at the University of Antwerp, Belgium. She introduced the project at the ICED-conference in Bielefeld (July 2000). At this moment she's responsible for designing activities which promote the expertise of university teachers. Some of these activities are coached by herself. M. Clement is professor at the Educational Support Office of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. She is responsible for the faculty development programs and her main areas of interest are faculty development, teacher thinking and instructional beliefs. C. Nelissen 's domain at the moment is supporting educational innovation and development within an interinstitutional context. Formerly she was responsible for educational development and evaluation at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. She is the past president of the Flemish ED network. Contact: Ann Stes, email: ann.stes@ua.ac.be |