1 Albert Pilot Institute of Education (IVLOS) & Freudenthal Instiitute for Science and Mathematics Education Utrecht University, the Netherlands [email protected].

1

Albert Pilot

Institute of Education (IVLOS) &

Freudenthal Instiitute for Science and Mathematics Education

Utrecht University, the Netherlands

[email protected]

The teacher as a crucial factor in curriculum innovation

the case of Utrecht University

•Introduction

•Conceptual framework

•Innovation processes

•Strategies, measures

•Authentic practices

•Conclusion

2

Perspective

1. Introduction2. Conceptual framework3. Innovation processes4. Three Strategies & six clusters of measures 5. Focus on the changing role of teachers: authentic practices 6. Discussion and conclusions

3

• Is the quality of personnel the capital in our business: university education?

• Is the teacher the crucial factor in curriculum innovation?

• Can this be the focus in univertsity policy and activities?

• How should this be done? • What are good indicators?

Teaching in a research university

•Introduction





•Conclusion

4

• What strategies are feasible to enhance the competencies and motivation of teachers in a research university on a large scale? Or:

• How to enhance the empowerment of teachers?

Research question:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

5

• Conceptual framework• 3 strategies and 6 clusters of measures

are described.• Analysis of implemented activities and

results.• Focus on authentic practices as a new

framework for linking teaching and research

Answering the question:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

6

Curriculum innovations require changes in teacher practice, but

experienced teachers do not change current practice because it is rooted in their beliefs and expertise.

Teachers need to be empowered for curriculum innovations in content and educational methods.

Conceptual framework

•Introduction





•Conclusion

7

Dimensions of empowerment:

Involvement in decision-making Teacher impact Teacher status Autonomy Professional growth Self-efficacy

Empowerment

•Introduction





•Conclusion

8

• High rate of dynamics in disciplines and professions, and changing demands on quality of education.

• Implications: * linking teaching and research (knowledge development) in a new model or paradigm * focus on the professional development of the teacher in a learning organisation.

Linking research and teaching

•Introduction





•Conclusion

9

• From expertise on educational innovations: Authority, Infrastructure & Concensus.

• Teachers are content specific experts: in university the criterion for authority.

• Teachers should also focus on design and management of eduducational innovations: co-ownership, empowerment.

Authority in innovations needs empowerment

•Introduction





•Conclusion

10

• Quality of education is our core business (next to quality of research).

• Educational innovation is necessary on a permanent basis.

• Enhancement of quality and status of education as ‘core business’ needs high competencies and motivation of teachers.

About 1990 Utrecht University decided:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

11

• UU Perspective of the major curriculum innovation processes in 2000-2007 is:

• introducing the Bachelor Master / Bologna framework in the Netherlands, and

• strengthening higher order learning, broadening academic development of students, facilitating highly talented students.

Perspective Bologna

•Introduction





•Conclusion

12

• the concept of the learning organisation.

• The capacity of an organisation to learn is a necessary condition to adapt to a fast developing and changing environment (characteristic for the research based UU).

Context of the innovation process in UU:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

13

• Enhancement of learning capacity of teachers is considered to be the main goal

• All innovation activities should contribute to this goal

• From the context of the theoretical framework 3 strategies are also structuring the analysis of results:

Learning capacity

•Introduction





•Conclusion

14

• Explicit requirements about quality in appointments and promotion (basic & senior quaifications are necessary), in authority and rewarding, and in external and internal quality assurance of education

1. The quality of the teacher as starting point for the educational

policy

•Introduction





•Conclusion

15

• Teachers are responsible and authorised to design and develop the educational constructs.

2. The teacher as designer and developer of education:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

16

• Give the teacher in the Community of Practice in his domain and profession a central position in his educational roles and tasks: authentic, stimulating dynamic input, non-scholastic assessment.

3. The teacher as professional expert in his community of

practice

•Introduction





•Conclusion

17

• Faculty members’ research quality was the only justification of all professional behaviour, not pedagogical qualities.

• Staff members were highly "change-resistant"

• Students expected teachers to be pedagogically qualified.

• Low results in national rankings (students, quality assurance system)

The situation in 1990 at Utrecht University

•Introduction





•Conclusion

18

• Qualifications on Teaching in Higher Education and training programs

• Human relations policy: all teachers had to comply with basic THE-qualification, professors with senior THE-qualification.

• Assessment based on portfolios, committees of high authority, but details were decided on the level of the departments.

Strategy 1, the quality of the teacher as starting point for policy: Qualifications

•Introduction





•Conclusion

19

• Implementation by the Board and Deans (thousands of teachers!).

• Procedures for new personnel in perspective of appointments etc.

• Results: Now a standard, fully accepted procedure and keystone in UU-policy. In May 2007 (after 12 years!) mutual acknowledgement in 9 Dutch Universities

Strategy 1, the quality of the teacher: Qualifications

•Introduction





•Conclusion

20

• Capabilities regarding discipline …• Pedagogical capabilities:

The teacher is capable to design teaching programs from the point of view that teaching programs support study programs of students. He/she is capable to perform various teaching activities both for groups of students and individuals, to assess learning results, and evaluate his/her own teaching.

• Organising capabilities …• General capabilities…

Shortlist of Teacher in Higher Education qualifications UU

•Introduction





•Conclusion

21

• Quality assurance. In the system of external quality assurance in Dutch universities quality of teachers important criterion, decisive for accreditation.

• The internal quality assurance system in UU complies with this by the qualifications strategy.

Strategy 1, the quality of the teacher: Quality Assurance, accreditation

•Introduction





•Conclusion

22

Some results: appreciation by students

•Introduction





•Conclusion

Appreciation by students of Programmes of Utrecht University in the national rankings of Elsevier: percentage of first places in 1996-2004:

Year % 1e places1996 01998 201999 02000 02001 172002 182003 402004 33

23

• Excellence in University Teaching: developing a think tank and innovation force.

• Permanent educational innovation in UU needs a group of teachers to provide the leadership in education and in innovation projects.

• Focus on high potentials, selected by Deans and Programme Board.

• Every year 15 participants.

Strategy 1, the quality of the teacher: Excellence in University Teaching

•Introduction





•Conclusion

24

• Programme of 15 months, 1,5 day each month, coached project activities in their departments, study visits to universities in Europe and North-America etc. Working conference with Board and deans (authority!).

• Results: positions of trainees now: programme directors, development of new programmes and initiatives, key persons in educational leadership.

Strategy 1, the quality of the teacher: Excellence in University Teaching

•Introduction





•Conclusion

25

• This perspective seems self-evident, but …

• from 1970-1990 a strong tendency to industrial model: teachers executing educational constructs developed by others: CAI-programmes, sets of test items, top-down decided innovations, etc.

• Resulting in …

Strategy 2, the teachers as designers and developers of education

•Introduction





•Conclusion

26

Teachers delivering educational constructs, developed by others results in ….. failures in implementation.

So we decided teachers should be the principal designers and developers of education, within the concept of ‘learning organisation’:

teachers as learning professionals in teams with responsibility and authority to design and develop.

Strategy 2, the teachers as designers and developers of education

•Introduction





•Conclusion

27

Results:

New strategic plan for 2006-2010:

“Teachers will get more possibilities to develop education in collegial exchange of ideas and from their own professional expertise, and to organise instruction in a small scale set up to well-organised groups of students”.

Strategy 2, the teacher as designer and developer of education

•Introduction





•Conclusion

28

Results, also: different position and expertise of educational

researchers and consultants.

IVLOS, Institute of Education, changed into consultant, supporting teachers and management. Teachers are owners of educational problems; co-operative responsibility for innovations, scenarios agreements, concerted investments.

Strategy 2, the teacher as designer and developer of education

•Introduction





•Conclusion

29

Founding of Utrecht University College, Honours College, English, international, residential, 600 students, selective, specific educational concept, Bachelor programme, years before the whole UU changed into BaMa.

Outstanding UU-teachers were invited with authority amongst their peers;reported experiences were decisive in UU policy on design of BaMa programme structures.

Strategy 2, teachers as designers and developers: Fostering excellence in

learning and teaching

•Introduction





•Conclusion

30

Utrecht University College was a laboratory for innovations, that were next implemented on large scale in UU. Also many disciplinary Honours Programmes were implemented.

Results: Recent developments to more Colleges (down

scaling!) are a further elaboration of the original vision. Initiatives do come from teachers, influence of ‘CEUT high potentials’ is striking.

Strategy 2, teachers as designer and developer: Fostering excellence in

learning and teaching

•Introduction





•Conclusion

31

Different vision on higher education, on relation between teaching and research: involving selection of content, choice of methods, assessment, role of the teacher. Change of paradigm.

Communities of Practice in the domain with characteristic tasks are given a key position in the curriculum.

Strategy 3, the teacher as professional expert in the authentic practice,

characteristic in discipline and profession

•Introduction





•Conclusion

32

Broadening the aims of the curriculum …

Students: “Miss, why do we have to do this assignment, why should we learn this? I want to become a physician …”

Teacher: “Euh, yes, no, maybe, euh, …, yes, no, …”

•Introduction





•Conclusion

33

Examples: in Computer Science: a project to develop

a software product and a business case;

in Chemistry and Physics: research projects.

In Veterinary Science: Clinical reasoning etc.

Strategy 3, the teacher as professional expert in the authentic practice

•Introduction





•Conclusion

34

Role of the teacher: expert from the discipline, needs up-to-

date expertise in authentic tasks, related to external client or assessor.

The teacher in his project activities and in his learning process should be involved in the dynamics of the practice of his own domain of competence.

Strategy 3, the teacher as senior and students as juniors in communities of

practice

•Introduction





•Conclusion

35

Role of the teacher: For students he is the guide on the side,

expert in issue knowledge, organising peer-assessment; shows the way to criteria of external assessors.

Results: Development until now not at large scale, but

steadily going on, and shown to be irreversible: understanding by teachers and management of the far-reaching consequences.

Strategy 3, the teacher as senior and students as juniors in communities of

practice

•Introduction





•Conclusion

36

Meaningful learning …

motive

?

motive

Secondary education Higher education

Secondary education Higher education

?

Professional and adult life

Knowing why having learned in retrospect

•Introduction





•Conclusion

http://images.google.nl/imgres?imgurl=http://www.gsjlindenhout.nl/bewerkte_fotos/tekening%2520twee%2520kinderen.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.gsjlindenhout.nl/Arnhem/SBU%2520Heijenoord.htm&h=353&w=300&sz=14&tbnid=4ygfYIupFgAJ:&tbnh=115&tbnw=97&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkinderen%26start%3D40%26hl%3Dnl%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN

http://images.google.nl/imgres?imgurl=http://www.gsjlindenhout.nl/bewerkte_fotos/tekening%2520twee%2520kinderen.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.gsjlindenhout.nl/Arnhem/SBU%2520Heijenoord.htm&h=353&w=300&sz=14&tbnid=4ygfYIupFgAJ:&tbnh=115&tbnw=97&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkinderen%26start%3D40%26hl%3Dnl%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN

37

Authenticity …•Introduction





•Conclusion

38

Structure of the course

• Phases in a course:– Orientation on an authentic practice– Focus on exemplary problem– Extending knowledge to solve the problem– Refocus on the other problems– Describe plan of action for the solution of another

problem

• Exemple of a case: R&D team in beverage industry: investing in an innovative separation technology or not?

• Concepts of mass transfer processes & reactor design

•Introduction





•Conclusion

39

• Company Friedel produces fruit juices• New policy: Consumer wants ‘Fresh Juices!’• Research team of the company:

– Analysis of process & identification of problem– Two alternatives: new innovative membrane

process (pervaporation) or more conventional but costly fractional distillation

– What to advice? How to communicate with engineering companies? What assignment for them? And how to evaluate their specifications?

What is the authentic practice?

•Introduction





•Conclusion

40

Adaptation of authentic practice

For the purpose of learning certain concepts /skills / etc.

In five subsequent phases

•Introduction





•Conclusion

41

Structure of course: phase 1

• Orientation on practice: ‘stage setting’– What is the professional situation? What kind of

problems do they deal with? What do they do?– Few exemplary problems (always more than one!):

• Preserving food aroma components in fresh juice

• Less thorough pasteurisation process

– Worthwhile to identify with the R&D people of Friedel

• Need to know about … motive

•Introduction





•Conclusion

42

• Focus on preservation of aroma components in fresh juice: dimensions of innovative separator

• Course must focus students on analysis:

• What steps to take & Need to know more about …

Orientation on example: phase 2

Raw material

stream: fruit juice

Product stream: concentrated juice

Multiple stage

evaporator

Aroma concentrate stream

Separator

motive

•Introduction





•Conclusion

43

• What are essential components of fruit juices to preserve in the product stream?

• What is this separator? How does it work? • What (semi-) commercial types may be

available?• How to relate essentials of the separation

technique to this problem? Choice of membrane (hydrophilic / hydrophobic)?

• How to calculate the required dimensions of the separator: flux, ΔP, membrane area (A)

• What steps to take next =

Extension of knowledge for solving the case:

Step by step in phase 3

motive

•Introduction





•Conclusion

44

Some details: Separator & Membrane

Feed

Vapour

Permeate

Retentate

30 m PDMS (silicone rubber) filled with zeolite crystals200 – 500 m PAN (polyacrylonitril)

2.

10 m PDMS (silicone rubber)

200 – 500 m PAN (polyacrylonitril)

1.

•Introduction





•Conclusion

45

Refocus on other problem: phase 4

• Presentation of advice to board of directors for the exemplary case

• Get another assignment, since the new route seems feasible / promising

• Need to know … about motive

•Introduction





•Conclusion

46

Reflection on plan of action: phase 5

• for looking back – forward: what have we done / learned to apply this for a new problem

• In plan of action for new case: Students make essential steps explicit for such a design problem:

express a typical design procedure

• And perhaps … a need to know more about … motive

•Introduction





•Conclusion

47

Framework: Five phases in learning

• Broad orientation: confrontation with several cases. motivation to get involved in practice, wanting to solve such cases

• Focus on exemplary problem content related motive, need-to-know how this in practice exactly is done (authentic practice as source of information)

• Extension of this knowledge when solving the exemplary problem

• Look back & forward: what have we done, with the perspective to solving another case

• Make plan for another case, generalising knowledge

•Introduction





•Conclusion

48

Not all authentic practices are suitable for adaptation … !

• Students appreciate and recognize the characteristic goals (problems) associated with the authentic practice

• Characteristic procedure to be used, can be expressed by students in common sense notions

• Students are aware of the issue & disciplinary knowledge that is needed to solve the problems in outlines

•Introduction





•Conclusion

49

Other examples at UU

• Physics research project 2nd year Physics Education, department of Physics and Astronomy

• Software ‘Companies’, 4th year education in department of Computer Sciences

• Chemistry research projects: esters, research in all departmental groups, making proposal on virus research, 1st, 2nd, 3rd year Chemistry Education

• Social Sciences: analysis of homeless persons in town for municipality

• Law: adapted authentic practice in court, supported by members of the court and lawyers.

•Introduction





•Conclusion

50

Comparison of projects

2. Plan

3. Guideexperiments

4. Experiments & Analysis

5. Report

6. Presentation &Assessment

1. Research question

• Research project:– Structured according to

a typical research procedure with decision worksheets

– Judged by paper and presentation in seminar (to staff !)

• Software companies– Structured according to

business plan (delivering intermediate products – presentation)

– Teacher acts as CEO;board of directors: external

2. BusinessPlan~1

3. Presentingfirst softwareproduct

4. Business plan~2

5. Final business planSoftware product

1. Product definition

•Introduction





•Conclusion

51

Design principles:

• Adaptation of ‘suitable’ authentic practices for the purpose of learning certain concepts

• All evaluated examples here are pre-structured for the sake of learning

• Broad orientation – example – solving – refocus – NEW ! example (Reflection)

• All projects were evaluated as highly motivating

• Stage setting: Student ‘roles’ & ‘Teacher roles’• Problem and Results are external

•Introduction





•Conclusion

52

Question:

What strategies are feasible to empower teachers for innovation in university education on a large scale?

Conclusions:

3 strategies and 6 clusters of measures consistent with the vision, aiming at enhancement of the quality and position of teachers.

Discussion and conclusions

•Introduction





•Conclusion

53

Analysis of activities show that strategies and measures have been implemented to a substantial extent as intended.

Results of national rankings and conclusions of national visitation and accreditation committees show results: enhanced quality of education.


•Introduction





•Conclusion

54

But the specific influence of the measures is difficult to determine precisely, because situation is complex, too many factors.

On key issues the vision is realised, indicators show that the quality and position of teachers is enhanced, and that the major curriculum innovations resulted in higher quality of the programmes.


•Introduction





•Conclusion

55

? What is the direction for the future of higher education?

? What are key factors in innovation processes?? What policy and measures are decisive?

Based on this research : Professional development of teachers should be a key

activity within a framework of a learning organisation. The strategies described can support the realisation of

this vision

Challenging problems for future innovation processes:

•Introduction





•Conclusion

56

Thank you for your attention!

57

Albert Pilot

Institute of Education (IVLOS) &

Freudenthal Instiitute for Science and Mathematics Education

Utrecht University, the Netherlands

[email protected]

The teacher as a crucial factor in curriculum innovation

the case of Utrecht University

•Introduction





•Conclusion

58

Measures:

A. Qualifications on Teaching in Higher Education and training programs

B. Quality assurance

C. Excellence in University Teaching

Strategy 1: the quality of the teacher as starting point for

policy.

59

Measures:

A. Qualifications on Teaching in Higher Education and training programs:

B. Quality assurance

C. Excellence in University Teaching

Strategy 1: the quality of the teacher as starting point for

policy.

60

Strategy 2: the teacher as designer and developer of education

D. Changing the perspective of the teachers into designers and developers of education

E. Fostering excellence in learning and teaching

Strategy 3, the teachers as professional experts in the Community of Practice, that is characteristic in their discipline and profession

F. Changing the role of teachers into seniors in Authentic Practices

Strategy 2 & 3

1 Albert Pilot Institute of Education (IVLOS) & Freudenthal Instiitute for Science and Mathematics Education Utrecht University, the Netherlands [email protected].

Documents

new framework

empowerment of teachers

clusters of measures

university education

curriculum innovations

teacher practice

research question

quality of education