An Investigation into Excellent Tertiary Teaching.pdf

7/28/2019 An Investigation into Excellent Tertiary Teaching.pdf

1/29

An Investigation into Excellent Tertiary Teaching: Emphasising Reflective PracticeAuthor(s): Ruth Kane, Susan Sandretto and Chris HeathSource: Higher Education, Vol. 47, No. 3 (Apr., 2004), pp. 283-310Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4151546 .

Accessed: 05/06/2013 10:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Springeris collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toHigher Education.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springerhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4151546?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4151546?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer


2/29

1 HigherEducation 47: 283-310, 2004. 283S 2004 KluwerAcademicPublishers. Printed n theNetherlands.

Aninvestigationntoexcellent ertiary eaching:EmphasisingreflectivepracticeRUTHKANE'*,SUSANSANDRETTO2 CHRISHEATH31College of Education,Massey University,PrivateBag 11222, NewZealand;2FacultyofEducation,Universityof Otago,P.O.Box 56, Dunedin,NewZealand;3HigherEducationDevelopmentCentre,Universityof Otago,P.O.Box 56, Dunedin,New Zealand(*author or correspondence, -mail: [email protected])Abstract. This study s anattempt o understand etter hecomplexnatureof tertiaryeachingby identifying and investigatingthe attributesof a group of excellent teachersin sciencedepartmentsof the University.In working with this group of teacherswe examined whatthey say abouttheir teachingand what they do in their teaching practice.Our findings,aswell as confirmingmuch of the existing literatureat primary, econdaryand tertiary evels,emphasise the stronglink between the teachingpractice and researchcommitmentof ourexcellent science teachers;as well as the key roles playedby interpersonal elationshipsandthe 'person'of theteacher.Weproposethatpurposefulreflectivepractice ntegrates hemanydimensionsof teachingfor this groupof excellentscience teachers.We presenta theoreticalmodel that can be used to assist novice or less experienced universityacademics in theirdevelopmentandunderstanding f teachingexcellenceat thetertiaryevel.Keywords: academic staffdevelopment,reflectivepractice,research/teaching exus, teacherattributes,eachercharacteristics, niversity eaching

IntroductionTheauthors'researchprojectwasconceived toenhance hepracticeof novicelecturersby makinguse of the expertisealready presentin the University.The projectbeganwith a discussionbetweenthe Assistant-Vice-Chancellor,Division of Sciences and one of the authorson how best to supportnewscience lecturers who typically have had little or no teaching experience,or professionaldevelopmentwith respect to teaching. The researchteam,comprising wo teachereducatorsand anacademicstaffdeveloper,embarkeduponthis researchconfident n the belief thatgood teachingis not innate,itcan be learned.Withthis in mind,theprojectsoughtto theorisethe attributesof excellent tertiaryteachers and the relationshipsamong those attributes,with the long-termgoal of assistingnovice academics in theirdevelopmentas teachers.

This paperdescribesfive dimensionsof tertiary eachingthat arosefromouranalysisof the threedatasourcesused in the investigation.Themultiple-

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:48:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/29

284 RUTH ANE TAL.methoddesign allowedus to listen to whatourparticpantshad to say abouttheirteaching and good teaching in general,and to observe their teachingpractice directly.We found evidence of differenttypes of reflectiveprac-tice used by the participants.We proposethatpurposefulreflectionon theirteachingplays a key role in assistingourparticipantso integrate he dimen-sions of subjectknowledge, skill, interpersonal elations,research/teachingnexus andpersonality ntorecognisedteachingexcellence. Weconcludewitha discussionof the implicationsof ourmodelfor staffdevelopmentefforts.

Characteristics of excellent tertiary teachersResearchershavetried to pinpointthe componentsof good tertiary eachingsince the 1930s (Weimer 1990). A numberof researchershave acknowl-edged that a widely accepted definitionof excellent teaching has yet toappear (e.g., McLean 2001; Trigwell 2001). A variety of methods havebeen employedto investigateteachingexcellence includingteachingobser-vations,andstudentand teachersurveysandinterviews.In 1973Hildebrandsoughtto "identifyand describeeffectiveteachingso that nstructors ould behelpedto improve" p.43). Hildebrand escribed ivecomponentsof effectiveperformance: ommandof the subject,clarity, nstructor-groupnteraction,instructor-individualtudent interactionand enthusiasm(1973, p. 46). Heexplainedthat "teachersregardedas strong in all five of the componentsof effective performanceare consideredto be fine instructorsby virtuallyeveryone" (p. 48). He also described a numberof traits present in bothineffective andeffectiveteachers.

Sherman t al. (1987) notedthatwhetherstudentsrated eacherson apre-preparedist of characteristics singa Likert cale, generated heirownlist ofcharacteristics f teachingexcellence or teacherswere interviewed, he samefive characteristics ppeared.These characteristicswere enthusiasm,clarity,attention o preparation/organisation,bilityto stimulate nterestandthinkingaboutthe subjectmatter,and love of knowledge(p. 67).Feldman(1988, 1996, 1997) investigatedevaluation nstruments"to seehow student evaluations can be used to help identify exemplaryteachersand instruction" 1997, p. 369). He explainedthat "evaluation nstrumentstry to capturethe multidimensionalityof teaching"(1996, p. 42). Feldman(1997) found that studentsplaced high importanceon the characteristics:clarity,stimulationof interestin the course,preparation/organizationf thecourse, and motivationof students,in identifyinggood teaching. Studentsplaced moderate mportanceon sensitivityto, and concern with class levelandprogress,knowledgeof thesubject,enthusiasm or thesubject,andavail-



4/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 285ability.Studentsratedthe personalityof the teacheras having moderate olow importance.Horan(1991) reviewedresearchon effectivecommunitycollege teacherswho had been identified as exemplarybased on studentachievement dataand theninterviewed o determineanycommoncharacteristics.Horan oundthateffectivecommunitycollege teachershadanin-depthknowledgeof theirsubject area, demonstratedknowledge of and use of a varietyof teachingtechniques, showed interest in teaching, were organised,were respectfuland interested n students,encouragedstudentparticipation,and regularlymonitored tudent earning o providefeedback(p. 23). Horanexplainedthat"thesecharacteristics re behaviorsandtechniquesratherhandispositionsorpersonality raits" p. 9).Elton (1998) explainedthat"teachingExcellence ... as a concept, lacksprecision"due to "the multidimensionalityof the concept" (p. 3). Eltonproposed a list of competencies for teachers and claimed that excellentteacherswould demonstrate highlevel of competence n "a numberof these,but not necessarily all" (p. 6). These competencies include organization,presentation, elationships,assessmentand evaluation(p. 6). He addedthatotherdimensionsof teachingexcellence include reflectivepractice,innov-ation, curriculumdesign, teachingservice to the community,research ntodisciplinespecificteaching,andpedagogicalresearch p. 6).Hativa et al. (2001) studied a group of exemplarytertiaryteachers inorderto "identifythe[ir] beliefs and pedagogical knowledge"(p. 703). Intheirreviewof researchon the characteristics f excellentuniversity eachersHativaet al. foundthat:

Exemplaryuniversity eachersare well preparedandorganized,presentthe materialclearly,stimulatestudents' nterest,engagement,andmoti-vation n studyingthe material hrough heirenthusiasm/expressiveness,have positive rapportwith students,show high expectationsof them,encouragethem, and generallymaintaina positive classroomenviron-ment(pp.701-702).

While these, and otherstudies,contribute o understandinghe perceivedattributes f excellentteachers, heyhave hadlimitedinfluenceon improvingthepracticeof less experienceduniversity eachers.Identifying he elementsof "good"university eachinghas not shed light on how university eachersdevelop these attributes.Ourstudy sought to investigatethe characteristicsof tertiaryeachingexcellence in the sciences at theUniversityand use thesefindings o address eaching developmentneeds of less experiencestaff.Thisprojectwas conducted n two phases:Phase I consistedof the identificationand subsequentstudy of excellent teachers fromUniversityscience depart-



5/29

286 RUTHKANE ET AL.ments.PhaseII involvedthe developmentand evaluationof an interventionwithnovice lecturersusingthe findingsfromPhaseI (Sandretto t al. 2002).Thispaperreports indingsfromPhaseI.

TheoreticalrameworkMany researchershave acknowledgedthe complexity involved in teachingand earning o teach(e.g., Ballantyneet al. 1997;Calderhead1996;Common1989). In an effort to bettercapturethe complex natureof teachingwe useTheories of Action as the theoretical rameworko informour research.Thisframeworkdeveloped by Agyris and Schoin(1974) "include[s]the values,strategies,and underlyingassumptionsthat informindividuals'patternsofinterpersonal ehavior"(Schoin1987,p. 255). Whenappliedto the practiceof teaching the theories of action differentiatebetween teachers'espousedtheoriesof action and theories-in-use.Briefly,espousedtheoriesof action arethose theories "thatwe use to explainorjustify ourbehavior"(Schin 1987,p. 255). Thesetheoriesareeasy to articulateandcouldbe interpreted s whatteacherssay abouttheir own teaching.Theories-in-use,however,are the tacittheoriesthatunderpinpractice.Schoin 1987) explained:

often we are unableto describe [our theories-in-use],and we are sur-prised to discover, when we do constructthem by reflecting on thedirectlyobservable dataof our actualinterpersonalpractice,that theyareincongruentwith the theoriesof actionwe espouse (p. 256).

Theories-in-useexist predominantlyas tacit knowledge,that is knowledgewe hold butcannotarticulate asily (ArgyrisandSchion1974;Polanyi 1966).Polanyi(1966) described acitknowledgeas "acertainknowledgethat[one]cannot ell"(p. 8). Espousedtheoriesof actionand theories-in-usedistinguishbetween whatpeople say theydo andwhattheydo. We believethat n order obettercapture he complexityof an activitysuch as teaching,it is importantto utilise a numberof methodsthat allow researchers o access both whatteacherssay about theirteachingandwhatthey do in practice.The Theoriesof Actionframeworkassistsus in achievingthis goal.

Participant electionGiven the initial interest from the Division of Sciences and our desire towork with a manageablesized group,we restricted he research o lecturersin sciences. Participantswere identifiedby solicitingHeads of Departments(HODs)in theUniversity'sDivisionof Sciences.Procedures orperformance



6/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 287appraisalused in ouruniversityplace significantresponsibilityon each staffmember'sHOD. The HOD is the personbestplacedto providean overviewof staff and studentperceptionsof teaching performance.The HODs wereasked to providea shortwritten statementof support n order to nominateacademicstaff who wererecognizedas excellentteacherswithintheirdepart-ments andwho had demonstratednterest n exploring heirteachingpractice.When soliciting nominationswe did not place any limits on the potentialparticipants,uchas a minimumnumberof yearsof teachingexperience.Weasked theHODsto specify the courses thatthe lecturer aughtandthe modesof teaching n whichtheyexcelled, i.e., largeclass lectures,practicalclasses,distance teaching, etc. We received 13 written and four telephonedstate-ments in supportof the 17 nominees. These writtenstatementsrangedfromthe briefestpossible: "Iam pleased to nominatex ... [who] excels in largeclass lecturesituationsas well as ... [a]practicalcontext" o extendedstate-mentsaccompaniedby relevantcourseoutlines,descriptionsof courses andsupporting tatements rompromotionreviews.Manyof the HODs referredto studentevaluationsof teaching,such as "xhasreceivedremarkabletudentevaluationreports .. consideringthe size of this class, the overall studentappreciation f his lecturingstyle andpresentations trulyexceptional,andto my knowledgeunequalledatthe firstyearScience level".We recognizethata fundamental ension exists wheneveranyonetriestoidentifyexcellent teachers.Lowman(1996) wrote"thenotionof the exem-plary ... teachersharesmuch with any idealized concept, such as truthorbeauty: t is difficult to achieve consensuson a generaldefinition,butmostpeople thinkthey know a specific examplewhenthey see it"(p. 33). We areusingthe termexcellence to signalanon-goingprocessof self improvement,ratherthan a measurableend-point.We do not see excellence in teachingas somethingthat once obtained, absolves teachers from seeking furtherimprovementn theirteaching.While it could be arguedthatthe HOD nominationswere insufficientlyrigorous, the HODs were invaluable in helping us to identify potentialparticipantswho were both willing to give of their time to explore theirteachingandperceivedas excellent teachers.Anotherpossible limitationofthe selectionprocess is that studentswere not consulteddirectlyduringthenominationsphase. It was clear from nominationstatements,however,thatmanyof theHODs drewuponstudentevaluationsof teaching o informtheirnominations.All 17 nominated ecturersagreedto participaten the study.The 10 menand seven women were teachersfrom departmentsof anatomyand struc-turalbiology, chemistry,computerscience, family and communitystudies,geology, marinescience, mathematicsand statistics,microbiology,human



7/29

288 RUTH KANEETAL.nutrition,physicaleducation,psychology,surveying,andzoology.Theparti-cipants'teachingexperiencerangedfrom six to 34 years with an averageof18 years.Participantswere not selected on the basis of the durationof theiruniversityteaching experience.Three of the participantshad been trainedas secondaryteachersbefore beginningtheir universitycareers.All of theparticipantswere also activeresearchers.

Research design and methodsTheresearchdesignwasdeveloped n order o capturebothwhat teacherssayabouttheirteachingand to observe theirteachingpractice directly(Kaneetal. 2002). To do so we implementeda multi-method esearchdesign. Kagan(1990) stated "the use of multimethodapproachesappearsto be superior,not simply because they allow triangulationof data but because they aremore likely to capturethe complex, multifacetedaspects of teaching andlearning"p.459). Initial ndividualnterviewsand theelicitationof repertorygridsprovidedourparticipantswith two separateopportunitieso 'talk'abouttheirteachinganddescribegood university eachingand teachers n general(espoused theories).Thevideotaped eachingepisodesandsubsequent timu-latedrecallinterviewsallowed us to observetheirteachingpractice irsthand,andgave theparticipants n opportunityo makeexplicitthe thinkingunder-pinning their teaching practice (theories-in-use).Through these multiplemethodswe soughtto capture hecomplexityinherent n university eaching.InitialinterviewsShortlyafter the participantswere nominated,they were interviewedindi-viduallyby one of the authors.The semi-structurednterviews asted from30to 90 minutes.Theparticipantsweresent the interviewquestionsin advance,althoughsome additionalquestionsaroseduringthe courseof the interviewforpurposesof clarification.Theinterviewquestionssoughtto elicit theparti-cipants'beliefs aboutgood university eaching n generaland their aims andintentions ortheirownteachingpractice.Thequestionsrangedfromgeneralqueriesaboutthe participants' ducationalbackgroundandteaching experi-ence, to morespecific questionssuch as: Whatareyour particular trengthsin teachingat a tertiary evel? The interview schedule was influencedby theworkof DunkinandPrecians 1992), Dunkin(1995), andBarrington1999).Theinitial nterview ranscriptswerereturned o theparticipantsorclarifica-tionandvalidation.Althoughsomeparticipantsook theopportunityo makesmalleditingchanges,none madeanysubstantive hangesto text ormeaning.



8/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 289Repertorygrid interviewsThe use of therepertory ridtechnique n this study complemented heinitialinterviewdata as they providedanothermeans for the participants o artic-ulate theirpersonalconstructionsof good teachingandgood teachersbasedon theirexperienceas universitystudentsand teachers.Repertorygrids arebased on Kelly's (1955) Personal ConstructTheory,which emergedfromhis work in clinical psychology and in particularhis notion of people as"personal cientists".Accordingto Kelly, people construct heir own frame-worksbasedonpersonalexperiencesand interactionswith theirworld.Thesepersonalframesare thenusedto interpretnew experiencesandpredict utureinteractions, xperiences,orbehaviours.Although designedinitiallyforuse in clinicalpsychology,repertory ridshave been utilised increasingly in recent decades in a range of researchstudies in the field of education. Researchershave used repertorygrids intheir investigationsof the ways in which teachersconstruethe curriculumof their classrooms (Ben-Peretz 1984; Munby 1984) and to identify theinfluencesteachers'personalconstructionshave on theirclassroompracticeas teachers (Oberg 1986). Exemplarysecondarymathematicsand scienceteachersparticipatedn a studyconductedby Meade et al. (1991) whichusedrepertorygrids to elucidate the participants'personaltheories of effectiveteachingwithin theirarea of expertise.Participantsn this study were invited to complete repertorygrids as ameans of makingexplicit and examiningthe ways in which they construeuniversity eachers andteaching.Fourteenof the 17 participants ompletedrepertory grid interviews during four small group sessions led by theresearchers.Completionof the repertorygridswas presentedas an optionalcomponentof thestudy.Threeparticipants eclined to participate,butdid sodue to the restrictionsof othercommitmentsrather hanin objectionto theprocedure.

Followingthe conventionof Diamond(1985) andZuber-Skerritt1988),the approach hosenfor this studyrequiredparticipantso generatepersonaldescriptionsof excellent andpoor universityteachersthroughcomparisonsof random riadsof university eachersknown to them.To elicit descriptionsof theseuniversity eachers,participantswereaskedto compare heattributesof randomtriadsof teachers as follows: "With their attributesas teachersin mind, in whatway aretwo of the teachersalike, and in whatway is thethird teacherdifferent from the other two?" This process resulted in twocontrasting,butnotnecessarilyopposite,sets of statementsoreachconstruct.The emergentconstruct which emerged from the similaritybetween twoteachers;and,theimplicitconstructwhichrepresentedhedifferencebetweenone teacherand the other two. Since the constructswere elicited from the



9/29

290 RUTHKANE ETAL.participants n their own terms the repertorygrids served to maintaintheintegrityof theparticipants'perspectives ree fromcorruption yresearchers'influencesand/or nterpretationsSolas 1992).Teachingobservationsand stimulatedrecall interviewsMakingexplicit the thinkingbehindthe teachingpracticeof participantsnterms of their own language was made possible in this study throughtheuse of observationsof the participants' eachingand associatedstimulatedrecall interviews.Stimulatedrecallhas served as an umbrella ermcoveringa range of interview techniques that aim to gain access to the thoughtsof teachers(and/orstudents)duringclassroominteraction.The stimulatedrecallmethodhas its originin studiesby Bloom (1953) of students'thoughtprocesses duringa range of instructionmodes, in particular,ecturingandgroupdiscussion.Bloom made audiorecordingsof class sessions whichwereplayedback to the studentswho were required o recall whatthoughts theyhad experiencedat significant points of the class. Bloom reportedthat theunderlyingpremise guiding the stimulatedrecall method "is that a subjectmaybe enabledto relive an originalsituationwith vividnessandaccuracy fhe [sic] is presentedwith a largenumberof thecues orstimuli whichoccurredduring he originalsituation" Bloom 1953,p. 161).Stimulatedrecall has not been employed frequently n publishedstudiesinvolving universityteachers, although it has been demonstratedto be auseful tool for accessing the beliefs that underpinprimaryand secondaryteachers'practice(Calderhead1981;Ethell 1997;Meade andMcMeniman1992).MeadeandMcMeniman 1992), in theirstudyof effective secondaryteachers' implicit theories found it "particularlyalient for examining therelationshipsbetween teachers'beliefs and actions" p. 7).Stimulatedrecall interviewswere used in this studyto allow participantsto makeexplicitand articulate he thinking,knowledge,theories andbeliefsthatguidedtheirteaching practice.All butone of the 17 participantsagreedto have a class observedand videotaped.Each chose a large grouplectureof aboutan hourin length, althoughall of them also taughtin small groupor otherinstructionalmodes. The stimulatedrecall interviewsin this studywere semi-structured, llowing both the participantand the interviewer tostop the videotapeat any time to questionor commenton the thinkinganddecisions underlyingthe recordedteaching practice.The stimulatedrecallinterviewswere conductedas soon as possible afterthe class, 14 within 48hoursand the remainderwithinone week. Before viewing the videotapeofthemselvesteaching,participantswere invitedto commenton theirobjectivesand ntentions orthe lecture,andto commenton anyideas,beliefs ortheorieswhich they could identify as having influenced theirplanningand teaching



10/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 291approach.Theviewingof thevideo commencedwiththefollowingdirectionsby the interviewer:

Now you're going to walk me throughthe lecture and tell me whatwas going on in yourmindat the time. Tryto distinguishbetween anythoughtsyou had at the time and thoughtsyou're havingnow as youwatchthe tape and make me awareof those differences. You can stopthe tapeas oftenas you like and foras long as you need to explainyourthinking(basedonMarland1984).

The stimulated ecall nterviewwas videotapedandthen transcribed erbatimfor subsequentanalysis.Data analysisOurdataanalysisfollowed an inductiveapproachgrounded n criticalread-ings andre-readingsof the transcriptsrom the initialinterviews,the reper-tory gridsand the stimulatedrecall interviews. The dataanalysiswas facil-itated by using Non-numericalUnstructuredData Indexing SearchingandTheorizing (NUD*IST) softwarefrom QualitativeSolutions and Research(QSR).TheNUD*ISTsoftware ends itself to inductiveanalysis by allowingthe researcherso workwiththe transcriptsn a manageableway, searchforpatterns,andidentifyandorganise hemes.Dataanalysiscommencedwiththefirstset of transcribednitialinterviewsandcontinued hroughouthe durationof the research.Analysisof repertorygridswasrestricted o contentanalysisof theparticipants' licitedconstructs.Typically,use of a ratingscale allows cluster and/orprincipal componentanalysis.In this study,however,we did not pursuethe ratingscale for tworeasons:First,we wereconcernedprimarilywithelicitingthe ways in whichthe participants onstrueduniversity eachersandteaching,rather hanhowthey locatedthemselvesandothersagainstsuchconstructions; ndsecond,itbecame evidentthatinstructionsgiven with respectto the ratingscale wereambiguousandhadbeen interpreted ifferentlyacross theparticipants.Two passes of coding were made througheach data set by the inter-viewer and the themes and trends that arose were discussed among allthreeresearchers.As each set of datawas addedto the analysis,the codingcategories were refined and expanded. The model of the dimensions oftertiary eachingwas drafted o represent he five majorcategoriesof codingthat had arisen from the on-going analysis of all three sets of data (seeFigure 1). All original transcriptswere then re-read to check for codingconsistency against the model. As is evidenced by the supportingquotesfor each dimension in the following discussion, each of the data sourcescontributedo thedevelopmentof the model.



11/29

292 RUTH ANE TAL.

SubjectKnowledge Skills

ReflectivePractice

InterpersonalPersonality Relationships

Research/TeachingNexus

Figure1. Model- dimensionsof tertiary eaching.

Common attributes of excellent university lecturers in sciencesThe five-dimensionalmodel of the attributes f excellent science teachers nthe Universitywas developed from the participants'descriptionsof them-selves from the initial interviewsand stimulatedrecall interviewsand theimportantattributesof excellent tertiaryteachers that were elicited in theparticipants'repertorygrids. The wheel-like model consists of five inter-relateddimensions as spokes; subject knowledge, skill, interpersonal ela-tionships, teaching/research exusandpersonality,withreflectivepracticeasthe hub.Whilethesedimensionsmaynotbe unexpectedas theyresonatewithpreviousstudies, the ways in which the dimensionsare relatedemergedascritical. Based on ourevidence, we proposethatthe participants ngagedinpurposefulreflectivepracticeas a meansto integrate hedifferentdimensionsof themselves as teachersand to betterunderstandand improvetheir ownteachingpractice.The following presentation f the dimensionsof themodelis supportedwithverbatimquotations romtheparticipants'nitial nterviews(II),repertorygrids(RG) andstimulatedrecall interviews(SRI).The quotesarerepresentativen regards o the genderbalanceof theparticipant roup.



12/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 293SubjectnowledgeThe firstdimension n ourmodel is subjectknowledge (Figure1). The viewthatwell developedsubjectknowledgeis a key attribute f a tertiary cienceteacher came throughclearly in the initial interviewsfor most (15) parti-cipants and was also apparentn stimulatedrecall interviewsand repertorygrids. For example:"thekey probablywouldbe knowledgeof the subject"(II);and,"it'sto knowyourfieldreally,so that I am notjust relianton whatIhaveread" SRI).Theneedtokeepup-to-datenthesubjectwas identifiedby 11participantsas an importantcharacteristic f excellent tertiaryscience teachers:"beingtotally up-to-datewith the literatureandable to articulatenew anddifferentideas very lucidlyandclearly" RG).Thischaracteristic ould be considereda corollaryto the dimension of subject knowledge;i.e., that an excellenttertiary eachercontinuesto acquiresubjectknowledgeexpertise long afterthe doctorate s completed.Subject matterknowledge has long been identified as a prerequisiteofeffective teaching in both primaryand secondaryteaching and is a givenat the tertiary evel where lecturerstypically hold doctoralqualifications.By virtueof these higherqualifications, ertiary eachersare expectedto beknowledgeable n theirsubjectarea.This has been acknowledgedby manyresearchersseeking to describeexcellence in university eaching (Feldman1988, 1996, 1997; Hildebrand1973; Lowman 1995, 1996; Shermanet al.1987). Ourstudyhas confirmed he key roleof subjectknowledgein tertiaryteachingexcellence.SkillThe second dimensionin our model is pedagogicalskill (see Figure 1). Anumberof skills were identifiedby the participants s important haracter-istics of excellent tertiaryscience teachers.We defined skills as techniquesthatteacherscanlearnandaddto theirteachingrepertoire, rtraits hatcouldbe learnedanddevelopedwithassistance e.g., Horan1991).Generally, heseskills areobservablebehaviours.It is significant hatclaritywasmentionedby all 17participants.Thetermclaritywas used by the participantso signal two differentconcepts. It wasused to emphasisethe need to "havevery good communication kills"(II),andtheneedto "beheardandunderstood"II).Clarity n termsof communi-cation skills was mentionedfrequently n the repertorygrid interviews,forexample:"acommitment o clarityof presentation"RG);"ability o explainthings clearly" (RG); and, "clearverbalpresentation .. good diction ...abilityto communicateatvariousknowledgelevels"(RG).



13/29

294 RUTHKANEET AL.Sixteen of the 17 participantsnoted the importanceof makingrealworldconnectionsbetween the subjectand studentexperienceto encouragestudentlearning,for example:"But the challengeis to put examplesin it that relatewhatyou knowto whatthey know" II);and,I thinkthe materialhas to be relevant o theirlives beforethey'regoingto engage. Try to use topical issues that they're readingaboutso thatthey can bringa sense of scholarshipand enquiryand mature houghtto thingsthat areragingaround hemat the moment so they can see theway the science is connectedto their ives (II).Fifteenparticipantsdentified he necessity of organisationandclarityofexpectationsin the tertiaryscience classroom."I think students like some-body at the front who is organised" II);and, "Theexpectationsareclear.Ican't havea hiddenagenda .. I like to be upfrontwith what theexpectationsare, and so they know where they'reheadedand they don't have to muck

aroundandwastetime tryingto workit outfor themselves" II).Fourteenparticipants sedseveraldifferent ermsto describe eacherswhoused strategies o inspire,or motivate,or stimulate he interestof students nlearningand in the subjectarea:"I wouldthinkI canmotivatethe studentsotheywouldlike to go further"II);and,the word 'inspirational'describesthe characteristichat is needed in auniversity eacher.You needto be able to makebrightstudentsnotonlyunderstand ourarea,butbe enthusedandwant to work in yourarea ...unless the lecturercan inspirethe students,they don't have much of arole in the actuallearningprocess(II).

Tenparticipantsdescribed heexcellenttertiary cience teacheras a facil-itatorof learning:"basically[I'm]a facilitator,a resourceperson,a soundingboard for new ideas ... all those things - generating discussion, providingfeedback,all relatebackto beinga facilitatorof learning,and that'show I seemy role, essentially"(II).An excellent tertiaryscience teacheris adaptableaccordingto nine ofthe participants.A tertiaryteacher needs to have "versatileapproaches"(II) and be able "to work in a varietyof situations" II) includinglectures,laboratoryclasses, tutorials,field work, seminars and postgraduate tudentsupervision.Repertorygrid interviews elicited this characteristicn both itspositive "abilityto teach in a range of contexts and situations"(RG) andnegative forms "never thinks of new ways of presenting - just copy it allon the blackboard" (RG).Nine participants identified preparation as a key attribute of excellenttertiaryscience teachers:



14/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 295whenI start o prepare orthe lectures t's actually heactof pullingthiswhole shambolicmixedup set of overheads ogetherandgettingtheminto order and touchingthem up a bit accordingto their adjustmentsfrom last time andthat'sactuallya processof somehowme climbinginandgettingthis informationogether SRI).

Thetertiary eacheras a life-longlearnerwas describedby sevenparticipants."I think of myself also being a teachableperson- in otherwords you arealways willingto learn.Youcan showthat o yourlearners o that heycanseethatyou're willing to learn romthem as well" (II).Thiscommitment o self-improvementwas evident:"Ibelong to ... an organisation et up for healthprofessionals n education .. I get a lot of abstractson thedifferent eachingjournals" II).Anotherparticipantwas keento partaken theproject"becauseit was a chance to see my ownteachingandthinkabout t andcritique t. AndI thoughtthat was just a wonderfulprofessionaldevelopmentopportunity"(II).Of the many skills identifiedby our participants,otherresearchershavesupported he role thatclarity(Feldman1988, 1996, 1997;Hildebrand1973;Lowman 1996;Murray1997;Shermanet al. 1987), organisation Feldman1988, 1996, 1997;Hildebrand1973;Lowman1996;Murray1997;Shermanet al. 1987);motivation/inspiration/stimulatingnterest Feldman1996, 1997;Lowman1996;Shermanet al. 1987);andpreparationFeldman1988, 1996,1997;Lowman1996;Murray1997;Shermanet al. 1987)play in successfultertiarylevel teaching. Each of these skills assist a universityteacher tocommunicatehis or hersubjectknowledge n clearandmeaningfulways thatsupportand enhancestudent earning.What all of the skills listed above have in common is that a newlyappointed tertiaryteacher, should he or she choose, could seek to learnandimplementthem in the courseof his/herteaching."Indeed,most of theskills of teaching, could, I believe, be learnedby any teacher who reallyput his [sic] mind to it and caredenough to invest the necessarytime andeffort"(Hildebrand1973,p. 49). Academicstaffdevelopmentoften focuseson the developmentof pedagogicalskills as a key way of supportingnewlyappointedacademics n theiruniversity eaching.We wouldargue,however,thatwhileperhaps he mostreadilyrecogniseddimensionof ourmodel, skillsare far frombeing the mostimportantdeterminant f teachingexcellence.Interpersonal elationshipsTertiaryeachingdoes not takeplacein a vacuumbut occurswithina relation-shipbetween the teacherandthe students.In ourmodel, these relationshipsform the third dimensionof tertiary eaching (see Figure 1). All 17 parti-



15/29

296 RUTH ANE TAL.cipants spoke of the role that interpersonal elationshipsplay in teachingat the tertiary evel: "butwhen I think back to last year, the most pleas-urable [sessions] were these long runs of lectures where I could establisha relationship" I); "I do thinkteachingrelies on one-to-one interpersonalrelationships,even if you're standingthere with 200 unknownnames, it'scritical" II);"adeep respectandeven fondnessfor students" RG);"there'salevel of humanityandempathy hatI think s criticalto beinga goodteacher"(II);and, "I thinkit's really important o not set yourselfabovethem buttoactuallyconvey to them in some way that you're really interested n themand theirpoint of view and what they bringto the situation" II). Anotherparticipant escribed he thinkingbehindherteaching style:

which I suppose againit'sjust thatI'mrevealingquitea lot aboutmyselfin my lectures,so I was makingmyself humanto them ... So they getto knowme probablyalmostas muchas I get to know them(SRI).Some of the participantsnoted the need for tertiaryscience teacherstoact as mentors oryoung people:"Ithinkempathy, rust,abilityto understandstudents' ssues, students'problems,anydifficulties.AndI guess it'smanifestin the fact thatthey will come andtalkto you openlyaboutany problemsordifficultiesthey have"(II). And lastly,interpersonal elationshipswere seenby some participantsas critical to effective tertiary eaching:"I would saythatknowingwherethey'reat andbeing able to communicatewith them aspeople is probably he top priority"II).We suggest thatteachingat all levels is primarilyaboutbuildingrelevantinterpersonalrelationshipswith students.Relationshipsthat are concernedwithcaringaboutthe students'needs, andwhatandhow they thinkemergedas important o ourparticipants.Teachingwithin universitiesoften involveslecturingto large numbers of studentswhich is often assumedto precludeopportunities or building relationshipsthat encourageinteractiveengage-mentbetween the teacherandstudents,and betweenstudentsand students.Itis interesting o note that16participantsn this studychose to videotape heirteaching in a large group lecture,and each of them identifiedestablishinginterpersonal elationshipsas centralto successfulteachingat a tertiary evelregardlessof class size.

Research/teachingnexusAlthoughtherewere not any questionsin any of the interviewsspecificallyasking the participantsabout connectionsbetween research and teaching,mostparticipants13) discussedthe effect theirresearchhad on their eachingand vice versa(see Figure1).For ourparticipantsromthe sciences,researchis anessentialpartof their ob as auniversityacademic;



16/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 297my role is different rom thatof a high school teacher,I'm a researcherandmy research s importanto me. And I'm tryingto show themhowmy researchskills ... can be communicatedo them... by tellingthema littleaboutthe research hatI do andusingthatas a way of linkingthelecturestogether(SRI).

The participants lso emphasised he link betweenresearchand teachingwhen describingcharacteristicsof excellent tertiaryscience teachers.Forexample:"pursuitof excellence and detail in researchand teaching"(RG);"integration f research ntoteaching" RG);and,

The otherthingthatI do atyearone, which mostof my colleaguesdon'tdo, is to actually use primaryresearchmaterial n the context of myteaching ... I love research,I love talkingaboutexperiments,so it's away of capturing orme theprocessof science,whichagainI think s thebest I can leave themwith. The facts, a lot of times, are irrelevant, ndthey'regoing to be out of dateby the timethey graduate.The thingthatwon't be out of date, however, s the way in which scientistsgo aboutsolving problems... So startingat year one, I use this researchbasedpractice... But a lot of times I try to make the points by walkingthestudentsverycarefullythrough heresearch hatwas conducted n orderto come up with thoseparticular onclusions... And they'restarting othinkcriticallyaboutthe whole processof science. And so that'sreallythe underlyingmotivationof going throughresearch .. tryingto teachthemthose important kills which I think transcend he content(SRI).

And in addition"some of my best research deashave come outin thecourseof teaching in an area that is not necessarilysomethingI do a lot in, butI'm readingup on it for my teachingandI think 'oh, thatwould be reallyinteresting,why don'twe do that?'" (II).Theparticipants idnot separate heirroles as researchers ndteachers. nNew Zealand the EducationAct states thatteachingandresearch n univer-sities are "closely interdependent,and most of their teaching is done bypeople who areactive in advancingknowledge" New ZealandGovernment1995,p. 162). Indeed thereis an understandinghatit is research nformedteaching hatsets apartuniversitiesnNew Zealand romother ertiary duca-tioninstitutions.JohnHenryNewman(1801-1889) wrote:"If its objectwerescientificandphilosophicaldiscovery,I do not see why a universityshouldhave students" as cited in Pelikan 1992, p. 80). The majorityof the parti-cipants (13 of the 17) related how researchplays an integralrole in whatand how they teach and who they are as universityteachers.This appearsto contradictmuch of the research that has sought to isolate and quantifythe relationshipbetweenresearchandteaching n universities.What is clear



17/29

298 RUTH ANE TAL.from our participants s that they are confidentthat teaching excellence isenhancedby the ways in which theirresearch nformstheirteaching,whichin turn nformstheirresearch.Researchershave been unableto quantifya significant,correlational ela-tionship between teaching and research at the tertiarylevel (Hattie andMarsh 1996; Ramsden and Moses 1992; Shore et al. 1990). Shore et al.(1990) found "theevidence we have collected largelycontradicts he beliefthat research andteaching informdirectlyupon each other"(p. 35). Hattieand Marsh(1996) in a meta-analysis hat sought to relatepublications(asevidence of research)andqualityof university eachingconcludedthat"thecommon belief that researchand teaching are inextricablyentwined is anenduring myth. At best, researchand teaching are very loosely coupled"(p. 529). While these quantitative tudiesappear o contradictour findings,it is important o note that their authorssought to establish and measurea relationshipbetween researchand teaching and used narrowparametersof both research and teaching excellence. We suggest that the researchapproaches doptedwereunable o minetherichnessof theindividualuniver-sity teacher'sexperienceandunderstanding f his or her own work.Kreber(2000) notedthatquantitative tudies"have been criticisedfor ignoringthecomplex natureof researchand teaching,and the criticalpoints where thetwo mightmeet"(p. 64).The complex and idiosyncraticnatureof the research/teachingnexusis highlighted in qualitativestudies by Kreber (2000), Neumann (1992),Robertsonand Bond (2001), Rowland(1996), and Smeby (1998). There isincreasing supportfor the notion thatuniversityteachersdo perceive thereto be a definite link betweenresearchandteaching.It is apparentrom thesestudies, and supportedby our project, that "thenexus is complex, and itssubtle,arcaneaspects appear o outweighthe moreconcrete,explicit ones"(Neumann1996,p. 14), whichmay accountfor the inabilityof quantitativestudiesto identify explicit relationshipsof the complexity describedin thisstudy.PersonalityThe fifth dimension n ourmodelis personality see Figure1). Wedifferenti-atedskillsfrompersonalityby usingourowntongue-in-cheekdefinition:Onecan learn new skills with some studyandpractice,butit wouldtakeyearsoftherapy o alterone'spersonality.Oneparticipantxplainedthatgoodtertiaryteachers"exhibitmuch of theirownpersonality"RG).

Significantly,the most commonly cited personality characteristicwasenthusiasm, named by 15 participants:"here is someone who is reallyenjoying the whole academic experience, that whole learningexperience.



18/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 299They'restill acquiringknowledgeevenattheirstagein life!"(II);"infectiousenthusiasm"RG); and,"one of the most important haracteristicss some-body who is extremelyenthusiasticandhas a realpassionfor thesubject hatthey'reteaching" II).Thirteenparticipantsmentionedtherole thata sense of humourcan playin the tertiary lassroom:"Ialso think thathavinga sense of humour s alsoa really important hing to have at a tertiary evel and not to take yourselftoo seriouslybecause we all makemistakesand to set yourselfup as beingcompletely nfallible leadsto a disaster n theclassroom" II);and,"so I lookfor ... theteachablemomentwhereI can safely introducehumouror interestinto the session"(SRI).

Tertiary eachersneed to be approachableaccordingto 10 of ourparti-cipants:"accessible n the sense thatif thereis somethingthey wantto talkabout,or complainabout ... at least they have some forumwhere thatcanhappen" II).The role thatpassion plays in excellent tertiary eachingwas mentionedby sevenparticipants: itall comes down toportraying hatsense of passionfor the work that makes [the students]want to go out and learnmore"(II).Forsevenof theparticipants, xcellenttertiary eachersarerelaxed:

If thingsgo wrong,don'tworryabout t. They'll [students]be relaxed fyou'rerelaxed.If the slide projectorbreaksdown, who cares ... Don'tlet it putyou off for the restof the lecture.Tryto improvise, ryto havea planB, always.(II).Excellent tertiaryteachersare "humane"accordingto six of our parti-cipants:"I'm revealingquite a lot aboutmyself in my lectures, so I was

making myself human to them"(SRI);and, "So there'sa level of humanityand empathy that I think is critical to being a good teacher"(II). Fourparticipants elt that fun was an importantcomponentof excellent tertiaryteaching:"I'mout therehavingfun"(II);and"I thinkthatas a teacheryou're... tryingreallyto communicate o them[students] hejoy of learning.So it'sgot to be a funexperience" II).What is at the heart of establishing interpersonalrelationshipswithstudents s the "person"of the teacher.Palmer(1998) remindsus thatgoodteaching goes far beyond technique of delivery of subject matter,"goodteachingcannotbe reduced o technique;goodteachingcomesfromtheiden-tity and integrityof the teacher" p. 10). The participantsn our study eachidentifiedpersonalaffective attributes s key influencesof who they were asteachers.Theparticipantswere determined o integrate heirpersonalitiesntotheirrole as teacher."There s no blueprint orbeing an effectiveteacherandteachers eopardisetheirgrowthwhen they try to imitateothersand ignore



19/29

300 RUTHKANE ET AL.theirself-actualisation.Being who you are is importantn the classroomandis essentialin forminghonestrelationshipswithstudents" Fraser2000,p. 3).

Integration of dimensions of teaching excellence through reflectionA common characteristicthat became apparentwas that these excellentuniversity eachersengagedin regular,purposeful eflectionon theirteachingpractice.Reflection ies at thehubof our model and we proposethat t is theprocessthroughwhich ourparticipantsntegrate he variousdimensions(seeFigure1). Oneparticipant xplained:"It's a continuousprocessof reflectionandtryingto do whatyou'redoingas well as you can"(II).It could be arguedthat we askedthe participantso reflect,particularlyn the stimulatedrecallinterviews,however,we also found unsolicited evidence in the initial inter-views as theparticipants fferedexamplesof the strategies hatthey regularlyused to engagein ongoingreflectionon theirteaching.Reflective practice is becoming an increasingly recognised aspect ofteaching in higher education(e.g., Biggs 1999;Brookfield 1995; Clegg etal. 2002;Kreber1999;McAlpineet al. 1999).Day (1999) wrote"itis gener-ally agreedthatreflectionin, on and aboutpracticeis essential to building,maintainingand furtherdevelopingthe capactitiesof teachersto thinkandact professionallyover the span of their careers"(p. 222). The origins ofthe termcan be traced back to the workof Dewey (1933). Dewey definedreflectionas "anactive,persistent,andcarefulconsiderationof any belief orsupposedformof knowledgein lightof the groundssupportingt andfutureconsiderations o which it tends"(Dewey (1933) as cited in Yost et al. 2000,p. 39). A resurgenceof interestin the role of reflection in the practiceofprofessionalshas been attributed o the workof Schon (1983, 1987).Schoin(1983, 1987) described "reflection-in-action"s reflection that takes placewhile the practiceis occuring;and "reflection-on-action"s reflectionthattakesplace after the practicehas concluded. Osterman 1990) characterisedreflectivepracticeas "mindful considerationof one's actions, specifically,one's professionalactions ... a challenging,focused andcriticalassessmentof one's own behaviour as a means towardsdeveloping one's own crafts-manship" p. 134).Korthagen 2001) explainedthat "reflection s the mentalprocess of trying to structureor restructurean experience, a problem, orexistingknowledgeor insights"(p. 58).A number of differentlevels or types of reflectionhave been describedin the literature Day 1999; Hatton and Smith 1995; Schjn 1983; Smyth1992; Wellingtonand Austin 1996). We used the frameworkof reflectionoutlinedby Hattonand Smith(1995) to identifyfourtypesof reflection n theinitial and stimulatedrecall interviews:technical,descriptive,dialogic and



20/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 301critical.All 17participants eflectedon theirpractice n one form oranother,and 13 participantsdemonstrated wo or more types of reflectivepractice.Participants eflectedon subjectknowledge and skills most frequently,buttheyalsoreflectedon interpersonalelationships,heresearch/teaching exusandpersonality see Figure1).Sixteen participantsmade statements that we classified as technicalreflection.Hattonand Smith(1995) defined echnicalreflectionas "decision-makingabout immediatebehavioursor skills" (p. 45). Typically,technicalreflection s focussed on the practicalskills of teaching; he methodsneededto transfernformationand the processesused to improve ecturesfromoneyearto thenext.Participants sedtechnicalreflection o reflecton the subjectknowledgeof a particular lass orthe skills they wereusing in theirteaching(see Figure 1). One participant xplained"I takeat least a thirdto a quarterof each courseeach yearand revisitit andupdate t bothfroma presentationpointof view anda contentpointof view"(II).Anotherparticipant otedthathe was often"reflecting n thosethingslike clarityand communication"II).Otherparticipants otedtechniques hey usedto helpthemreflect:

if there are certainthings thathave gone well, or more particularlyfthings haven'tgone well, I'll sit down andwriteout a sheet which I'llput in with my notes for thatparticular ecturefor next year to makesure I don't make the same mistakeagainnext year. Or that if thingshavegone well thatI do adoptthatsame sort of order, hatsame sortoflogic thathas gone down well withthe students his year,nextyear(II).I will alwaystake notesimmediatelyaftera lecture f something'sgonewrong.So I used the video in yesterday'sone and I spooled it forjusttoo long andI felt theenergychangeso I makemyself notes (SRI).

Wefound evidenceof descriptive reflection from 16 participants.Hattonand Smith (1995) characteriseddescriptivereflection as "analysingone'sperformance n the professionalrole ... giving reasons for actions taken"(p.45). Theparticipants seddescriptive eflection o examinesubjectknowl-edge, skills, interpersonalrelationships,the research/teachingnexus andpersonality(see Figure 1). In the initial interview,this participant eflectedon experiencesas anundergraduate:I constantlydraw on that, I think, "well, how are we going to showthem how to get stuff out of this situation? .. Whatwas the way thatsomebodydealt with me in a particularly ffective way when I was anundergraduate?" ... I can use those models over and over again to tryand solve the same kinds of problemswhen they come up in my ownteachingcareer(II).



21/29

302 RUTH ANE TAL.In the stimulated ecallinterview,a participant xplained he thinkingbehindthe visible teachingbehavioursandhisconcernwithbuildingandmaintainingpositive relationshipswith students:

I think the otherthingI am doing thereis valuing responsesand so nomatter whatthey said, if it was a really silly one I would still try andmakethemostI couldout of it. And so it createsa safe environmentorpeople to speakin a largegroup... because ... whatever hey say theyaregoing to get some good feedback... Even if it is a silly one, I willturn t to good effect if I can (SRI).

Thirteenparticipants emonstratedvidenceof dialogic reflectionin theirstimulated recall interviews.Hatton and Smith (1995) described dialogicreflection as "hearingone's own voice exploringalternativeways to solveproblemsin a professionalsituation" p. 45). Ourparticipantsused dialogicreflectionto examinethe skills, or teachingmethods,they were using andtoexploreways to improve(see Figure1).Forexample:

Ah well, I often ask myself, "wouldI as a learnergain anythingfromthis? What wouldI thinkof it?WouldI enjoyit?WouldI move on?" Sothat's one criteriaI use. .... Gaininga sense of "haveI achievedwhatIset out to?"... and look back over it andsay, "didI actuallycover thematerial?"And if not, "amI going to send them out an handout/articleor something?How amI going to address hat?" II).The videotapedlecturesprovideda strongstimulusfor reflection,as evid-encedby this participant'statements:

Even when I wasdoingthedeliveryon [subject]I was thinking herearesome thingsI reallyneedto hone here,some thingsI need to organiseabitbetter.MaybeI needsomedifferentgraphics,maybeI'll cutoutsomeof the facts. WhatI did ... is I presentedtwo alternativeexplanationsfor [topic]butreallyat firstyearlevel we don'tneedthat.I thinkI'll justdispensewith the firstone. Becauseitjust addsa bit of noise rather hansignal.So I was thinking hatatthe time,"whyamI sayingthis?" SRI).

The finaltypeof reflection,critical reflection,wasdemonstrated y threeof ourparticipants.This type of reflectionwas the least often demonstratedby the participants.HattonandSmith(1995) describedcriticalreflection,as"thinkingabout the effects upon othersof one's actions, takingaccount ofsocial, politicaland/orcultural orces"(p. 45). The participantsused criticalreflection o interrogateheirskills, or teachingmethods,andsubjectknowl-edge, in termsof social, politicaland historicalcontexts (see Figure 1). Forexample:



22/29

AN INVESTIGATION NTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 303I have been aware thatthe usual methodof teaching [subject]in thedepartment, nd it waswhat I experiencedwhenI was a student, eemedto reinforcepeople'sprejudicesaboutpeoplewho aredifferent .. [so] Iwas lookingfor othermodels of teaching(II);I choseto readsomethingout like this to actually ryto startheighteningthe emotionalintensityof what was going on, [to] hook them into anemotionalargumentabout an issue ... I thinkthatin the end people dorespondto an emotionalargumentand it can improve earning o showa humandimensionall theway along(SRI);and,I alwaystryto use menandwomen,to mix them,to tryto findexampleswhere women are in positions of their careerplacementsand makingkey decisions. I try to bring women into the classrooma lot becausescience is done differentlyby women thanby men, they communicatedifferently.But also tryto get Maiorin. All thosesortsof ways of tryingto showdiversityof approaches SRI).

Each of theparticipantsevealedthattheythoughtabout,orreflectedon theirteachingpractice n differentways. For thepurposesof the followingdiscus-sion, thedifferent ypes of reflectionhave beenclusteredunderthe umbrellaterm of reflectivepractice.

Reflections the hub of theteachingexcellencewheelThe fivedimensionsof ourmodel (see Figure1) describing ertiary eachingrepresentcognitive, affective and relationalattributesof teaching that wepropose are inter-related hrougha process of reflectivepractice.Weimer(1990) highlightedthe need for researchthatextends what is known aboutexcellent tertiary teaching: "we know what the characteristics[of goodteaching]are,butwe don'tknow how they relate to each other" p. 13). Wefoundthat ourparticipants sed different ypes of reflectionto improvetheirunderstanding f dimensions of theirteaching.Weproposethatongoingandpurposefulreflectivepracticeis a means of interrogatingand establishingteaching practiceswhere subject knowledge, skills, interpersonalrelation-ships with students,research,and personalitycan complementeach otherand work in concertto developexcellence in teaching.McCleanandBlack-well (1997) claimed that "teachingexcellence resides in a reflective, selfcritical,theoretically nformedapproach"p. 85). We place reflectionat thecentre of our model because we believe that it is this dispositiontowardsreflective,self-criticalpractice hat enables ourparticipantso understand ndto reconcile the variousdimensions of teachingandto establishexcellence.



23/29

304 RUTHKANE ET AL.It has become increasinglycommon for primaryand secondaryteacherpreparation rogrammes o espouse the necessity of reflectivepractice(e.g.,Loughran2002; Osterman1990;Sebren1994;Wildmanet al. 1990;Yostetal.2000). Sternberg nd Horvath1995)explained hat"inthemindsof many,the dispositiontoward[sic] reflection s centralto expertteaching" (p. 15),and Bell (2001) arguedthat"reflectivepracticeis regardedas an essentialskill of effective teachers"(p. 32). McAlpine and Weston (2000) studiedsix exemplaryuniversity eachersand concludedthatreflectionfunctions"asa mechanismfor the improvementand developmentof teaching" (p. 382).Other researchershave made links between the scholarshipof teaching(Boyer 1990) andthe role of reflectivepractice(e.g., Kreber2002; KreberandCranton2000; Trigwellet al. 2000). Lastly, Biggs (1999) describedthecriticalrole thatreflectivepracticeplays in tertiary eaching:"Learningnewtechniquesfor teachingis like the fish thatprovidesa meal today;reflectivepractice s the net thatprovidesmealsfor the restof one's life" (p. 6).In proposingthe model Dimensions of TertiaryTeaching(see Figure 1)we do not claim to have re-invented the pedagogical wheel. Our parti-cipantshighlightedcharacteristics hat have beenexploredpreviously.Wedoconcludehowever,thatit is not only the presenceof the dimensions but theway in which the participantshink about and understandheirown practicethroughpurposefulreflection, hathasledto theirdevelopmentof excellence.Theparticipantswere able to articulatehow they understood he dimensionsof tertiary eachingto be relatedand how they soughtto continually mprovetheirownpracticethroughreflectingon theirteaching n differentways.

ThewayforwardIn offeringadvice to less experienceduniversitycolleagues ourparticipantsemphasised he importanceof seekingto understand neself as a teacher:

try andbe yourself,not tryingto be what somebodyelse wantsyou tobe. If you've got a passionaboutwhatyou wantto teachyou've got toteach it andyou'vegot to teach it yourway and therearelots of differentways.Differentmethodsareoftenjust as effectivebecauseit's whoeveryou arethatmakes t work(II).Our participantshighlighted also the need for the University,and forthoseresponsible oracademicdevelopment n particular,o considera moreholistic and supportedapproachto the development of less experienceduniversityacademics. "I suppose you will have gotten the message that Ithink there needs to be a strongerintervention or novice teachers,moresupport"(II). They called for a scaffolded approachto the development



24/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTO EXCELLENTTERTIARYTEACHING 305of less experiencedstaff wherebythe universitywould introducestrategiesand programmes o help people become better teachersand to encouragecollaborativeandopenexaminationof teaching:

we shouldbuildup a cultureamongstour teachers hatwe will actuallywatch each other do the process and learnfrom each other;thattherewill be enoughkindnessandgentlenessthat we can honestlytalk aboutthe mistakes n ourteachingas well, or at least the less effectivethings,as well as the thingsthat workverywell (SRI).This study has several limitations that could be addressed in futureresearch.There s a need to conducta similarstudy n a differentgroupingof

disciplines,withinthe Humanities or example.We focussed on how excel-lent teachersin sciences thoughtabout andpracticedteaching.We did notseek student nput,nordid we linkthese excellentteachers o theperformanceof their students.Future tudiescould examine excellentteaching n sciencesfrom the perspectiveof students,and/or examinethe connectionsbetweenteachingexcellenceand student earning.On several occasions our participants ndicatedthat they had differentteaching practices according to the context, i.e., lecture, laboratories,seminarsand so on. However,the 16 participantsobservedall selected alecture for us to observe and videotape. With more resources we wouldhavevideotapedmorethan one teachingepisodein severaldifferent eachingcontexts andconducted timulated ecall nterviews or eachteachingepisodeto amplifyourmodel.We could then haveanalysedhow the teachingcontextaffects the characteristics escribedand modelledby ourparticipants.

Conclusion"Teachings the heartof the University" II)If, as statedby one of ourparticipants, eaching ies atthe centreof universitywork,we need to be constantlyseeking ways to assistearlycareeracademicswiththedevelopmentof teachingexcellence. Ourstudyrevealswaysin whichuniversity eachers dentifiedas excellent thinkandgo abouttheirteaching.We proposethatinsights provided by ourparticipants an be used to assistless experienceduniversity eachers n examining heirownteachingpractice(e.g., Sandretto t al. 2002).No two of ourparticipantsapproached heir teaching in the same way.They hada wide rangeof subject expertise, nterpersonal elationshipswithstudents, teaching practices,researchareas, and personalities.They wereall passionateabouttheirsubjectsand spent a greatdeal of time reflecting



25/29

306 RUTHANE TAL.on their teaching in differentways. We propose that it was this reflectionwhichenabledthem to interrogateheirteachingpracticeand to findthe bestfit between their subject, teaching skills, relationshipsbuilt with students,researchandpersonality.These participantsdemonstratedhatit is possibleto integrate hevariousdimensionsof tertiary eachingthroughreflection.In addition,this study demonstrates hat the methods used - individualinterview,observation, timulated ecallinterviewsandrepertory rids- eachenabled the participants o articulateand examinetheirown thinkingaboutteachingand their roles as teachers.For the participantsn this project,theopportunity o talk aboutthemselvesas teachers,to watchvideo recordingsof their ownpracticeanddiscussthis witha colleague(researcher)provedtobe powerfulmethodsto makeexplicit the thinkingunderpinning heirownpracticeas teachers.Throughengagingin this projectourparticipants ameto understand etter heir own teachingpractice.Inmany ways theprocessesemployedin this studyalongsidethe model (see Figure 1) derived fromthestudy, ogetherprovidea wayforward orassisting n thedevelopmentof lessexperienceduniversity eachers.We believe that the strengthof our model (see Figure 1) lies not in itsprescriptiveability,butrather n its descriptivecapability.It not only makesexplicit what constitutesan excellent tertiaryteacherbut also sheds lighton how we can support ess effective teachersto improvetheirteaching.Inworkingwith tertiary eachers,bothexperiencedandnovice, it can initiateadialogueon thecomplexitiesof teachingdevelopment:t providesa commonstartingplace andvocabulary or teachersto discuss their currentandfuturepractices.Ourmodelhas thepotential o helpteachersunderstandhesignifi-cance of the differentdimensionsthatcontribute o tertiary eachingand toencourage hemto talk abouttheirteaching.No one who teaches or works with teacherswill deny the complexityinvolved in teaching. In the past, however,many have chosen to focus ononly one or two dimensionsin an attempt o simplify the pictureof tertiaryteaching. Some researchersacknowledge that we must be wary of thosesimplifiedpicturesof teaching:"teaching s more complicatedthanany listof the qualitiesor characteristics f good teachingcan suggest"(CentraandBonesteel 1990,p. 11).With ourmodel,we candevelopstaffdevelopmentprogrammeshat assistnovice or less experienced ertiary eachers n examiningall the dimensionsof their teaching practice.We can emphasisethat "Master eachersare notborn;they become. Theybecomeprimarilyby developinga habitof mind,away of looking criticallyat the workthey do; by developingthe couragetorecognizefaults,andby struggling o improve" Common1989,p. 385). Thekey for new teachersat the tertiary evel, just as atprimaryandsecondary, s



26/29

ANINVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTERTIARYEACHING 307to encourage hedevelopmentof the skills of reflectivepractice.We canhelptertiary eachersdevelopthemselvesas teachers n a way thatacknowledgesall the dimensionsthatmakeupthecomplexact of teaching.

But we'll also havea goodtimeand that'swhatI thinkmarks hediffer-ence between a lecturerandjust watchinga video or readinga book,thatif you can communicate omethingof yourpersonality, omethingof yourowninterestas a scientistorasaresearcherhenthat'ssomethingthat makesthe lectureworthcomingto, hopefully(SRI).

ReferencesArgyris,C. andSch6n, D. (1974). Theory n Practice:IncreasingProfessionalEffectiveness.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.Ballantyne,R., Bain, J. andPacker,J. (1997). Reflectingon UniversityTeaching:Academics'Stories. Australia:AustralianGovernmentPublishingService.Barrington,E. (1999). Top TeachersTalk: Conversationswith the 1995 and 1996 Distin-

guished TeachingAwardWinners.Auckland:Universityof Auckland;Centre for Profes-sionalDevelopment.Bell, M. (2001). 'Supportedreflective practice: A programme of peer observationandfeedback or academic eachingdevelopment', nternationalJournal or AcademicDevel-opment6(1), 29-39.Ben-Peretz,M. (1984). 'Kelly's theoryof personalconstructsas a paradigm or investigatingteacher hinking', n Halkes,R. andOlson,J. (eds.), TeacherThinking:A New Perspectiveon PersistingProblems.Lisse, Netherlands:Sweta& Zeitlinger,pp. 103-111.

Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching or Quality Learningat University.Buckingham,UK: Society forResearch nto HigherEducationandOpenUniversityPress.Bloom, B.S. (1953). 'Thought processes in lectures and discussions', Journal of GeneralEducation7, 160-169.Boyer,E.L. (1990). ScholarshipReconsidered:Prioritiesof the Professoriate.Princeton,NJ:The CarnegieFoundation or the Advancementof Teaching.Brookfield,S.D. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.Calderhead, . (1981). 'Stimulated ecall:A methodfor researchon teaching',BritishJournal

of EducationalPsychology51, 211-217.Calderhead, . (1996). 'Teachers:Beliefs andknowledge', in Berliner,D.C. andCalfee,R.C.(eds.),Handbookof EducationalPsychology.New York:Macmillan,pp. 709-725.Centra,J. andBonesteel, P. (1990). 'Collegeteaching:An art or a science?',New Directionsfor Teachingand Learning43, 7-15.

Clegg, S., Tan,J. and Saeidi, S. (2002). 'Reflectingor acting?Reflectivepracticeandcon-tinuingprofessionaldevelopment n highereducation',ReflectivePractice3(1), 131-146.

Common,D.L. (1989). 'Master eachers nhighereducation:A matterof settings',TheReviewof HigherEducation12(4), 375-387.

Day, C. (1999). 'Professionaldevelopmentand reflectivepractice:Purposes,processes andpartnerships',Pedagogy,Culture&Society7(2), 221-233.Dewey,J. (1933). How WeThink:A Restatementof the Relationof Reflective Thinking o theEducativeProcess. Boston:Heath.



27/29

308 RUTHKANEETAL.Diamond,C.T.P. 1985). 'Becominga teacher:an altering eye', in Bannister,D. (ed.), IssuesandApproaches n Personal ConstructTheory.London:AcademicPress,pp. 15-35.Dunkin, M. (1995). 'Concepts of teaching and teaching excellence in higher education',HigherEducationResearchandDevelopment14(1), 21-33.Dunkin, M.J. and Precians,R.P. (1992). 'Award-winninguniversity teachers' concepts ofteaching',HigherEducation24, 483-502.Elton,L. (1998). 'Dimensions of excellencein university eaching',International ournal orAcademicDevelopment3(1), 3-11.Ethell, R.G. (1997). Reconciling Propositional and Procedural Knowledge: BeginningTeachers'Knowledgein Action.UnpublishedDoctoralThesis, GriffithUniversity.Feldman, K.A. (1988). 'Effective college teaching from the students' and faculty's view:Matchedor mismatchedpriorities?',Research n HigherEducation28(4), 291-344.Feldman,K.A. (1996). 'Identifyingexemplary eaching: Using datafrom course andteacherevaluations',New Directions or Teachingand Learning65, 41-50.Feldman,K.A. (1997). 'Identifyingexemplary eachersandteaching:Evidence from studentratings', in Perry,R. and Smart, J. (eds.), Effective Teachingin Higher Education:Researchand Practice.New York:Agathon,pp. 368-395.Fraser,D. (2000). 'Building relationships n the classroom through peer teaching and peer

assessment', in Spiller,D. (ed.), Narratives rom TertiaryTeaching: Giving StudentsaVoice.Auckland,New Zealand:Longman,pp. 1-14.Hativa,N., Barak,R. and Simhi, E. (2001). 'Exemplaryuniversity eachers:Knowledgeandbeliefs regardingeffective teaching dimensions and strategies', The Journal of HigherEducation72(6), 699-729.Hattie,J. andMarsh,H.W.(1996). 'Therelationshipbetweenresearchandteaching:A meta-analysis',Reviewof EducationalResearch66(4), 507-542.Hatton,N. and Smith, D. (1995). 'Reflectionin teachereducation:Towards definitionandimplementation',Teaching& TeacherEducation11(1), 33-49.Hildebrand,M. (1973). 'Thecharacter nd skills of the effectiveprofessor',Journalof HigherEducation44(4), 41-50.Horan,M. (1991). Attributesof ExemplaryCommunityCollege Teachers:A Reviewof theLiterature.ERICDocumentReproductionServiceNo. ED 346 900.Kagan, D. (1990). 'Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: Inferences concerning theGoldilocksprinciple',Reviewof EducationalResearch60(3), 419-469.Kane, R.G., Sandretto,S. and Heath,C.J. (2002). 'Tellinghalf the story:A criticalreviewon the teaching beliefs and practicesof universityacademics', Review of EducationalResearch.

Kelly,G.A. (1955). ThePsychology of Personal Constructs:A Theoryof Personality Vol. 1).New York:WW Norton& Company.Korthagen,EA.J. (2001). LinkingPractice and Theory:ThePedagogy of Realistic TeacherEducation.Mahwah,New Jersey:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Kreber,C. (1999). 'A course-basedapproach o the developmentof teaching-scholarship:Acase study', Teaching n HigherEducation4(3), 309-325.Kreber,C. (2000). 'How universityteaching award winnersconceptualiseacademic work:Some furtherthoughtson the meaning of scholarship', Teachingin Higher Education5(1), 61-78.Kreber,C. (2002). 'Reflectionon teachingand the scholarshipof teaching'.Presentedat theAnnualMeetingof the AmericanResearchAssociation,New Orleans.Kreber,C.A. andCranton,P.A. (2000). 'Exploring he scholarshipof teaching',TheJournalof HigherEducation71(4), 476-495.



28/29

AN INVESTIGATIONNTOEXCELLENTERTIARYEACHING 309Loughran,J.J. (2002). 'Effective reflectivepractice:In search of meaningin learningaboutteaching',Journalof TeacherEducation53(1), 33-43.Lowman,J. (1995). Masteringthe Techniques f Teaching 2nd ed.). San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.Lowman,J. (1996). 'Characteristicsf exemplary eachers',New Directions or TeachingandLearning65, 33-40.Marland,P.(1984). 'Stimulated ecall fromvideo:Its use in researchon thethoughtprocessesof classroomparticipants',n Zuber-Skerritt, . (ed.), Video nHigherEducation.London:Kogan Page,pp. 156-165.McAlpine, L. and Weston, C. (2000). 'Reflection: Issues relatedto improvingprofessors'

teachingandstudents' earning',InstructionalScience28, 363-385.McAlpine,L., Weston,C., Beauchamp,J., Wiseman,C. andBeauchamp,C. (1999). 'Buildinga metacognitivemodel of reflection',HigherEducation37, 105-131.McLean,M. (2001). 'Rewardingeachingexcellence. Can we measure eaching'excellence'?Who shouldbe thejudge?',Medical Teacher23(1), 6-11.McLean,M. andBlackwell,R. (1997). 'Opportunity nocks?Professionalismandexcellencein university eaching',Teachersand Teaching: heoryandpractice3(1), 85-99.Meade, P. and McMeniman,M. (1992). 'Stimulated recall-an effective methodology forexamining successful teaching in science', Australian Educational Researcher 19(3),1-11.

Meade, P., McMeniman,M., Wilson, J., Kanes,C. and Davey, I. (1991). 'Towardsmakingexplicit the implicitknowledge of effective maths and science teachers- a triangulatedmethodology'.Presentedat theAnnualMeetingof theAustralianAssociationof Researchin Education,GoldCoast,Australia.

Munby, H. (1984). 'A qualitativeapproach o the study of a teacher'sbeliefs', Journal ofResearch n Science Teaching21(1), 27-38.Murray,H.G. (1997). 'Effective teachingbehaviorsin the college classroom', in Perry,R.andSmart,J. (eds.),EffectiveTeachingnHigherEducation:ResearchandPractice.NewYork:AgathonPress,pp. 171-204.Neumann,R. (1992). 'Perceptionsof the teaching-research exus: a framework or analysis',HigherEducation23(2), 159-171.Neumann,R. (1996). 'Researchinghe teaching-research exus: A criticalreview',AustralianJournalof Education40(1), 5-18.New ZealandGovernment 1995). EducationAct 1989. Wellington,New Zealand.Oberg,A. (1986). 'Using constructtheoryas a basis for research nto teacherprofessionaldevelopment',Journalof Curriculum tudies19(1), 55-65.Osterman,K.F. (1990). 'Reflectivepractice:A new agendafor education', EducationandUrbanSociety22(2), 133-152.Palmer,P.J. 1998). TheCourage o Teach:Exploring heInnerLandscapeof a Teacher'sLife.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.Pelikan,J. (1992). TheIdeaof the University:A Reexamination.New Haven:YaleUniversityPress.Polanyi,M. (1966). TheTacitDimension. New York:Doubleday.Ramsden,P. andMoses, I. (1992). 'Associationsbetween researchandteachingin Australianhighereducation',HigherEducation23, 273-295.Robertson,J. and Bond, C.H. (2001). 'Experiencesof the relation between teaching andresearch: What do academics value?', Higher Education Research and Development20(1), 5-19.



29/29

310 RUTHKANEETAL.Rowland, S. (1996). 'Relationshipsbetween teaching and research', Teachingin HigherEducation1(1), 7-20.Sandretto,S., Kane, R. and Heath, C. (2002). 'Makingthe tacit explicit: A teaching inter-vention programmefor early career academics'. InternationalJournalfor Academic

Development7(2), 135-145.Schbn, D.A. (1983). The ReflectivePractitioner:How Professionals Think n Action. NewYork:Basic Books.Sch6n,D.A. (1987). EducatingtheReflectivePractioner:Toward New Designfor Teachingand Learning n the Professions.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.Sebren,A. (1994). 'Reflective hinking: ntegratingheoryandpractice n teacherpreparation',JOPERD-The ournalof Physical Education65(6), 23-27.Sherman,T., Armistead,L.P.,Fowler,F.,Barksdale,M.A. andReif, G. (1987). 'Thequestforexcellence in university eaching',Journalof HigherEducation58(1), 66-84.Shore, B.M., Pinker,S. andBates, M. (1990). 'Researchas a model for universityteaching',

HigherEducation19, 21-35.Smeby, J.C. (1998). 'Knowledge productionand knowledge transmission.The interactionbetweenresearchandteachingat universities',Teaching n HigherEducation3(1), 5-20.Smyth, J. (1992). 'Teachers' work and the politics of reflection', American Educational

ResearchJournal29(2), 267-300.Solas,J. (1992). 'Investigating eacherand student hinkingaboutthe processof teachingandlearningusing autobiography ndrepertory rid',Reviewof EducationalResearch62(2),205-225.

Sternberg,R. and Horvath,J. (1995). 'A prototypeview of expert teaching', EducationalResearcher24(6), 9-17.Trigwell,K. (2001). 'Judginguniversityteaching', TheInternationalJournal or Academic

Development6(1), 65-73.Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin,J. and Prosser,M. (2000). 'Scholarshipof teaching:Amodel', HigherEducationResearchand Development19(2), 155-168.Weimer,M. (1990). 'It's a myth:Nobody knows what makes teaching good', in Neff, R.A.and Weimer,M. (eds.), College Teaching:CollectedReadingsfor the New Instructor.Madison,WI:Magnn,p. 13.Wellington, B. and Austin, P. (1996). 'Orientationsto reflective practice', EducationalResearch38(3), 307-316.Wildman, T.M., Niles, J.A., Magliaro, S.G. and McLaughlin, R.A. (1990). 'Promotingreflectivepracticeamong beginning and experiencedteachers',in Clift, R.T., Houston,W.R. andPugach,M.C. (eds.), EncouragingReflectivePractice in Education.New York:TeachersCollege Press,pp. 139-162.Yost,D.S., Sentner,S.M. andForlenza-Bailey,A. (2000). 'Anexaminationof the constructofcritical reflection:Implicationsfor teachereducationprogrammingn the 21st century',Journalof TeacherEducation51(1), 39-49.Zuber-Skerritt,. (1988). 'Personalconstructsof second languageteaching:A case study',Babel 23(3), 4-9.

An Investigation into Excellent Tertiary Teaching.pdf

Documents