At the TA training Community of Practice meeting last month, Catherine Rawn treated us with four references from the scholarship of teaching and learning. Instead of letting me give him a copy of these papers, my coworker and friend David Steinberg invited me to post them on my blog (and since I didn’t have one, led to the creation of this one).
Each of these papers offers specific points to consider when thinking about a TA training program and we all enjoyed a great conversation based on those during the meeting.
In their paper, Eison and Vanderford [1], offer five guidelines for self-assessment:
- GTAs should be provided with a substantive orientation program designed to facilitate their introduction to both their department and their teaching assignment.
- GTAs should be provided with a comprehensive set of written materials that assist them in their initial teaching efforts.
- GTAs should be provided with periodic, discipline-based, instructional skill-building training programs.
- GTAs should be observed in action periodically in the classroom and provided with appropriate feedback.
- GTAs supervisors should meet regularly to design collaborative strategies which enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of GTA training activities in the department.
In the Lueddeke [2] paper, we are offered four areas demanding high priority in GTA training:
- Tutoring in seminars, workshops, field trips and practicals.
- Traditional and interactive lecturing (including IT).
- Assessment and marking.
- Classroom management: special considerations (e.g. student diversity and special needs) and problems (e.g. plagiarism, discipline).
The seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education by Chickering and Gamson [4] have been around for a while and remain pertinent in the context of TA training. Good practice:
- Encourages contact between students and faculty.
- Develops reciprocity and cooperation among students.
- Encourages active learning.
- Gives prompt feedback.
- Emphasizes time on task.
- Communicates high expectations.
- Respects diverse talents and ways of learning.
The chapter written by Shore [4] offers a literature review of best practices and also includes suggestions for data collection.
Look at my own department and its current TA training program in the light of those suggested standards gives many insights in both what has been already accomplished and the amount of work that still needs to be done. I’ll leave those thoughts for a later post though! Thanks again to Catherine for facilitating that meeting and sharing these resources!
References
- [1] – Eison, J., & Vanderford, M. (1993). Enhancing GTA training in academic departments: Some self-assessment guidelines. To improve the academy, 12, 53-68.
- [2] – Lueddeke, G. R. (1997). Training postgraduates for teaching: Considerations for programme planning and development. Teaching in Higher Education, 2, 141-151.
- [3] – Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association of Higher Education Bulletin, 39, 3-7.
- [4] – Shore, C. (2010). Assessing the effectiveness of GTA preparatory activities and programs. In W. Buskist, & V. A. Benassi (Eds.), Effective college and university teaching: Strategies and tactics for the new professoriate (pp. 181-187). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.