A National Survey of Faculty Development Evaluation Outcome Measures and Procedures

Katrina A. Meyer, Vicki S. Murrell

Abstract


This article presents the results of a national study of 39 higher education institutions that collected information about their evaluation procedures and outcome measures for faculty development for online teaching conducted during 2011-2012. The survey results found that over 90% of institutions used measures of the faculty person’s assessment of satisfaction and usefulness of the training; student GPAs were used by only 30% of the institutions. As for how evaluations were conducted, online evaluations were used by 80% of institutions and focus groups were used by 21% of the institutions.

Keywords


Faculty development, evaluation activities, outcome measures, types of evaluation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2012). Digital faculty: Professors, teaching and technology. Babson Survey Research Group.

Atheny, S., & Hoffman, K.D. (2007). The Master Teacher Initiative: A framework for faculty development. Marketing Education Review, 17(3): 1-9.

Boulemetis, J. & Dutwin, P. The ABCs of Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005.

Camblin, L.D., & Steger, J.A. (2000). Rethinking faculty development. Higher Education, 39(1):1-18.

Daly, C.J., & Dee, J.R. (2009). Innovative models for organizing faculty development programs: Pedagogical reflexivity, student learning empathy, and faculty agency. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 7(1): 1-22.

DiLorenzo, T.M., & Heppner, P.P. (1994). The role of an academic department in promoting faculty development: Recognizing diversity and leading to excellence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 72(5): 485-491.

Dittmar, E., & McCracken, H. (2012). Promoting continuous quality improvement in online education: The META model. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 163-176.

Edwards, L., Freeman, L.M., Hodges, J., Johnston, R.A., Odell, M., & Sunal, C.S. (2001). Teaching science in higher education. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5): 246-257.

Fetters, M.L., & Duby, T.G. (2011). Faculty development: A stage model matched to blended learning maturation. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,15(1): 77-85.

Grant, M.M. (2004). Learning to teach with the web: Factors influencing teacher education faculty. Internet and Higher Education, 7:329-341.

Gruppen, L.D., Frohna, A.Z., Anderson, R.M., & Lowe, K.D. (2003). Faculty development for educational leadership and scholarship. Academic Medicine, 78(2): 137-141.

Haviland, D., Shin, S., & Turley, S. (2010). Now I’m ready: The impact of a professional development initiative on faculty concerns with program assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 35(4): 261-275.

Hixon, E., Barczyk, C., Buckenmeyer, J., & Feldman, L. (2011). Mentoring university faculty to become high quality online educators: A program evaluation. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(5), 2011. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter144/hixon_Barczyk_Buckenmeyer_feldman144.html

Jones, S.J., & Meyer, K.A. (2012). The “virtual face” of distance learning at public colleges and universities: What do websites reveal about student support services? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 15(4). Retrieved http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter154/jones_meyer154.html

Kidney, G.W., & Frieden, S. (2004). When the cows come home: A proven path of professional development for faculty pursuing e-learning. The Journal. Retrived from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2004/06/01/When-the-Cows-Come-Home-A-Proven-Path-of Professional-Development-for-Faculty-Pursuing-ELearning.aspx

King, K.P. (2004). Both sides now: Examining transformative learning and professional development of educators. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2): 155-174.

Koehler, M.J., Mishra, P., Hershey, K., & Peruski, L. (2004). With a little help from your students: A new model for faculty development and online course design. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1): 25-55.

Koepke, K., & O’Brien, A. (2012). Advancing pedagogy: Evidence for the role of online instructor training in improved pedagogical practices. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 73-84.

Kucsera, J.V., & Svinicki, M. (2010). Rigorous evaluations of faculty development programs. Journal of Faculty Development, 24(2): 5-18.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for teaching and learning? Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 247-254.

Lackey, K. (2011). Faculty development: An analysis of current and effective training strategies for preparing faculty to teach online. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(5). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdle/winter144/lackey144.html

Lavoie, D., & Rosman, A.J. (2007). Using active student-centered learning-based instructional design to develop faculty and improve course design, delivery, and evaluation. Issues in Accounting Education, 22(1): 105-118.

Lindman, J.M., & Tahamont, M. (2006). Transforming selves, transforming courses: Faculty and staff development and the construction of interdisciplinary diversity courses. Innovative Higher Education, 39(4): 289-304.

Liu, O.L. (2012). Student evaluation of instruction: In the new paradigm of distance education. Research in Higher Education, 53: 471-486.

Longanecker, D.A. (2008). Mission differentiation vs. mission creep: Higher education’s battle between creationism and evolution. Retrieved from http://www.wiche.edu/info/gwypf/dal_mission.pdf.

Lowenthal, P.R., & Thomas, D. (2010). Digital campfires: Innovations in helping faculty explore the online learning wilderness. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(3). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no3/lowenthal_0910.htm

Maxwell, W., & Kazlauskas, E. (1992). Which faculty development methods really work in community colleges? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 16(4): 351-360.

McQuiggan, C.A. (2012). Faculty development for online teaching as a catalyst for change. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 27-62

Meyer, K.A. (2008a). The “virtual face” of institutions: What do home pages reveal about higher education? Innovative Higher Education, 33(3), 141–157.

Meyer, K.A. & Murrell, V.S. (2014). A national study of training content and activities for faculty development for online teaching. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18.1.

Meyer, K.A. (2008b). The “virtual face” of institutions: Why legislators and other outsiders view higher education as aloof. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 178-185.

Meyer, K.A. (2014). An analysis of the research on faculty development for online teaching and identification of new directions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(4), 93-112.

O’Meara, K.A. (2007). Striving for what? Exploring the pursuit of prestige. In Smart, J.D. (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, 22 (pp, 121-179). New York: Springer.

Orozcco, M., Fowkles, J.K., Jerzak, P., & Musgrove, A. (2012). Zero to sixty plus in 108 days: Launching a central elearning unit and its first faculty development program. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 177-192.

Potter, R., & Meisels, G. (2005). Enhancing teacher preparation and improving faculty teaching skills: Lessons learned from implementing “Science That Matters” a standards based interdisciplinary science course sequence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(2): 191-204.

Puzziferro, M., & Shelton, K. (2008). A model for developing high-quality online courses: Integrating a systems approach with learning theory. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3-4): 119-136.

Ragan, L.C., Bigatel, P.M., Kennan, S.S., & Dillon, J.M. (2012). From research to practice: Towards the development of an integrated and comprehensive faculty development program. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 16(5), 71-86.

Reilly, J., Vandenhouten, C., & Gallagher-Lepak, S. (2012). Faculty development for e-learning: A multi-campus community of practice (COP) approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 99-110.

Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovation. New York: Free Press.

Schrum, L., Burbank, M.D., Engle, J., Chambers, J.A., & Glassett, K.F. (2005). Post-secondary educators’ professional development: Investigation of an online approach to enhancing teaching and learning. Internet and Higher Education, 8: 279-289.

Skeff, K.M., Stratos, G.A., Mygdal, W., DeWitt, T.A., Manfred, L., Quirk, M., Roberts, K., Greenberg, L., & Bland, C.J. (1997). Faculty development. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 12: 56-63.

Sloan Consortium. (n.d.) Quality framework narrative, the 5 pillars. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/Quality_Framework_Narrative_5_pillars.

Southern Regional Education Board. (2009). Guidelines for professional development for online teachers. Southern Regional Education Board: Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from http://publications.sreb.org/2009/09T01_Guide_profdev_online_teach.pdf

Stehle, S., Spinath, B., & Kadmon, M. (2012). Measuring teaching effectiveness: Correspondence between students’ evaluations of teaching and different measures of student learning. Research in Higher Education, 53:888-904.

Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Centeno, A., Dolmans, D., Spencer, J., Gelula, M., & Prideaux, D. (2006). A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education. Medical Teacher, 28(6): 497-526.

Storandt, B.C., Lacher, A.P., & Dossin, L.C. (2012). Toward an understanding of what works in professional development for online instructors: The case of PBS Teacherline. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 121-162.

Vaill, A.L., & Testori, P.A. (2012). Orientation, mentoring and ongoing support: A three-tiered approach to online faculty development. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 111-120.

Wilson, J. L., & Meyer, K.A. (2009). Higher education websites: The “virtual face” of diversity. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2(2), 91-102.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i3.450