A National Survey of Faculty Development Evaluation Outcome Measures and Procedures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i3.450Keywords:
Faculty development, evaluation activities, outcome measures, types of evaluationAbstract
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.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.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
