jagomart
digital resources
picture1_Team Teaching Pdf 156628 | Stanford Speaking Of Teaching Newsletter (1)


 158x       Filetype PDF       File size 0.51 MB       Source: www.aup.edu


File: Team Teaching Pdf 156628 | Stanford Speaking Of Teaching Newsletter (1)
fall 2006 newsletter vol 16 no 1 speaking of teaching the center for teaching and learning stanford university team teaching beneats and challenges n recent years team taught courses tive ...

icon picture PDF Filetype PDF | Posted on 18 Jan 2023 | 2 years ago
Partial capture of text on file.
                                                                                                                                     Fall 2006
                                                                                                                                     NEWSLETTER
                                                                                                                                     Vol.16, No.1
           
               Speaking of  
           Teaching
             THE CENTER FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING • STANFORD UNIVERSITY
             Team Teaching: Beneàts and Challenges
                n recent years, team-taught courses        tive approach.                                effort will result in a far more success-
             Ihave become an important part                    Professors Lanier Anderson (Phi-          ful intellectual experience. As Cowan, 
             of the Stanford curriculum. Long an           losophy) and Joshua Landy (French             Ewell, and McConnell (1995), a teach-
             integral aspect of the Introduction           and Italian), who have team-taught            ing team at City College of Loyola 
             to the Humanities (IHUM) program,             several courses together, summed up           University in New Orleans, write, “Our 
             team teaching has now found a place           some of the lessons taken from their          joint planning sessions became inter-
             in many different departments, pro-           experience in an Award-Winning                disciplinary conversations into which 
                                                           Teachers on Teaching presentation             we subsequently invited our students. 
                                                           during Winter Quarter 2005-2006. In           These conversations were among the 
                                                           the following, their suggestions for          highlights of our teaching together 
                                                           team-teaching, presented as a mock            (par. 5).”
                                                           Decalogue, are interspersed with results 
                                                           from recent research on team teaching.        Thou shalt attend thy neighbor’s lec-
                                                                                                         tures.
                                                           Thou shalt plan everything with thy           One of the most important rules of team 
                                                           neighbor.                                     teaching, Landy says, is to “attend all 
                                                           Team teaching requires different prep-        meetings of the class. Never miss a 
                                                           aration than traditional, single-instruc-     colleague’s lecture.” Anderson and 
             Professor Lanier Anderson                     tor courses, particularly concerning          Landy use what is typically called 
                                                           the organizational aspects of course 
             grams, and disciplines, at levels ranging     management. Careful and extensive 
             from undergraduate lectures to graduate       planning can help instructors prevent 
             seminars. Team teaching boasts many           disagreements down the line regarding 
             pedagogical and intellectual advan-           assignments, grading procedures, and 
             tages: it can help create a dynamic and       teaching strategies (Letterman and 
             interactive learning environment, pro-        Dugan, 2004; Wentworth and Davis, 
             vide instructors with a useful way            2002).  Planning meetings also allow 
             of modeling thinking within or across         instructors to familiarize themselves 
             disciplines, and also inspire new             with their partner’s material, helping 
             research ideas and intellectual partner-      make the class a true team effort from                             Professor Joshua Landy
             ships among faculty. To experience the        the start. According to Landy, “Every-
             full benefits of team teaching, however,      one on the team has to be behind every        an interactive teaching model, where 
             instructors must adjust their course          element of the course.” While reaching        all members of the teaching team are 
             planning and classroom management             this consensus may take a lot of time         present during each course meeting. 
             strategies to accommodate a collabora-        and  compromise, in the end the extra         This model provides the most oppor-
         Fall 2006     Vol. 16, No.1                                                                                                 Speaking of Teaching
          tunity for the integration of different            and presentations (Minnis and John-                other courses and assignments. “If you’re 
          subjects and disciplines. However, when            Steiner, 2005). Anderson and Landy                 trying to prepare students for interdisci-
          scheduling or budget constraints make              integrate their different disciplinary             plinary work themselves, then you really 
          this level of interaction unfeasible, there        approaches by referring to each other              need to pay attention to modeling for the 
          are different formats that can give stu-           in lectures and presentations. By show-            students what the disciplinary approa- 
          dents and instructors the experience of            ing respect for each other’s ideas, even           ches are,” Anderson says.
          a team-taught course. For instance, in a           when they may disagree, they are able 
          rotational model, only one instructor 
          is present at a time, but a series of 
          instructors rotate throughout the course,              “Have somebody sitting in the middle,” Landy 
          teaching only the course topics that                   suggests. “It really encourages a kind of cross-
          fall within their specialty. While the                 fire, and the sense that people are all equal 
          rotational model allows students to learn 
          each aspect of the course material                     participants in the process.”
          from an expert in the field, it has the 
          disadvantage of forcing students to 
          adjust to a new teacher’s style several            to keep students interested and engaged            Thou shalt have something to say, even 
          times over the course of a quarter                 in all aspects of the course material.             when thou art not in charge. 
          (Morlock, 1988). In a dispersed team               Some teaching teams take a more                    Although Anderson and Landy urge each 
          model, the course meets two or three               direct approach, and assign one instruc-           member of the teaching team to be pres-
          times a week, once with all faculty                tor during each class meeting the task             ent during each course meeting, often 
          members present, and once or twice                 of making connections among different              only one instructor has the primary 
          more in sections with one faculty                  course topics (Corcos, Durchslag, Mor-             responsibility for presenting material on 
          member present. This model “provides               riss et al., 1997). Whichever method               a certain day. What to do when you’re 
          opportunities for integration and inter-           instructors choose, giving students the            not the one in charge? The instructor 
          action” when the instructors teach                 opportunity to observe integration in              who is not presenting still has an oppor-
          together, but also provides “a small class         action helps them better understand                tunity to help students better understand 
          environment” in a single-instructor sce-           instructors’ expectations, as well as              the material by acting as an exemplary 
          nario (McDaniels and Colarulli, 1997,              improve their own learning outcomes.               “student” (Hammer and Giordano, 
          p. 32). However, this model can limit                                                                 2001). In Anderson and Landy’s courses, 
          the opportunity for students to hear mul-          Thou shalt model debate with thy                   the instructor who is not leading the 
          tiple perspectives on the same topic, one          neighbor.                                          class meeting often plays the role of a 
          of the core learning advantages of team            Team-teaching allows students to                   “kibitzer,” sitting in the middle of the 
          teaching.                                          observe high-level intellectual debate             class and offering commentary on the 
                                                             among colleagues. Anderson and Speck               other’s presentation or lecture. “Have 
          Thou shalt refer to thy neighbor’s                 describe this respectful debate as “pro-           somebody sitting in the middle,” Landy 
          ideas.                                             fessional disagreement” that is both               suggests. “It really encourages a kind 
          The purpose of a team-taught course,               “expert and collegial” (1998, p. 681).             of crossfire, and the sense that people 
          from an educational standpoint, is to              When such debates are successful, stu-             are all equal participants in the process.” 
          push students to achieve higher levels of          dents learn to disagree without hostility.         Wentworth and Davis offer several sug-
          synthesis and integration in their study           They also learn how to encounter new               gestions for different roles the non-
          of new material. It is, therefore, vitally         material through a variety of perspec-             presenting teacher can play. Among 
          important for instructors to model                 tives, and gain a practical knowledge of           them are: “model learner,” in which the 
          the process of integration by interweav-           different academic disciplines. Watching           instructor asks questions and otherwise 
          ing teaching partners’ perspectives into           instructors debate using different meth-           contributes to discussion; “observer,” in 
          each presentation. Often students are              odological approaches allows students              which the instructor takes notes and 
          assigned projects that require them to             to discover the advantages of different            gauges student response to the presenta-
          integrate the material individual instruc-         disciplines, and to understand which               tion; “discussion leader,” in which the 
          tors have presented. Consequently, stu-            methodology best suits a particular line           instructor facilitates or leads break-out 
          dents have expressed a desire for                  of inquiry. In addition, interdisciplinary         groups; or “devil’s advocate,” in which 
          teachers to demonstrate the same prac-             debate encourages students to apply the            the instructor raises provocative or chal-
          tice of integration in their own lectures          skills of integration and collaboration to         lenging questions in an effort to stim-
          2
         Fall 2006    Vol. 16, No.1                                                                                          Speaking of Teaching
         ulate class creativity (Wentworth and           the sort of dialogic instruction they pres-    figure out the key points of a lesson 
         Davis, 2002, p. 27).                            ent in class. Meetings allow instructors       when faculty choose to present many 
                                                         time to plan upcoming courses, but also        possible solutions to a problem (McDan-
         Thou shalt apply common grading                 to reflect upon their progress thus far,       iels and Colarulli, 1997). In some cases, 
         standards.                                      and to compare their impressions regard-       faculty must work hard to overcome 
         One of the benefits that team teaching          ing student response and engagement            students’ resistance to the non-lecture 
         offers students is an increase in the           (George and Davis-Wiley, 2000). Ander-         format; a good first step is to be clear 
         amount of feedback they receive from            son and Landy use meetings to “test            about the format of the course right 
         instructors (Wadkins, Miller, and Woz-          the pulse of the course.” It is important      from the start (Helms, Alvis, and Willis, 
         niak, 2006). Yet, students often worry          to have regular class meetings, Landy          2005).
         whether instructors will apply consistent       urges, because in a team-teaching envi-
         grading standards. Conflicts can emerge         ronment, “you have everyone pulling in         Thou shalt let thy students speak. 
         regarding the standards for evaluating          different directions, and you need to          Team teaching can have a highly positive 
         student work, and instructors sometimes         keep a coherence in the course.”               impact on student learning outcomes, 
         struggle to bridge their differences                                                           largely due to the increased opportunity 
         regarding evaluation procedures or              Thou shalt ask open questions.                 for student participation that team teach-
         criteria. Landy recommends, “You’d              Students in team-taught courses learn          ing provides. The presence of more than 
         better find some way of having mutually         new material by approaching it from            one instructor in the classroom increases 
         agreed-upon standards. It’s best to be as       many different perspectives. The dialogic      the occasions for student-teacher inter-
         explicit as you can about how you want          structure of class meetings often stands       action (Wadkins, Miller, and Wozniak, 
         to grade.” To ensure fairness in grading,       in stark contrast to the lecture format to     2006). More importantly, a collaborative 
         some instructors design a specific              which many students and instructors are        teaching environment invites students to 
         grading rubric, tailored to the needs of        accustomed. Instructors must, therefore,       take a more active role in the learning 
         a team-taught course. For instance, one         adjust their teaching practices to invite      process. Because team teaching encour-
         teaching partnership devised the follow-        many different responses to a particular       ages a variety of perspectives on a topic, 
         ing system: “Papers that clearly met our        question or issue. As Landy suggests,          students are more likely to feel they can 
         expectations were read, responded to,           asking a question that is susceptible to       make valuable contributions to class dis-
         and evaluated by just one teacher; others       multiple answers is very powerful, and         cussions (Anderson and Speck, 1998). 
         that the first reader deemed as not meet-       also extremely hard to do. Yet he advises      “It’s good, in the first few meetings, to 
         ing expectations or ‘marginal’ were read        instructors to try to “ask some questions      set up a pattern in which people do inter-
         by both teachers. Together, we would            to which you really have no idea of            vene in the discussion from all kinds of 
         make suggestions and assign a point             the answer.” Doing so is a risk, but, as       angles,” Anderson notes. He and Landy 
         value for that section of the paper”            Anderson notes, it “takes students out         make a conscious effort from the begin-
         (George and Davis-Wiley, 2000, p. 77). 
         Like most aspects of team teaching, the            “...ask some questions to which you really have 
         extra time and attention devoted to grad-
         ing strengthens instructors’ pedagogical           no idea of the answer.” Doing so is a risk, but, 
         practices, in this case by encouraging             as Anderson notes, it “takes students out to the 
         them to better understand the philosophy           leading edge of knowledge” and shows them 
         behind their grading procedures. For 
         example, collaborative grading allowed             “what the production of knowledge is really like.”
         Anderson to “understand much more 
         explicitly what the grading standards are 
         that I think are important and why.”            to the leading edge of knowledge” and          ning of the quarter to create a learning 
                                                         shows them “what the production of             environment in which “student contribu-
         Thou shalt attend all staff meetings.           knowledge is really like.” Likewise, to        tions are going to be valued and indeed 
         In addition to increased preparation time,      gain the benefits of this mode of inquiry,     expected.” 
         successful team teaching also requires          students must stop searching for the “one 
         ongoing meetings among instructors to           right answer” to problems. Although            Thou shalt be willing to be surprised.
         review and reassess their goals for             many students enjoy the diversity of           Part of the challenge of team teaching is 
         the course. For many team teachers,             voices and viewpoints that emerge in the       putting yourself in a position where your 
         meetings become the testing ground for          team-taught classroom, others struggle to      own authority and expertise on a certain 
                                                                                                                                                 3
         Fall 2006     Vol. 16, No.1                                                                                         Speaking of Teaching
         topic may have to take a backseat.             sional approach to subject matter.               returning time and again to the chal-
         Faculty must make the shift from being         Ultimately, the advantages of team               lenges, and the rewards, of team teach-
         “experts” to being “expert learners,” for      teaching far outweigh the time and               ing. ♦
         in the collaborative classroom, teachers       energy it requires. Anderson and Landy 
         and students join in a shared process of       describe themselves as “recidivists,”            —Melissa C. Leavitt, Ph.D.
         intellectual discovery (Wentworth and 
         Davis 2002, p. 23). Instructors gener-
         ally agree that being prompted to look            Bibliography
         at a topic from a different angle can             Anderson, Rebecca S. and Bruce W. Speck. “Oh What a Difference a Team Makes: Why Team 
         be one of the most rewarding expe-                Teaching Makes a Difference.” Teaching and Teacher Education 14, no. 7 (1998): 671-86.
         riences of participating in a teaching 
         team.  Teachers can “get out of their             Corcos, Christine A., Melvyn R. Durchslag, and Andrew P. Morriss, et. al. “Teaching a Mega-
         own conceptual boxes” and learn new               course: Adventures in Environmental Policy, Team Teaching, and Group Grading.” Journal of 
                                                           Legal Education 47, no. 2 (1997): 224-39.
         approaches that will enhance their                Cowan, Michael A., Barbara C. Ewell, and Peggy McConnell. “Creating Conversations: an 
         own research and writing (Corcos,                 Experiment in Interdisciplinary Team Teaching” [Electronic version]. College Teaching  43, 
         Durchslag, and Morriss, 1995, p. 235).            no. 4 (1995): 127-31.
         Anderson and Landy, for instance, have            George, Marshall A. and Patricia Davis-Wiley. “Team Teaching a Graduate Course. Case study: 
         co-authored a paper that was inspired             a Clinical Research Study.” College Teaching 48, no. 2 (2000): 75-80.
         by the topics covered in the courses 
         they have taught together. In addition            Hammer, Elizabeth Yost and Peter J. Giordano. “Dual-Gender Team-Teaching Human Sexual-
         to creating new research opportunities,           ity: Pedagogical and Practical Issues.” Teaching of Psychology 28, no. 2 (2001): 132-33.
         team teaching can also encourage                  Helms, Marilyn M., John M. Alvis, and Marilyn Willis. ”Planning and Implementing Shared 
         instructors to hone their pedagogical             Teaching: an MBA Team-Teaching Case Study.” Journal of Education for Business 81, no. 
                                                           1 (2005): 29-34.
         skills. Anderson remarks, team teach-             Letterman, Margaret R. and Kimberly B. Dugan. “Team Teaching a Cross-Disciplinary Honors 
         ing “does raise your game, and some-              Course: Preparation and Development.” College Teaching 55, no. 2 (2004): 76-79.
         times quite dramatically so.”                     McDaniels, Elizabeth A. and Guy C. Colarulli. “Collaborative Teaching in the Face of  Produc-
         As Landy says, team teaching gives                tivity Concerns: the Dispersed Team Mode.” Innovative Higher Education 22,  no. 1 (1997): 
         professors the opportunity “to teach              19-36.
         in a different way, and to learn in a             Minnis, Michele and Vera John-Steiner. “The Challenge of Interdisciplinary Education.” In 
         different way.” It allows instructors             Elizabeth G. Creamer and Lisa R. Lattuca, eds. Advancing Faculty Collaboration Through 
         to hone their pedagogical skills and              Interdisciplinary Collaboration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005. 44-61.
         develop new topics for research and               Morlock, Henry C. et al. “A Rotational Format for Team Teaching Introductory Psychology.” 
         scholarship. The benefits of team                 Teaching of Psychology 15, no. 3, (1988): 144-45.
         teaching extend to students as well,              Wadkins, Theresa, Richard L. Miller, and William Wozniak. “Team Teaching: Student Satisfac-
         improving learning outcomes by                    tion and Performance.” Teaching of Psychology 22, no. 2, (2006): 118-20.
         offering increased student-teacher                Wentworth, Jay and James R. Davis. “Enhancing Interdisciplinarity Through Team Teaching.” 
         interaction, as well as a multi-dimen-            In Carolyn Hayes, ed. Innovations in Interdisciplinary Teaching. Westport, CT: The Oryx Press, 
         VHS and DVD copies of Professors                  2002. 16-37.
         Anderson’s and Landy’s presentation are 
         available at the CTL library and online at        Photos: Rod Searcey
         http://ctl.stanford.edu/AWT.
         The Center for Teaching and Learning
         Fourth Floor, Sweet Hall
         Stanford University
         Stanford, CA 94305-3087
         http://ctl.stanford.edu
The words contained in this file might help you see if this file matches what you are looking for:

...Fall newsletter vol no speaking of teaching the center for and learning stanford university team beneats challenges n recent years taught courses tive approach effort will result in a far more success ihave become an important part professors lanier anderson phi ful intellectual experience as cowan curriculum long losophy joshua landy french ewell mcconnell teach integral aspect introduction italian who have ing at city college loyola to humanities ihum program several together summed up new orleans write our has now found place some lessons taken from their joint planning sessions became inter many different departments pro award winning disciplinary conversations into which teachers on presentation we subsequently invited students during winter quarter these were among following suggestions highlights presented mock par decalogue are interspersed with results research thou shalt attend thy neighbor s lec tures plan everything one most rules says is all requires prep meetings class ne...

no reviews yet
Please Login to review.