Higher Education

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 253–268 | Cite as

The development and validation of a framework for teaching competencies in higher education

  • Dineke E.H. Tigelaar
  • Diana H.J.M. Dolmans
  • Ineke H.A.P. Wolfhagen
  • Cees P.M. van der Vleuten
Article

Abstract

In higher education, approaches to teaching are becoming more student-centred, which demands different teaching competencies. Therefore, it is necessary to have an adequate framework of teaching competencies that can be used for evaluation purposes. The weaknesses of the existing frameworks are that they do not pay attention to the person as teacher, they are too narrowly defined, they are not validated and they are not adjusted to modern approaches to teaching.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a framework of teaching competencies in higher education. A framework for teaching competencies was therefore constructed containing the following domains: The Person as Teacher, Expert on Content Knowledge, Facilitator of Learning Processes, Organiser and Scholar/Lifelong Learner. The framework was validated using a Delphi method. Educational experts (N = 63) were asked: ``How important are the following teaching competencies in each domain for an experienced teacher in higher education?'' A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the adequacy of the domains.

After two rounds, the shift in ratings was minimal, so the results were considered stable. The response rate was 82%. From the original list with 134 items, 30 items were omitted because many experts failed to respond to them. The experts reached consensus on 61 out of the resulting 104 items (59%). A confirmatory factor analysis on the three best scoring items in each domain confirmed the model. A framework of teaching competencies was developed and validated that can be used as a starting point for teacher evaluation in higher education.

Delphi method student-centred approaches to teaching teaching competencies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arbuckle, J.L. (1997). Amos Users' Guide. Chicago: IL Small Waters Corporation.Google Scholar
  2. Beijaard, D. and Uhlenbeck, A.M. (2001). 'Het formuleren van docentcompetenties: werkwijze en resultaten [Formulating teacher competencies: procedure and results]', VELON Tijdschrift voor lerarenopleiders 22(2), 26–33.Google Scholar
  3. Bos, E.S. (1998). Competentie: verheldering van een begrip [Competence: Clarifying a Concept] (Otec Report 98/RO1). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland (Onderwijstechnologisch expertisecentrum).Google Scholar
  4. Clayton, M.J. (1997). 'Delphi: a technique to harness expert opinion for critical decisionmaking tasks in education', Educational Psychology 17(4), 373–386.Google Scholar
  5. Darling-Hammond, L. and Snyder, J. (2000). 'Authentic assessment of teaching in context', Teaching and Teacher Education 16, 523–545.Google Scholar
  6. Dietze, A., Jansma, F. and Riezebos, A. (2000). Een kijkkader voor competenties voor de tweedegraads lerarenopleidingen [A Framework of Competencies for Secondary Grade Teacher Education]. Programma Management Educatief Partnerschap.Google Scholar
  7. Ertmer, P.A. and Newby T.J. (1993). 'Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective', Performance Improvement Quarterly 6(4), 50–72.Google Scholar
  8. Executive Board of the Utrecht University (1995). Doceren aan de universiteit: basiskwalificatie [University Teaching: Basic Qualification]. Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht.Google Scholar
  9. Harris, K.R. and Alexander, P.A. (1998). 'Integrated, constructivist education: challenge and reality', Educational Psychology Review 10(2), 115–127.Google Scholar
  10. Kember, D. (1997). 'A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics' conceptions of teaching', Learning and Instruction 7(3), 255–275.Google Scholar
  11. Kember, D. and Kwan, K. (2002). 'Lecturers' approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching', in Hativa, N. and Goodyear, P. (eds.), Teacher Thinking, Beliefs and Knowledge in Higher Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 210–239.Google Scholar
  12. Korthagen, F.A.J. (2001). Waar doen we het voor? Op zoek naar de essentie van goed leraarschap [What For? Searching for the Essence of Good Teaching]. Inaugural address given at the acceptance of professorship in Didactics for teacher education at the IVLOS of the Utrecht University. Utrecht: WCC.Google Scholar
  13. Lowyck, J. (1994). 'Teaching effectiveness: an overview of studies', Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch 19(1), 17–25.Google Scholar
  14. Martin, E., Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P. and Benjamin, J. (2000). 'What university teachers teach and how they teach it', Instructional Science 28, 387–412.Google Scholar
  15. Moltmaker, T. and Meulenkamp, H. (2000). 'Bekwaam beoordeeld [Capably assessed]', VELON Tijdschrift voor lerarenopleiders 21(3), 30–35.Google Scholar
  16. Murry, J.W.J. and Hammons, J.O. (1995). 'Delphi: a versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research', The Review of Higher Education 18(4), 423–436.Google Scholar
  17. Prosser, M. and Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in Higher Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Putnam, R.T. and Borko, H. (1997). 'Teacher learning: implications of new views on cognition', in Biddle, B.J., Good, T.L. and Goodson, I.F. (eds.), International Handbook of Teachers and Teaching. Boston: Kluwer, pp. 1223–1296.Google Scholar
  19. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Samuelowicz, K. and Bain, J.B. (1992). 'Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers', Higher Education 24, 93–111.Google Scholar
  21. Samuelowicz, K. and Bain, J.D. (2001). 'Revisiting academics' beliefs about teaching and learning', Higher Education 41, 299–325.Google Scholar
  22. Saris, W. and Stronkhorst, H. (1984). Causal Modelling in Nonexperimental Research. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Sociometric research Foundation.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, K.S. and Simpson, R.D. (1995). 'Validating teaching competencies for faculty members in higher education: a national study using the Delphi method', Innovative Higher Education 19(3), 223–234.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, R.G. and Coldron, J.H. (1996). Mere Competence or Personal Achievement? Is the Specification of Competences Incompatible with a View of Teaching as Inescapably Personal? Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, Seville, Spain.Google Scholar
  25. Stoof, A., Martens, R., van Merriënboer, J. and Bastiaens, T. (2002). 'The boundary approach of competence: a constructivist aid for understanding and using the concept of competence', Human Resource Development Review 1, 345–365.Google Scholar
  26. Trigwell, K. (2001). 'Judging university teaching', The International Journal for Academic Development 6(1), 65–73.Google Scholar
  27. Trigwell, K. and Prosser, M. (1996). 'Congruence between intention and strategy in university science teachers' approaches to teaching', Higher Education 32, 77–87.Google Scholar
  28. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M. and Waterhouse, F. (1999). 'Relations between teachers approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning', Higher Education 37, 57–70.Google Scholar
  29. Twisk, T.F., Daniels, J.J.M.C. and Bolweg, J.F. (1999). Competenties van leraren [Teacher Competencies]. Utrecht: Berenschot.Google Scholar
  30. Uhlenbeck, A.M., Verloop, N. and Beijaard, D. (2002). 'Requirements for an assessment procedure for beginning teachers: implications form recent theories on teaching and assessment', Teachers College Record 104(2), 242–272.Google Scholar
  31. VELON (The Association for Teacher Educators in the Netherlands) (1999). Eerste versie Beroepstandaard lerarenopleiders [First Draft Professional Standard Teacher Educators]. Diemen: VELON.Google Scholar
  32. VSNU (The Association of Universities in the Netherlands) (1996). Raamplan voor de universitaire lerarenopleiding [Framework for University Teacher Education]. Utrecht: VSNU.Google Scholar
  33. Williams, P.L. and Webb, C. (1994). 'The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion', Journal of Advanced Nursing 19, 180–186.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dineke E.H. Tigelaar
    • 1
  • Diana H.J.M. Dolmans
    • 1
  • Ineke H.A.P. Wolfhagen
    • 1
  • Cees P.M. van der Vleuten
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational Development and ResearchUniversity of MaastrichtMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations