Abstract
Higher education institutions prepare future faculty members for multiple roles, including teaching. However, teaching professional development programs for graduate students vary widely. We present evaluation data from a high engagement program for STEM doctoral students. We analyzed the impact on three cohorts of participants over three academic years and identified the components most influential upon their teaching professional development. Participants found the year-long teaching assessment project and the disciplinary and reflective focus instrumental for improving their knowledge of teaching and learning. We recommend these components for the design of other such high-engagement programs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (2011). Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: A call to action. Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization to the academic career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73, 94–122.
Austin, A. E., Campa III, H., Pfund, C., Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Mathieu, R., & Stoddart, J. (2009). Preparing STEM doctoral students for future faculty careers. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, 83–95. doi:10.1002/tl.346
Border, L. L. B., & von Hoene, L. M. (2010). Graduate and professional student development programs. In K. Gillespie & D. L. Robertson (Eds.), A guide to faculty development (pp. 327–345). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Boyer, E. L. (1991). The scholarship of teaching from: Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. College Teaching, 39, 11–13. doi:10.1080/87567555.1991.10532213
CIRTL Network (2016). Center for the integration of research, teaching and learning. Madison, WI: Board of Regents of The University of Wisconsin System. Retrieved from http://www.cirtl.net/p/about-us-cirtl
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Connolly, M. R., Bouwma-Gearhart, J. L., & Clifford, M. A. (2007). The birth of a notion: The windfalls and pitfalls of tailoring an SoTL-like concept to scientists, mathematicians, and engineers. Innovative Higher Education, 32, 19–34.
Corder, G. W., & Foreman, D. I. (2014). Nonparametric statistics: A step-by-step approach (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
Council of Graduate Schools (2017). Meeting professional development needs of today’s STEM graduate students. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools. Retrieved from http://cgsnet.org/meeting-professional-development-needs-today%E2%80%99s-stem-graduate-students
De Janasz, S. C., & Sullivan, S. E. (2004). Multiple mentoring in academe: Developing the professorial network. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 263–283.
Fairweather, J. S. (2005). Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. The Journal of Higher Education, 76, 401–422.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 201319030.
Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., & Richler, J. J. (2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 2–18.
Ginns, P., Kitay, J., & Prosser, M. (2008). Developing conceptions of teaching and the scholarship of teaching through a graduate certificate in higher education. International Journal for Academic Development, 13, 175–185. doi:10.1080/13601440802242382
Henderson, C., Beach, A. L., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 952–984.
Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 8(2), 020104. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104
Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: A developmental network perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 26, 264–288.
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (2015). Doctorate recipients from U.S. universities. Survey of earned doctorates 2014. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsf16300/digest/nsf16300.pdf
National Science Board. (2016). Science & engineering indicators 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
PCAST (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
Pruitt-Logan, A. S., & Gaff, J. G. (2004). Preparing future faculty: Changing the culture of doctoral education. In D. H. Wulff & A. E. Austin (Eds.), Paths to the professoriate: Strategies for enriching the preparation of future faculty (pp. 177–193). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rushin, J. W., Saix, J. D., Lumsden, A., Streubel, D. P., Summers, G., & Bernson, C. (1997). Graduate teaching assistant training: A basis for improvement of college biology teaching & faculty development? The American Biology Teacher, 59, 86–90. doi:10.2307/4450255
Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2012). Science PhD career preferences: Levels, changes, and advisor encouragement. PLoS One, 7(5), e36307. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036307
Torvi, D. A. (1994). Engineering graduate teaching assistant instructional programs: Training tomorrow’s faculty members. Journal of Engineering Education, 83, 376–382. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb00134.x
Vergara, C., Urban-Lurain, M., Campa, H., Cheruvelil, K., Ebert-May, D., Fata-Hartley, C., & Johnston, K. (2014). FAST-future academic scholars in teaching: A high-engagement development program for future STEM faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 39(2), 93–107. doi:10.1007/s10755-013-9265-0
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. K. Klomparens, and the MSU CIRTL steering committee members, Drs. D. Ebert-May, K Cheruvelil and C. Fata-Hartley for their assistance with program planning and development. Funding for this program and evaluation were provided by MSU Graduate School and the National Science Foundation (Award No. 1231286). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prevost, L.B., Vergara, C.E., Urban-Lurain, M. et al. Evaluation of a High-Engagement Teaching Program for STEM Graduate Students: Outcomes of the Future Academic Scholars in Teaching (FAST) Fellowship Program. Innov High Educ 43, 41–55 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-017-9407-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-017-9407-x