A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education is sensitive to the competing demands of teaching, research and scholarship, and academic management. Against these contexts, the book focuses on developing professional academic skills for teaching. Dealing with the rapid expansion of the use of technology in higher education and widening student diversity, this fully updated and expanded edition includes new material on, for example, e-learning, lecturing to large groups, formative and summative assessment, and supervising research students.Part 1 examines teaching and supervising in higher education, focusing on a range of approaches and contexts.Part 2 examines teaching in discipline-specific areas and includes new chapters on engineering, economics, law, and the creative and performing arts.Part 3 considers approaches to demonstrating and enhancing practice.Written to support the excellence in teaching required to bring about learning of the highest quality, this will be essential reading for all new lecturers, particularly anyone taking an accredited course in teaching and learning in higher education, as well as all those experienced lecturers who wish to improve their teaching. Those working in adult

No abstract

Background: We aimed to analyze which medical school experiences contribute to success in an increasingly competitive CaRMS match. Methods: We surveyed all matched University of Saskatchewan 2019 medical graduates on characteristics of their applications: number of program applications, interviews obtained, experiences (research, volunteer, leadership), awards and money spent on the residency match process, and qualitative reflections on the process. Using published CaRMS statistics based on number of positions versus applicants, specialties were divided into high availability/low demand (HA) (e.g. family and internal medicine) and low availability/high demand (LA) (e.g. dermatology and emergency medicine). Quantitative results were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square and t-tests, and qualitative results thematically. Results: Data from 27 of 94 matched students were included. LA applicants were more likely to report at least one research project on their CV (66.67% among LA vs. 15.38% among HA, n = 27, χ2 = 8.640, p = 0.013), with a greater number of research presentations (mean=3.75 presentations vs. 2.07, t (25) = -2.251, p = 0.033). LA applicants had more elective weeks outside Saskatchewan (mean 11.75 weeks vs. 7.40 weeks, t (25) = -2.532, p = 0.018). Other application variables were not different between groups. Some students endorsed broader electives strategies, others (especially in surgical disciplines) supported narrower ones. Students reported travel, financial burden, document submission, and uncertainty as the greatest match process stressors. Conclusions: LA applicants cited more research projects and presentations, spent more elective weeks outside Saskatchewan, but were otherwise similar to HA applicants. Further studies should be done on student factors in the residency match process.

No abstract