Student Appraisals of Collaborative Teaching

Dugan, Kimberly B.; Letterman, Margaret R.

doi:10.3200/ctch.56.1.11-16

Cited by 74 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…I was assigned to teach an architecture design studio on a team. Like other college professors, I found team teaching is challenging (Shapiro and Dempsey, 2008;Ginther et al, 2007) and it requires a high level of communication (Havnes, 2009) and collaborative skills (Game and Metcalfe, 2009) to insure that faculty experience academic freedom (Robinson and Schaible, 1995) and that students learn (Dugan and Letterman, 2008). Ostensibly, with the goal of meeting accreditation criteria, my co-teachers had developed a set of lectures, learning objectives, and assignments to which all faculty were tacitly expected to adapt, accept, and replicate.…”

Section: Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

When you have a hammer in your hand, everything looks like a nail

Corroto

2014

Qualitative Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -Taking Community Design Centers (CDC) in the USA as case studies, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of a type of service learning increasingly found in colleges of architecture. Typically, the CDC is a model of architecture's civic engagement that makes claims to "give back" to under-served communities and enhance student learning with applied architectural design work. Design/methodology/approach -This project is part of a long-term engagement as participant observer and ethnographer in the field of architecture. Fieldwork in this investigation is presented as four case studies in separate and specific contexts. Findings -Initial findings suggest there are conflicting intentions and aspirations at work through service learning in architecture and its implementation calls into question who or what is served. The author argues architecture's epistemology, pedagogical structure, and ideology precludes effective civic engagement. Originality/value -The value of this research is the understanding of how those with power and resources are able to frame their work in low-income communities as service, even though there is little of worth given. It also demonstrates how stratification is reinforced through institutional arrangements in the USA.

show abstract

Section: Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

When you have a hammer in your hand, everything looks like a nail

Corroto

2014

Qualitative Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This would also be useful for students and team members who would have a better understanding of what they can expect from each other and once again point queries in the right direction. The critical importance of careful planning, close collaborative working, which includes the clear definition of responsibilities is also echoed and supported in numerous other team teaching focused studies (Shilbey 2006;Dugan and Letterman 2008;Nevina, Thousand et al 2009;Coker 2014). Shilbey (2006), for example, highlights the importance of planning out team roles, clearly defining team member responsibilities and investing significant time and effort into planning as being key factors in successful delivery of team-taught course content.…”

Section: Discussion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, less is known about whether there are benefits to adopting more collaborative team teaching-based approaches over more traditional individual instructor-led approaches to course content delivery within the computer science domain. In the existing literature, the term 'team teaching' can broadly be associated with one of three forms: (1) simultaneously taught content which involves two or more academic practitioners present during each session (co-teaching approach); (2) one academic practitioner being present in each session, but taking it in turns to deliver sessions between two or more people over the duration of the course (tag rotation approach); and (3) a combination these two models (hybrid approach) (Dugan and Letterman 2008). Guest lectureships may also feature as form of team teaching, but has been found difficult to evaluate (Jacob et al 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team-taught versus individually taught undergraduate education: a qualitative study of student experiences and preferences

Money

Coughlan

2016

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Team teaching is becoming more common in undergraduate programmes of study although the relative merits to the more traditional individually taught courses have not been determined for best practice. For this study, 15 final-year undergraduate computer science students were interviewed to gain insight into their learning experiences. A thematic analysis of the interview data identified the perceived advantages and disadvantages of each mode of teaching. The advantages of individually taught courses included: consistency of content delivery and advice, familiarity with the lecturer's teaching style and better continuity of the subject content. The disadvantage of individually taught modules included missing knowledge, compared to a team approach. Advantages of team-taught modules included: greater insight into a topic delivered by multiple team members. Disadvantages included: content overlap, conflicting messages relating to assessment, team members not taking ownership of their roles and responsibilities and a belief that overall team failure is worse than individual failure to deliver a module well. The results revealed that individually taught modules were generally preferred to team-taught modules. A set of best practice recommendations are proposed to address the challenges when delivering team-taught teaching and become more student focused.

show abstract

“…Many studies have shown a positive impact on academic success and retention of students from attendance policy (Clores, 2009;Friedman, Rodriguez, & McComb, 2001;Hudson, 2006Hudson, -2007Moore, 2003;Moore, Armstrong, & Pearson, 2008;Wyatt, 1992), mastery learning (Guskey, 2007;Kulik, Kulik, & Bangert-Drowns, 1990;Melton, 2008;Wambugu & Changeiywo, 2008), and peer tutoring (Evans & Cuffe, 2009;Verlinden, 1996). Mixed results are reported for collaborative teaching with some studies showing its benefits for students (e.g., Dugan & Letterman, 2008;Stuart, Connor, Cady, & Zweifel, 2006;Vogler & Long, 2003) and other studies citing roadblocks that could hinder the success of team teaching (e.g., Bondy & Ross, 1998). Similarly, instructional delivery studies were shown to have varying impact on student success and retention (Lim, Kim, Chen, & Ryder, 2008;McFarland & Hamilton, 2006;Zavarella & Ignash, 2009;Zhang, 2005).…”

Section: Seidman's Retention Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic Progress in Developmental Math Courses: A Comparative Study of Student Retention

Silverman

Seidman

2011

Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Pr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of college students are not ready for college-level math courses, which, when completed, have been shown to increase graduation and transfer rates. To address this problem, the Math My Way (MMW) program was developed to integrate module-based curriculum and mastery learning approaches. The program is based on Seidman's retention formula, which postulated that early identification of student deficiencies followed by early, intensive, and continuous interventions increase student retention and success. The purpose of this study was to investigate if the MMW program improves progression rates and academic achievement. A quasiexperimental, nonequivalent treatment-control group evaluation using survival analysis revealed that students who completed the MMW program were significantly more likely to progress through their math sequence than students who completed equivalent curriculum in the control group. Further, students in the treatment group had significantly higher math grade point averages (GPA) than their counterparts, with no significant difference for cumulative college GPA.

show abstract

Student Appraisals of Collaborative Teaching

Cited by 74 publications

References 13 publications

When you have a hammer in your hand, everything looks like a nail

When you have a hammer in your hand, everything looks like a nail

Team-taught versus individually taught undergraduate education: a qualitative study of student experiences and preferences

Academic Progress in Developmental Math Courses: A Comparative Study of Student Retention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About