Student Experiences and Perceptions of Team-Teaching in a Large Undergraduate Class

Abstract

This paper examines student experiences and perceptions of two models of team-teaching employed at a regional Australian university to teach a large undergraduate marketing subject. The two team-teaching models adopted for use in this subject can be characterised by the large number of team members (ten and six) and the relatively low level of team involvement in the planning and administration of the teamteaching process. The paper examines students’ experiences in an effort to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the team-teaching approach from the students’ perspective. This paper contributes to our knowledge of teaching practice by identifying, amongst other things, aspects of the team-teaching approach that both facilitate and hinder student learning. Data for this study was collected on each teaching model through two identical surveys. In total, data was collected from 440 student responses. Despite the relatively weak forms of team-teaching adopted to teach this subject, the majority of the students liked the concept of team-teaching. The findings in this study suggest that team-teaching can facilitate student learning through the generation of interest and exposure to ‘experts’, but can hinder student learning if the team fails to act as a cohesive unit and work together to adequately link learning concepts. This study also argues that the most critical factor in determining the success or failure of a team-teaching effort is the actual composition of the team. A key implication of this study is that a team that comprises of ‘good teachers’ (perceived as those skilful in teaching large classes) is far more important than a team comprising of ‘experts’ in different knowledge areas. This aspect of team-teaching is often overlooked in the literature.

Embedding Core Skills in First-Year Engineering Students with Applications in Embedded System Design

“…It became common for instructors to cover multiple sections for the projects in their own discipline and trade away their section on projects they were less comfortable with. This resulted in heightened instructor exhaustion along with increased student frustration and confusionconsequences in agreement with the reports of others [2].…”

La codocencia para la formación docente en educación integrada: una experiencia con STEAM y AICLE

“…A pesar de estas bondades, las relaciones de codocencia no son simples y, de hecho, no se dan de forma natural (Clancy et al, 2015). Según Yanamandram y Noble (2005), el éxito de la colaboración en la codocencia requiere una inversión de tiempo y esfuerzo y una preparación cuidadosa.…”

Revolutionizing Learning Environments with Guerrilla Pedagogy in Large Classes

“…As a result, there are many models of team teaching. In some models of collaborative teaching, instructors collaborate on the evaluation of learners (e.g., Yanamandram & Noble, 2006). In other models, instructors collaborate during planning and instruction (e.g., Lock et al, 2018;Yanamandram & Noble, 2006;Zhang & Keim, 1993).…”

“…In some models of collaborative teaching, instructors collaborate on the evaluation of learners (e.g., Yanamandram & Noble, 2006). In other models, instructors collaborate during planning and instruction (e.g., Lock et al, 2018;Yanamandram & Noble, 2006;Zhang & Keim, 1993). When educators plan together, they also agree on content to be taught, materials to be used, and how the content will be delivered and who does what and when.…”

“…As a result, guerilla instruction is a collaborative strategy that could save on planning time. Yanamandram and Noble (2006) highlight four elements that are important in team teaching:…”