Tomorrow's Professor™ Listserve #6
Messages 51-60
-----------------------------------------------------------------
51 - How Students Learn, How Teachers Teach, And What Goes Wrong With the Process
52 - Negotiating Up-Front For The Right Start-Up Package
53 - The Information Glut; a New (Or Is It Old?) Perspective
54 - Respecting Our Students
55 - The High-Leverage Impact of One "Non-Traditional" Student on An Academic Research Program
56 - The Right Start-Up Package - It’s Not Just About Money
57 - Interesting Statistics On Higher Education In The u.s.
58 - Other Uses of Teaching Evaluations
59 - The "Next-Stage" Approach To Preparing For An Academic Career
60 - On Linking Research Grants To Teaching Evaluations
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #51 - HOW STUDENTS LEARN, HOW TEACHERS TEACH, AND WHAT GOES WRONG WITH THE PROCESS
Folks:
At the recent NSF sponsored, New Century Scholars Workshop, held on August 2-7, 1998 at Stanford University, Richard M. Felder , professor of chemical engineering at North Carolina State University presented the results of some of the very interesting work he and his colleague, Rebecca Brent have been doing on student learning styles. Here is my summary of his remarks (based in part on his handouts and on the reference at the end of this message.) Further information can be found at Felder's web site at [http://www2.ncsu.edu/effective_teaching/].
Richard Reis
reis@stanford.edu
UP NEXT - Negotiating Up-Front for the Right Start-up Package
----------------------- 655 words -----------------------
HOW STUDENTS LEARN, HOW TEACHERS TEACH, AND WHAT GOES WRONG WITH THE PROCESS
Richard M. Felder
North Carolina State University
8/3/98
* Different students learn in different ways, that is, they have different learning styles.
* Different faculty also teach in different ways, that is, they have different teaching styles.
* Learning styles can be defined in large part by the answers to five questions:
(1) What type of information does the student preferentially perceive: sensory (external) - sights, sounds, physical sensations, or intuitive (internal) - possibilities, insights, hunches?
(2) Through which sensory channel is external information most effectively perceived: visual - pictures, diagrams, graphs, demonstrations, or auditory - words, sounds?*
(3) With which organization of information is the student most comfortable: inductive - facts and observations are given, underlying principles are inferred, or deductive - principles are given, consequences and applications are deduced?
(4) How does the student prefer to process information: actively - through engagement in physical activity or discussion, or reflectively - through introspection?
(5) How does the student progress toward understanding: sequentially - in continual steps, or globally - in large jumps, holistically?
* Teaching styles may also be defined in terms of the answers to five questions:
(1) What type of information is emphasized by the instructor: concrete - factual, or abstract - conceptual, theoretical?
(2) What mode of presentation is stressed: visual - pictures, diagrams, films, demonstrations, or verbal - lectures, readings, discussions?
(3) How is the presentation organized: inductively - phenomena leading to principles, or deductively - principles leading to phenomena?
(4) What mode of student participation is facilitated by the presentation: active - students talk, move, reflect, or passive - students watch and listen?
(5) What type of perspective is provided on the information presented: sequential - step-by-step progression (the trees), or global - context and relevance (the forest)? [6]
* Problems occur because there are often significant mismatches between the learning styles of most college students and the teaching styles of most college professors.
* The key to dealing with the above reality is "BALANCE." The goal is NOT to match each students preferred learning style with a corresponding teaching style, rather it is to present a variety of teaching styles to all learners.
* Professionals need to function as sensors (practical, methodical) and intuitors (interpretive, imaginative), visual and verbal learners, etc.
* Students taught only in their less preferred modes can't learn effectively.
* Students taught only in their preferred modes won't develop balanced strength.
* Solution: Teach to both sides of each dimension.
Felder offers the following recommendations to address various learning types:
* Establish relevance and provide applications for all course material. Before presenting theoretical material, provide graphic examples of phenomena that the theory describes or predicts. (sensing, inductive, global)
* Balance concrete information (facts, observations, data) (sensing) and abstract information (principles, theories, models) (intuitive) in all courses.
* Make extensive use of pictures, schematics, graphs, and simple sketches before, during, and after presenting verbal material. (sensing, visual)
* Use multimedia presentations. (sensing, visual) Provide demonstrations (sensing, visual), hands-on if possible.
* Use some numbers in illustrative examples, not just algebraic variables. (sensing)
* Give students time to think about what they have been told. Assign "one-minute papers" (Write the main point of this lecture and the muddiest point) or learning logs. (reflective)
* Give small-group exercises in class. (active, reflective)
* Use computer-assisted instruction (if you have software that allows for experimentation and provides feedback). (sensing, active)
* Assign some drill exercises in homework (sensing, active) but don't overdo it (intuitive, reflective).
* Assign some open-ended problems and exercises that call for creative thinking and critical judgment. (all styles)
* Have students cooperate on homework. (all styles)
* Limit new material, surprises, twists, etc., on timed tests and minimize speed as a critical factor. (sensing)
* Encourage creative solutions, even wrong ones. (all styles)
* Tell students about their learning styles or let them assess their own style. See the Index of Learning Styles at above web site.
* Try a few of these suggestions at a time. Adopt the ones that work. Then try a few more.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
R.M. Felder & R. Brent, National Effective Teaching Institute, 1998
R. M. Felder and L.K. Silverman, "Learning and teachings styles in engineering education," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 77, no. 2, April, 1988
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tomorrow's Professor Msg. 52 Negotiating Up-Front for the Right Start-Up Package
Folks:
Here are some further comments, in response to an inquiry of a graduate student, on negotiating for the right start-up package for academic positions. The remarks are from Judith A. Hewitt, assistant professor, Microbiology & Immunology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, and are reprinted with her permission.
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: The Information Glut: A New (Or Is It Old?) - Perspective
------------- 539 words --------------
NEGOTIATING UP-FRONT FOR THE RIGHT START-UP PACKAGE
I will offer some comments, but I'm afraid I don't fall into the category of somebody who did it right (but I didn't do it wrong either).
First, I just finished reading a book called "On the Market: Surviving the Academic Job Search" edited by Christina Boufis and Victoria C. Olsen (Available from Amazon.com, $10.36). It is mainly about recent (94-95) Ph.D.'s in the humanities not being able to find academic positions when there was supposed to be a predicted shortage of professors. While the climate in science may be different, it was still worth reading. For one thing, it made me realize that I don't have it so bad after all, even though there is plenty of room for improvement. It did have some suggestions about interviewing, but I think the big take home lesson is that in a competitive market, getting a job is more about being the "peg that fits the hole" rather than just being good and getting interviews.
The book is easy reading since it is a collection of essays by 30 people who have been there, some successful and some not. It also has a number of useful web sites listed at the back including:
http://psyche.uthct.edu/nes/nes.html (has a new page on interviewing)
http://www.physics.uiuc.edu/ysn/httpd/htdocs/ysnarchive/index.html
Given that I'm here and didn't negotiate tough up front, what works best for me is to know that there are other people in my situation. For instance, one woman here who is maybe 5-7 years ahead of me in the career progression (although she is an MD so it's a bit different) found out that she was paid less than male counterparts. Once she got a grant, albeit not a huge one, she had a leg to stand on and asked for more money and got it. It was very helpful to know that situations can be improved even once you're there, but the major message in the book is to get as good a deal as you can up front.
In my case, I didn't do the above as well as I could, although things are beginning to change for me now. I think that academia is in a state of flux, and that is what determines whether or not you are able to get what you want. Also, every place is going to have a different culture, and as prepared as you might be, you can't know everything before the interview or even before you start the job.
I don't know if this helps or not. Personally, I find it easier to play
the game now that I'm in it, rather than trying to get picked for a team, which is what that book is all about. A recent interview helped me to realize that even though the glass is half empty, it's also half full and likely to be the same in other places. *And*, there are plenty of people here who got fine packages up front, and are still anxious about their future. I'm sure other peoples' experiences can offer a different perspective. I don't want to sound depressing, but I do think it is important to be realistic.
Judith A. Hewitt, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Microbiology & Immunology
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #53 - THE INFORMATION GLUT; A NEW (OR IS IT OLD?) PERSPECTIVE
Folks:
Below is a copy of a letter that appeared in the June 5, 1998 issue of theChronicle of Higher Education (Vol. XLIV, No. 39, p. B3). It is by DennisBaron, head, Department of English, professor of English and Linguistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and is reprinted with his permission. The letter reminds us all that there is much historicalprecedent for what we often assume is a unique phenomenon of the late 20th century - the information glut. In fact, it leads me to recall (not personally of course) the great worry around the turn of the last century, that with the advent of large public libraries, students would spend all of their days "lost in the stacks" superficially scanning hundreds of columns, never having time to read anything in depth, while wasting away without sunlight and exercise. Sound familiar?
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: Respecting Our Students
----------------------468 words ------------------
THE INFORMATION GLUT; A NEW (OR IS IT OLD?) PERSPECTIVE
To The Editor (Chronicle of Higher Education):
Todd Gitlin worries about the information glut on the World Wide Web. Many of us have trouble sorting through the vast amount of data accumulating in cyberspace. It may be no consolation, but the situation is not really a new one. We've been this route before, developing ways of dealing with the explosion of print materials that came with the introduction of the printing press, or the explosion of written documents that followed the invention of writing a few thousand years ago.
This leads me to ask: Is there an information glut today, or rather a perception that one exists? If I do a keyword search on the Internet, I may get 50,000 hits in response. I'm not likely to wade through more than the first 10 or 20 - although if I'm really after something, I may look at 100 sites.
But I also work at an institution with a large library. We have over eight million books....in our library. When I go to that library, I don't feel a sense of information glut. When I do a library search I don't get 50,000 "hits." That's because we have developed methods to access library materials (librarians, catalogues, indexes, computer data bases, etc.)
There was a time when libraries and archives were much less easy to use than they are now. Books did not start with tables of contents or end with indexes. It's hard to imagine now, but we once had no notion of putting things in alphabetical order. Nor was there much of a system, in the early days of writing, for sorting what we wrote. Cataloguing in classical Athens meant the municipal-archive administrator put a scroll or tablet in a convenient jar, adding new jars as they filled up. When the administrator died, the information became basically irretrievable, unless of course you went through every jar, every scroll-a situation that would leave you cursing the information glut. And, of course, many scholars still deal with archives that consist of boxes of undescribed, uncatalogued materials.
Using an uncatalogued data base reminds me of Sartre's La Nausee, in which he narrator meets a character who seven years earlier had entered a public library and took the first book from the first shelf on the far right and opened it to the first page..... The narator concludes.."and the day will come when he will say, in closing the last volume from the last shelf on the far left, 'And now?'"
Eventually, we will develop new search procedures on the Net, ones that match or even exceed the efficiency of our library searches. Meanwhile, both our electronic and print data bases continue to grow, and we continue to deal with that growth as best we can. If that doesn't work, there's always existentialism.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message # 54 RESPECTING OUR STUDENTS
Folks:
At the recent NSF, New Century Scholars workshop held at Stanford
University, John Bravman, professor and chair of the Materials Science and Engineering department, and winner of numerous Stanford teaching awards, gave a talk on the "Essential Concepts for Successful Lecturing." Here is my summary of his comments about the importance of respecting our students.
--------------------- 315 words -------------------
RESPECTING OUT STUDENTS
We hear a lot about today about how students don't show respect for their professors. Well, respect is a two-way street, in which teachers also need to earn the respect of their students. Students do have major responsibility for being motivated, but faculty can still help a great deal. Here are some things you can do that will show students that your respect them:
* Clearly establish high expectations for the course, and then be consistent. This is true for "behavior" as well as for academic work.
(Note: Easy does not mean "good," hard does not mean "bad." In fact, there is no correlation at all with how difficult a course is and student evaluations of the course and the instructor.)
* Enforce prerequisites, but make clear what students are expected to know going in.
* Timeliness: start and end class on time. Be on time with grading of homework and exams.
* Accessibility outside class: keep office hours and appointments; return phone calls and emails in a timely manner.
* Deliver a quality product; students are very sensitive to a blasé, uncaring attitude. "Responsiveness" and "enthusiasm" are highly correlated with student satisfaction.
* Don't change "the rules" (regarding assignments, exams, and projects) in mid-quarter.
* Use third-week teaching evaluations; short, but to the point; or, talk with several students who will give you honest feedback. (Consider naming 2-3 class ombudsperson with the job of talking to other students and then giving you feedback.)
* Ask questions of the audience frequently! Insist that they answer. (Most students assume that you will answer the question yourself if they just sit tight, avoid eye contact with you, and say nothing.)
* In general, be reflective and self-critical of your lectures.
* Admit ignorance ("I don't know the answer to that"); don't waste precious lecture time trying to show how much you know.
* Admit mistakes.
* Don't let students show lack of respect to other students.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #55 THE HIGH-LEVERAGE IMPACT OF ONE "NON-TRADITIONAL" STUDENT ON AN ACADEMIC RESEARCH PROGRAM
Folks:
The following message from mechanical engineering Professor Lisa Pruitt at University of California, Berkeley, describes the significant, and in some ways unanticipated impact of bringing a "non-traditional" student into her research laboratory. There is much in this story for all of us to admire - and emulate.
Regards,
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: The Right Start-Up Package - It's Not Just About Money
---------------------- 454 words -----------------------
THE HIGH-LEVERAGE IMPACT OF ONE "NON-TRADITIONAL" STUDENT ON AN ACADEMIC RESEARCH PROGRAM
As an assistant professor, I had the opportunity to advise an exceptional graduate student. She was a "non-traditional" student in that she had a severe disability that prevented her from using her hands. This student was interested in working with me on one of my biomaterials projects. At that time I only had experimental projects underway in my laboratory, yet rather than turning her away we came up with a plan to have undergraduates assist her with her experiments.
Initially this plan required some extra work and planning, yet in the long run it was most beneficial to the student, my research group, and the undergraduates who worked with her. Everything I put into this student I got back (and more). Advising her not only added diversity to my research group, it was a wonderful experience. It was because of her disability that I initially took in several undergraduates into my research group which subsequently led to a very strong undergraduate presence in my laboratory.
The undergraduates who assisted this student had a unique opportunity to work closely with a doctoral candidate and to learn invaluable experimental techniques. Each of these undergraduate students went on to graduate school while my graduate student (who also was my first Ph.D. student to graduate) went on to a research position in a government laboratory
Diversity propagates itself. Undergraduate and graduate students choose specific research labs/advisors based on the recommendation of their friends or colleagues. The positive experiences of these students provide invaluable information for future students. The positive experience of one "non-traditional student" will give the message that you are receptive to non-traditional students in your group. I do not go out of my way to "recruit" non-traditional or minority students but in the last five years I have had several "minority" or non-traditional students (both graduate and undergraduate) in my laboratory.
Furthermore, diversity in our research group affects the scientific
community, outreach programs and public perception. At scientific research meetings, I often bring my whole research group. We are often noticed initially because of our diversity. This notice has resulted in numerous industrial collaborations and job offers for my students. Further, we are active participants in outreach programs and have hosted numerous K-12 and open houses in the research laboratory. These activities have had a positive impact on the public perception of science and engineering. When young students or children visit a diverse research laboratory, it not only provides stimulus for science-- it provides them with a message that not
all engineering and science students are of a certain background, gender or ethnicity.
Lisa A. Pruitt
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering
University of California@Berkeley
lpruitt@newton.berkeley.edu
http://euler.berkeley.edu/me/faculty/pruitt.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #56 THE RIGHT START-UP PACKAGE - IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT MONEY
Folks:
The following note from Hy D. Tran, assistant professor of Mechanical
Engineering and of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of New Mexico gives some important insights on negotiating for a successful start-up package for beginning professors.
Regards,
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: Interesting Statistics on Higher Education
-------------------------- 462 words ------------------------
THE RIGHT START-UP PACKAGE: IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY
It is generally accepted that one has the best negotiation position before accepting an offer, and vice-versa. It is also accepted that offers are virtual (vaporware, if you will), unless they are in writing. However, a lot of verbal exploration is a part of any negotiation process. Regardless of how careful you are, there will always be
surprises--promises made in writing may be subject to "interpretation" (e.g. you thought you had a 2000 sq. ft lab promised to you, but it's really a broom closet...) The most important thing is the people--do you feel that you will be comfortable in the environment that you've been interviewing. You must realize that your future department is always putting its best foot forward (these are all truisms, even in non-academic environments).
The most important part about negotiating a startup package is to realize that it's not about money! It's about getting your career launched as quickly and effectively as possible. Insofar as money is useful (e.g. you can now afford to buy lunch, dinner, and use a laundry service) money is important. But in addition to salary, you have to ask for laboratory/office space, professional development support, equipment money, student support funds, and reduced teaching commitments. If you are expected to do research, the reduced teaching load is probably the most important part of your startup! Try to get (in writing in your offer) a reduced teaching load for as long as you can. In addition, a departmental or school commitment to reduce your teaching load can be used to demonstrate to funding agencies the "institutional commitment" This is time that you can use to write proposals, publications, and do research. You can (and should) also use this time during your first year to prepare a "career roadmap." If you can sketch out a career roadmap prior to getting a written offer, all the better.
So, while you're out interviewing (or before), think about what is it that you want, and what you *really* need. (I want a salary in 6 digits, but can make do with 5; but I *really* need parking, etc.) For me, a very important consideration was child care. Classify those
desires--compensation; work environment; expectations; support--and think about what contribution *you* are making to your department. Why are they interviewing you? What is it that they're looking for? Will you be happy fulfilling their expectations? Then, negotiate for the things that you will need in order to succeed.
That said, you should not offer to take less $$ than they're willing to
give :-)
Dr Hy D. Tran, PE
Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering
and of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Mechanical Engineering Building Room 330
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
E-mail: tran@me.unm.edu
Tel:(505)277-2831
http://me.unm.edu
Fax:(505)277-1571
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #57 INTERESTING STATISTICS ON HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE U.S.
Folks:
Each year the Chronicle of Higher Education publishes an Almanac Issue with extensive statistics on all aspects of higher education in the U.S. Here are few results that I thought might be of interested to academics in science and engineering. (From: The Chronicle of Higher Education, Almanac Issue, August 28, 1998, vol. XLV, no.1.)
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: Other Uses of Teaching Evaluations
------------------------------- 461 words ---------------------------
INTERESTING STATISTICS ON HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE U.S.
Number of colleges and universities
Top institutions in research and development expenditures - fiscal
1996
Institutions with the largest endowment per student - 1997
Campuses with the largest enrollment
Institutions enrolling the most foreign students
Student enrollment by type of institution
Student enrollment by status
Degrees awarded
Percent doctorates awarded - 1996 - selected fields
Number of earned doctorates 1994-95 - selected fields
Universities awarding most earned doctorates - 1996
Total number of faculty - 1995 (932,000, 59% full--time, 41%
part-time)
Average pay of full-time professors
Number of colleges and universities
Public 4yr (613)
Public 2yr (1,088)
Private 4yr non-profit (1,510)
Private 4yr for-profit (144)
Private 2yr non-profit (184)
Private 2yr for-profit (470)
Total (4,009)
Top institutions in research and development expenditures - fiscal
1996
Johns Hopkins University ($710,119,000) Note - figure includes $42
M
for the Applied Physics Laboratory)
University of Washington ($312,695,000)
University of California - San Diego ($291,917,000)
Stanford University ($281,641,000)
University of Michigan ($281,062,000)
Institutions with the largest endowment per student - 1997
Princeton University ($775,773/student)
Academy of the New Church College ($712,527/student)
Webb Institute ($638,690/student)
Agnes Scott College ($611,496/student)
Harvard University ($610,140/student)
Campuses with the largest enrollment
Community College of the Air Force (63,123)
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities (51,388)
Miami-Dade Community College (48,795)
Ohio State University - main campus (48,352)
University of Texas - Austin (48,008)
Institutions enrolling the most foreign students
Boston University (4,657)
New York University (4,491)
University of Southern California (4,183)
University of Wisconsin-Madison (3,886)
Columbia University (3,807)
Student enrollment by type of institution
Public 4yr (5,806,036)
Public 2yr (5,314,463)
Private 4yr (2,998,157)
Private 2yr (248,864)
Student enrollment by status
Undergraduate (12,326,948)
Graduate (1,742,260)
Professional (298,312)
Degrees awarded
AA (539,691)
Bachelor's (1,160,134)
Master's (397,629)
Doctorate (44,446)
Professional (75,800)
Percent doctorates awarded - 1996 - selected fields
Engineering (male - 87.7%, female 12.3%)
Life Sciences (male 56.5%, female 43.5%)
Physical Sciences (male 79.3%, female 20.7%)
Number of earned doctorates 1994-95 - selected fields
Bio./Life Sciences (4,545)
Computer Science/Information Science (884)
Engineering (6,110)
Mathematics (1,226)
Physical Sciences (4,483)
Universities awarding most earned doctorates - 1996
University of California - Berkeley (786)
University of Wisconsin - Madison (752)
University of Texas - Austin (744)
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities (724)
Ohio State University (708)
Total number of faculty - 1995 (932,000, 59% full--time, 41% part-time)
Average pay of full-time professors
Professors ($69,924)
Associate Professors ($50,186)
Assistant Professors ($42,335)
All ($55,068)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #58 OTHER USES OF TEACHING EVALUATIONS
Folks:
The posting below describes two interesting uses for teaching evaluations. It originally appeared as a letter to the editor in the August 17, 1998 issue of The Scientist (The News Journal for the Life Scientist), Vol. 12, no. 16, p.8, and is reprinted here with the permission of the author, Howard M. Lenhoff, Department of Developmental and Cell Biology, University of California, Irvine (hmlenhof@uci.edu).
Regards,
Rick Reis
reis@dcr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: The "Next-Stage" Approach to Preparing for an Academic Career
-------------------- 372words --------------------
OTHER USES FOR TEACHING EVALUATIONS
The article by Ricki Lewis, "Teaching Evaluations: Widespread and
Controversial" (The Scientists, 12[9]:12-13, April 27, 1998), hit some important points regarding the use of teaching evaluations. I suggest two other (uses of evaluations):
Daily Evaluations:
If the purpose of teaching evaluations is to improve teaching, I recommend instituting daily evaluations of every lecture, rather than taking them when the semester or quarter is over. For the evaluations to have the greatest impact, the improvements must be made during the time that it can help the students writing the evaluations. I do this and find the process simple and confidential. At the beginning of every class, I pass out 10 to 20 half-sheets of paper with a few questions, such as, "Did you find any parts of the lecture unclear?" or "Did I cover the material too slowly, too rapidly, just right?" Then I leave space for comments. Usually I get back
half of the questionnaires, and invariably I find them quite helpful. I look themover, and at the beginning of the next lecture I answer any questions that appear to bother a number of students. I also try to rectify any teaching techniques that they find confusing.
Use of Evaluations for Promotion and Tenure:
If a department has developed a well-thought-out evaluation form to be used in the promotion and tenure process, then why not have federal granting agencies require university professors to submit the latest evaluations of their teaching performance with their grant proposals and renewal requests. The process would not make it more difficult for faculty members to apply for research grants. They would merely need to attach to their proposals the evaluations of their teaching performance that were submitted to their department as part of their most recent request for promotion or for merit-based increase in salary. Such a simple modification of our granting procedure would serve broad notice that the nation's granting agencies and the taxpayers who make those grants possible have a clear goal. The country wants the research scholars at our universities to be deeply concerned with their teaching responsibilities, and, in so doing, to stimulate our youth to follow in their footsteps.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #59 THE "NEXT-STAGE" APPROACH TO PREPARING FOR AN ACADEMIC CAREER
Folks:
In preparing for an academic career, or really any post-graduate employment, it is wise to look ahead to some of the things you will be doing in the next position you want to occupy and see if you can't take on some of these duties while still a graduate student or post-doc. This Next-Stage approach is described in more detail below.
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: On Linking Research Grants to Teaching Evaluations
-------------------- 581 words --------------------
THE "NEXT-STAGE" APPROACH TO PREPARING FOR AN ACADEMIC CAREER
In the Next Stage approach, you think ahead, look ahead, and to some degree act ahead of the stage you (and your future competition) are currently occupying. By doing so, you not only demonstrate your WILLINGNESS to assume the role of the position you are seeking, but also your READINESS to do so. Just as most of the best graduate students began taking graduate courses and/or conducting research as college seniors, you need to begin doing some of the things professors do while you are still a graduate student and postdoc. Today it is not enough to be outstanding in your current job, you must also demonstrate that you can be successful in the NEXT JOB for which you want to apply by actually PERFORMING in advance some of the activities and responsibilities that are part of that job.
Here are some areas in which demonstrating this "next-stage" competence would be important. No one expects you to demonstrate all of them. However, doing at least some of them will distinguish you from most of your competition, and within limits, the more you can do the better.
RESEARCH - In addition to having identified a dissertation or a postdoc research project that is compelling as opposed to just interesting, look for ways to engage in cross-disciplinary and multidisciplinary activities with faculty and students from other areas or departments - with the permission of your advisor or supervisor of course.
TECHNICAL REVIEWING - Find opportunities, both formal and informal, often for you to review papers, grants, and proposals written by others.
PROPOSAL WRITING - In addition to reviewing the proposals of others and contributing sections to your advisor's proposals, write your own proposals and grant applications for research that you want to do as a professor.
SUPERVISION OF OTHER STUDENTS- As you advance in your development as a graduate student or postdoc, find ways to play a more formal role in the supervision of other students, both undergraduate and graduate.
PUBLISHING - Coauthorship is fine, but make sure you publish at least one article in which you are the first author.
PRESENTATIONS AT CONFERENCES - Establish a record of giving technical presentations at conferences in which faculty and industrial researchers are present.
RELATIONS WITH INDUSTRY- Visit various research sites and give technical presentations, use equipment, samples, and other industry resources in your research, conduct joint investigations, publish with industrial collaborators, and consider internships and other forms of employment with industry or government laboratories.
TEACHING - Plan to acquire at least some experiences beyond those of a typical TA, such as giving lectures, covering sections of a class or even taking full responsibility for a course.
The key steps in the Next-Stage approach are to ask questions (think ahead), make observations (look ahead), and acquire experiences (act ahead) by putting yourself in the right places at the right times and tuning your antenna to the gathering of the right information. You can do this in a variety of settings, such as classrooms, laboratories, faculty offices, staff meetings, seminars (particularly with guest speakers from other schools), professional conferences, private discussions with students and faculty, and during visits to industrial and government R&D facilities. In all cases, the key question is: AM I LIKELY TO ENCOUNTER THIS SITUATION AS A PROFESSOR, OR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIST OR ENGINEER, AND IF SO, WHAT>CAN I LEARN FROM IT THAT WILL HELP ME TO DO BETTER PREPARE ME FOR SUCH A>ROLE?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message #.60 ON LINKING RESEARCH GRANTS TO TEACHING EVALUATIONS
Folks:
Below is an interesting message from Professor: Michael D. Bryant, mechanical engineering department, The University of Texas at Austin in response to the portion of Message #58 on the tying the awarding of research grants to teaching evaluations.
As always, your comments are most welcome.
Rick Reis
reis@cdr.stanford.edu
UP NEXT: Report on Important New Affirmative Action Study
------------------------------ 328 words -----------------------------
ON LINKING RESEARCH GRANTS TO TEACHING EVALUATIONS
I am a proponent of good teaching. At University of Texas at Austin, a good teaching record is an essential part of any promotion, as it should be. I have seen several promotion cases rejected at UT-Austin because the teaching evaluations were low. I agree with the emphasis on good and competent teaching, but I believe the comments in "Msg.# 58 Other Uses of Teaching Evaluations," concerning the need to connect the awarding of research grants to teaching evaluations are way off base. Yes, good teaching and research are intermingled, and one reinforces the other, however, I VERY MUCH disagree with the contention that research proposals should be evaluated and granted with teaching evaluations in mind.
National Science Foundation and other agency guidelines for evaluating proposals usually stress as paramount the strength and novelty of the basic idea, the proposer's research track record, and the research plan. Years of observing relationships between proposals and successful research went into forming these guidelines. However well intentioned, granting proposals via considerations not-related-to-doing-the-actual-research have the potential for wasting HARD TO GET RESEARCH money. This includes granting research proposals via teaching evaluations.
Wasting research dollars derived from taxpayers (federal and state) and investors (industrial) pose dangers. Underwriters frustrated with substandard research could slow or halt the already scarce research funding. It's happened before in certain fields. This WOULD AFFECT the non-classroom teaching of graduate and (some) undergraduate students who are research assistants.
Tomorrow's (and today's) professor is expected to be a competent teacher, researcher, and servant to the community. The academy should evaluate all the above. If, as mentioned in Msg.# 58, it is true that the problem with focusing on research is that good research does guarantee good teaching, then the converse is also true: good teaching does not guarantee good research. We should evaluate BOTH, but separately.
Professor: Michael D. Bryant
Mechanical Engineering
The University of Texas at Austin
mbryant@mail.utexas.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Postings 1-60 can now be found at:
http://cis.stanford.edu/structure/tomprof/listserver.html
Anyone can SUBSCRIBE to Tomorrows-Professor Listserver by sending the following e-mail message to: Majordomo@lists.stanford.edu
subscribe tomorrows-professor
To UNSUBSCRIBE to the Tomorrows-Professor send the following e-mail message to: Majordomo@lists.stanford.edu
unsubscribe tomorrows-professor
------------------------------------------------------------------------