CPD: How teaching assistants can support student learning

SecEd ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (29) ◽  
pp. 14-14
Author(s):  
Steve Burnage
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants

scholarly journals Teacher immediacy and student learning: An examination of lecture/laboratory and self-contained course sections

2014 ◽  
pp. 29-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke LeFebvre ◽  
Mike Allen
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Cognitive Learning ◽  
Student Interaction ◽  
Teacher Immediacy ◽  
Student Effort ◽  
Immediacy Behaviors ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Instruction Quality ◽  
Behavior Frequency

This study examined teaching assistant’s immediacy in lecture/laboratory and self-contained classes.  Two hundred fifty-six students responded to instruments measuring teachers’ immediacy behavior frequency, perceptions of instruction quality, and cognitive learning.  No significant difference was identified when comparing lecture/laboratory and self-contained teaching assistants’ immediacy behaviors.  But all students who observed frequent immediate behaviors demonstrated higher affective and cognitive learning.  Teaching assistants’ ratings had significantly higher levels of faculty-student interaction for self-contained sections but lecture/laboratory sections were significantly higher for student effort/involvement. 

scholarly journals Undergraduate teaching assistants can provide support for reformed practices to raise student learning

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-38
Author(s):  
Douglas B. Luckie ◽  
Benjamin W. Mancini ◽  
Noor Abdallah ◽  
Ali K. Kadouh ◽  
Alisha C. P. Ungkuldee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Shared Vision ◽  
University Teaching ◽  
Undergraduate Teaching ◽  
Publish Or Perish ◽  
Undergraduate Instruction ◽  
Engineering Mathematics ◽  
Additional Support

Graduate students who serve as teaching assistants are a critical part of STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) education and research at large universities in the U.S. Yet just like faculty, graduate students are not immune to the publish or perish paradigm, which can compete with one's dedication to teaching. While in recent years many STEM faculty members have become aware of how well undergraduates can assist instructors in their teaching, many, if not most, university faculty still teach in traditional settings, where graduate students are the norm and use of undergraduates is a completely unexploited opportunity. Undergraduates can serve as effective teaching assistants and may bring unique skills and experience to undergraduate instruction not held by graduate students. Undergraduate teaching assistants (UTAs) can provide additional support for reformed practices, which raise student learning. Based on cost, prior experience and success as students in same course, and shared vision with professors, a number of institutions have initiated UTA programs and reported increased student learning. The audience of this paper is faculty who are not familiar with the use of UTAs in university teaching, and the purpose is to review the literature on UTAs, contrast the contributions of UTAs and graduate teaching assistants, and examine the potential value of UTAs in undergraduate education.

scholarly journals Toward a More Perfect Union: Increasing Student Assistant Efficacy through an Online Training Program

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-25
Author(s):  
Jacob Minniear ◽  
Jennifer Hornbaker
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Training Program ◽  
Student Teaching ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Online Training ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Local Culture ◽  
Domestic Student ◽  
Current Procedure

Using domestic student teaching assistants (SAs) in the ESOL classroom has been widely accepted as an effective tool for enhancing student learning. SAs have been shown to facilitate student participation in the classroom, foster students’ confidence in interacting with native speakers, and serve as a connection to the local culture (Lynch & Anderson, 2001). To capitalize on the benefits afforded by SAs, the AEC has, since 2007, integrated SAs into level one courses. However, research literature underscores that, to maximize SA efficacy, SAs must be purposefully trained for their roles (Gube & Phillipson, 2011; Kachi & Choon-hwa, 2001; Underhill & McDonald, 2010; Williams, 1991). As new GTAs, we observed that the AEC’s SAs represent a broad range of personalities, facilities, and experiences. Given these variances in SAs’ skills, we found ourselves questioning to what standard of knowledge we could and should hold them. Defining such a standard would enable teachers to design class activities that most productively draw upon the strengths of SAs without overstepping the boundaries of their expertise. Three lines of inquiry arose out of this realization: 1) What are the expectations of SAs at the AEC? 2) Do the AEC’s current, procedure-focused SA training practices satisfactorily prepare SAs to meet these expectations? If not, 3) how can the training program be improved to make the presence of SAs in the classroom more fruitful for students, teachers, and SAs alike?

Relationship between teaching assistants’ perceptions of student learning challenges and their use of external representations when teaching acid–base titrations in introductory chemistry laboratory courses

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 821-836
Author(s):  
Nicole Baldwin ◽  
MaryKay Orgill
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Chemistry Laboratory ◽  
External Representations ◽  
Acid Base ◽  
Chemistry Teaching ◽  
Laboratory Courses ◽  
Learning Challenges ◽  
Teaching Assistant Training ◽  
Learning Chemistry

Practicing chemists use models, diagrams, symbols, and figures to represent phenomena which cannot be detected by the human senses. Although research suggests that these external representations (ERs) can also be used to address the challenges that students have in learning chemistry, it is not clear how instructors' use of ERs aligns with their perceptions of student learning difficulties. In other words, do instructors use ERs to address what they perceive as students' major challenges in learning chemistry, or are they using ERs for other reasons? The answer to this question could have implications for the professional development of chemistry instructors, including both classroom instructors and laboratory facilitators. As a pilot study to guide the development of a larger project focused on the use and interpretation of ERs, we interviewed eleven general chemistry teaching assistants at a major university in the U.S. Southwest about their use of ERs when facilitating acid–base titration laboratory activities. Our data suggest that there is a lack of alignment between teaching assistants’ primary reported use of ERs and the primary challenge that they perceive their students have when learning about acid–base titrations. We discuss potential reasons for this misalignment, as well as implications for teaching assistant training related to the use of ERs in the laboratory learning environment.

scholarly journals The Impact of a Pedagogy Course on the Teaching Beliefs of Inexperienced Graduate Teaching Assistants

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. ar5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Star W. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Concept Maps ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Graduate Teaching Assistants ◽  
Teaching Beliefs ◽  
Secondary School Education ◽  
Graduate Teaching ◽  
The Impact

There has been little attention given to teaching beliefs of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs), even though they represent the primary teaching workforce for undergraduate students in discussion and laboratory sections at many research universities. Secondary school education studies have shown that teaching beliefs are malleable and can be shaped by professional development, particularly for inexperienced teachers. This study characterized inexperienced GTAs’ teaching beliefs about student learning and how they change with a science-specific pedagogy course that emphasized student learning. GTA teaching beliefs were characterized as traditional (providing information to students), instructive (providing activities for students), and transitional (focusing on student–teacher relationships). At the start of the course, traditional, instructive, and transitional beliefs were emphasized comparably in the concept maps and presentations of inexperienced GTAs. At the end of the course, although GTAs’ beliefs remained mostly teacher focused, they were more instructive than traditional or transitional. GTAs included teaching strategies and jargon from the course in their concept maps but provided minimal explanations about how opportunities for active student engagement would impact student learning. These results suggest there is a need to provide ongoing discipline-specific professional development to inexperienced GTAs as they develop and strengthen their teaching beliefs about student learning.

scholarly journals Motivation Strategies and Exiting Class by Students in Inquiry-Oriented Biology Labs

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-139
Author(s):  
John M. Basey ◽  
Clinton D. Francis ◽  
Maxwell B. Joseph
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Exit Time ◽  
Student Population ◽  
Exit Times ◽  
Science Labs ◽  
Motivation Strategies

Experimental inquiry-oriented science labs can be designed to have students regulate their own learning and decide when they leave class or to have the teacher regulate student learning and determine when they leave class. In this study, grades were examined relative to student exit times in a student-regulated class design. Preliminary interviews revealed four motivation strategies likely to differentially influence exit times and grades: proficiency, grade-target-A, grade-target-C, and time-limited. Students were categorized into the four groups of motivation strategies with a survey. Twenty teaching assistants teaching three lab sections each taught the stand-alone lab class. Students recorded the time they left class each week. Grades were determined as the overall percentage of points a student received in class. Results of the survey showed that the four motivation strategies were well represented in the student population, and two additional strategies were also frequently seen: a hybrid-1 between proficiency and grade-target-A, and a hybrid-2 between time-limited and grade-target-C. Grades were significantly higher for grade-target-A and hybrid-1 students, followed by time-limited, proficiency, grade-target-C, and hybrid 2. Time spent in class was not significantly different among categories. Students who chose to stay in class longer had significantly higher grades. If a grade is the goal, these results support the idea of a teacher-controlled exit time for the students in these inquiry-oriented labs. Implications are discussed.

Comparison of a Self-Care Therapeutics Course Taught in the P1 vs the P2 Year

2021 ◽  
pp. 089719002110388
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M. Bald ◽  
Demetrius Kourtides ◽  
Nicholas Cox ◽  
Hanna Raber ◽  
James H. Ruble ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Self Care ◽  
Student Learning Outcomes ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Learning Behaviors ◽  
Student Volunteers ◽  
One Year ◽  
Care Course

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare student learning outcomes, behaviors, and attitudes in a non-prescription drug and self-care therapeutics course taught in the second professional (P2) year vs the first professional (P1) year at one pharmacy school. Methods: Mean performance of students by class year on case consultations and exam scores was compared. Focus groups with student volunteers and course teaching assistants (TAs) and one-on-one interviews with a subset of instructors were conducted by an outside educational evaluation specialist to capture perceptions of student learning behaviors and attitudes. Results: There was no difference in performance on graded case consultations (mean difference = 0.16, P = .74, 95% CI [−0.77 to 1.09]), mid-term examinations (mean difference = 0.53, P = .62, 95% CI [−1.59 to 2.65]), or final examinations (mean difference = 0.73, P = .57, 95% CI [−1.83 to 3.30]) between P1 and P2 students. P1 students reported being more consistent in completing pre-class readings and in feeling less distracted by other courses than did P2 students. Students, TAs, and instructors consistently spoke about advantages of the course in the P1 year (e.g., less stress and greater eagerness to learn and apply skills at work) and disadvantages in the P2 year (e.g., distraction from concurrent P2 integrated pharmacotherapeutics course and tension between real-world experience and constraints of grading rubric). Conclusion: P1 students, despite one year earlier in their curriculum, performed equally well as P2 students. All stakeholders agree that the advantages of teaching a self-care course on students’ learning behaviors and attitudes in the P1 year outweigh disadvantages.

scholarly journals Influence of teaching assistants' motivation on student learning

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey Joy Rodgers ◽  
Farshid Marbouti ◽  
Ali Shafaat ◽  
Hyunyi Jung ◽  
Heidi A. Diefes-Dux
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching Assistants
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document