February 4, 2011 Leave a comment
In the statement for the tenure review in 2001, I discussed my teaching under the headings:
- A. Wide Scope of My Teaching and its Active, Ongoing Development
- B. The Philosophy of Teaching Critical Thinking I Brought to UMB
- C. Teaching Critical Thinking about Science in its Social Context
- D. Leading Students from Critical Thinking to Taking Initiative
- E. Learning from Difficult Courses in a Thoughtful, Respectful, and Professional Manner
- F. Learning from Educators beyond CCT
- G. Promoting Collegial Interaction Around Innovation in Teaching
(Discussion of related themes and exhibits from a 1999 review can be viewed at http://www.faculty.umb.edu/pjt/portfolio99exhibits.html.)
The last heading points the sharing of work I pursue in a number of ways:
- documentation of process and outcomes, evident in my Practitioner’s Portfolio;
- regular presentations and workshops, both at UMB (under the auspices of CIT) and outside; and
- posting on my website of teaching and learning thought-pieces, tools, and activities (linked to each syllabus) [supplemented in recent years on wikis, such as this page].
Creating and maintaining a web presence for my work is one way my teaching is also characterized by
- H. Making educationally justified and sustainable choices of when and how to integrate technologies
Related thought-pieces and compilations of exhibits
Guidelines about specific situations and specific ways in which specific technologies are of significant pedagogical benefit. (With case studies from science education)
“We know more than we are, at first, prepared to acknowledge: Journeying to develop critical thinking”
- “five passages in a pedagogical journey that has led from teaching undergraduate science-in-society courses to running a graduate program in critical thinking and reflective practice for teachers and other mid-career professionals”
Review of Courses, aka Practitioner’s Portfolio.
- For each course taught at UMB since 1998 I include a review of:
- the original objectives for the course (which should be read together with the description and goals stated in the syllabi);
- challenges encountered and my responses; and
- future plans.
- Each review is followed by:
- the syllabi;
- summaries of the GCoE evaluations;
- summaries from the written course evaluations I designed; and/or the originals of those evaluations.