Need of Faculty Training inEngineering(SUBJECT DOMAIN ANDPEDAGOGY)Dr. J. N. JhaProfessor and Head (Civil Engg.)Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana,Punjab IndiaEmail: email@example.com
Effect of Training Job Done in a Wrong way unknowingly(Before Training) Job Done in a Right way knowingly(After Training) Job Done in a Right way unknowingly(Training and Updating)
Faculty Training(Subject domain and Pedagogy) Broad objectives (Pedagogy Training) Assist faculty to become more effective teacherswhich will enable them to improve the learningoutcomes of their students. Job-requirements and employer expectations fromthe newly graduate engineers within thedeveloping Indian economy and availableinternational opportunities and link these to thecurrent learner requirements and teaching-learning process.
To equip the faculty with the latest tools andtechniques for effective teaching Training through discussions, group work,lectures, laboratory work, workshop exercises,assignments, projects, etc., To prepare faculty for their role as motivators andguides within and outside classrooms for helpingstudents achieve their post education goals.
Challenges of Faculty Training Pre World War II of 19th century: Engineering education- Emphasized training atShop floor, Drafting and Laboratory courses forindustrial practice (Industry oriented) Post World War II of 19th century: Engineering Education: More emphasis frompractice to theory toward scientific andmathematical fundamentals (Shift frompractice to theory in the curriculum)
Practice to Theory Learning-Aftereffects Chorus of complaints (began to arise from theemployers of engineering graduates) - Newhires lacked skills in areas as critical andcreative thinking, communication, andteamwork Theory-oriented lecture-based instruction(dominating engineering education ) - Failed toaddress both the development of skills desiredby industry and the learning needs of much ofthe student population
How to overcome? Meaningful engineering education reform(Understanding the need for change) To explore alternative approaches to teaching(Preparing the faculty to teach utilizing the newmethods and technologies -A word of caution : Do notoveremphasize Digital technology - Result in an e-version of the whole curriculum!) Transforming faculty from “knowledgeimparters”(Discrete lectures designed to tell studentswhat they need to know) “knowledgedevelopers”(Guiding students to become activelearners, skill development in gathering andevaluating information)
Traditional reluctance of faculty members toparticipate in professional development/Training Apprehension that FD program/trainingcreated and maintained with TEQIP fundingmay disappear once the funding ends
Faculty Development/TrainingProgramme Component of FD Programme - Instructional development and support Campus infrastructure and climate
Instructional development andsupport Programs open to all faculty, Programs specifically for new faculty members,and Programs for graduate students
Campus infrastructure and climate Appointment of Faculty coordinator: To organise,coordinate the faculty development/Trainingefforts based on Training Need Analysis Teaching Resource Centre: Sources Forpedagogical expertise along with it shouldcompliment the discipline specific expertise Incentive, reward and involvement of Faculty:Provisions for the faculty incentive and rewardsystem Who not only supports but brings theimprovements in teaching and educationalmethod
Training Programs for NewFaculty College teaching only skilled vocation that neitherrequires prior training for its practitioners beforejoining the job nor is being provided by theemployer after or during the job Typical time required for new faculty membersto become as productive in research and effectivein teaching are generally 4–5 years(Self Learning Process) A good faculty Training program can reduce thelearning curve to 1–2 years “quick starters”
Types of Training Programs opento all faculty Workshops : Designed specifically for engineeringand science faculty covering various aspects ofpedagogy Seminars : Teaching methodology and use ofmodern technology, Learning outcomesassessment, Teaching Inter disciplinary Subjects : Designintroduce need based multidisciplinary subjectsand other topics Sensitization: Supporting women , minorities andphysically disable in engineering for inclusive
Special Training Programs forgraduate student Learning curve for new Faculty can also beshortened by providing them with sometraining while they are still in graduate school Suggested Topics : Addressing different student learning styles, Effective lecturing techniques, Active and cooperative learning, Dealing with common student problems, Success strategies
Important Factors Required forsuccessful Faculty Training Programme Emphasize discipline specific relevance in Trainingprograms Discipline specific relevance is perhaps the single mostimportant feature of any training that inducesengineers/Faculty to take them seriously Workshops/Seminars: Recommend specific disciplinewise examples for devising effective teachingstrategies. Tailor made presentation as per the needs of thetargeted audience (explicit about the promotionalmaterials) Engineers/Participants/Faculty likely to come to aTraining workshop if there is some plan to address their
Insert the Practicality Aspect in the Training second most critical characteristic of successfulengineering Training programs is their perceivedpracticality Most Faculty/Participants who attend Training onteaching workshops want to know what they cando next Monday to make their classes work better(Not seeking philosophical discussions about thenature of learning) Some material (especially research data) shouldbe part of the presentation to support the practicalideas
Include both pedagogical expertise anddisciplinary expertise Construct some practical examples and exerciseswith some insertion of technical content/terms like“partial differential equations” and “entropy” duringintroduction of the training programme. Participants when hear these familiar magicwords, they tend to be more willing to listen to thepresenters Many engineering faculty members who come tothe Training workshops do so because they knowthat one of the facilitators is willing to discussdiscipline specific expertise
Cite the research input in the Training Most engineers are “thinkers” tending to makedecisions based on facts, logic, and hard evidence Teaching workshops must have solid theoreticalfoundations extensively supported by empiricalresearch,(Science, mathematics, engineering andtechnology) Workshop handouts should include summaries ofrelevant research results and references for thosewho wish to check the research for themselves for
Avoid appearing prescriptive, dogmatic, orevangelical Presenter while recommending the methodsteaching (solid evidence to back them up) mustnot imply that they are providing a recipe which isthe only acceptable way for effective teaching Most professors resent being told that what theyhave been doing in their classes for so manyyears is wrong and now must be done differently Professor should be encouraged to take a gradualapproach, trying one or two new techniques at atime rather than trying to do everything at once,
Practice what you preach Participants are acutely conscious of whether or notpresenters do what they are recommending Some suggested recommendation If one recommendation is to write instructional objectivesfor courses, then presenter must also define and write aset of objectives for the present workshop/Training If the importance of presenting visual information is beingemphasized- Presenter should make sure that thegraphics presentation of workshop looks professional If active learning is advocated, the Training/workshopshould include large number of group exercises fordifferent type of specific problems
Assessment of Program Effectiveness Goal of Faculty Training Programme: Ascertaining participant satisfaction Judging the impact of training programs on theteaching of the participants Discovering whether the programs had animpact on student’s learning (Rarely bothered)
A Case Study An e-mail survey conducted to the active engineeringfaculty (1999) by sending a structured questionnaireto 1621 faculty (e-mail addresses) who had attendedSome sort of Faculty Training Program A follow-up survey was sent a month later to the non-respondents After elimination of blank and duplicates forms fromthe returns, number of valid and usable surveys formwas only 586, (a return rate of 36%) 75 were again excluded from most analyses becausethe respondent had not taught undergraduates in thelast three years Actual number of respondent for analysis was only511.
Main survey results (FDP- All analysisbased on only 511 respondent) Participation in faculty development activities: 82% of the respondents reported attending one ormore teaching workshops on their campuses, 64% attended a meeting or brown-bag lunchdealing with teaching, 62% consulted books, 59% consulted a newsletter or a web site, 40% observed a videotape, 35% participated in a mentoring program, 13% worked with a teaching consultant
Use of active learning: 60% assigned small group exercises for briefintervals in their classes with 22% doing soonce a week or more, 37% used active learning for most of the classperiod and 8% doing active learning so once aweek or more
Use of team-based learning: 73% gave assignments on which students hadthe option of working in teams with 35% doingso weekly or more often 54% gave assignments on which teams wererequired with 16% doing so weekly or moreoften 82% reported assigning a major team projectin some or all of the courses they taught
Writing instructional objectives: 65% reported usually or always writing formalinstructional objectives for their courses. Giving writing assignments: 88% gave writing assignments in theirengineering classes 21% gave assignments weekly or more often
Impact of FDP on instructional methods 59% reported that they either began orincreased their use of active learning, 43% wrote instructional objectives, 43% used team-based learning, 28% provided study guides before tests, 18% participated in a mentoring program
Impact of FDP on Student’s Learning 69% of respondents reported improvements 6% said they could see no improvement, 25% indicated that they had not made anyefforts
Some Suggestion for In house FacultyTraining under TEQIP-II Some tailor‐made programmes to suit the facultymembers’ requirements(Experts from other institutions and industry can beinvolved) One week in house course for faculty at the beginningof every semester by each department(Involving outside subject experts to give necessaryexposure and depth of knowledge for teaching variouscourses effectively) One week pedagogical training for conductingexperiments in various lab to all the newly joinedfaculty members
Training on some state‐of‐the‐art technology Finishing school for engineering graduates Training programme about the use of softwareavailable at the institute for all fresh andnewly‐recruited faculty members Training for in house software development forpurposes such as laboratory experiment simulation,assistance for smooth conduct of universityexaminations etc. Needs of women teachers kept in mind while finalizingtraining(Computer Science and Engineering, InformationTechnology, Electronics and CommunicationEngineering)
Final Comments Adopting above suggestions should significantlyenhance the chances of making a TrainingProgramme more attractive and persuasive to abroad spectrum of the faculty. But offer no guarantee of success of the FDP ifthe above suggestions are adopted Faculty development programs are like any othercollege courses and Faculty are also likestudents: no matter what you do, someone won’tlike it.
Acknowledgement Wishes to acknowledge the various sources usedduring the preparation of this presentation whichmay have aided and enhanced the quality ofinformationAny Question ………..?The EndThanks for your attention