Self-evaluation - Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendices self-evaluation research programme ESoE ESoE and its content is determined by the senior researchers (full professors, assistant professors and associate professors) within ESoE, after consultation of seniors from ESoE’s partner institutes. The ESoE’s senior research staff holds three-monthly meetings in which the following topics are discussed: (a) proposals and new plans for research projects, (b) progress and quality of PhD projects, (c) ESoE’s research policy and (d) quality of supervision and PhD student satisfaction with this supervision. The ESoE’s research director operates under the responsibility of the Dean of ESoE and has monthly meetings with the management team of ESoE. The management team consists of the Dean, the financial director, the research director and the education director and is supported by a management secretary. The management team decides on daily matters within ESoE and carries out the policies as put forward by the Board of Governors. Full-time, TU/e-funded PhD students 1 are given four days a week (or 80 percent of their appointment) to conduct their research and to undertake their own training as researchers; a total of one day (20 percent) is assigned to teaching or innovation tasks and other activities at the institute. This also applies to externally funded PhD students that have an appointment at ESoE. These are, among others, PhD students who have been appointed on the basis of NWO 2 (PROO 3 ) funding, or sources such as the POVB 4 , schools and school groups, or other financing institutions. This schedule may be deviated from in consultation with the promotor and the daily supervisor, for example, in the event of a limited appointment percentage (0.8 or less). External PhD students, e.g. PhD students located at partner institutes such as Fontys Hogescholen, Hogeschool de Kempel, Hogeschool Zuyd, Hogeschool Avans and OMO, but that defend their dissertation at ESoE (TU/e) 5 , make agreements regarding their research time and time for other tasks at their own institute, but always notify and obtain consent from their promotor and/or daily supervisor. In principle, TU/e appointed PhD students are always present at the ESoE. For these PhD students agreements relating to the teaching task and its implementation at the institution need to be approved by the promotor(s). External PhD students are not expected to be present at ESoE – unless agreed otherwise -, with the exception of supervision meetings, or to contribute to teaching tasks. However, presence of external PhD students at research colloquia or lectures by international guests and/or institute-related social activities is stimulated and they always receive invitations for these events. 1.1 The ESoE research programme (short summary of March 2011 version) The ESoE research programme, called Professional Learning, starts from two premises. The first is that of the teacher as a professional: namely, one who takes his or her own responsibilities, makes his or her own choices, and takes on his or her own professionalization. The image of the teacher as a professional is currently often an unrealized ideal. Consequently, considerable work still needs to be done for a teacher to achieve the status of a professional. One of the focal questions of this research programme therefore concerns how teachers can be supported in their further development as professionals, and how the initial education of teachers can anticipate ongoing professionalization. The second premise is that teaching is a complex task in a complex environment. To grasp this complexity we propose to study teaching and teacher learning from different perspectives: a subject 1 Generally, NWO and TU/e PhD students can only opt for an 0.8 appointment (for 4.8 years) or a 1.0 appointment (for four years). 2 Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, or NWO for short (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research). 3 The Programmaraad voor het onderwijsonderzoek, or PROO for short (Program Council for Educational Research), was set up in September 1996 by the NWO Governing Board, under the auspices of the Board of NWO’s Social Sciences and is charged with drafting a research program for educational research. 4 Programma Onderzoek Vernieuwing Bètavakken, a program focused on research into the innovation of science subjects. 5 For these PhD students and PhD students who are supervised by the ESoE but who obtain their doctorate from a different university, the partner institution is responsible for the PhD student, and arrangements will be made concerning distribution of the doctoral bonus. 30
Appendices self-evaluation research programme ESoE matter perspective, a pedagogical content perspective, an interpersonal perspective, a learning activities perspective, a moral perspective, a classroom management or classroom organisational perspective, et cetera. A variety of perspectives thus can be used consecutively to study one teaching act, or a series of acts. Teacher (professional) learning occurs during the entire career. The teacher education institutes educate beginning teachers who still need to learn a great deal after completion of their training. After teacher education, teachers learn via professional development activities or formally organized schooling, as a result of innovation processes and via informal learning experiences. The need for continued professional learning by teachers, in particular science and technology education teachers, is (at least) threefold. First, both society and education as integral part of it change constantly. These changes require new content and skills from students, and, consequently, new roles and expertise from teachers. Second, teachers in the science and technology education domain (from primary to higher education) are confronted with a number of domain-related problems. For example, science is not popular with students and often considered (too) difficult, boring and unmotivating. Third, teachers are confronted with educational innovations within their context, which require teachers to take up new roles and learn new content. Professional learning has a few characteristics. First, teachers learn by experience and by working independently on improving and refining their own teaching practice. The extent to which professional learning from experience takes place is determined by the meaning given by teachers to experiences and the importance they attach to these experiences, their own involvement in shaping and organizing learning situations (e.g. their “ownership” of the learning process) and their engagement and commitment, which can be encouraged by giving teachers responsibility or agency. A second characteristic of professional learning is that it involves evaluation and reflection. Selfevaluation and assessment are essential in this respect, because they may be a significant source of reflection on the teacher’s own functioning. A third characteristic of professional learning is that it is personal in nature. What, how and to what extent people learn depends, first and last, on the learner as a person. This involves the teachers’ identity which, on the one hand, is formed by the complex interaction between personal views, preferences, feelings, and so on, and, on the other, by the values, standards, expectations, and so forth, which are considered important by others, including by the body of knowledge that is considered significant for professional functioning. Professional learning always takes place in a context. Lack of time, little interest on the part of school management, and limited options for cooperation with colleagues and for learning from each other are factors that may obstruct learning in the workplace. In addition, the relationship with students and the use of educational resources are decisive factors for teachers’ learning at the workplace. Obviously, the outcomes of professional learning should be the enhancement of practice. Learning outcomes should become visible in terms of changes in teacher cognition, attitude, and behavior. A major criterion for determining improvement is the impact of an intervention on students (student perceptions) and student learning outcomes, in any shape or form. The research programme on “professional learning” does not focus on one or several theories and paradigms in advance, but determines the theoretical perspective on the basis of the approaches chosen for research, and on the associated questions. Consequently, no preference is expressed for qualitative or quantitative research. Insofar as a preference exists, it will be based on a balanced combination of both aspects. Choices that are connected to this are primarily determined by the research question. The same applies to the methods and techniques applied. The choice of a certain method or technique should be substantiated in relation to the theory on which the research is based. Studies can be large or small scale. Also, studies may primarily aim at expanding the scientific knowledge base, but they may also aim at improving practice and everyday learning at the workplace or the education institute. The research programme Professional Learning was started in 2007. Most studies from the period 2007-2011 were descriptive in nature and focused at analysing teacher learning and practice in innovative contexts. Often, studies focused on only one of the earlier mentioned perspectives on 31
Page 1 and 2:
Self-evaluation of the research pro
Page 3 and 4:
Self-evaluation research programme
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12: Self-evaluation research programme
Page 33 and 34: Self-evaluation Of the research pro
Page 35 and 36: Appendices self-evaluation research
Page 61: Appendices self-evaluation research
Page 113 and 114:
Appendices self-evaluation research
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
show all

Self-evaluation - Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?