Abstracts - Earli

Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the effect of pedagogical training on teaching in highereducationLiisa Postareff, University of Helsinki, FinlandThe present follow-up study explores the effect of university teachers’ pedagogical training onapproaches to teaching and self-efficacy beliefs measured by Approaches to Teaching Inventoryand an additional part measuring motivational strategies. In addition, the study analyses teachers’writings of their experiences of pedagogical training. From the inventory, the effect of pedagogicaltraining on teaching is analysed among 35 teachers who had not participated in pedagogicalcourses after the first measurement in 2004 as well as among 45 teachers who had acquired morepedagogical training after the first measurement. The results showed that there were more positivechanges on the measured scales among teachers who had acquired more credits of pedagogicalcourses since the first measurement than among teachers who had not acquired more credits. Theresults of the first and second measurements are compared. Of the 80 teachers who participated inthe follow-up study, 70 wrote about their experiences of pedagogical training. Five broad themesarose from the data: 1) an ability to reflect on different aspects of teaching and learning, 2) anawareness of different aspects of teaching and learning, 3) self-confidence as a teacher hasstrengthened, 4) changes in conceptions of teaching and learning and 5) changes in teachingpractices. The results of the study clarified and deepened our understanding of the effects ofpedagogical training since previous studies have suggested diverse effects of such training.Effects of university teachers’ approaches to teaching on students’ approaches to learning in aproblem based learning environmentJeanette Hommes, Unversity Maastricht, NetherlandsWim Gijselaers, University Maastricht, NetherlandsMien Segers, University Maastricht, NetherlandsEducational innovations like Problem Based Learning (PBL) should create a learning environmentwhich stimulates students to engage in higher order learning activities. Nevertheless, recent metaanalysison the effect of PBL does not present conclusive results. It is argued that PBL has a strongpositive effect on the application of knowledge but not a strong effect on the level of knowledge ofthe students. Therefore, the question arises whether all the conditions for educational innovationsare met. One of the influencing factors on student learning is the teacher’s approach to teachingand learning. In this research a case study in a PBL environment is presented. A quantitativeexploration of the teachers approaches to teaching and the student’s approaches to learningshowed a significantly higher preference for Conceptual Change Student Focussed (CCSF)teaching approaches instead of Information Transmission Teacher Focussed (ITTF) teachingapproaches. The results from the students’ questionnaires showed a significantly higher preferencefor deep learning approaches instead of surface learning approaches. In addition, the studentsperceived the quality of teaching significantly higher for the teachers with a CCSF approachinstead of an ITTF approach. However, only low correlations were found between CCSFapproaches and deep learning approaches of students. Additional analyses of the results showed asignificantly higher preference for a CCSF teaching approach for teachers representing the softsciences in contrast to the teachers of the hard sciences. Also the students of soft sciences teachersreported a significantly lower preference for a surface approach to learning. As a consequence thequestion may be raised how faculty development can enable teachers to develop teacherapproaches and teacher skills which align with the needs of PBL curricula.– 399 –