Norman V. Duffy Kent State University Kent. Ohio 44242
Faculty Development and the Academic Chemist
Within the past three years, Offices of Faculty Development (or Instructional Development or Professional Development) have come into existence on many campuses. The overview of Faculty Development programs currently in operation in colleges and universities is bewildering; programs under the three different names listed above at three different universities might he virtually identical, while three Offices of Faculty Development a t three other universities may differ significantly one from another in goals, funding, and administrative structure. Regardless of this diversity, each program exists to serve the academic chemist as well as other faculty members and deserves hislher careful investigation. Whatever the name or structure, the office will have as a stated or unstated goal the improvement of instruction. The key question for the academic chemist to ask is what are the hasic assumptions that the office operates on concerning how instruction can he improved. Listed below are a few typical assumptions and how then the office may he utilized 1) Student evaluation of instruction is a necessary first step to the improvement of instruction. This assumption is rather typical (and threatening, and, for the most part, correct). The implementation of this assumption is rather complex and may come as a) compulsory student evaluation tied in with promotion, tenure, and salary increases b) compulsorystudent evaluation for the evaluation of instruction (and instructor) and published for the consumer C) ~ ~ m p ~ lstudent ~ o r yevaluation with the results availahle to the instructor and few (if any) others d) voluntary student evaluation as listed in a), h), or C) Regardless of the relative acceptability of the process to the individual faculty memher, each has common good points i) an evaluation instrument designed and tested by someone else (that saves many hours) and developed local norms ii) assistance of trained persannel in interpreting the results of the evaluation and explaining student perceptions iii) availability of skilled advice in the suggestion of possible modificationsin the organization and presentation of course materials on the basis of student perceptions 2) Professional faculty need only the appropriate tools made available to them and they will breathe new life into their courses. This assumption usually results in a small grants program, a "Dean's Challenge Fund," or something similar. The key feature is that funds are availahle to the faculty memher for this or that pet project or item. "This concept (unitlcourse) would he so much clearer for my class if only I had that film (set of slideslaudio tapesltransparencieslmodels)" is a frequently heard statement. Departmental budgetary priorities may prohibit that purchase, hut the Faculty Development Office should have funds for just that purpose. The faculty memher should have formulated an appropriate evaluation plan to determine if the concept is clearer as the result of using that learning aid-most Faculty Development units will require such plans for evaluation in order to justify the expenditure of funds to the internal or external funding agency. Depending on local guidelines, funds may also be available to attend a national ACS meeting for a particular symposium, to pay registration for an appropriate ACS Short Course, or purchase a small instrument for a teaching laboratory. 3) After a period of time, a faculty member needs a new, stimulating intellectual experience to renew himlher. This
assumotion is usuallv realized in a oroeram of sabbaticals. sahhaiical supplem&ts, or faculty exciange programs. ~n Office of Professional Development, concerned more with mid-career crises faced by academics than the improvement of instruction per se, is more likely to provide this type of program. The iocation of the office in the structure i f the university is very important in this program in orchestrating research grants and travel funds. 4) Faculty members with innovative instructional ideas should be encouraged to pursue them by being released from instructional responsibilities for a period of time. Regardless of the apparent contradiction of taking the better instructor out of the classroom for a while, aprogram of Summer or Academic Year Teaching Development Awards, or such, is quite effective. The process usually involves the faculty memher writing up a specific proposal on how the released time would he utilized, which course(s) would he improved, and how many students would benefit. Typical propmala would be to develop some audiovisual learnine" aid for a specific course or laboratory, to develop some innovative service course (forensic chemistrv. environmental orohlems. etc.), or to familiarize the recipient kith computer-assisted instruetion and the develooment of a d o t oroiect. Such promams with emphasis on tearhing are ~;sr.ful~an&~s to t h e ~ u k r n e and r cade emir Year Released Time Research Grants and the presence of hoth in an institution is often viewed as one essential demonstration of institutional commitment to research and teaching.
5) Faculty were trained as academicians. Teaching is not an art, but, to a great extent, a communication skill that can itself be taught and improved upon. Each of us perceives himself or herself as a good teacher, having special knowledge and qualities to make chemistry exciting and meaningful to our students. A very real obstacle to great teaching may he good teaching-that is, we may have settled into a comfortable instructional pattern that works for us and venturing out of which would he threatening. This assumption requires that helo he available. Real. concrete su~eestionscan he offered to ielp remedy that sinking feeling w i i n you realize that your recitation section involves you "reciting" for 80% of the time. The help availahle may he the consultation of an educational osvcholoeist who knows little or no chemistrv, hut who is an &pert in"the process of instruction, or the availability of former outstanding teaching award winners who know the real everyday problems of trying to be an instructional catalyst. Such help is almost always confidential, and videotaping systems are frequently availahle if you only wish to see yourself as others see you. (The presence of a supportive expert is advisable when you view yourself for the first time.) In summarv, the Faculty Development movement is designed to assist and support facults consequently, its programs deserve careful investigation by each faculty member. The efforts at institutional imprnvem~ntof instrurtion may take place hy remrdinl work with ilrficient teachers, but i1 may also place its emphasis on attempting to help good teachers become better teachers. The goal of this paper is to ask you to consider your part within the context of the second alternative. Thp author is Associate Dpan of the College uf A r t i and Sciences at Kent Stntr and alw the ('hairpcrsm of the Steering Conimitrrr of the Offire of Fardry Drwhpment at Kent State University.
Volume 54, Number 8, August 1977 / 503
