scholarly journals 17: Faculty Development Centers in Research Universities: A Study of Resources and Programs

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 291-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delivee L. Wright
2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Rhode ◽  
Stephanie Richter ◽  
Peter Gowen ◽  
Murali Krishnamurthi

Purpose – As faculty professional development increasingly occurs online and through social media, it becomes challenging to assess the quality of learning and effectiveness of programs and resources, yet it is important to evaluate such initiatives. The purpose of this paper is to explore how one faculty development center experimented with using analytics to answer questions about the use and effectiveness of its web and social media resources. Design/methodology/approach – The case study was based on direct observation of the center’s practice and review of selected data generated by the analytic tools. Findings – Unfortunately, while some analytics are available from a variety of sources, they are often distributed across tools and services. The center developed an analytics strategy to use data from Google Analytics and social media reporting tools to assess the use of online and social professional development resources. Initial results show that the center’s online and social professional development resources are widely used, both within and outside the university. However, more work is necessary to improve the strength and scope of the available analytics. Practical implications – As a result of the analysis, the center has streamlined online resources, targeted social media use, and has begun developing methods to allow faculty to report online resource use as professional development for academic personnel purposes. Originality/value – Many faculty development centers have not explored methods of evaluating online and social media resources. This paper outlines a strategic evaluation plan to measure the usage of online resources as well as engagement and interaction through social media.


Author(s):  
Walter Wager

For many faculty the integration of technology and learner-centered teaching strategies or the adoption of instructional “best practices” represents innovation and change. The author visited fifteen research intensive university faculty development centers, looking at what they considered best practices with regard to improving instruction. The practices and programs described had one or more of the following components: Motivation, Opportunity, Resources and Evaluation, what I am calling here the MORE model. This paper discusses these four factors important to instructional change agents. The paper ends with a list of implications, based on the model, for that would enable faculty development centers to have more control over the factors that are important to faculty success and systemic change.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 (136) ◽  
pp. 101-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth M. Schwartz ◽  
Aeron Haynie

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document