Ways to write an academic life: Queering the academic curriculum vitae

The curriculum vitae (CV) is a short account of one’s career and qualifications typically prepared for a position or promotion. In academia, the CV chronicles a representation of the academic self in terms of scholarly activities such as publications, research grants and projects, conference participation and teaching awards. Far from being a neutral record, the CV (re)produces gendered norms and highlights continued gender inequalities in academic careers. This article explores how the CV is made possible (and consequently measured and valued) through material practices as well as via discourses of productivity, employability and success. It does this by embracing Jack Halberstam’s concept of ‘queer failure’ and Karen Barad’s theory of ‘intra-action’ in an experimental auto-ethico-ethnography of the academic CV. Using a diffractive approach, this article also calls into question the separation of the body and the materiality of the CV, our emotional relationship with the CV, as well as gendered academic labour. In theorising the CV through the lens of performativity, attention is reoriented towards the assemblage of relations and intra-actions between academic, writing, the career, the body and representation and reveals them to be complexly located within and through each other.

Factors Impacting Elementary General Music Teachers’ Career Decisions: Systemic Issues of Student Race, Teacher Support, and Family

The purpose of this study was to examine factors that may influence the projected career plans of elementary general music teachers. Survey participants ( N = 972) completed a questionnaire designed to elicit responses about multiple factors and projected career plans in 1 year and in 5 years. The vast majority of participants planned to remain in their position the following year, yet a little under half of them planned on remaining in their positions in 5 years. The variables associated with teacher migration or attrition in 5 years were issues of teacher support (i.e., participation in a mentoring program and recognition in the form of teaching awards), student race, and family responsibilities (i.e., number of children at home). Movers were also more likely to have received a teaching award than those who intended to stay in their current positions or those who planned to leave the profession. Implications for the profession as well as for practice and future research are discussed.

Lessons Learned from Research on Student Evaluation of Teaching in Higher Education

In higher education, anonymous student evaluation of teaching (SET) ratings are used to measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness and to make high-stakes decisions about hiring, firing, promotion, merit pay, and teaching awards. SET have many desirable properties: SET are quick and cheap to collect, SET means and standard deviations give aura of precision and scientific validity, and SET provide tangible seemingly objective numbers for both high-stake decisions and public accountability purposes. Unfortunately, SET as a measure of teaching effectiveness are fatally flawed. First, experts cannot agree what effective teaching is. They only agree that effective teaching ought to result in learning. Second, SET do not measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness as students do not learn more from more highly rated professors. Third, SET depend on many teaching effectiveness irrelevant factors (TEIFs) not attributable to the professor (e.g., students’ intelligence, students’ prior knowledge, class size, subject). Fourth, SET are influenced by student preference factors (SPFs) whose consideration violates human rights legislation (e.g., ethnicity, accent). Fifth, SET are easily manipulated by chocolates, course easiness, and other incentives. However, student ratings of professors can be used for very limited purposes such as formative feedback and raising alarm about ineffective teaching practices.

Teaching Philosophy Statements

Teaching philosophy statements articulate educators’ beliefs about what makes learning happen. They can be powerful tools in identifying assumptions about teaching, articulating our values as educators, and connecting to a community within and across disciplines. Teaching philosophy statements are often an integral part of job applications, promotion and tenure processes, teaching development, and teaching awards. By developing a philosophy and discussing it with colleagues, educators can improve their practice through the process of reflection, dialogue, and engagement with scholarship of learning and teaching. The recipients of the 2020 JME Lasting Impact Award are companion articles “Philosophy rediscovered: Exploring the connections between teaching philosophies, educational philosophies, and philosophy” and “Finding our roots: An exercise for creating a personal teaching philosophy statement” by Beatty et al. These articles have had a profound and sustained impact on management education and other disciplines by furthering understandings of teaching philosophies and their connection to effective teaching and learning. Analysis of subsequent teaching philosophy statement research identifies three strands of inquiry: how to develop a teaching philosophy, the role of teaching philosophies in graduate education, and the relationship between teaching philosophies and continuous professional development. The impact of the papers and areas for future research are canvassed.

Teaching excellence and how it is awarded: A Canadian case study

Quality teaching and how to assess and award it, continue to be an area of scholarship and debate in higher education. While the literature demonstrates that assessment should be multifaceted, operationalizing this is no easy task. To gain insight into how teaching excellence is defined in Canadian higher education, this empirical study collected and analysed the criteria, evidence, and standards for institutional teaching awards from 89 institutions and 204 award programs across Canada. The majority of awards included criteria such as specific characteristics of teaching performance and student-centredness; while activities that had impact outside an individual’s teaching practice were also prevalent, including campus leadership, scholarship of teaching and learning, and contributions to curriculum. Lists of potential sources of evidence were heavily weighted towards student perceptions and artefacts from instructors’ teaching. Recommendations for individuals and institutions wanting to foster excellence in teaching are offered along with suggestions for future research.