Applying Total-Quality-Management Principles to Improving Engineering Education
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 134, Issue 1
Abstract
Peer review of teaching is assumed to be an excellent tool, next to student evaluation, to measure the quality of a professor. This argument builds on the fact that only peers can understand the material of the engineering discipline and are up-to-date with the practice. On the other hand, virtually no engineering professor has had any training in being an educator, never having passed a course in pedagogy or instruction. This paper will first review this inconsistency before introducing the substance of scholarly teaching. The main section, however, discusses a new and dynamic model for a peer review of teaching that introduces a process of constant improvement. It is believed that replacing the old method of peer review is vital in persuading the engineering professoriate to implement the changes called for by many blue-ribbon committees. However, this change has to be framed by an institutional culture that provides the incentives for continuous improvements of teaching by an ongoing increase of the competence level of teachers who, today, lack any significant training in education.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
American Association of University Professors (AAUP). (1946). “1946 report of Committee A.” AAUP Bulletin No. 31, Washington, D.C., 60–61.
Altbach, P. G. (1995). “Problems and possibilities: The US academic profession.” Studies in Higher Education, 20(1), 27–45.
Arreola, R. A. (2000). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation, 2nd Ed., Anker, Bolton, Mass.
Arreola, R. A., and Aleamoni, L. (1990). “Practical decisions in developing and operating a faculty evaluation system.” Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice. New directions for teaching and learning, No. 43, M. Theall and J. Franklin, eds., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Bennett, J. B. (1998). Collegial professionalism: The academy, individualism, and the common good, Oryx, Phoenix.
Bernold, L. E. (2005). “Paradigm shift in education is vital for the future of our profession.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 131(5), 533–539.
Bernold, L. E., Bingham, W. L., McDonald, P. H., and Attia, T. M. (2000). “Influence of learning type oriented teaching on academic success of engineering students.” J. Eng. Educ., 89(4), 191–199.
Bloom, B., ed. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive domain, McKay, New York.
Boyer Commission. (1998). “Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities.” The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, Boyer Rep., http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/boyer.nsf/ (March 19, 2006 ).
Brent, R., and Felder, R. M. (2004). “A protocol for peer review of teaching.” Proc., Annual Conf. & Exposition, ASEE, Salt Lake City.
Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluations: Enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Centra, J. A. (2001). “Evaluating the teaching portfolio: A role for colleagues.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 83, 87–94.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). “School reform at the crossroads: Confronting the central issues of teaching.” Educational Policy, 11(2), 151–166.
Fairweather, J. S. (1996). Faculty work and public trust: Restoring the value of teaching and public service in American academic life, Alan and Bacon, Needham Heights, Mass.
Fink, L. D. (2002). “Improving the evaluation of college teaching.” A guide to faculty development: Practical advice, examples, and resources, K. Herr Gillespie, L. R. Hilsen, and E. C. Wadsworth, eds., Anker, Bolton, Mass., 46–58.
Fink, L. D., Ambrose, S., and Wheeler, D. (2005). “Becoming a professional engineering educator: A new role for a new era.” J. Eng. Educ., 94(1), 185–194.
Franklin, J., and Theall, M. (1989). “Who reads ratings: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of users of student ratings of instruction.” Proc., 70th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., and Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Hamilton, N. W. (2002). Academic ethics: Problems and materials on professional conduct and shared governance, American Council on Education and Praeger, Westport, Conn.
Johnson, T. D., and Ryan, K. E. (2000). “A comprehensive approach to the evaluation of college teaching.” New directions for teaching and learning, No. 83, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Keig, L., and Waggoner, M. D. (1994). “Collaborative peer review: The role of faculty in improving college teaching.” ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Rep. No. 94-2, George Washington Univ., Washington, D.C.
Kreber, C. (2002). “Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching.” Innovative Higher Education, 27, 5–23.
Kreber, C., and Cranton, P. A. (1997). “Teaching as scholarship: A model for instructional development.” Issues and Inquiry in College Learning and Teaching, 19(2), 4–12.
Kruger, J., and Dunning, D. (1999). “Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.” J. Pers Soc. Psychol., 77(6), 1121–1134.
Lenzner, R., and Johnson, S. S. (1997). “Seeing things as they really are.” Forbes Magazine, March, 10 .
Lewis, M. (1997). Poisoning the ivy: The seven deadly sins and other vices of higher education in America, Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y.
Metzger, W. P. (1955). Academic freedom in the age of the university, Columbia University Press, New York.
National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Adapting engineering education to the new century educating the engineer of 2020, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., ⟨http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309096499/html/R12.html⟩ (October 11, 2006).
National Research Council (NRC). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, eds., Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., http://books.nap.edu/html/howpeople1/index.html (April 4, 2006 ).
Prados, J. W., Peterson, G. D., and Lattuca, L. R. (2005). “Quality assurance of engineering education through accreditation: The impact of engineering criteria 2000 and its global influence.” J. Eng. Educ., 94(1), 165–184.
Seldin, P. (1999a). Changing practices in evaluating teaching, Anker, Bolton, Mass.
Seldin, P. (1999b). “Self-evaluation: What works? What doesn’t?” Changing practices in evaluating teaching: A practical guide to improved faculty performance and promotion/tenure decisions, P. Seldin et al., eds., Anker, Boston, 97–115.
Swazey, J. P., Anderson, M. S., and Louis, K. S. (1993). “Ethical problems in academic research.” Am. Sci., 81(6), 542–553.
Theall, M., and Centra, J. A. (2001). “Assessing the scholarship of teaching: Valid decisions from valid evidence.” New direction for teaching and learning, No. 86, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Trigwell, K., and Shale, S. (2004). “Student learning and the scholarship of university teaching.” Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 523–536.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 134 • Issue 1 • January 2008
Pages: 33 - 40
Copyright
© 2008 ASCE.
History
Received: May 12, 2006
Accepted: Sep 19, 2006
Published online: Jan 1, 2008
Published in print: Jan 2008
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.