Melissa Starking
Ph.D. Candidate
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
Michigan State University
Certificate in College Teaching Portfolio
The Certificate in College Teaching (CCT) is administered by the Graduate School at Michigan State University (MSU). This program is for graduate students and Postdocs to develop and advance their teaching skills and gain experience through a mentored project. Participants in the program must meet five core competencies (below). This portfolio completes the requirements for the CCT program.
CORE COMPETENCY 1: Developing Discipline-Related Teaching Strategies
Course: An Introduction to Evidence-Based Undergraduate STEM Teaching
Completed: Fall 2017
Description
I was a student in a MOOC (massive open online course) called “An Introduction to Evidence-Based Undergraduate STEM Teaching” taught by Derek Bruff, Trina McMahon, Bennett Goldberg, and Henry (Rique) Campa III. This course is directed towards new and future STEM faculty, graduate students and post-doctoral fellows. It introduces teaching strategies that are effective and research based. The course covers the principles of learning, learning objectives, assessments, active learning, inclusive teaching, lesson planning and a conclusion that brings all of these topics together. Concurrently with this course, I participated in an MOOC-supported learning community on campus at Michigan State University (MSU) with Dr. Campa and fellow MOOC students. We discussed topics introduced in the course, did activities, and expanded on the course objectives and learning goals.
Artifacts & Rationale
The syllabus for the course (link above) shows the course description and format. Throughout the eight weeks, the course includes videos, discussion boards, and peer graded assignments.
Materials
The link above is an example of one of our peer-graded assignments completed during the course. This assignment was focused o developing learning goals for an introductory course. I choose an introductory ecology course as an example and following the guided questions this shows how I would develop a learning goal for introductory undergraduate students and develop questions associated with varying levels using bloom’s taxonomy. Finally, showing what types of activities I would have students complete to answer the multilevel questions and reach the learning goal I developed.
Reflection
The tools and foundation that “An Introduction to Evidence-Based Undergraduate STEM Teaching” has given me has enabled me to develop other courses for graduate and undergraduate students. This course helped me discover effective teaching strategies towards developing effective learning goals and outcomes. Before taking this course, I was unaware of the scientific research for learning in STEM. I am now able to identify the differences between goals for the teacher versus learning outcomes for the students. While enrolled in this course, I was developing and implementing my mentored teaching project. This course enabled me to identify learning outcomes for my project and develop a field-based lab that I implemented in a course at Michigan State University. This course helped me develop my assessments for the project and use active learning in my project and courses that I teach. I am able to use the principles of learning, based on scientific research, to engage my students and assess them in multiple ways. I am more aware now of inclusive teaching techniques to ensure my classrooms are servicing all of my student’s needs. I am continually building lesson plans with all of these in mind as I grow as an educator. The feedback throughout the discussions in the course and through the learning community at MSU has been invaluable. I look forward to continuing to learn about learning and develop my style of pedagogy further.
CORE COMPETENCY 2: Creating Effective Learning Environments
Workshop: University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute, Michigan State University
Workshop Date: May 11-12, 2017
Description
During the Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute one of the workshops was “Creating Effective Learning Environments: Five easy steps to peer instruction” given by Bennett Goldberg from Northwestern University. He introduced clicker-questions and peer-instruction to the group. We also went through the question cycle and discussed before, during, and after instruction questions. We discussed motivation for students, how to get them motivated to participate with you as an instructor and motivate them to participate with each other (students).
Artifact & Rationale
notes from reflections written during the workshop
The link shows my reflection from the ‘create an effective learning environment’ session during the University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute on May 12, 2017.
Reflection
Creating effective learning environments was eye opening for me. As a student, I had been introduced to clicker questions and peer instruction without realizing what it was. It was great to see the reason behind this teaching method and to comprehend how to properly utilize clicker questions and peer-instruction in my own classroom. Fist we went through a series of clicker questions that we answered, we watched videos on peer-instruction, wrote down what we observed and then discussed this with our peers. We learned about the learning cycle and the appropriate types of questions to ask during each part of the cycle, then how to make sure we completed the learning cycle and if those matched with our learning objectives for the students. Often the learning cycle is not complete with first exposure to a topic really being the focus of lecture only based classrooms. The clicker-questions aligned with peer-instruction allow a teacher to close the learning cycle and allow for first exposure, practice and feedback, followed by second exposure of any given topic. With the focus on peer-instruction, we also went over ways to implement two-way learning environments, being cognizant of what students may be thinking and their knowledge base coming into the course to avoid student misunderstanding. The topics concerning student discussion and active learning to encourage motivation in our classrooms helped me to understand more of this two-way learning environment and bring together the things we had learned in the teaching institute from the day before. Since participating in this workshop, I have tried to implement these ideas and active learning, with clicker type questions and practice and feedback in my own classes.
CORE COMPETENCY 3: Incorporating Technology in your Teaching
Workshop: University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute, Michigan State University
Workshop Date: May 11-12, 2017
Description
During this portion of the workshop, we learned about the TPack model that incorporates three foundations of instructor knowledge that is necessary for best teaching practices. Teachers must have pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge, and technological knowledge. Technology is not meant to overshadow the other two but instead works with them so that you can implement a pedagogical approach and meet learning objectives for the content that you are teaching.
Artifact & Rationale
notes from reflections written during the workshop
The link shows my reflection from the ‘incorporating technology in the classroom’ session during the University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute on May 12, 2017.
Reflection
It was refreshing to see how technology can be used to motivate and interest students. Many times in classes, it is a war against cell phones or Facebook, with so many distractions fighting for the attention of the students’. One of the videos and discussions we had was about using twitter in the classroom and outside of class to engage students. Students were in a biology of birds course and learning to identify birds in their environments. Instead of having students go too far off pristine wilderness and memorize everything; the professor had them tweet about birds in the landscapes surrounding their everyday lives. Over spring break, students engaged and started actively learning in their spare time about the topics of the course. Learning what motivates students to communicate and learn in their everyday lives about course topics is inspirational. The TPack model of the knowledge base that instructors need really helped me understand what teachers need in their ‘toolbox’ and the different ways and things that you need to think about if you want to convey information in a way that optimizes learning.
CORE COMPETENCY 4: Understanding the University Context.
Workshop: University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute, Michigan State University
Workshop Date: May 11-12, 2017
Description
This session during the Certificate in College Teaching Institute focused on informing us about the many types of institutes for higher education. It covered various types of institutions by giving examples of mission statements and institution information for faculty promotion and tenure. We took part in a breakout session that helped us work through the beginnings of writing our own teaching philosophy.
Artifact & Rationale
notes from reflections written during the workshop
The link shows my reflection from the ‘understanding the university context ‘session during the University Graduate Certification in College Teaching Institute on May 12, 2017.
Reflection
This session introduced the various types of higher education available in the United States. We covered 6 different types: research universities, comprehensive universities, liberal arts colleges, community colleges, minority serving institutions, and for-profit institutions. When learning how to teach and how learning works its vital to know where you will be doing your teaching. I never realized that there would be such a big difference between some of these institutions. Depending on the type of post-secondary institution you plan to target for your career, you may need to focus on different forms of teaching. This workshop introduced some of the differences in responsibilities that faculty have at different institutions, what is required to become hired, promoted, and receive tenure if applicable.
We read the institutions mission statements and match these with our own thoughts on how we want to teach and were we want our impacts to be. We completed a reflection on a teaching practice of our choice to help us explore how we think about teaching. I reflected on assigned readings as a replacement to lectures so that class time can be spent on peer instruction, discussions and other active learning methods. After listing the assumptions and reflecting what would be need from me and my students, I discovered that my current thinking about teaching focuses on upper level undergraduate students and graduate students. I also discovered during this session that my research and field experience influences my teaching and that I should focus on research and comprehensive universities as a target for my future.
The session also provided us with an introduction to a teaching philosophy. This has always seemed somewhat abstract and I have had a hard time writing one in the past. A worksheet provided, teaching inventory and self-assessment, helped make the teaching philosophy a less abstract idea for me. The worksheet walked me through the context of my teaching experience, the students I have had and will have, components of my teaching practice and knowledge, and my beliefs about teaching. We also went over the differences between teaching philosophies and teaching statements. After this session was over, I felt much better about writing my teaching philosophy and the direction my future teaching would go in.
CORE COMPETENCY 5: Assessing Student Learning
Project: Mentored Teaching Project
Project Date: Fall 2017
Description
I implemented this project in the Wildlife Research and Management Techniques course (FW413). I developed a laboratory assignment that spanned two weeks that included a prelab reading/lecture, pre/post assessment for students, and a field-based activity. The topic was wildlife detection using scent stations and camera traps. During week 1, students received a basic lecture, conducted a reading, and filled out a prelab assessment. Subsequently, students went to the field and set-up a two-camera trap array and a scent station to measure wildlife occupancy. Students were responsible for completing a detection test using their camera set-up, and then check their scent stations for wildlife activity before the next lab meeting. Week two involved an interactive session with students about their detection results, photo interpretation, post assessment, and a wrap-up discussion. The learning objectives were to gain hands-on experience with a broadly used wildlife research and management technique, while thinking about the steps through implementation, comprehension, and analysis.
I conducted this project in Fall 2017. Dr. Roloff and I met several times to discuss and plan the project; the project spanned 2 lectures and 1 lab in one week, and a second lab the following week. The project also included outside of class work for the students before and during the two-week project. I researched and read several papers on detection probability to support development of the project. I based elements of the project on teaching/learning principles from the teaching course and workshops I have taken. I wrote a teaching outline, lesson plan, lab exercise for students, pre/post assessments, and data collection sheets, all including broad and specific learning goals and objectives. I also assisted in discussions, guiding, and demonstrating techniques with individual students, groups, and the class as a whole. I also helped with informal feedback after the lab was over to improve this lab for future classes.
Artifact & Reflection