National Academies Report Offers Ways to Improve Undergraduate Education

Universities should revamp how they evaluate S&T teaching, report says

Because advances in science and technology have done much to fuel U.S. economic growth over the past 50 years, both the public and private sectors have invested heavily in university research. However, the evaluation of teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics has been haphazard and less exacting, says a new report from the National Academies' National Research Council.

Fair strategies for evaluating undergraduate teaching and learning in these fields deserve wider appreciation and use, the report states. First-rate scholarship focused on improving teaching and learning also should be recognized and supported as a bona fide academic endeavor on par with top-notch research. Likewise, faculty members who excel in the classroom should be publicly recognized and rewarded, the report suggests.

Many of the nation's higher-education institutions stress the need for superior science and mathematics instruction, especially in lower-level undergraduate courses, but faculty members and administrators often believe it is nearly impossible to objectively gauge the effectiveness of teaching skills or the impact of departmental curricula, according to the report. Since scientific disciplines, colleges and universities vary considerably, no single path to high-quality evaluation of professors or academic departments is clearly superior. On the whole, teaching and program effectiveness should be judged by the extent of student learning, the report emphasizes, but evaluations often leave this key variable out of the equation.

Evaluations of teaching effectiveness and departmental curricula could be informed by input from colleagues who have observed fellow instructors in the classroom or analyzed their course content and materials, says the committee that wrote the report. Feedback from undergraduate students and graduate teaching assistants also could enhance reviews of academic programs and teaching or mentoring performance. Each of these criteria, the committee warns, should be considered with care, however. Many factors other than teaching performance – institutional policies, for example – may affect student learning and development.

While the report underscores the importance of tapping into a variety of information sources to foster evaluation that promotes continuous improvement, it also acknowledges that putting multiple review measures in place can be time-consuming. The report suggests that, in addition to making undergraduate education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics a top priority, university leaders, departments or governing boards should undertake the following:

• Expect teaching methods that are based on scientific evidence about how students learn best and clearly articulate that expectation;
• Encourage established faculty members to teach some introductory and lower-level courses to make sure that experienced educators meet all students' needs;
• Create endowments to recognize faculty members who, over time, have made significant contributions to teaching;
• Provide funds for professors who are seeking ways to deepen their understanding of how people learn;
• Establish and support centers for teaching and learning to provide faculty with ongoing professional-development opportunities; and,
• When submitting individual personnel recommendations, provide separate ratings on teaching, research and service as components of the overall recommendation.

Shared commitment to the goal of improving undergraduate education is critical at the department level, where key decisions regarding tenure, promotions, and curricula are made, the report states. Beyond the campus, agencies and boards that certify colleges and universities for accountability purposes also must play a role in shoring up undergraduate education. They should revise their policies to stress student learning as a primary criterion for program accreditation, concludes the report.

Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics was sponsored by the National Research Council, a private, nonprofit institution that provides science and technology advice under a congressional charter. The report is available at: http://www.nap.edu/books/0309072778/html/