欢迎来到常州大学教师教学发展中心!

|常州大学主页

外国语学院举办首期“专业教师发展工作坊”

   发布时间: 2014-03-07    已访问: 37

201436日外国语学院举办首期“专业教师发展工作坊”

召集人:伊咏教授,Dave Hufton博士

 

 

First ‘professional teacher development workshop’, 6th March 2014

 

Participants:

Convener - Yi Yong                      Wan Chunyan

Facilitator - Dave Hufton               Li Dundong

Zhang Chunfang                          Liu Chang

 

Aims: 

1) To explore the options for professional teaching development that flow from the relational model proposition that personal teacher development in research and academic writing can and should lead to professional development in teaching skill and quality, leading to enhanced outcomes for the individual teacher, the University and its students.

2) To understand how a programme that supports such a proposal might best be initiated, implemented and developed.

 

 

Key to the diagram:

A = Total holistic personal development of the teacher i.e. ‘inputs’

B = Teacher professional output related to their research development

C = Teacher professional output related to their academic writing development

X = Sum total of the developmental outcomes related to the programme (A+B+C)

In purely fiscal terms, the value of X must equal or exceed the total cost of the ‘inputs’ to justify continuation, HOWEVER, ‘X’ the value of such a programme will always involve intangible benefits that result from the synergy created by investment in human capital; reputation (e.g. of individuals, University, City, students) motivation, quality, loyalty. These are by definition almost impossible to factor in as quantifiable data, but must enter into the strategic assessment of the programme.

 

Indicative agenda

Functional note: Evidence suggests that employees value meaningful activity at work: too many meetings that are held without clear structure or purpose, undermining the potential for meaning to arise. This meeting will follow a flexible, but defined agenda and will seek specific outcomes related to the stated aims. The function of the facilitator is to ensure focus and to identify conclusions, which will be reported to the University leadership for consideration.

 

 

15:00  Welcome, introductions.

Opening discussion re perceptions as to the purpose/function of the group.

 

Introduction of the ‘relational model’ followed by discussion as to its relevance and viability – suggestions for modification.

 

Related to area ‘A’ of the model, individual presentation of personal motivation to engage in a peer development group/network: share examples of research projects and/or academic papers to develop… each personal presentation to be followed by exploration of how a facilitated peer group might best work to support and develop the individual concerned.

 

Exploration of perspectives related to areas B and C of the model, examining how personal developmental inputs might be used to provide outputs that benefit the University and students, thus placing a value on the process to justify the investment… leading to a discussion related to ‘X’ and what the ‘value components’ are for creating peer learning groups.

 

Discussion leading to guidance related to the conduct of peer learning groups: e.g. what, if any, ethical or procedural protocols and protections need to be in place, such as confidentiality, or ensuring fairness and non-discrimination? Is participation purely voluntary? May the University leadership require people to engage in peer development – and if so how will this affect the work in practice? What policy is needed to guide strategy for such groups and where will the authority to spend University time in relation to the groups come from? How might individual requests for specific development be assessed for funding?

 

16:45  Drawing conclusions:

Group to ensure that the facilitator is aware of which issues need reporting to managers for further consideration of factors arising.

 

Decision as to whether to meet again – agree date, time and location if so.

 

Formulate outline agenda for a second meeting.

 

Agree on method for communication: E-mail group, QQ group or other peer networking solution?

 

17:00  Close meeting

 

Post Meeting:

Convener and facilitator to agree a summary report to submit in the first instance to Professor Zhao Bin as head of teacher development, seeking recognition of the group’s ideas and recommendations for formal progression.  

NB Ideally, there will be some feedback from University strategic management concerning the issues raised from the first meeting, in time for inclusion on the agenda for the second meeting, if agreed.

 

Dr. D R Hufton M.Ed. (Human relations)

QQ 2932604052

关闭窗口