INSIDE DOUGLAS COLLEGE / OCTOBER 30, 1990

Lecturing: Some Myths and a Few Truths ...continued

asked to comment, those who receive good ratings often modestly repeat the myth. After all, it may be difficult for them to say, "I think the reason I receive excellent student ratings is because I am a truly superb instructor.” In this case, the truth is more complicated, because the evaluation of excellence in teaching is more complicated. Educational psychologists tell me that there is a very high correlation between the students’ ratings and the ratings instructors receive from their peers. The latter are higher, but the rank order is similar. However, student evaluations must not be the only criterion used to evaluate instruction. Many students cannot estimate the importance of the lecture material, nor can they assess its accuracy. Also, instructors may make tactical errors such as an inadvertent remark, which the class interprets as sexist or derogatory. Although such errors must not be excused, they can result in low ratings that do not accurately reflect the overall teaching ability.

After reviewing numerous student

evaluations of colleagues, whose

lectures I have watched closely, I

believe the following statements are

true, but I would have trouble

providing scientific proof:

¢ Students are capable of distinguishing between the entertaining instructors, who do not help them to learn, and the equally entertaining instructors who help them to understand and develop new ideas.

¢Students are also capable of distinguishing between the dull instructors who do not help them

to learn and the equally dull instructors who effectively organize their material ina manner that helps them to grasp the subject matter.

¢ Peer evaluation of instructional content is critical. Other faculty members can assess the importance and relevance of the material better than students.

elt is always wise to consider student comments carefully, even if you disagree with them. Although lecturers may think they are emphasizing the material students need to know, the students may not agree, and changes must then be made.

¢ If you receive a set of negative evaluations, do not panic; instead, consider what might have gone wrong. However, a second set of negative responses is cause for concern, and a third set of bad evaluations indicates that something must be changed. As one of Ian Fleming's villains said to James Bond, "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and three times is enemy action."

Myth #5:

| As long as the material is covered, j the lecturer is doing the job.

Here is the death knell of successfu teaching: "I'm no worse than anyone else on staff." The truth is that instructors have a tremendous responsibility to do the best job they can. Unlike the unsuccessful salesperson, it is often possible for an instructor to hang on to a paid position, despite an abysmal teaching record. Brilliant researchers or graduate student

supervisors may be justified exceptions, however, these individuals should then be given more time in their respective areas and not be expected to teach. For the rest of us who have made a major commitment to education, it is simply not enough to show up and go through the motions. As instructors, we have the great potential to effect change — the ability to open doors and alter lives. Nearly everyone has had an educator who changed their beliefs or influenced their decisions.

In many ways, instructors are no different than their students. If you are fascinated by and enthusiastic about your subject, you can make several instructional errors (although you probably won't) and still do a good job. On the other hand, no matter how organized you are, if you care neither for the students nor the material, you will not be an effective instructor. Before you conclude that the views expressed in this article merely restate the obvious, think about the other instructors you work with. Do their instructional habits suggest that they embrace some of these myths whole-heartedly? Of course, how you choose to disillusion them is up to you.

Submitted by

David Cook,

Professor & Chairman Department of Pharmacology University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H7 (403)492-0511

ST