Associate Fellowship Booklet
Leadership in Education Awards Programme
On behalf of the LEAP programme team, I would like to welcome you to the Leadership in Education Awards Programme (LEAP) and support sessions for Fellowship applications. We hope that you find this workbook useful in supporting your application.
LEAP is accredited by the Higher Education Academy (HEA), can awardAssociate, Fellowship, Senior and Principal HEA Fellowships.
This programme supports you in documenting and evidencing your teaching excellence and is your opportunity to receive a formal national qualification for your teaching or to enhance your HEA fellowship status.
“This is fabulous news and a great endorsement of the priority that the Faculty places on Teaching & Learning excellence - and will provide invaluable evidence for reporting against the proposed Teaching Excellence Framework”,Gillian Wallis, Associate Dean teaching, Learning and students.
In addition to the programme of activities we have in place peer support groups and LEAP mentors offering advice and feedback on your application. As Head of the Centre for Academic and Researcher Development and Academic Lead for LEAP I welcome you onto the programme
Dr. Judith Williams
Head of the Centre for Academic and Researcher Development
Academic Lead for LEAP
Associate Fellowship Assessment criteria
Associate Fellow Pathway (D1, AFHEA)
You are able to choose between submitting a written Portfolio of no more than 1 500 words or giving an oral presentation of no more than 20 minutes (plus up to 15 minutes of questions). The assessment criteria are the same for both pathways and assessors will use the same pro-forma.
AFHEA Portfolio route
There is a word limit of 1 500 words for the written portfolio. It must include an introduction (no more than 500 words) that sets the context for your application and gives a brief career history. The main part of your application consists of two 500 word case studies. The case studies must illustrate your achievement and impact in two areas of activity, core knowledge (K1 and K2) and appropriate values from the UKSPF-both should be reflective in nature.Your application should highlight how you meet all the D1 criteria from the UKPSF. It may be helpful to view the assessment criteria prior to starting your application To support your application you will need to provide two referees’ statements.
AFHEA Oral presentation route
The oral presentation should be between 10-20 minutes in durationand cover two examples of practice. This must illustrate your achievement and impact in two areas of activity, core knowledge (K1 and K2) and professional values from the UKPSF. It willbe followed by up to 15 minutes of questions from the assessors. In addition to your presentation you need to provide 2 written referees’ statements the highlight how you fulfil the D1 criteria from the UKPSF. A maximum of 1 page A4 handout may be given to the assessors in addition to a copy of the PowerPoint slides. Further guidance will be given in the workshop on the content and number of slides.
My initial thoughts on which route of assessment to take
Mapping my activity against the UKPSF
You only need to demonstrate activity against 2 areas of activity
Capture your initial thoughts around the evidence that you may use
Areas of Activity
A1 Design and plan learning activities and/or programmes of study
A2 Teach and/or support learning
A3 Assess and give feedback to learners
A4 Develop effective learning environments and approaches to student support and guidance
A5 Engage in continuing professional development in subjects/disciplines and their pedagogy, incorporating research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practices
Core Knowledge
You should consider what evidence you have for K1-2
K1 The subject material
K2 Appropriate methods for teaching, learning and assessing in the subject area and at the level of the academic programme
K3 How students learn, both generally and within their subject/disciplinary area(s)
K4 The use and value of appropriate learning technologies
K5 Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of teaching
K6 The implications of quality assurance and quality enhancement for academic and professional practice with a particular focus on teaching
Professional Values
You may want to consider which of the values you are able to discuss
V1 Respect individual learners and diverse learning communities
V2 Promote participation in higher education and equality of opportunity for learners
V3 Use evidence-informed approaches and the outcomes from research, scholarship and continuing professional development
V4 Acknowledge the wider context in which higher education operates recognising the implications for professional practice
Advice for completing your HEA Fellowship application
- It's a good idea to make the direct connections for the assessors between the assessment criteria and your evidence.Some examiners like to see the links within the text others are happy for you to indicate.
- Similarly, to make it easier for your referees make those direct connections on your behalf by providing them with some words "that they might like to use or adapt" that explicitly make those connections, e.g. from one of my referees:
"Based on the Guidance Notes for Referees, and having read Dr Xcareer history and his two Case Studies, I am happy to confirm that the information presented is an accurate account of Dr X’s activities and practices. Dr X has demonstrated engagement with two areas of teaching activity listed in the UKPSF, has solid core knowledge and understanding of his discipline and of teaching and learning more generally
- Don’t use too many quotes - I would advise using these carefully. What is important is your reflection and use of the feedback they provide and including a list of direct quotes is not really appropriate. I recommend summarising or paraphrasing and then saying how you reacted – the odd one is fine but not too many. We want your experience in your own voice rather than other people’s – your Referees provide the external corroboration.
- You need to write a personal narrative/reflection which you strengthen by making your underpinning pedagogic theory explicit. It helps to focus more on ‘why’ rather than ‘what’ in your narrative
Examples of Fellow case studies
Title: Developing teaching skills after an experience of lecturing
Descriptors: I, II, III, IV, V, VI
In September 2013, I was asked to cover some of the lectures to the ‘Critical Numbers’ course for first year medical students. Whilst the materials were already prepared, I refined slides slightly to fit my style of presenting and read around the core subject material to ensure a good knowledge to be able to deliver the lectures. I also met with the previous module convenor before the lectures to discuss the subject material and how the course was designed to facilitate learning (i.e. were these appropriate methods for teaching the content and students).
After delivering the lectures, I read the student feedback on the course which was mixed. Students enjoyed the level of detail covered, but the presentation and engagement with students was lacking. I discussed with my line manager about how to improve my teaching skills in accordance with the feedback. It was agreed that I would attend sessions of the Graduate Teaching Assistant course on small and large group teaching. These provided me with a better understanding of different methods and techniques that I could incorporate into my teaching to improve my delivery and engagement with students. I supplemented these sessions with external reading (e.g. Race, 2007, Chapter 4).
I was later asked to give a seminar as part of the master’s level module. This required designing and planning the seminar from scratch. Prior to this, I organised a meeting with the programme Director. I reflect on what I had learnt from my training and reading (Trigwell and Shale, 2004), and discussed my ideas with the Director. This allowed me to tailor my session to achieve the module outcomes and better understand what would be effective for teaching the students (Biggs and Tang, 2007).
I included multiple methods for teaching including lecturing, group tasks and class discussions to account for differences in student approaches to learning (Cuthbert, 2005). The lecture design was influenced by Bloom’s Taxonomy in structure (Bloom, 1956). I would introduce and describe topics through lectures, before moving towards group tasks and class discussions to allow students to apply this knowledge to case studies to help develop their understanding of topics. I also rearranged the room so that it best suited the range of tasks in the session especially as some tasks involved moving around. During the group tasks, I monitored each group and listened to their discussions, asking questions to check that they understand the material as well as prompting further debate (Race, 2007).
After the seminar I contacted the programme director who was present during my session. I asked them to peer review my teaching, as this is an important part of developing teaching skills (Trigwell and Shale, 2004; Race, 2007). I received positive comments about engaging the students across a range of methods, as well as critical comments over tasks that did not work. This allowed me to refine the seminar for the next academic year.
Example 2
Effective feedback enhances student learning
I regularly provide feedback to students regarding their written or practical work and also provide personal assessments (A2, A3). For example I provide feedback on project write-ups from undergraduate Biomedical Science students where I formally assess their project write-up using a scoring and written feedback system (A3). This involves providing an overall grade (1st 2.1, 2.2 etc.) which is calculated from a scoring system of different aspects of the write-up, which requires a large amount of core knowledge to assess this (K1). I also provide written and face-to-face feedback which I find to be more effective than merely a scoring system (emphasised by Page (Page, 1958)) as this provides “interactive” feedback (K2). These methods have proven to be more personal and the student learns more to improve their performance in the future. Therefore, in future assessments I would always use either written and/or face-to-face feedback, however, the student themselves may have a preference and therefore, I would always be happy to give feedback based on the individual’s needs (V1).
Importantly, Hattie and Timperly(2007) proposed a model of different levels of feedback (feedback about the task, feedback about processing of the task, feedback about self-regulation and feedback about the self as a person) and the level it was targeted at determined the effectiveness of feedback (V3). In addition, Brookhart (2008) produced a summary table displaying what would make good feedback, which I have tried to apply when giving feedback to students. Points of importance were the timing of feedback, the amount, clarity, valence, specificity and tone, to give but a few examples (V3). I would usually provide feedback within a 1-2 week period as I have found previously that students in some scenarios can become anxious if feedback isn’t provided soon after the hand-in date. In addition, from previous experience, regarding the amount of feedback, I write enough to iterate important points to the student by prioritising important aspects which are clear for their level of learning (V1) but I try not to write too little as that gives the impression that little care or attention has been given. I also try to provide both positive and constructive feedback. I would always focus on the positive as a way to encourage the student in the future, and where a potentially negative area may lie, I state positive ways to improve the work instead. Again, this was a better strategy as students can become demotivated and disheartened if only negative feedback is given or do not learn from mistakes if only positive feedback is provided. Overall, the effectiveness of feedback is extremely important to ensure students learn from their experiences.
References:
Brookhart, S.M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students (ASCD).
Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research 77, 81-112.
Page, E.B. (1958). Teacher comments and student performance: A seventy-four classroom experiment in school motivation. Journal of educational psychology 49, 173.
Example reference
Reference: Dr. X
Post: Associate Fellow of the Higher Education Academy
Teaching
X has provided teaching support in the Masters in Y. As part of a group of three staff, has taught seminar sessions in the revision period of the Z module. X was responsible for answering students’ questions and guiding their understanding of the course material.
In terms of the UKPSF dimensions of practice, X showed good knowledge of the subject materials, thoroughly reviewing the material before the session (K1) and of the appropriate methods for teaching and learning in this subject and at this level, discussing the role of revision questions as part of a course of traditional lectures (K2). She was aware of students’ varying opinions on the role of self-directed learning and question-based learning as compared to lectured material, and in discussions after the teaching session, showed good insight into the different roles these approaches take in student learning (K3).
She was professional, confident and enthusiastic, and worked effectively with a large multi-national and multi-cultural group of students, engaging with both subject specific questions and cultural and language barriers to understanding among the cohort (V1, V2). Through engagement with teaching on this module, X has also built an awareness of the interface between higher education and professional practice as many students were taking the course for either professional accreditation or professional development (V4).
Course Development
I have worked with X on the development of a new module for the Masters in Public Health. X designed the vast majority of the module, with an awareness of learning objectives and the constructive alignment of taught material, learning activities and assessment. The module was passed for inclusion in the XXX teaching committee (A1)
Marking and assessment
X is a second marker on two modules which I lead. She shows a strong understanding of the mark schemes and rubrics we work with and can reliably and consistently assess both written work and short question exams (A3).
In my time working with X, I am aware that she questions and seeks a deeper understanding of subject material, teaching methods and the underlying aims of the academic course. She reflects on her experience and relates this back to the course aims and the needs of the students.