DOCTORAL ISSUESTraining Doctoral Students in the Art of Teachingby Harvey J. Brightman College of Business Administration, Georgia State University
Is teaching important in schools of business? Exhibit 1, taken from the 1988 Porter and McKibbon study (Porter and McKibbon, 1988), reveals that while faculty had very different perceptions than deans and provosts, all believed that teaching was and should be more important than research. However, all agreed that research would become more important, and faculty believed that research would supersede teaching in importance. This was especially true for faculty and deans of research universities. Will the increased emphasis on research come at the expense of teaching? While it need not, it may unless three conditions are met. First, business schools must develop systems for evaluating the impact of teaching and curriculum beyond our present student evaluation of instructor instrumentation. Even valid and reliable instruments focus on the teaching process, and not on what students can do upon graduation. While there are many reasons for the ascendance of research, one factor is surely the ability to measure scholarly output. While the "article number count" metric has serious faults, faculty promotion and tenure committees often use it when reviewing a candidate's file. Schools must develop equivalent "count" procedures to assess student learning outcomes and skill development. Second, innovative and excellent teaching will continue if schools reward it. We will know that good teaching is truly rewarded when outstanding teachers do not obtain course releases to upgrade their research, or poor teachers get extra teaching loads. We believe that schools must provide incentives for excellent and innovative teaching. Third, schools must establish comprehensive faculty development programs to help those who seek to improve their teaching. Given the lack of teacher training in most Ph.D. programs, faculty development programs can provide the needed skills and strategies to be a more effective and innovative teacher. In the absence of faculty development, poor student evaluation of instructor ratings are frustrating and lead to resentment. It's bad enough to be told by students that one's teaching needs improvement without having the resources in place to make the necessary improvements. While faculty development is appropriate, training doctoral students during their Ph.D. program would help solve the problem "upstream." Why then have only a handful of doctoral programs in business offered formal courses in teaching? In a recent Decision Line (March 1995, pp. 17-18), Chan Hahn speculated that "because teaching entails complexity and dynamism, it is extremely difficult to do it well.'' Perhaps that is why most doctoral schools do not offer formal courses in teaching, but the innovation literature suggests other more serious barriers to initiating teaching seminars. Under what conditions do organizations adopt innovations? The literature suggests that the innovation must pass the following tests. Does the innovation (1) provide solutions for an existing problem?, (2) have top management support? , (3) have a champion?, or (4) clash with the existing values of the organization? Does the innovation, teaching seminars for doctoral students, pass the four tests? The answer to the first two tests would seem to be yes. Exhibit 1 suggests that in 1987 deans and provosts overwhelming believed that teaching was more important then research and expected teaching to be more important than research even into the future. I believe that the lack of doctoral training in teaching rests with the failure of faculty champions to step forward and design and direct such courses. Perhaps we should not be surprised given the faculty's expectations that research would be soon be more important than teaching (from Exhibit 1). However, several external forces are producing a renewed interest in teaching and curricula development. Three independent forces have dramatically changed the business school environment since the late eighties. First, business schools are facing significantly reduced enrollments, especially at the undergraduate level. Innovative and effective teaching and curricula could help reverse this trend. Second, accrediting agencies and federal and state political bodies have taken a renewed interest in outcome assessment. As of 1990, 40 states require some form of assessment in higher education. Some faculty think that assessment is "bean counting," useless paper work, and will disappear if neglected. However, Richard Mallard, the former president of the Council on Postsecondary Accreditation, believes that assessment seeks to evaluate universities on what their students and programs achieve rather than on the reputations that they have gathered over the years (Mallard, 1991). Given the general support for assessment within colleges and the continuing commitment for assessment by the political and accrediting communities, I believe that assessment will become a permanent part of the academic landscape. Finally, the emerging technology, especially the Internet, may spark renewed interest in teaching. The Internet already supports teaching by (1) getting educators in touch with others through mailing lists and news groups, (2) providing educational software, (3) providing course syllabi and reading lists, (4) locating research articles on improvement of teaching, and (5) linking students with other students. Given the renewed interest in teaching and learning, perhaps it is time to reconsider developing teaching seminars within our doctoral programs. At the 1990 meeting of the American Association of Doctoral Program Coordinators of Business, Georgia State University offered as a model its 10-week, 45-hour course on university teaching (see Exhibit 2) that is required of its graduate teaching assistants. Since 1981, the College of Business Administration has taught the teaching seminar twice a year. Beyond the topics in Exhibit 2, the course encourages doctoral students to discuss current problems in their classes, learn classroom management skills such as how to deal with cheating, unresponsive classes, and student-snipers, and learn the college's policies and procedures. We renew the offer once again. To help other schools get started, I will be placing my doctoral seminar teaching material, handouts, course syllabus, and Powerpoint slides on the home page of Georgia State University's Decision Sciences Department (http://dsc.gsu.edu) by the fall quarter (or send e-mail to dschjb@gsusgi2.gsu.edu and ask for the materials). I invite you to review and download my material and initiate some form of doctoral training in teaching. In any case, I stand ready to help you launch your efforts in teaching doctoral students how to teach. Only one questions remains: Are there any faculty champions out there? References Mallard, Richard. Today's myths and tomorrow's realities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991, 235-236. Porter, Lyman & Lawrence McKibbin. Management education and development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1988, 53.
See exhibits mentioned in this article (pdf file)
HARVEY J. BRIGHTMAN is Regents' Professor of Decision Sciences at Georgia State University. He received his B.S. in mechanical engineering from the University of Connecticut and his M.S. in management engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. In 1970 he received his Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts with a major in management science. He worked at the Sprague Electric Company, and was manager of technical services at the American Optical Company. His main areas of interest are managerial problem solving/decision making and the improvement of university-level teaching. He has consulted with Armco Steel, Ericsson Network Systems, AT&T, IBM, ARCO, The Centers for Disease Control, Coca-Cola, Institut Pengembangan Manajemen Indonesia, Georgia Power Company, among others. Dr. Brightman has published over 65 articles in scholarly and professional journals. In 1984 he was selected the Alumni Distinguished Professor from the College of Business. He is also a recipient of the 1989 and 1991 CBA faculty recognition awards for outstanding teaching and for outstanding service. In 1992 he was selected the Alumni Distinguished Professor for Georgia State University. In 1992 he also received the Dennis Grawoig Distinguished Service Award from the Decision Sciences Institute. He is the author of the best selling book, Problem Solving: A Logical and Creative Approach, which was the main dual summer selection (1981) of the Macmillan Executive Book Program. The book was translated into Japanese in 1983 and is now in its eighth printing. A second book, entitled Group Problem Solving: An Improved Managerial Approach, was also translated into Japanese. He has also written two books on statistics, and is currently completing a book on improving university-level teaching. Dr. Brightman is a past president and a Fellow of the Decision Sciences Institute. |