Advice on resources on teaching methods at third level

summerdays

I'm mid 40s, self employed (business sector), have an MSc and am currently working towards a PhD and am now interested in moving into academia. I have a lot of experience of designing and delivering training in work contexts but have really no experience in delivering a curriculum based training in third level. My question is this - where can I do some reading up on teaching methods for third level? Yes, I know there are lots of web sites out there but I am looking for the best places to start. For example I'm not sure how I would hold the attention of a class full of under graduates even though I am knowledgeable about my subject area and recognise that I need to do some reading/researching and learning about pedagogy etc..

Any advice would be very welcome, thanks in advance

PS: I may have posted this in the wrong thread so if that's the case my apologies and I'd appreciate it if one of the mods would move it..

Tom Dunne

I think I should be able to offer some insight here.

summerdays wrote:

My question is this - where can I do some reading up on teaching methods for third level? Yes, I know there are lots of web sites out there but I am looking for the best places to start.

I am not aware of any websites, books, manuals or papers that tell you how to be a good lecturer. I do, however, know what works in a class full of 18-21 year olds and what doesn't.

Let's cut to the chase here - lecturing at third level is an art form. There are two types of lecturers - the stuffy academics who undoubtedly know their stuff, but cannot for the life of them convey this information to anyone apart from fellow academics, and the "cool" types who know their stuff, but might not have the vast range of academic qualifications, but can get concepts across to students who are at least 10-15 years younger than them. I like to think I fall into the latter bracket . There is another type, those that simply haven't a clue what they are talking about and should never be put in front of a class, but we will ignore them.

summerdays wrote:

For example I'm not sure how I would hold the attention of a class full of under graduates even though I am knowledgeable about my subject area and recognise that I need to do some reading/researching and learning about pedagogy etc..

Personally, I find the key to a successful class is to make it as easy as possible to learn. To make it easy, you have to get the attention of the class and maintain it. Dare I say, you have to make it fun. Now I teach computers, and trying to make the theory of operating systems fun is not an easy task. But explaining concepts, making analogies, drawing on personal experience help to make it interesting. Also, regular breaks (within reason, of course). Going off on a tangent sometimes helps, as do anecdotes. I have been told by current students that I come across as very enthusiastic, which I must admit, I love to hear.

Relating what is taught in the theory class to what has to be done in the practical classes also helps immeasurably. You are helping the students join the dots, so to speak, with theory reinforcing the practicals.

Do you mind me asking, what field you are in?

summerdays

Tom - thanks for that. I'm in Management and the way you describe teaching is probably the way I work with adults in a learning environment. I work from "lived experiences" and use anecdotes, artwork - what ever captures attention and works. However, I've been told by various academics that if I want to get a full time post in particular I will need to be able to talk about my ability to deliver a course end to end, how I will capture the attention of a group of under grads, and how I'll establish the basics etc and be able to put some "lingo" on that i.e. methodologies/pedagogy etc...

Maybe I won't....?

PS: I just realised you're "that" Tom Dunne - I guess that helps in the classroom as well eh? lol

Tom Dunne

summerdays wrote:

However, I've been told by various academics that if I want to get a full time post in particular I will need to be able to talk about my ability to deliver a course end to end, how I will capture the attention of a group of under grads, and how I'll establish the basics etc and be able to put some "lingo" on that i.e. methodologies/pedagogy etc...

Well any course should adhere to the syllabus, that goes without saying. Learning should be a combination of theory and practicals, where possible. Using a combination of written assignments plus classwork plus end of semester exams gives students a fair attempt at achieving a good mark. Also, I make a point of insisting students get more than one viewpoint on a topic - don't just take my notes and accept them as gospel, get another angle from books/articles/papers/website, a type of positive reinforcement.

Analogies are an excellent way of establishing the basics. And I am a very graphic type of person - I draw diagrams at the drop of a hat. I also pick on students - I have the list of names on the sign-in sheet in front of me and rather than just spoon-feeding the class, I draw discussion out of them by picking a name and asking the student his/her opinion on a topic. Of course it doesn't work as well with shy or foreign students, but if done right, in a non-intimidatory way, it can really encourage participation.

summerdays wrote:

PS: I just realised you're "that" Tom Dunne - I guess that helps in the classroom as well eh? lol

I am? That's news to me.