A would-be instructor must ask: How does a successful teacher organize activities, communicate in and out of the classroom, and motivate students to engage with that material in an enduring way? The resources and guidance presented here can help answer that question.

Nearly two decades ago, Barr and Tang argued that higher education was experiencing a significant shift. The “instruction paradigm” of the college classroom was giving way to a “learning paradigm” (Barr and Tagg 1995). Learner-centered models of curriculum design and student engagement have made inroads on college campuses. In today’s university, proficiency not only in teaching but in supporting student learning is valued currency.

The scholarship of pedagogy is thriving. Findings from studies of neuroscience and human development contribute to new practices which education researchers further explore. (See Arnone et al. 2011; Jensen 2008; Bass 2012; Martin and Dowson 2009; Haskell and Champion 2007). More than ever, the onus is on college faculty to use instructional methods that prepare graduates to apply their education to real-world tasks. Institutions increasingly support the development of faculty teaching skills by establishing centers for teaching and learning, considering instructional commitment in tenure decisions, and improving assessments of student outcomes.

This is good news for doctoral students today. Tools that were not available a generation ago are now within reach. The teaching support on tap for university faculty can serve as a bonus curriculum for the PhD student who is savvy enough to take advantage of it. Today’s graduate can enter an academic position or expand a professional repertoire with tangible teaching skills and a solid foundation in pedagogy.

Where to Begin

The valuable instructional resources available at a university can enhance a student’s career. Nevertheless, subject matter expertise remains the most important focus of a doctoral program. PhD students have to make tough choices. Most have limited time to take on yet another parallel course of study, even if it is free for the taking.

Shortcuts exist for those students interested in pedagogy. Listed below are several tools and tips for getting started.

Resources for Emerging Instructors

1. Books

How Learning Works: Seven Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching by Susan Ambrose, et al. is a great primer for those interested in student engagement. This guide “synthesizes empirical research evidence and research-based learning theory into practical advice for how to improve your college teaching.” Published in 2010, it is a timely collection of the recent findings and applications (Ambrose 2010)

Learner-Centered Teaching: The Five Key Changes to Practice by Maryellen Weimer is a practical guide to implementing learner-centered teaching methods in the college classroom (Weimer 2002).

What the Best College Teachers Do by Ken Bain is the go-to text for Mason’s Center for Teaching and Faculty Excellence. This book is the conclusion of fifteen years of studying nearly 100 instructors. It provides a synopsis not only of the best practices of successful teachers but insight into the orientations and understandings that guide their practices  (Bain 2004).

What’s the Use of Lectures? by Donald Bligh is a handy companion for those instructors who are accustomed to relying on the lecture format. It lays out an accessible theoretical foundation before describing numerous technique for integrating active learning practices into content-heavy course modules  (Bligh 2000).

2. Websites

The two websites below contain resources for everything from writing a lesson plan to classroom management. The links are organized well for both skimming and deeper inquiry.

• GMU’s Center for Teaching  and Faculty Excellence :  http://ctfe.gmu.edu/
• The Ohio State University’s University Center for the Advancement of Teaching (UCAT):   http://ucat.osu.edu

Two Tips for Emerging Instructors

1. Observe and Be Observed

Doctoral students wanting to learn about teaching have few opportunities to focus on form over content, yet paying attention to teaching in action can itself be a good teacher. Seeking out a willing instructor and observing classroom practices can be a valuable exercise.

An observation tool is a template for taking organized notes on what works and what needs adjustment. Using such a tool can facilitate reflection on teaching techniques and classroom dynamics. The University of Minnesota’s Center for Teaching and Learning has links to several classroom observation instruments:  http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/resources/peer/instruments/index.html  (Because it can be daunting to be watched while teaching, observers should always pay the instructor back with gratitude.)

When the next opportunity arises to present ideas or be a guest lecturer, future teachers should not only accept the challenge but also ask a peer to observe and comment on the module.

2. Reflect

Writing in a reflective manner about teaching and learning can help bridge the gaps between ideas, implementation, and improvement.

For an emerging instructor, reflection begins in the role of a learner.  Taking notes about successes and stumbling blocks in the classroom helps form reflective habits.  Then, when teaching or presenting, it is good practice to make notes about session goals, activities, and content just before walking into the classroom. A brief writing period should immediately follow the module. How did expectations square with what took place? Did “critical incidents” occur, and if so, what questions did they raise? What went well? Where did things become stuck and what different approaches are available? Thoughts that occur in the midst of the teaching experience can become insights if they are recorded and explored soon after.

Integration of knowledge occurs at unexpected times, quite often outside the classroom.  It is prudent to keep a journal handy in the stretches between teaching components. The reflective journal is a place to jot down questions that emerge and ideas about new approaches.

This journal can also become a place for clarifying a teaching philosophy over time. A developing instructor tries on different personas, attempts a variety of assessments, and experiments with classroom techniques. Active reflection allows for a student of pedagogy to keep expanding over the life of a career.

A few prompts for reflective journaling are listed below (Danielson 2009).

• What worked in this lesson? How do I know?
• What would I do the same or differently if I could re-teach this lesson? Why?
• What root cause might be prompting or perpetuating this student behavior?
• What do I believe about how students learn? How does this belief influence my instruction?
• What data do I need to make an informed decision about this problem?
• Is this the most efficient way to accomplish this task?

–

Works Cited

Arnone, Marilyn P., Ruth V. Small, Sarah A. Chauncey, and H. Patricia McKenna. 2011. “Curiosity, Interest and Engagement in Technology-pervasive Learning Environments: a New Research Agenda.” Educational Technology Research and Development 59 (2) (April 1): 181–198. doi:10.2307/41414933.

Bain, Ken. 2004. What the Best College Teachers Do. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Barr, Robert B., and John Tagg. 1995. “From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education.” Change 27 (6) (November 1): 12–25. doi:10.2307/40165284.

Bass, Christa. 2012. “Learning Theories & Their Application to Science Instruction for Adults.” The American Biology Teacher 74 (6) (August 1): 387–390. doi:10.1525/abt.2012.74.6.6.

Bligh, Donald A. 2000. What’s the Use of Lectures? 1st ed. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Danielson, Lana. 2009. “Fostering Reflection.” Educational Leadership 66 (5) (February). http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb09/vol66/num05/Fostering-Reflection.aspx.

Haskell, Deborah H., and Timothy D. Champion. 2008. “Instructional Strategies and Learning Preferences at a Historically Black University.” The Journal of Negro Education 77 (3) (July 1): 271–279. doi:10.2307/25608693.

How Learning Works: Seven Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching. 2010. 1st ed. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Jensen, Eric P. 2008. “A Fresh Look at Brain-Based Education.” The Phi Delta Kappan 89 (6) (February 1): 408–417. doi:10.2307/20442521.

Martin, Andrew J., and Martin Dowson. 2009. “Interpersonal Relationships, Motivation, Engagement, and Achievement: Yields for Theory, Current Issues, and Educational Practice.” Review of Educational Research 79 (1) (March 1): 327–365. doi:10.2307/40071168.

Weimer, Maryellen. 2002. Learner-centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. 1st ed. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

George Mason University and School of Public Policy Student Association Presents

“School Of Public Policy Goes Global”

Professional Speaker Series

Sonia Ketkar
Assistant Professor; Co-Director of Center for Emerging Market Policies

Jamal Abdi
Policy Director at NIAC organization

International Student Speaker Series

Taste Foods From Around The World And Get A Henna Tattoo

Venue: Founders Hall, Room 120
Date: 04/11/2013
Time: 5:00pm – 6:45pm

The panel will feature chapter members in a variety of transportation fields (policy/engineering, public/private sector) who will discuss and answer questions about their career paths. Panelists will be available to talk one-on-one with students, and light refreshments will be served.

Date: Thursday, April 4

Time: 6-7:30 PM (one-hour panel followed by a chance to speak one-on-one with panelists)

Location: Founders Hall, room 602, on the George Mason University Arlington campus (Virginia Square-GMU Metro)

Directions: http://www.gmu.edu/resources/welcome/Directions/Directions-to-Arlington.html

Downloadable map: http://info.gmu.edu/Maps/ArlingtonMap12.pdf

WTS-DC, the local chapter of the Women’s Transportation Seminar, is an organization for transportation professionals. While we seek to promote women in transportation, both men and women can join. We provide professional development for transportation professionals in all modes.

Students interested in attending should RSVP to Liisa Ecola at lecola@rand.org. We hope to see you there.

Monday, April 8
Noon
Arlington Campus, Founders Hall, Room TBA
Dr. Dieter Plehwe
Research Fellow
WZB (Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung)
(The Social Science Research Center Berlin)
“Think Tank Technology and Public Policy: Between Networks and Complex Organization”

How, then, can a doctoral student become fluent in the written word? Consistent routines and frequent practice are essential. So is breaking the habit of self-containment. In a 2008 survey of productive authors in the field of educational psychology,  respondents most frequently cited collaboration with colleagues as contributing to their productivity (Mayrath 2008). Graduate students who participate in writing groups also report increases in output, skills, and confidence (Aitchison 2009), (Li and Vandermensbrugghe 2011), (Ferguson 2009).

The benefits of writing with a group are threefold. The first is practical skill improvement by giving and receiving feedback. You learn to identify your patterns and to replace them with sharper prose. Your work becomes more readable as you expand the range of style options available to you.

Second is increased productivity. A group helps you find your pace. Output is expected as group members hold each other accountable. Participants support each other in developing a more organized writing practice.

Third are the psychosocial benefits. Sharing your work with non-judgmental critics (yes, they do exist) allows you to gain confidence in your process. The encouragement and camaraderie of a group can help you overcome fears you may not even know are keeping you from your best work.

Can any group arrangement do the trick? Perhaps, but the studies noted above offer insight into best practices. One is that including members with different research backgrounds is an advantage (Ferguson 2009). Scholars and policy experts rarely write for just a single, narrow discipline. Rest assured your readership will consist of more than just the three or four members of your committee. Diverse group participants can help one another become more dexterous communicators. Multiple perspectives enhance your awareness of the reader and compel you to write clearly for a range of audiences.

Another insight is the positive impact of offering feedback to others. While participants expected the critiques they received to improve their writing, they were surprised at how much the process of reviewing the work of other members improved their own (Aitchison 2009). Scholarship on peer tutoring suggests similar benefits.  By instructing fellow students, tutors review and reevaluate their own knowledge and learn to appraise their own material (Topping and Ehly 1998). Attending to the form style, and clarity of peers’ work will help you find the best way to say what you have to say.

Finally, creating a voluntary and positive group identity with clear guidelines for constructive feedback enhances the psychosocial benefits of participation (Li and Vandermensbrugghe 2011). Doubt, insecurity, low confidence and fear of rejection affect early-career and established academics’ writing productivity as much as time pressures and heavy workloads. Academic authors report that peer support enhances confidence and motivation. It is a new experience for many students to engage in a review process that is not linked to a consequence. This in turn might give you the confidence to try new approaches when delivering your ideas.

Forming a Writing Group

In most cases, any group is better than no group. Peer support alone can be a great motivator. Even if the members decide to meet simply to write independently, the experience of writing in the company of others adds value. Your group, however, may be eager to make something more of the time you spend together. The tips below can help you draft your group’s outline:

Composition: Aim for small, adaptive, diverse, and engaged. A writing group can consist of as few as three and as many as ten members. A smaller size helps you avoid scheduling headaches and enables ample opportunity for in-depth criticism. Consider how you will handle people leaving and others joining later especially if your group includes students at different points in the program. Ideally, you will have a mix of native and non-native English speakers from various stages of study with a range of research interests. It may be impossible to achieve such balance, so bear in mind that commitment trumps demographics. Group members must be enthusiastic in their dedication to this undertaking. It only works if the participants make it work.

Design: Spend your first meeting hashing out a blueprint. Compile a list of the group’s basic objectives. Decide how often you will meet, where, and for how long. The most common format involves members sending pieces to each other a week or so in advance of the session so that everyone has a chance to read and compile comments. For a small group, there may be time to critique each contribution. For a larger group, it might be preferable to take only 2-3 submissions for each meeting or to split into smaller clusters to provide more robust feedback.

Facilitation: A gentle, consistent guide can enhance the critique process and keep the discussion on track. The simplest approach is to allow the facilitator role to rotate among the members. Alternatively, a few folks in the group may gravitate towards this position and others may appreciate their leadership. It is a good idea to discuss this openly. As time goes on, more reserved members may be encouraged to take turns leading.

The facilitator makes sure every attendee receives submissions ahead of the meeting and confirms the schedule. During the session, this person watches time and keeps the conversation on track. The facilitator should come prepared with simple questions such as, “What works for you in this piece? What is confusing?” The member in this role can guide the discussion, summarize, create transitions, and draw out quieter participants. The facilitator may also be in charge of determining a brief writing exercise to be offered at the meeting.

Creativity: Many groups dedicate a portion of each session to generating material. Free-writing exercises are a common tool. While your time may feel too pressed for this, consider the value of writing while creativity is firing on all cylinders. When ideas about style are flying around, participants may be primed to produce useful raw material. This segment of the session can be dedicated to general brainstorming, reflection, or a structured exercise. The facilitator could provide “either-or” options for the free-write, such as “either compose an outline for your next chapter or prepare a draft conclusion.”

Evaluation: Assess the process at regular intervals. Review group objectives and make adjustments as needed. Which aspects of the sessions are most fruitful? Do some members want to attempt a shared writing project? Take advantage of outside resources to support your progress. The sites listed below provide guidance on peer writing practice and collaborative learning. You can also contact Shannon Williams in PhD Student Services for ideas about how best to use other Mason resources so your group can thrive.

 –

Links

Starting an Effective Dissertation Writing Group is a toolkit that contains templates, guides, and tips for running a group. From Dr. Souhi Lee and Dr. Chris Gold at the Hume Writing Center at Stanford University.

Running an Effective Writing Group from UCLA’s Graduate Writing Center hosts an online page with tools and links for getting started.

 –

 Works Cited

Aitchison, Claire. 2009. “Writing Groups for Doctoral Education.” Studies in Higher Education 34 (8) (December): 905–916.

Elbow, Peter. 1997. “High Stakes and Low Stakes in Assigning and Responding to Writing.” New Directions for Teaching & Learning (69): 5.

Ferguson, Therese. 2009. “The ‘Write’ Skills and More: A Thesis Writing Group for Doctoral Students.” Journal of Geography in Higher Education 33 (2) (May): 285–297.

Li, Linda Y., and Joelle Vandermensbrugghe. 2011. “Supporting the Thesis Writing Process of International Research Students Through an Ongoing Writing Group.” Innovations in Education & Teaching International 48 (2) (May): 195–205.

Mayrath, Michael C. 2008. “Attributions of Productive Authors in Educational Psychology Journals.” Educational Psychology Review 20 (1) (March 1): 41–56. doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9059-y.

Topping, Keith and Ehly, Stewart. Peer-assisted Learning. 1998. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Erdal Tekin on “Air Pollution and Infant Mortality: Evidence from the Expansion of Natural Gas Infrastructure.” (http://www.gsu.edu/~ecoext)

Details regarding the room number will follow soon! Please save the date. We hope that you can attend.

This workshop will provide an overview of international and overseas fellowship opportunities for graduate students, and a tutorial on how to search for opportunities in your field/region of interest.

The presentation will be divided into three parts:

Part I (6:00 pm – 6:45 pm) will focus on well-known, nationally competitive opportunities for worldwide study and research, including the Fulbright U.S. Student Program, the Boren Fellowships, and the Critical Languages Scholarship Program. The presentation will include a basic overview of the purpose, structure, timing, and requirements of these awards and advise on how to position oneself competitively for them.

Part II (6:45 pm-7:05 pm) will focus on opportunities for Ph.D. students to conduct overseas / international dissertation research.

Break: 7:05-7:15 pm.

Part III: 7:15 -8:00 pm Tutorial on how to search for opportunities in your field or world region of interest. The presentation will include demonstrations of search tools, funding databases, and strategies for locating funding opportunities.

Those who cannot attend for the entire two-hours are welcome to attend for only part of the session as their schedule / interest allows. Please RSVP by 5:00 pm on Tuesday, March 12, with name, degree program, and (if known) country/region of interest to Dr. Kathryn E. Agoston, Director of Graduate Fellowships, at kagoston@gmu.edu

6:00-8:00pm

Founders Hall 210

Mason Policy Prof. Stephen Fuller, Director of the Center for Regional Analysis

The Washington Area economy has grown tremendously thanks to federal government spending. In 2010, total federal spending accounted for nearly 40 percent of the region’s GDP, according to Mason Policy Prof. Steve Fuller. But times have changed, and whether sequestration happens or not, the region faces a sea change, as federal spending is on a downward trend.

At a recent Vision Series Lecture, Fuller presented an overview of the key conditions shaping the regional economy, including declining federal spending, wage and salary compression, and demographic shifts. He also identified key development challenges that the region faces, including a shortage of workers to fill region’s projected job growth; growing dependency on non-resident workforce; shortages of housing in all jurisdictions to house the future workforce; lack of long-term regional solutions and implementation of public-sector investments to support the growth and development of the Washington economy; and a need for local and state leadership.

Fuller began the presentation by noting, “We have a chronic shortage of workers.” Despite the unemployment rate, the region lacks qualified workers to fill the kinds of jobs it’s creating.

One result is that “We import more workers than any other place in the country, on a daily basis,” he said, in effect making the region dependent on other economies to support it.

Fuller shared data on the sectors that are recovering jobs, including Education and Health Services, which contributed 52,000 jobs to the region’s economy. “There’s a big churn going on. Once the federal government stops going, what are we going to do? What sectors are we going to do? What sectors are we going to rely on? Education and Health Services is an obvious one,” he says. “One takeaway is that we’ve been damaged somewhat by a reduction in federal spending…but there’s something else going on, something to build on.”

The entire slideshow is available at the Center of Regional Analysis, where Fuller is director.

Dr. Jonathan Gifford, director of Mason’s Transportation Policy, Operations and Logistics program, moderated the panel, which included Jack Schenendorf, Covington & Burling LLP; Frank Shafroth, assistant professor and director for the Center of State and Local Leadership at George Mason University; and Shin-pei Tsay, director of cities and transportation in the energy and climate program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The panelists discussed the specifics of the Virginia proposal, as well as broader issues of transportation funding and the efficacy of the user-pay or utility model for this sector of economic activity.