View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Leading Edge of Pedagogical Innovation: A Portrait of National Winners of the US Professors of the Year Competition, 1981-2015

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Leading Edge of Pedagogical Innovation: A Portrait of National Winners of the US Professors of the Year Competition, 1981-2015
Language: English
Authors: Huber, Mary Taylor
Source: Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. 2018 50(3-4):79-83.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 5
Publication Date: 2018
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: College Faculty, Higher Education, Teaching Methods, Awards, Teacher Competencies, Undergraduate Study, Educational Innovation, Educational Change, Teacher Characteristics, Intellectual Disciplines, Educational History
DOI: 10.1080/00091383.2018.1509611
ISSN: 0009-1383
Abstract: The past fifty years have witnessed a sea of change in teaching and learning in higher education. In a general shift of emphasis from teaching to learning, best symbolized by Robert Barr and John Tagg's much cited 1995 "Change" article, "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education," reformers have introduced an array of new media pedagogies, active learning strategies, high impact practices, and novel approaches to classroom inquiry and improvement. While surveys can suggest how widely these new teaching practices have spread, they are limited in their capacity to capture the creativity involved in teaching well--with new or, for that matter, more traditional approaches. By contrast, the US Professors of the Year awards, offered from 1981-2015, afford a much more in-depth view of the leading edge of pedagogical innovation. Led by the Council for the Advancement and Support of Higher Education (CASE) in collaboration with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, this program served as the only sustained national teaching award in US higher education that cut across the disciplines and recognized exemplary teachers from all major institutional types. Over its thirty-five-year history, 101 national winners were named--one annually from 1981-1993, then four each year from 1994-2015, representing the major types of higher education institutions: community colleges, baccalaureate colleges, master's colleges and universities, and doctoral universities. Annual winners were also selected from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories, when there were enough entries of sufficient quality. From the 1990s on, the number of nominations fluctuated from around 300 to 500 per year. Of course, this is a select group. By definition, they are not average college teachers, and they don't reflect the growing numbers of faculty in contingent and other non-tenure-track appointments over those same years. Still, if one wants to see how creativity in undergraduate teaching has developed over the past 35 years, this is a promising group to explore. This article discusses what educational innovations look like in the hands of teachers recognized as exemplary by their own institution and by the competition's judges. The article asks what has changed over time, and what has remained the same in the dossiers of those who have won this award. The article explores what has lasted the test of time throughout the decades, and how these faculty members engaged departmental, disciplinary, and institutional colleagues in pedagogical and curricular change?
Abstractor: ERIC
Number of References: 2
Entry Date: 2018
Accession Number: EJ1195422
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEbAjwkjDylcWiKI_IpOJDlAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCvXYQt8PNPHRLRq2AIBEICBm-BeqI7t9iIhEbekWWFYUPHN_PzwT55PHFJ3pe76gIzyFvXJXI8CnyeDBq8fYejSGbkd1LBc_jdop7q_sjWpYU5UJjm95FJLYLVrU7LWZQmY8rSeYAmfwolGhJ1cHdZomXWyGQStTJ5X3GAuOszHKxmpXcRNIuplHs2s5khLLkmRNrMHGpa4P6cGOSze1jGVodNd47clSrULIudc
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0132432883;chg01may.18;2018Oct18.09:28;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0132432883-1">The Leading Edge of Pedagogical Innovation: A Portrait of National Winners of the US Professors of the Year Competition, 1981-2015 </title> <p>The past fifty years have witnessed a sea-change in teaching and learning in higher education. In a general shift of emphasis from teaching to learning, best symbolized by Robert Barr and John Tagg's much cited 1995<emph>Change</emph> article, "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education," reformers have introduced an array of new media pedagogies, active learning strategies, high impact practices, and novel approaches to classroom inquiry and improvement.</p> <p>While surveys can suggest how widely these new teaching practices have spread, they are limited in their capacity to capture the creativity involved in teaching well—with new or, for that matter, more traditional approaches. By contrast, the US Professors of the Year awards, offered from 1981-2015, afford a much more in-depth view of the leading edge of pedagogical innovation. Led by the Council for the Advancement and Support of Higher Education (CASE) in collaboration with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, this program served as the only sustained national teaching award in US higher education that cut across the disciplines and recognized exemplary teachers from all major institutional types (Tables 1 and 2).</p> <p>US Professors of the Year, by Institutional Type*</p> <p> <ephtml> <table border="1" cellpadding="4"><tr><td align="left" /><td align="center">1981-93</td><td align="center">1994-2015</td><td align="center">Total</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Doctoral</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="center">22</td><td align="center">27</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Master's</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="center">22</td><td align="center">25</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Baccalaureate</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="center">22</td><td align="center">27</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Community College</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">22</td><td align="center">22</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="center">13</td><td align="center">88</td><td align="center">101</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 As determined by contemporary Carnegie Classifications of Institutions of Higher Education</p> <p>U.S. Professors of the Year, by Discipline</p> <p> <ephtml> <table border="1" cellpadding="3"><tr><td align="left">STEM FIELDS</td><td align="center">Number</td><td align="center">Totals</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Engineering & Computer Science</td><td align="center">11.5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Biology</td><td align="center">9</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Chemistry</td><td align="center">9</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Physics</td><td align="center">9</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Mathematics</td><td align="center">6.5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Geology</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Astronomy</td><td align="center">1.5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Subtotal STEM</td><td align="center" /><td align="center">49.5</td></tr><tr><td align="left">ARTS & HUMANITIES</td><td align="center" /><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">English</td><td align="center">12</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Philosophy</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Foreign Language</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Arts</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">History</td><td align="center">4</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Religious Studies</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Subtotal Arts & Humanities</td><td align="center" /><td align="center">33</td></tr><tr><td align="left">SOCIAL SCIENCES</td><td align="center" /><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Psychology</td><td align="center">7</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Anthropology</td><td align="center">4.5</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Economics</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Political Science</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Sociology</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Subtotal Social Sciences</td><td align="center" /><td align="center">17.5</td></tr><tr><td align="left">PROFESSIONAL FIELDS</td><td align="center" /><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Nursing</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center" /></tr><tr><td align="left">Subtotal Professional</td><td align="center" /><td align="center">1</td></tr></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Over its thirty-five-year history, 101 national winners were named—one annually from 1981-1993, then four each year from 1994-2015, representing the major types of higher education institutions: community colleges, baccalaureate colleges, master's colleges and universities, and doctoral universities. Annual winners were also selected from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories, when there were enough entries of sufficient quality. From the 1990s on, the number of nominations fluctuated from around 300 to 500 per year.</p> <p>Of course, this is a select group. By definition, they are not average college teachers, and they don't reflect the growing numbers of faculty in contingent and other non-tenure-track appointments over those same years. Still, if we want to see how creativity in undergraduate teaching has developed over the past 35 years, this is a promising group to explore. What does educational innovation look like in the hands of teachers recognized as exemplary by their own institution and by the competition's judges? What has changed over time in the dossiers of winners of this award? What has stayed the same? How have these faculty members engaged departmental, disciplinary, and institutional colleagues in pedagogical and curricular change?</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-2">The US Professors of the Year Program</hd> <p>From the beginning, the US Professors of the Year program honored faculty for "extraordinary dedication to undergraduate teaching," using criteria that have invited nominees and their supporters to present a broad picture of the candidate's pedagogical work. Throughout, the criteria have included (with some changes in wording):</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Impact on and involvement with undergraduate students;</item> <p></p> <item> A scholarly approach to teaching and learning;</item> <p></p> <item> Contributions to undergraduate education in the institution, community, and profession, and</item> <p></p> <item> Support from colleagues and current and former undergraduate students.</item> </ulist> <p>Every year, campuses across the country nominated their best teachers for this award (most were winners of campus, system-level, or professional society awards). Candidates from 1981-1993 submitted a one-page teaching-oriented resume, a log of courses taught in the most recent academic year, and six letters of recommendation from students and colleagues. After 1994, materials also included the nominee's own two-page statement about his or her special contributions as a teacher.</p> <p>Judging was a three-stage process. CASE invited colleagues from the larger higher education community to serve as judges in two preliminary rounds of evaluation, while the Carnegie Foundation selected a new 6-person panel each year to review the finalists and choose the national winners. As convener of that final panel from 1991 to 2015, I can assure readers that the judges found virtually all finalists to be worthy of a national prize. The final panel's task, then, was to choose <emph>which way</emph> of being a great teacher deserved special recognition that year.</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-3">Pedagogical Decades</hd> <p>What would one see if one had time-lapse video of the pedagogical accomplishments of the 101 national winners of the US Professors of the Year award from 1981-2015? Throughout the sequence, one would see faculty who had become masters of the standard teaching repertoire of their discipline, be it lecture, seminar, tutorial, lab, field, or studio. Yet one would also see, as time passed, experiments with different ways of enlivening those forms—connecting theoretical ideas with real-world examples, integrating opportunities for research or community engagement into course design, exploring the possibilities of new technologies, encouraging more active learning.</p> <p>Innovation was evident as well in the national winners' accomplishments as educational leaders. This work beyond their own classrooms shows a similar pattern of continuity and change. Throughout the program's thirty-five years, there have been winners who built up their undergraduate degree programs, strengthened campus-wide academic life (for example, founding or leading honors colleges, tutoring centers, or speakers series), or made special efforts to recruit and support underrepresented students. Many also engaged in outreach to local community organizations, including K-12 students and teachers. What changed over time is the level of engagement with colleagues on educational issues. The roster of winners has always included text-book authors or creators of materials for use by other faculty, but in the program's later years a significant number also engaged in the kinds of inquiry and improvement known as the scholarship of teaching and learning. (Winners' profiles can be seen at the program website.)</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-4">The 1980s</hd> <p>There were only nine national winners in the 1980s, but they provide the baseline for the pattern sketched above. Virtually all were recognized in letters of support for enlivening traditional formats. A biologist incorporated demonstrations and student participation activities into her large introductory biology course and was praised for lectures that were models of clarity. One of the social science professors was lauded as a "quintessential seminar leader;" another as a "masterful discussion leader" and "best paper-grader ever." The letters supporting nominees in the 1980s cite innovative assignments and activities, like journaling, giving exams before class discussion of a particular text, and using new approaches to teach math. Three of the 1980s winners engaged undergraduates in the real work of the discipline—anthropological research during field trips to Mexico; a first-year writing course in which students wrote for various offices of the university; a forensic anthropologist who brought students along on investigations into a murder or accident case.</p> <p>As one would expect, some of the innovations in this era were responsive to their times—for example, a professor who had received a Ford Foundation grant to teach colleagues how to integrate gender into their courses. Several had organized interdisciplinary courses and programs, among them a multi-disciplinary course on ethical dilemmas in modern society and a program patterned after the Oxford Philosophy, Politics, and Economics major. Contributions to the educational culture on and beyond campus were in evidence as well, including one winner who arranged visits with colleagues as a way to improve teaching, a textbook author, and one who had designed the math placement tests at his campus, served on the basic skills commission in his state, and designed math curricula for K-12 teachers.</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-5">1990s</hd> <p>Twenty-eight national winners were recognized in the 1990s, one annually from 1990-1993 and then four each year beginning in 1994. Along with continued attention to improving standard formats, designing class activities that help students see the "real-world" applications of the discipline, and creating opportunities for undergraduate research; experimentation with technology and community service learning also came into view.</p> <p>Innovative uses of technology cut across the institutional and disciplinary map. In the mid-to late 1990s, a computer scientist at a community college had helped adapt an introductory course for distance education, providing multimedia materials and support; a humanities professor at a baccalaureate college had worked with students to create "cybercollege," a virtual environment for students, alumni, academics, and experts to have real-time exchanges. A mathematician at a master's university had students working in pairs with a computer work station on topics related to students' different majors (Florida's manatee population for biology majors, for example, or disease epidemics for nursing majors). A physicist at a doctoral university had used technology to design a course with self-paced components, allowing for hands-on student participation in the lecture hall; a historian at a doctoral institution was using IT in the classroom to encourage students to become historians by gaining experience in working with primary sources.</p> <p>Community-based service learning also garnered attention among the national winners in the 1990s, often doubling as a form of undergraduate research. For example, an engineer had students in an engineering club designing a pedestrian bridge, a playground, and other locally useful projects; an English professor worked with students to publish an anthology to raise funds for the relief of victims of the Bosnian conflict; an art historian had students in a senior seminar on the history of murals actually make one in collaboration with 9th graders in a local high school. A political scientist integrated community service into his academically rigorous classroom as a way of "promoting the cognitive, communicative, political skills, and moral dispositions needed to be effective citizens." Indeed, this was part of a new major with community service required in all core courses and a community-based senior project.</p> <p>Educational leadership in the 1990s continued to include impressive feats of program-building—for example, overseeing all service learning programs on campus; securing grants for minority-serving premed and science programs; equipping a physics lab; convincing nearby professional associations and corporations to help develop an on-campus networking technologies lab to give community college students access to the latest computer hardware and software and allow them to work with experienced professionals. Many winners in this decade were also active professionally with schools and other community organizations. For example, the innovative historian mentioned above also worked with libraries, museums, churches, and schools on tech-related projects designed to encourage people beyond the campus to become historians.</p> <p>We first see widespread engagement with colleagues on teaching and learning in the 1990s—not that this hadn't happened in the 1980s, of course, but now it was foregrounded in applications and letters of endorsement. Professors of the Year were giving workshops for colleagues on topics like integrating technology into their classrooms, offering courses on teaching for graduate and undergraduate TAs, and spearheading faculty development—a Writing Across the Curriculum initiative, a cross-campus conversation about assessment, and bringing in outside speakers (on math reform, for example). Several national winners were writing textbooks, handbooks, and developing multimedia materials. And in this decade, we have the first few who talked about testing methods of teaching with different groups of students and presenting what they learned in a variety of professional venues on education in their fields.</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-6">2000s</hd> <p>In the 2000s, the scholarship of teaching and learning began to appear regularly in the resumes of national winners. This includes faculty exploring alternative course designs and making their findings known to colleagues, especially in the sciences where large lecture courses were (and still are) contributing to attrition from these fields. Some had become well-known for their publications, seminars, and workshops on college teaching. Others had developed models and materials that had become widely influential. For example, Edward Ayers (a winner in 2003) worked with students to create his well-known Valley of the Shadow web archive of records from two nearby counties which fought on opposite sides of the civil war. Michael Wesch (a winner in 2008) and his anthropology students made videos about teaching, learning, and higher education that went viral. Carl Wieman (a winner in 2004) and his research team had created simulations for physics teachers and students on the web, funded in part by his Nobel Prize winnings. Wieman's Science Education Initiative was still ahead of him!</p> <p>These accomplishments in the scholarship of teaching and learning and discipline-based educational research were accompanied by impressive levels of classroom creativity, undergraduate research opportunities, and educational leadership. A few highlights can hardly begin to do justice to the varieties of pedagogical imagination shown by the 40 professors in this cohort, but one area of innovation in the decade of the 00s is particularly worth looking at: the growth of service learning. Reading through the nominations, one finds a professor of Spanish using service learning to foster civic responsibility and Spanish fluency (volunteering in the local Hispanic community and class trips to soup kitchens); a sociology professor using service with the homeless as an experiential learning opportunity; an English professor creating a program of community engagement that involved undergraduates as facilitators in the arts and theater with prisoners, detained youth, and disadvantaged high school students—all supported through carefully structured training and group work and extended through a program enabling students and alumni to continue volunteering in teams outside of class.</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-7">2010s</hd> <p>From 2010 until the program's end in 2015, a final 24 faculty members were selected as US Professors of the Year. This group of faculty members is notable, among other things, for addressing the needs of underserved students, including a chemist teaching and advocating for students with disabilities, and a professor of Mexican-American Studies who developed culturally relevant pedagogy to honor the experience of her students. Other innovators include a historian whose "Crossing the Street" pedagogy brought students to a nearby museum, and winners across the disciplines who were using active learning techniques, for example, a community college math professor who developed a robot to engage students in "function thinking." These faculty also continued to create opportunities for high-impact experiences in undergraduate research, and/or community engagement—one English professor, for example, developed a service learning leaders program to train students to assist faculty in implementing service learning and community-based research in their courses.</p> <p>This last cohort also includes national winners who have built academic programs—a psychologist used her research on millennial students to help design the first-year experience program at her college; a physicist developed a nationally recognized student learning assistant program in the science fields; a professor built a thriving engineering program at his community college by transforming it from a traditional lab and lecture curriculum to one based on "design and build" pedagogy with strong linkages to partner transfer institutions. These faculty also made substantial contributions to campus intellectual life, like the geologist at a master's university in the south who led an evolution learning community to celebrate Darwin's anniversaries.</p> <p>The scholarship of teaching and learning continued as an important facet of work in the 2010s, with many national winners citing literature on learning as inspiration for their innovations in pedagogy and assessment, engaging with colleagues on campus around pedagogical goals and challenges, and contributing to regional and national forums on educational issues. For example, winners included one of the founders of a new national education research group in biology; a pioneer in engineering education research; and two national leaders in physics education research. The picture is perhaps best represented by a baccalaureate college professor who teaches music theory in a way that brings the field closer to practice than usual. He had conducted workshops on other campuses and published on teaching music theory. Indeed, one of his recommenders wrote that he had already influenced the pedagogies of 10 to 15 percent of his professional society's 1150 members!</p> <hd id="AN0132432883-8">Supporting Pedagogical Innovation</hd> <p>The US Professors of the Year program concluded in 2015, but most of the 1200 or so national and state winners, along with the thousands of other nominees, are still active as educators. To get a sense of how inspiring it has been to read the applications over the years, to hear the national winners speak at the annual award ceremony, and to listen to their students introduce them, readers can turn to the program website at <usprofessorsoftheyear.org>. Reading the materials and watching the videos posted there is a reminder of the creative things that our best faculty do—the care with which they enact their extraordinary commitment to students, the thoughtfulness that underlies their pedagogy, the vision that informs their contributions to program design, and the purpose that can animate community outreach.</p> <p>The growing record of nominees' engagement with colleagues over issues of teaching and learning is a sign of the widening reach that faculty with pedagogical expertise and imagination can have. Be it through writing text books and materials, participating in reform initiatives, committees, and workshops, or presenting and publishing on educational matters, these award winners have been contributing their share and more to the future of higher education. Through their efforts, the teaching commons has become a larger, more exciting, better informed, and more well-connected place.</p> <p>One lesson from the US Professors of the Year award program is that it is time to rethink how higher education supports such innovative educational work. The national winners of this award are exemplars of a view of college and university teaching that has emerged in recent years, namely, in Carl Wieman's words, "that it is an activity that involves true expertise that comes from knowledge and careful practice, rather than merely a matter of individual opinion and expression" (2017, p.123). Could this approach to teaching gain credence more widely? If that is the goal, then colleges and universities, graduate schools, disciplinary societies, and granting agencies need to strengthen the foundations for it. Pedagogical innovation should be treated as a knowledge practice deserving serious support, and those who engage in it successfully should be honored with the highest levels of professional recognition and reward.</p> <ref id="AN0132432883-9"> <title> Works Cited </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Barr, R.B., & Tagg, J. ( 1995 ). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. <emph>Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning</emph>, 27 ( 6 ), 12 - 26.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Wieman, C. ( 2017 ). <emph>Improving how universities teach science: Lessons from the Science Education Initiative.</emph> Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Mary Taylor Huber</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1195422
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Leading Edge of Pedagogical Innovation: A Portrait of National Winners of the US Professors of the Year Competition, 1981-2015
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Huber%2C+Mary+Taylor%22">Huber, Mary Taylor</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Change%3A+The+Magazine+of+Higher+Learning%22"><i>Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning</i></searchLink>. 2018 50(3-4):79-83.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 5
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Awards%22">Awards</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Competencies%22">Teacher Competencies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Study%22">Undergraduate Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Innovation%22">Educational Innovation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Characteristics%22">Teacher Characteristics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intellectual+Disciplines%22">Intellectual Disciplines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+History%22">Educational History</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/00091383.2018.1509611
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0009-1383
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The past fifty years have witnessed a sea of change in teaching and learning in higher education. In a general shift of emphasis from teaching to learning, best symbolized by Robert Barr and John Tagg's much cited 1995 "Change" article, "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education," reformers have introduced an array of new media pedagogies, active learning strategies, high impact practices, and novel approaches to classroom inquiry and improvement. While surveys can suggest how widely these new teaching practices have spread, they are limited in their capacity to capture the creativity involved in teaching well--with new or, for that matter, more traditional approaches. By contrast, the US Professors of the Year awards, offered from 1981-2015, afford a much more in-depth view of the leading edge of pedagogical innovation. Led by the Council for the Advancement and Support of Higher Education (CASE) in collaboration with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, this program served as the only sustained national teaching award in US higher education that cut across the disciplines and recognized exemplary teachers from all major institutional types. Over its thirty-five-year history, 101 national winners were named--one annually from 1981-1993, then four each year from 1994-2015, representing the major types of higher education institutions: community colleges, baccalaureate colleges, master's colleges and universities, and doctoral universities. Annual winners were also selected from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories, when there were enough entries of sufficient quality. From the 1990s on, the number of nominations fluctuated from around 300 to 500 per year. Of course, this is a select group. By definition, they are not average college teachers, and they don't reflect the growing numbers of faculty in contingent and other non-tenure-track appointments over those same years. Still, if one wants to see how creativity in undergraduate teaching has developed over the past 35 years, this is a promising group to explore. This article discusses what educational innovations look like in the hands of teachers recognized as exemplary by their own institution and by the competition's judges. The article asks what has changed over time, and what has remained the same in the dossiers of those who have won this award. The article explores what has lasted the test of time throughout the decades, and how these faculty members engaged departmental, disciplinary, and institutional colleagues in pedagogical and curricular change?
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: ERIC
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 2
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1195422
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1195422
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/00091383.2018.1509611
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 5
        StartPage: 79
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Awards
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Competencies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Study
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Innovation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Change
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Characteristics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intellectual Disciplines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational History
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Leading Edge of Pedagogical Innovation: A Portrait of National Winners of the US Professors of the Year Competition, 1981-2015
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Huber, Mary Taylor
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0009-1383
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 50
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3-4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning
              Type: main
ResultId 1