Reviewers' Notebook: Expectations for Teaching

From CSWiki

Grinnell's Faculty Handbook states:

Since teaching covers a wide range of activites and topics, the discussion here is divided into several subsections.

Contents 1 Activities Related to Specific Courses 2 Pedagogy 3 Course Development 4 Curricular Development 5 Activities Extending Beyond the CS Department 6 The Role of Advising 7 Teaching Loads and Logistics 7.1 Course Meetings 7.2 Teaching Assignments for CS Faculty 7.3 Rotation of Courses among the CS Faculty 7.4 Electives

Activities Related to Specific Courses

Grinnell College and the CS faculty have high expectations regarding each course. Faculty spend considerable time organizing a course, developing materials, preparing for each class, etc. Also, there is a clear expectation among both CS faculty and students that faculty will be available in their offices frequently to offer help. Posted office hours typically include 5-10 hours per week, but CS faculty also tend to follow the practice that students may come in for questions whenever the door is open. This open-door policy likely increases the availability of office hours to at least 15-20 hours per week.

Since the CS faculty are all active professionally, an on-going challenge is the meeting of classes when an instructor is traveling to meetings or for consulting. These challenges often are met by scheduling tests for travel days and by one colleague covering for another. Although not unknown, canceling a class is relatively uncommon.

Pedagogy

The recent position description for our new, tenure-track position stated,

The CS faculty regular experiment with new and different pedagogy, including labs, projects, small-group activities, individual and group assignments, and problem-solving related to client-based applications. Although courses may include some traditional lectures, few courses rely primarily upon lecture as their primary format.

Two examples illustrate these experiments with alternative pedagogical techniques.

• As early as Fall 1992, sections of CSC 151, Fundamentals of Computer Science I, have followed a lab-based format that emphasizes collaboration. The course covers approximately one new lab per day; students read background material ahead of time and then work in pairs through lab-based exercises in class. During class, an instructor (sometimes aided by an undergraduate lab assistant) moves from group to group to answer questions and make suggestions. When common issues arise, the instructor may call the class together for a 5-10 minute mini-lecture. In addition, individual programming assignments and tests supplement the lab activities. This approach now is used for all sections of CSC 151 as well as for the accelerated CSC 153.

• CSC 223, Software Design, regularly utilizes small groups to tackle large software-development projects. Each group develops its own design, algorithms, and coding — sometimes working on a common course project and sometimes on its own individeual project. Readings cover key elements of software development methodology, and students often must send questions/comments to the instructor electronically before the material is discussed in class.

Course Development

Faculty in many [all?] disciplines throughout many liberal colleges emphasize that they spend considerable time and effort in planning, organizing, and revising their courses. Grinnell College gives teaching a very high priority and expects faculty to develop, refine, and update their courses as part of the teaching load of the college. The CS faculty take this charge seriously, and we spend much time writing and revising course materials.

As part of this work, Grinnell's CS faculty often prefer to utilize modern technology in support of their courses. For example, all CS faculty post syllabi, labs, and supporting course documents on the Web, John Stone has used a Wiki in CSC 341, several faculty have used e-mail or Blackboard to allow students to submit questions and comments on course readings, all CS faculty use a variety of programming environments in courses, etc.

Since faculty in every department typically believe that they work hard to upgrade their courses, comparisons from one department to another are difficult (and likely not productive). Within computer science, two quotes from reports to the Administration by Henry Walker may illustrate the scope of this course development for CS faculty at Grinnell.

From Walker's Faculty Activity Report for 1997-1998:

From Walker's 2004-2005 Faculty Activity Report:

As already noted, the college has regularly considered this level of work to be part of normal course preparation. Further, since the content of computer science relates to technology, the CS faculty have not been eligible for college grants related to the incorporation of technology into the pedagogy of our CS courses.

Curricular Development

The CS faculty discuss the CS curriculum regularly in informal discussions and meetings. In addition, every few years, the CS faculty typically devotes some time for a summer workshop to assess the current curriculum and to consider refinements and revisions. Most recently, the CS faculty spent a week in Summer 2007 reviewing the current curriculum and brainstorming about possible revisions described elsewhere in this review document.

The CS faculty also spends considerable effort in staying abreast of national curricular discussions. For example, John Stone, Sam Rebelsky, and Henry Walker participated in the 2002 summer meeting of the Liberal Arts Computer Science Consortium, held at Grinnell College, to begin a new round of discussions regarding CS curricula in a liberal arts setting. Henry Walker also was Chair of the Pedagogy Focus Group on Supporting Courses for Computing Curricula 2001 from the Association for Computing Machinery and the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Enginnering.

Activities Extending Beyond the CS Department

The CS faculty have a strong interdisciplinary and extra-departmental interests. Here are a few of many examples.

• The CS faculty have a long-standing commitment to teaching the First-year Tutorial.
• Sam Rebelsky and Janet Davis have taught Technology Studies 154, Evolution of Technology, both are on the Technology Studies Committee, and Sam is the current Chair.
• John Stone has been heavily involved in the Linguistics Concentration, sometimes chairing the concentration's Committee.
• Henry Walker and Clark Lindgren (Biology) were co-advisors for a student with an independent major in neuroscience.
• Sam Rebelsky received a course release through the college's HHMI grant for sitting in on Statistics 115, and he will teach a section of the course this spring.
• Janet Davis received a course release through the HHMI grant for work with psychology related to human-computer interfaces, and she will be incorporating that material into her special topics course this spring.
• Marge Coahran, Janet Davis, Sam Rebelsky, and Henry Walker are regular participants in the Science Teaching and Learning Group.
• Marge Coahran and Henry Walker are regular participant's in the Writing Lab's luncheon series on writing through the curriculum.
• CS faculty regularly participate in college-wide summer seminars related to the improvement of student writing, the improvement of student oral communication skills, and the like.

With the expansion of the CS faculty beginning fall 2008, we are delighted that we will be able to expand and regularize our support of course offerings that relate to interdisciplinary and college-wide work.

The Role of Advising

Back in 1971 (or so), Grinnell College abolished its previous system of course requirements and replaced it with a system that relies upon advising to encourage students to take a wide-ranging program of courses. The formal college requirements for graduation are, roughly:

• completion of the First-Year Tutorial (a writing-intensive course offered by all departments),
• completion of a major,
• completion of 124 credits, subject to some constraints:
  • no more than 48 credits may be counted toward graduation in one department
  • no more than 92 credits may be counted toward graduation in one division (e.g., science, social studies, humanities)
  • some rules related to pratica credits and grades

Although the limitations on credits applicable toward graduation in a department or division provide some encouragement for students to take a breadth of courses, the impact of these formal rules is modest.

With this system, the academic advising of students has emerged as the primary mechanism for students to achieve a well-rounded liberal arts education. Thus, each semester, students must meet with their faculty advisors to consider courses for the next semester, preregistration cards are completed, and students must obtain the signature of their advisor in order to preregister or to change their registration. Altogether, the college expects faculty to work with students to take courses in a range of disciplines and divisions, and faculty take this role very seriously.

In addition to workshops for faculty related to the First-Year Tutorial and advising, the Academic Advising Office provides materials to support faculty in their advising role. For example, see Advising in an Individually Advised Curriculum.

Teaching Loads and Logistics

The normal teaching load at Grinnell College is 5 courses per year, although a faculty member may receive one or more course releases for designated activites. For example, the Department Chair receives one course release every other year. Some other opportunities for course reductions include service on the College's Executive Council (this year for Sam Rebelsky), interdisciplinary projects, and college-level activities.

Course Meetings

Introductory courses (e.g., CSC 151, 152, 201) typically meet for four 50-minute sessions per week. Since the CS faculty have adopted a combined lecture/lab format, these classes always meet in a teaching lab. A few courses (e.g., CSC 211 and 213) meet in a regular classroom three times per week for 50 minutes and have a separately-scheduled 50-minute lab per week. (There may be 2 or 3 sections of these labs; students sign up for one section, but the instructor meets all of the sections.) Most other courses meet in a teaching lab for three 50-minute sessions per week.

Most courses at Grinnell are offered for four credits, and homework is adjusted for this level of academic work. Thus, homework expectations may be relatively high for four-credit courses that meet three times per week.

Teaching Assignments for CS Faculty

In recent years, CS staffing has been at the level of approximately 3.6 FTE. (John Stone teaches 3 courses per year in addition to his MathLAN responsibilities.) Although specific staffing is complicated by leaves and course releases, in a typical year, we have tried to teach the following courses:

• 3 non-majors courses (e.g., tutorial, 105, Tech. Studies/Stat)
• 8 introductory sections (151 (4), 152 (2), 153 (1), 201 (1))
• 5 core courses (211/213, 223, 301, 302, 341)
• 2 electives (1 per semester)

Although some additions to this list are anticipated with the addition of a new CS faculty member, the following discussion draws primarily on past history with 3.6 FTE. Since the CS faculty choose to spread courses among ourselves, this course offering generally yields the following allocation per faculty member:

• 1 non-majors course
• 2 introductory sections
• 2 upper-level courses (1-2 core courses, 0-1 elective)

The CS faculty enjoys this range of teaching: we each like to teach courses for non-majors, introductory courses, some core courses, and some electives.

Rotation of Courses among the CS Faculty

Since the 1970s, the faculty in the combined Department of Mathematics and Computer Science chose to rotate the teaching of all upper-level courses. Everyone taught 2-3 sections of calculus or equivalent, but faculty took turns teaching courses at the 200-level and higher. Since class preparation for a course requires considerable effort, a faculty member typically would teach a course twice in successive years before rotating to different teaching assignment. Further, for many years with mathematics, each faculty member expected to teach [almost] all courses in the curriculum over a period of years.

In more recent years, faculty rotated among a range of upper-level courses, as the curriculum expanded. For example, only selected faculty taught statistics or computer science, and not everyone (e.g., statisticians) were expected to teach abstract algebra or topology.

The CS faculty have enjoyed this practice of rotating courses, and we have tried to continue it. Ten years ago or so, the rotation expected that all CS faculty would teach all CS courses over a period of years. However, with the special expertise of the CS faculty, a few courses (e.g., Computational Linguistics) are always taught by the same person, and some others (e.g., Networks) by just a few.

Although the CS faculty enjoy this practice, rotation of courses has both advantages and disadvantages:

• Advantages
  • Faculty do not get stale and complacent in teaching courses; there is always variety, and faculty tend to stay fresh and engaged.
  • Course materials and approaches can reflect the perspectives of multiple instructors who have recently taught a course.
  • The offering of courses can continue when individual faculty members are on leave.
  • Few courses are considered the province of just one person; CS faculty feel a collective ownership of [almost] all courses.
  • Courses are commonly discussed, as CS faculty move from one to another; we have a good idea what is covered in each course and why, and we know what background can be assumed in subsequent courses.
  • Curricular discussions can consider specific courses without hurting a colleague's feelings.

• Disadvantages
  • For introductory courses particularly, content and emphasis can vary somewhat from one section to another.
  • The constant preparation of new courses requires considerable, on-going faculty effort.
  • Courses are only refined to a certain level before a CS faculty member move onto the next course.

Altogether, the CS faculty are enthusiastic about the practice of rotating courses, but we also understand this comes at the cost of preparation time.

Electives

Some electives represent the major exception to the rotation of courses. In recent years, we have tried to offer at least one elective course every other year in an area of special interest for each faculty member. For example, John Stone teaches Computational Linguistics, and Janet Davis teaches Human-Computer Interface Design. These courses add richness to our curriculum and also connect with interests and programs outside the department.