University of California, Riverside

Evaluation and Assessment



Annotated Inventory


Annotated Teaching Practices Inventory

The Teaching Practices Inventory was created by Carl Wieman and Sarah Gilbert. It asks instructors about various types of teaching practices that have been found to be effective and promoting student learning in the literature. This is a non-interactive version of that survey that highlights the connections to the literature of teaching and learning by providing links to many of the specific studies Wieman and Gilbert drew on. Links maybe missing for some kinds of resources where there was no easily accessible electronic version, say a chapter in a book.

If you would like to take the survey, please email assess@ucr.edu for a link to the survey.

After taking the survey (you will receive an email with your score), this website should help you easily find literature on effective teaching that may be of interest to you based on how you scored.

___________________________________________________

Instructor name:                                ___________________________________

Course number (i.e.: PSYC 001):     ___________________________________

Approximate number of students:    ___________________________________

I. Course information provided to students via hard copy or course webpage. (check all that occurred in your course) a

  • List of topics to be covered
  • List of topic-specific competencies (skills, knowledge, ...) students should achieve (what students should be able to do)
  • List of competencies that are not topic related (critical thinking, problem solving, ...)
  • Affective goals – changing students’ attitudes and beliefs (interest, motivation, relevance, beliefs about their competencies, how to master the material)
  • Other, please specify : __________________________________________________

II. Supporting materials provided to students (check all that occurred in your course)

III. In-class features and activities

  1. A.    Various

In the lecture section of this course how often did you:

 

Several time each meeting

Once or twice each meeting

Some weeks but not others

Never

Paused for students to ask questions

 

Had students discuss in small groupsf

 

Show demonstrations or simulations

 

Show demonstrations or simulations AND had students first record predictions and then compare observations with predictionsg

 

Discussed why material was useful and/or interesting from students' perspectiveh

 

             

 

Are there any additional practices that you used:

___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Check all that occurred in your course:

Fraction of typical class period you spend lecturing (presenting content, deriving mathematical results, presenting a problem solution, ...)k

  • 0-20%
  • 20-40%
  • 40-60%
  • 60-80%
  • 80-100%

Considering the time spent on the major topics, approximately what fraction was spent on the process by which the theory/model/concept was developed? l

  • 0-10%
  • 11-25%
  • more than 25%

B. Personal Response System (PRS)

If a student response system is used to collect responses from all students IN REAL TIME IN CLASS, what method is used? (Check all that occurred in your course.)

  • Electronic “clickers” with student identifier
  • Electronic “clickers” that were anonymous
  • raising hands
  • written student responses that are collected and reviewed in real time
  • A smartphone app, please specify ________________________________________
  • Other, please specify __________________________________________________

Number of questions followed by student-student discussion per classm ____
Number of times used a quiz device (counts for marks and no student discussion) per class ____

IV. Assignments (check all that occurred in your course)

V. Feedback and testing; including grading policies (check all that occurred in your course)

A. Feedback from students to instructor during the termq

  • Midterm course evaluation
  • Repeated online or paper feedback or via some other collection means such as clickers
  • Other, please specify __________________________________________________

B. Feedback to students (check all that occurred in your course)r

  • Assignments with feedback before grading or with opportunity to redo work to improve grade
  • Students see graded assignments
  • Students see assignment answer key and/or grading rubric
  • Students see graded midterm exam(s)
  • Students see midterm exam(s) answer key(s)
  • Students explicitly encouraged to meet individually with you
  • Other, please specify __________________________________________________

C. Testing and gradings

Number of midterm exams ___________________________________

Approximate fraction of exam grade from questions that required students to explain reasoning _____%

Approximate breakdown of course grade (% in each of the following categories)

  • Final Exam                                           _____%
  • Midterm Exam(s)                                  _____%
  • Homework assignments                        _____%
  • Paper(s) or project(s)                            _____%
  • In-class activities                                  _____%
  • In-class quizzes                                     _____%
  • Online quizzes                                      _____%
  • Participation                                          _____%
  • Lab component                                     _____%
  • Other, please specify:                           _____%

VI. Other (check all that occurred in your course)

VII. Training and guidance of Teaching Assistants (check all that occurred in your course)w

  • No TAs for course
  • TAs must satisfy English language skills criteriax
  • TAs receive 1⁄2 day or more of training in teaching
  • There are Instructor-TA meetings every two weeks or more frequently where student learning and difficulties, and the teaching of upcoming material are discussed.
  • TAs are undergraduates
  • TAs are graduate students
  • Other, please specify __________________________________________________

VIII. Collaboration or sharing in teaching

Discussed how to teach the course with colleague(s)

  • 1 Never
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5 Very Frequently

Read literature about teaching and learning relevant to this kind of  courseaa

  • 1 Never
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5 Very Frequently

Sat in on colleague's class (any class) to get/share ideas for teachingy

  • 1 Never
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5 Very Frequently

 


 






  


 

a Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

Black P, Wiliam D (1998). Assessment and classroom learning; Hattie J, Timperley H (2007). The power of feedback. Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

c Atkinson R, Derry S, Renkl K, Wortham D (2000). Learning from example: instructional principles from the worked examples research. Rev Educ Res 70, 181-214.

d Kiewra K (1985). Providing the instructor’s notes: an effective addition to student note taking. Educ Psychol 20, 33-39.

e Pintrich P (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. J Educ Psychol 95, 667-686.

Black P, Wiliam D (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assess Educ Princ Pol Pract 5, 7-74; Hattie J, Timperley H (2007). The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res 77, 81-112.

g Atkinson R, Derry S, Renkl K, Wortham D (2000). Learning from example: instructional principles from the worked examples research. Rev Educ Res 70, 181-214.

h Kiewra K (1985). Providing the instructor’s notes: an effective addition to student note taking. Educ Psychol 20, 33-39.

i Novak G, Patterson E, Gavrin A, Christian W (1999). Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning and Web Technology, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

j Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Pascarella E, Terenzini P (2005). How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

l  Abd-El-Khalick F, Lederman N (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. Int J Sci Educ 22, 665-701.

m Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley

n Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley; Cooper H, Robinson J, Patall E (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research 1987-2003. Rev Educ 13, 321-341; Walberg HJ, Paschal RA, Weinstein T (1895). Homework’s powerful effects on learning. Educ Leadership 42, 76-79; Richards-Babb M, Drelick J, Henry Z, Robertson-Honecker J (2011). Online homework, help or hindrance? What students think and how they perform. J Coll Sci Teach 40, 81-93; Cheng K, Thacker B, Cardenas R, Crouch C (2004). Using an online homework system enhances students’ learning of physics course. Am J Phys 72, 1447-1453.

Kuh G (2008). High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter, Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

p  Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science.

q Centra J (1973). Effectiveness of student feedback in modifying college instruction. J Educ Psychol 65, 395-401; Cohen P (1980). Effectiveness of student-rating feedback for improving college instruction: a meta-analysis of findings. Res High Educ Res 76, 1-62; Diamond M (2004). The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes. Active Learn Higher Educ 5, 217-231.

r Black P, Wiliam D (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assess Educ Princ Pol Pract 5, 7-74; Froyd J (2008). White Paper on Promising Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Commissioned Papers, Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Academy of Science; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley

s Gibb G, Simpson C (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learn Teach Higher Educ 1, 3-31.  

t Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley; Brandford J, Brown A, Cocking R, Donovan SM, Pellegrino J (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, expanded ed., Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

u  Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley; Brandford J, Brown A, Cocking R, Donovan SM, Pellegrino J (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, expanded ed., Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

v Printrich P (2003). Amotivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. J Educ Psychol 95, 667-686; Ambrose S, Bridges M, DiPietro M, Lovett M, Normal M (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, San Francisco, CA: Wiley

w Seymour E (2005). Partners in Innovation: Teaching Assistants in College Science Courses, Lanham, ND: Rowman & Littlefield.

x Anderson-Hsieh J, Koehler K (1988). The effect of foreign accent and speaking rate on native speaker comprehension. Lang Learn 38, 561-613; Hinofotis F, Bailey K (1981). American undergraduates’ reactions to the communication skills of foreign teaching assistants. In: On TESOL’80—Building Bridges: Research and Practice in Teaching English, ed. JC Fisher, M Clark, and J Schachter, Washington, DC: TESOL, 120-133; Jacobs L, Friedman C (1988). Student achievement under foreign teaching associates compared with native teaching associates. J Higher Educ 59, 551-563; Williams J (1992). Planning, discourse marking, and the comprehensibility of international teaching assistants. TESOL Q 26, 693-711.

y  

z

aa Sadler P, Sonnert G, Coyle H, Cook-Smith N, Miller J (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. Am Educ Res J 50, 1020-1049. 

More Information

General Campus Information

University of California, Riverside
900 University Ave.
Riverside, CA 92521
Tel: (951) 827-1012

UCR LibrariesCampus Status
Career OpportunitiesDiversity
Visit UCRMaps and Directions

Department Information

Evaluation and Assessment
1100 Hinderaker Hall

Tel: (951) 827-6254
Fax: (951) 827-7745
E-mail: gary.coyne@ucr.edu

Footer