The Necessity for Teaching Assistants

Imagine NUS without teaching assistants (TAs): How many additional teaching staff would we need to cover our classes? How many laboratory/practical/tutorial sessions would have to be cancelled if extra teachers could not be hired? What would be the impact on the design of courses and the learning and morale of undergraduates? Then imagine we have plenty of TAs, but they do not know how to teach: Would undergraduate students benefit? Would it be justifiable to pay these graduate students $40/hour on top of their scholarships for their teaching efforts?

In California, TAs teach 30% of the classes at certain representative universities, a figure similar to other institutions.1 In recent years, the NUS Department of Biological Sciences (DBS) has also become more dependent on graduate TAs to keep class sizes manageable. TAs are used extensively in lower division laboratories and tutorial classes and, in many cases, TAs have more direct contact with undergraduate students than do professors.

There are several advantages of using TAs. They form a practical source of instructors for small classes. As students themselves, TAs identify with their students and can be strong motivators.2 They are less intimidating than professors, especially for weaker students. Unfortunately, TAs often lack the discipline, knowledge and teaching skills of experienced teaching staff and may not make the laboratory/tutorial classes effective learning experiences for students. Since most TAs have previously learnt mainly through lectures, TAs tend to lecture instead of employing appropriate inquiry or discussion techniques. But by providing TAs with some professional training, such disadvantages can be overcome. It is vital that TAs are trained because the TA experience is an important part of training future faculty members, and TA training bolsters the quality of university teaching in general.3

Alas, TAs are often the last ones to be considered for professional development, possibly because of the transient nature of their appointments. If teaching is to be considered an important part of scholarship on par with original research4 , then it seems that graduate schools frequently fail to provide meaningful kinds of pedagogical training for future ‘lecturers’. Fortunately, NUS has begun to realise that TAs deserve preparation for their responsibilities, as shown by CDTL’s implementation of a TA Training Programme held twice thus far in May and November 1999.

Training Teaching Assistants

To gauge the importance of TA training and obtain feedback for CDTL and DBS, a survey was performed in DBS in March 1999. The resulting report concluded that although DBS endorses the training of its TAs by CDTL, it is essential for DBS to give discipline-specific support to make the training successful. The report also recommended that the training of TAs in DBS should have a ‘3-tier approach’, i.e. TAs should undergo training provided by CDTL, DBS, and the lecturers of various undergraduate modules. Consequently with backing from CDTL, DBS and the Science Deanery, BL5301, a module entitled ‘Teaching in Biology’ (pending Senate approval), has been designed to provide the TAs with the training required based on this ‘3-tiered approach’.

Dept of Biological Sciences TA Training Session, July 1999

By imparting specific instructional strategies (especially in Biology) that other teachers have used successfully and educational researchers have found to be effective, this course aims to improve the ability of TAs to help undergraduates develop intellectual and cognitive skills. It is hoped that TAs can subsequently: (1) organise and explain materials in ways appropriate to students’ abilities, (2) be attentive and responsive to students’ needs and give appropriate feedback on students’ work, and (3) understand the importance of helping students to become autonomous, self-regulated learners.

The course is made up of: (1) the Core Component offered by CDTL (20 hours), (2) the Complementary Component offered by DBS (15 hours), and (3) at least 36 hours of Teaching Practice in practical and/or tutorials in level 1000-3000 modules.

In the Core Component, TAs will learn about: Teaching and Learning in Higher Education; How Small Group Teaching Facilitates Learning; How to Enhance My Presentation Skills; Assessment of Student Performance; and Supporting Teaching and Learning through the NUS Integrated Virtual Learning Environment.

In the Complementary Component, topics covered include: Biology Teaching Today; Method of Inquiry in Science and Biology; Active Learning and Studying; Practical Teaching in Practical Subjects; Teaching Skills on the Laboratory Floor; Being a Teacher in the Field; Skills in Explaining Clearly; Skills in Leading a Discussion; Skills in Asking Questions and in Fielding Students’ Questions; Skills in Motivating Students; and Supervising Student Projects.
To satisfy the Teaching Practice requirement, TAs must assist various lecturers in one or more modules, and the lecturer/s involved will file a written report on the TAs’ performance. If possible, TAs will also go through a micro teaching practice session with the lecturer in charge. The TAs’ participation in this entire training programme will also be listed on their transcripts so as to encourage them to take part wholeheartedly and perform their best during their teaching practice.

The Complementary Component will make TAs more aware of the process of inquiry in Science and Biology, thereby possibly turning them into better researchers. They will learn how to supervise undergraduate research, and can be involved in the Science Research and Undergraduate Research Opportunities Programmes with greater proficiency. Such an involvement will hopefully improve their own performance in their respective graduate research programmes.

Responses from TAs

At least 50 TAs have already gone through part of this module. Here are some of their comments:

1. “I think the course is useful in making us more effective teachers. As graduate students, we are always learning to be more effective researchers, but until the advent of this course, we have never had any training in being a teacher, much less an effective one.”
   
2. “I strongly feel that without this course graduate students cannot be allowed teach.”
   
3. “The course has changed my concept of a teacher; I have understood the actual meaning and functions/roles of being a teacher or a demo…and shall try my best to reflect some of these in my teaching. This would definitely benefit the students and help in bringing the relation between the teacher and learner closer, giving it a clearer meaning and understanding.”
   
4. “I will try my best to make my teaching a more student-centred one. Hopefully, the students would be encouraged to think and question more and I definitely hope that the students will benefit from the change.”

Conclusion

If this module succeeds in helping our TAs gain some basic teaching skills, or even become ‘competent’5 in their teaching duties at NUS, perhaps other departments may wish to consider implementing their own complementary discipline-specific teaching programmes for training their TAs. Such efforts to improve our teaching quality will surely enhance NUS’ image as a distinguished tertiary institution. More importantly, it is hope that our TAs will continue to develop as ‘experts’6 in teaching wherever they hold teaching positions upon graduation. Credit will then accrue to NUS for a job well done in imparting to our graduate students not only subject matter, but also skills and knowledge in teaching.

References

1. Heller, S. ‘Teaching Assistants Get Increased Training; Problems Arise in Foreign Student Programs: Foreign Student Programs’. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 33, No. 9, October 29 1986, pp. 9-10.
   
2. Lawrenz, F., Heller, P., Keith, R., and Heller, K. ‘Training the Teaching Assistant: Matching TA Strengths and Capabilities to Meet Specific Program Goals’. Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 22, Nov 1992, pp. 106-109.
   
3. Monaghan, P. ‘University Officials Deplore Lack of Adequate Training Given to Teaching Assistants, Ponder How to Improve It’. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 36, No. 13, November 29 1989, pp. 29-30.
   
4. Fifield, S. ‘Reflections of a Prospective College Teacher in Graduate School.’ Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. XXII, No. 4, February 1993, pp. 209-211.
   
5. Berliner, D. ‘Implication of Studies on Expertise in Pedagogy for Teacher Education and Evaluation’. New Direction for Teacher Assessment: Proceedings of the 1988 ETS International Conference. Princeton, N. J.: Educational Teaching Service, 1988. pp. 39-68. Berliner proposes a 5-stage model of teacher development: a) Novice; b) Advance Beginner; c) Competent; d) Proficient; and e) Expert.
   
6. Ibid.