Frontload Course Development by Creating Intensive Course Design Institutes

Use this brief for strategies and a case study on supporting faculty through course development and redesign.

There are many factors that disincentivize faculty teaching innovation, this is most apparent when considering new faculty. PhD programs help aspiring professors become subject matter experts but often do not include coursework on the fundamentals of teaching. New faculty inadvertently begin their career with limited course design experience. New faculty orientation often serves as an introduction to institutional policies and procedures and is not always a mechanism to provide “onthe-job” training.

Even if faculty know who to turn to for teaching and learning support the tenure rat race disincentivizes prioritizing teaching improvement.

These barriers create a need for upfront course design support which will save faculty from having to redesign their courses in the future and will create a culture of teaching innovation across campus. One way to do this is through multi-day course design institutes (CDIs).

Frontload course development activities

Most Centers of Teaching and Learning (CTL) operate such intensive institutes to bring faculty together to design new courses or revamp existing ones. These can take place at any time during the academic year, but many institutions opt to offer them during the summer.

This frontloads course development support so that faculty do not have to participate in course design activities during the busy school year. The multi-day program often covers learning theory and provides hands-on support to faculty. After participating in the program faculty can devote a bulk of their time during the academic year on their research and other institutional obligations.

Learn the Strategies

Ensure that course design institutes provide support

Typical CDIs usually cover learning theory and important elements of effective courses such as learning outcomes, assessment, and class activities. However, most CDIs often neglect to include some key elements of a successful program: dedicated time to receive an outside perspective on their course through peer and staff feedback, ability to apply concepts learned by developing a course syllabus, and a mechanism to evaluate the course redesign.

Get the Strategies

Help faculty create learning-focused syllabi

The five criteria are typical components of learning-centered syllabi such as learning goals and objectives, assessment activities, schedule, overall learning environment, and learning activities. The scoring spectrum helps faculty identify areas for improvement. In addition to providing detailed descriptions of each element the rubric also highlights parts of a syllabus where each component is typically found. This not only makes assessment easier it also gives faculty advice about how to develop their syllabi.

Each of the 16 components is designated as essential, important, or less-important. This is reflected by the weighted scores assigned to each element and allows faculty to prioritize including the most important components. The elements are scored on the “strength of supporting evidence”. For example, strong evidence indicates that many of the characteristics of the component are present in the syllabus and match the descriptions closely while low evidence indicates that very few of the characteristics of the component are present in the syllabus and/or don’t match the descriptions.

“The syllabus is extremely comprehensive but also gets me excited to work with the teacher and participate in the class.”

– Students’ perception of learning-focused syllabi at UVA

Learn About the Components