Transcription
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWMore work for less rewardAcademic perceptions of service teachingDelma Clifton & Steve McKillupCQUniversityService teaching, through which core courses or modules are provided by a department other than the one administering the degree,occurs in universities worldwide, but there have been many reports of student dissatisfaction with their service-taught courses. Theexperiences of service teachers have received little attention and may help to suggest strategies for improvement, so we surveyed serviceand discipline teachers from the science departments/faculties at Australian universities for their perceptions of the difficulty, the effect onthe likelihood of promotion, and qualifications needed, for each type of teaching. Both service and discipline teachers perceived serviceteaching to be significantly more difficult, yet significantly less valuable for promotion, than discipline teaching. More research is neededto investigate whether these perceptions reflect the realities of service teaching because, if they do, they will have implications for universitypolicies and workload models.Keywords: service teaching, discipline teaching, academic attitudes, academic promotion, perceived value, curriculum integrationIntroductionexpansion of profession-specific programs and decliningenrolments in traditional generic disciplines such asService teaching, defined as the situation whenarts and science (McInnis, 2000). In many departments,core courses or modules are provided by a differentservice teaching is an increasingly important source ofdepartment to the one administering the degree (Brownfunding that helps maintain academic positions: for some& Atkins, 1988), is common in universities worldwide.it provides over half of the income based on student loadFor example, life scientists teach anatomy, physiology(Pollard et al., 2006).and pathophysiology to health science students (CliftonFor the majority of Australian and international& McKillup, 2016); statisticians teach students innursing programs, the science components have beenbiology, agriculture, environmental science, psychologyservice-taught (Logan & Angel, 2014), but there hasand business (Fawcett, 2017; Pollock & Wilson, 1976);been considerable debate about the effectiveness ofeconomists teach economic theory to business andservice teaching of science (i.e. chemistry, microbiology,management students (Barrett, 2005); and historians teachhuman anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology) tostudents in education and journalism (Crotty & Eklund,health science students in relation to graduate outcomes2006).(Prowse & Heath, 2005; Prowse & Lyne, 2002), studentThe advantages of service teaching include reducingsatisfaction and perceptions of the value of service-the duplication of expertise, facilities, and courses; andtaught courses (e.g. Friedel & Treagust, 2005; Gresty &exposing students to broader knowledge deliveredCotton, 2003; Jordan, Davies & Green, 1999; Ralph et al.,by teachers who have appropriate depth and current2017). A good understanding of anatomy, physiology andunderstanding of the topic (Brown, White & Power, 2017;pathophysiology underpins and is essential to professionalGordon, Petocz & Reid, 2007; Pollock & Wilson, 1976).practice, but the majority of studies have found thatService teaching is becoming more common due to thehealth science students are dissatisfied with their sciencevol. 61, no. 2, 2019More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillup49
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWservice courses (Craft et al., 2013), often describing themthe extent of course development required or the level ofas content heavy, frightening, and neither enjoyable norprior knowledge of their students, nor be aware of thevaluable (Birks et al., 2011; Dawson, 1994; McKee, 2002;techniques needed to design, teach and maintain a relevantWalker, 1994).This has led to calls to rethink how scienceand effective service course. Even if they do, they may notis taught to health science students (e.g. Larcombe &have sufficient time or motivation for such development.Dick, 2003; McVicar, Andrew & Kemble, 2015).Previous studies have concentrated upon surveysHowever, there are some reports of health scienceof the recipients (i.e. students and recent graduates) tostudents appreciating the importance and relevance ofinvestigate their perceptions of service-taught courses.bioscience courses to their careers (e.g. Friedel & Treagust,Feedback from the teachers who deliver service courses2005; Gresty & Cotton, 2003; Jordan et al., 1999; Nicoll &may also suggest strategies for improvement and weButler, 1996). Reporting on student satisfaction, Cliftonfound it surprising that their perceptions and experiencesand McKillup (2016) found their nursing students ratedhad received very little attention, with no comparativethe three service-taught science courses in the top four ofstudies of the perceptions of service and disciplinethe 14 that comprised the first and second years of theirteachers.Therefore, as an initial step, we surveyed servicedegree and, from these results, suggested four strategiesand discipline teachers employed in the science facultiesfor successful service teaching. First, the teacher neededof Australian universities for their perceptions of serviceto have enough knowledge, commitment and confidenceand discipline teaching, including the relative difficulty ofto develop and offer clear and conceptual explanationseach, the qualifications required and how well each typeinstead of excessive and often irrelevant detail. Second,of teaching is valued for promotion.they needed to see things from the student’s perspectiveand start at an appropriate level, take advantage of priorstudent knowledge and experiences, and put conceptsMethodsinto the context of the service class. Third, they neededParticipantsto provide well organised, quality teaching materialsA survey was circulated by email to 37 Deans of Sciencethat catered for a range of learning styles. Fourth, it wasin Australia with a request to forward it to their staff. Weimportant to communicate clear expectations, giveused a web-based survey as an efficient and inexpensivedetailed and prompt feedback, respect the diversityway of reaching as many staff in as many differentwithin classes and encourage interaction with students.institutions as possible. To ensure the introduction to theThese strategies, and other recommendations (e.g.survey did not bias responses, potential participants wereBrown & Atkins, 1988), suggest service teaching isonly told that the purpose of the research was to examinemore difficult and time-consuming than teaching into athe attitudes of science academics towards service andprogram within one’s discipline (henceforth referred todiscipline teaching. All responses were voluntary andas ‘discipline teaching’). First, service teaching requires aconfidential.The survey had low-risk ethics approval fromhigh level of ongoing consultation between the teacherour university (number H13/06-107).and the recipient department. Second, the service teachermust design their teaching materials, explanations andDatapresentation to cater for students who do not have aThe 18 survey questions and their set response rangesstrong background, and often little interest, in the subjectare shown in Table 1. Since the survey was designedbeing taught (Pollock & Wilson, 1976). Third, they needto provide comparative data for service and disciplineto be able to integrate what they are teaching into theteachers which may be confounded by differences incontext of the external program (e.g. A physiologistteaching experience, gender and academic level betweenteaching about respiratory physiology may have tothese two groups, respondents were asked to give thebe aware of the procedures used to assess and treatnumber of years they had worked as an academic, theirrespiratory dysfunction in hospitals). Fourth, they maycurrent academic level, highest academic qualificationexperience, and have to work to overcome, considerableand whether they held a teaching qualification (questionsinitial hostility from students who have an aversion to, or1 – 9). These were followed by questions 10 – 15 thateven fear, the service topic (Pollock & Wilson, 1976).were designed to compare the perceptions of serviceIf service teaching is more difficult, it may help explainand discipline teachers of both types of teaching inwhy service-taught courses are often rated poorly byrelation to the qualifications needed, difficulty of thestudents because many service teachers may not appreciatework and how it may affect a person’s likelihood of being50More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillupvol. 61, no. 2, 2019
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWTable 1. Questions asked in an anonymous survey of science academics in Australian universities and the set range ofresponses for each.QuestionResponse range(1) Are you female or male?1 female, 2 male(2) At which university do you work? ##1 – 13 where 1 ACU, 2 CQU, 3 CDU, 4 ECU,5 GU, 6 SCU, 7 UA, 8 UNE, 9 UQ, 10 USyd, 11 UTS, 12 USC 13 CSU(3) How many years have you been an academic?1 – 4 where 1 0-5, 2 6-10, 3 11-15, 4 15(4) What is your academic level?1 – 5 where 1 A (Associate Lecturer), 2 B (Lecturer), 3 C (Senior Lecturer), 4 D(Associate Professor), 5 E (Professor).(5) What is the highest level of education you have completed?1 – 5 where 1 PhD, 2 Masters by research, 3 Masters by coursework, 4 Honours, 5 Bachelor(6) What teaching qualifications have you completed?1 – 5 where 1 Cert IV, 2 GC or GD, 3 Bachelor,4 Higher degree, 5 None(7) Do you have any teaching qualification?1 yes, 2 no(8) Does your school/department offer service teaching of science (e.g. chemistry,anatomy, physiology, pathophysiology, pharmacology for programs such as aBachelor of Nursing)?1 yes, 2 no(9) Do you teach science courses for other programs (e.g. A Bachelor ofNursing?)1 yes, 2 no(10) How difficult is it to teach science to science students?1 – 5 where 1 Very easy, 2 Easy, 3 Average,4 Difficult, 5 Very difficult(11) What level of qualification is necessary to teach science to science students?1 – 5 where 1 PhD, 2 Masters by research, 3 Masters by coursework, 4 Honours, 5 Bachelor(12) How well regarded is teaching science to science students for academicpromotion at your institution?1 – 5 where 1 Very low, 2 Low, 3 Neutral,4 High, 5 Very high(13) How difficult is it to teach science to non-science students such as nursingstudents?1 – 5 where 1 Very easy, 2 Easy, 3 Average,4 Difficult, 5 Very difficult(14) What level of qualification is necessary to teach science to non-sciencestudents such as nursing students?1 – 5 where 1 PhD, 2 Masters by research, 3 Masters by coursework, 4 Honours, 5 Bachelor(15) How well regarded is teaching science to non-science students such asnursing students for academic promotion at your institution?1 Very low, 2 Low, 3 Neutral, 4 High,5 Very high(16) In my school/department service teaching is used to ‘top up’ science staffworkloads.1 – 5 where 1 Strongly disagree, 2 Disagree,3 Neutral, 4 Agree, 5 Strongly agree(17) In my school/department active researchers are not required to do serviceteaching.1 – 5 where 1 Strongly disagree, 2 Disagree,3 Neutral, 4 Agree, 5 Strongly agree(18) I would be likely to apply for a job in which a major component of theworkload was service teaching.1 – 5 where 1 Strongly disagree, 2 Disagree,3 Neutral, 4 Agree, 5 Strongly agree## ACU Australian Catholic University; CQU Central Queensland University; CDU Charles Darwin University; ECU Edith Cowan University; GU Griffith University; SCU Southern Cross University; UA University of Adelaide; UNE University of New England; UQ University of Queensland;USyd University of Sydney; UTS University of Technology, Sydney; USC University of the Sunshine Coast; CSU Charles Sturt University.promoted. Then each respondent was asked to give theirData analysisperceptions of the administration of service teaching intheir department/school and whether they would beData were analysed with SPSS version 25 (IBM Corp.,likely to apply for a service teaching position. Finally,Armonk, New York 2017). All ordinal scale data showedrespondents were invited to submit a free text commentno significant heteroscedasticity or lack of normality, soin answer to the question ‘Would you like to make anywere analysed with parametric tests: either single factorother comment about service teaching in universities?’.ANOVAs, two factor repeated-measures ANOVAs or singlevol. 61, no. 2, 2019More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillup51
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWsample t tests. For all analyses p 0.05 was consideredPerceptions of service and discipline teachingsignificant.Respondents gave their perceptions of the difficulty ofteaching science to science students and science to non-ResultsThe profiles of service and discipline teachersscience students; how each teaching type was regardedfor promotion; and the academic qualification requiredto teach each. These three sets of dependent data wereWe received responses from 136 academics, of whichanalysed as two factor repeated measures ANOVAs with40 per cent were female and 60 per cent male, atthe between-subjects factor whether the person was13 universities. Most respondents (106) belonged toa service or discipline teacher, and the two types ofdepartments or schools that conducted service teachingteaching (i.e. science to science students and scienceand approximately half (62) were service teachers.to non-science students) the within-subjects (repeatedThe universities were a mix of older and more-recentlymeasure) factor.established, city and regional, and included researchfocussed and teaching-intensive institutions.Teaching science to non-science students was perceivedas significantly more difficult than science to sciencestudents (F1,111 52.041, p 0.001). There was nosignificant difference between the perceptions of serviceand discipline teachers (F1,111 1.712, NS) and nointeraction between the two factors (F1,111 0.200, NS)(Figure 2). The mean difficulty scores given by service anddiscipline teachers, respectively, for service teaching were3.48 and 3.38, while for discipline teaching they werelower: 2.95 (by service teachers) and 2.77 (by disciplineteachers) (Figure 2). On the response scale of 1 – 5, where3 was average, (Table 1), discipline teaching was ratedas having slightly below average difficulty while serviceFigure 1. The number of responses received againstacademic level for service teachers (black bars) anddiscipline teachers (grey bars).teaching was rated between ‘average’ and ‘difficult’.The perceived difficulties of teaching a service courseand a discipline course were also compared betweenrespondents who held a teaching qualification and thoseTen respondents did not specify whether they werewho did not. There was no significant difference in theservice or discipline teachers and were excluded fromperceptions of teaching difficulty by these two groupsall analyses. Almost equal proportions of female (47.5(two factor repeated measures ANOVA: F1,104 0.007,per cent) and male staff (52.5 per cent) were serviceNS) so the possession or lack of a teaching qualificationteachers and the gender ratio did not differ significantlyhad no effect on the perceived difficulty of eitherbetween service and discipline teachers (Fisher exactservice or discipline teaching. Here too, however, bothtest, p 0.068). There was no significant differencebetween the distributions of the academic levels ofservice and discipline teachers (Fisher exact test, p 0.463) (Figure 1), the mean number of years spentteaching (single factor ANOVA: F1,127 1.036, NS) orthe mean highest academic qualification (single factorANOVA: F1,125 0.317, NS).Although a greater proportion of service teachers(53.6 per cent) had a teaching qualification comparedto discipline teachers (35 per cent) this difference wasnot significant (Fisher exact test: p 0.065). For thosewith a teaching qualification there was no difference inthe proportions of each type of qualification betweenservice and discipline teachers (Fisher exact test: p 0.640).52More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillupFigure 2. The perceptions of service and disciplineteachers of how difficult it is to teach science toscience students (grey bars) and science to non-sciencestudents (black bars).vol. 61, no. 2, 2019
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWThere was no significant difference in the qualificationlevel considered necessary to teach science to sciencestudents compared to non-science students (F1,107 1.049, NS), no difference between the perceptions ofservice and discipline teachers (F1,107 0.004, NS) andno interaction between the two factors (F1,107 0.070,NS) (Figure 4).Perceptions of the administration of serviceteachingFigure 3. The perceptions of service and disciplineteachers of the value for academic promotion ofteaching science to science students (grey bars) andscience to non-science students (black bars).For each of the last three questions (16 – 18) we usedgroups perceived service teaching to be significantlyservice teaching is used to ‘top up’ science staff workloads’more difficult than discipline teaching (F1,104 45.98,showed no significant difference between service andp 0.001) and this perception was consistent betweendiscipline teachers (F1,110 0.202, NS). A single samplegroups (interaction F1,104 0.028, NS).t test comparing the combined mean response of 2.88 forsingle factor ANOVA to examine the relationship betweenthe response to the question (coded as 1 – 5 on the Likertscale:Table 1) by service and discipline teachers.The responses to question 16 ‘In my school/departmentTeaching science to non-science students was perceivedboth service and discipline teachers to an expected meanas significantly less valuable for promotion than teachingof 3.0 corresponding to ‘Neither agree nor disagree’ wasscience to science students (F1,108 7.437, p 0.01).not significant (t111 1.07, NS).Here too, there was no significant difference between theFor question 17 ‘In my school/department activeperceptions of service and discipline teachers (F1,108 researchers are not required to do service teaching’1.486, NS) and no interaction between the two factorsthere was no significant difference in the mean response(F1,108 0.472, NS) (Figure 3). Service teaching wasbetween service and discipline teachers (F1,111 2.50,given a mean value for academic promotion of 2.69 byNS). A single sample t test comparing the mean (2.48) ofservice teachers and 2.85 by discipline teachers, bothall respondents to an expected mean of 3.0 (i.e. neitherof which are between ‘low’ and ‘neutral’ for the scoringagree nor disagree) showed that active researchers weresystem used (Table 1). The perceived promotional valuealso required to service teach in that there was significantof discipline teaching was consistently higher with adisagreement with the statement in question 17 (t112 mean of 2.83 (but still between low and neutral) by5.31, p 0.001) (Figure 5).service teachers and 3.08 (very slightly above neutral) bydiscipline teachers.Figure 4. The perceptions of service and disciplineteachers of the academic qualification required toteach science to science students (grey bars) andscience to non-science students (black bars).vol. 61, no. 2, 2019Figure 5. The number of responses for each categoryon the Likert scale (1 Strongly disagree, 2 Disagree,3 Neutral, 4 Agree, 5 Strongly agree) to thestatement ‘In my school/department active researchersare not required to do service teaching’. The mean ofthe distribution is significantly less than a neutralresponse of 3.More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillup53
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWPerception of the desirability of a serviceteaching positionneutral scores assigned to both service and disciplineThe response to ‘I would be likely to apply for a job wherewere that university teaching was given little recognitiona major component of the workload was service teaching’compared to research. This is a common perceptionshowed no significant difference between teacher typeworldwide (e.g. French & O’Leary, 2017).teaching) and seven of the 55 free response comments(F1,113 2.50, NS) nor a significant difference betweenAll teaching shows some degree of instructor-specificthe mean response to the question by all respondentsstudent satisfaction, but this may be accentuated inand an expected mean of 3.0 (neither agree nor disagree)service classes where students have no interest in the(single sample t test, t114 0.690, NS).topic and see it as an unpleasant hurdle to overcome aspart of their study. Only three of the 55 free responses toDiscussionour survey reported that service teaching was enjoyable:we suspect they were from academics who had the time,This appears to be the first report of the perceptionsskills and personalities to be able to engage with theirof service and discipline teachers about the relativeservice students. For example, for the service teachingdifficulty, promotional value and qualifications needed forof statistics, Pollock and Wilson (1976, p. 248) emphasisethese two types of teaching. Our samples of service andthat ‘far more than with specialist students the servicediscipline teachers appeared comparable in that they didcourse lecturer has to be showman and salesman as wellnot differ significantly in the proportions at each academicas teacher’. A basic and essential tenet of good teaching islevel, gender, whether they had a teaching qualification,the contextualisation of course content to make it relevantthe level of teaching qualification, years spent teaching, orto students, but even a service teacher who is extremelyhighest academic qualification.knowledgeable may be unfamiliar with the application ofPerceptions of service and discipline teachingthe material they are teaching in the program taken bytheir service students.Both service and discipline teachers perceived scienceFurthermore, it is not uncommon for universities toservice teaching to be significantly more difficult thanoffer one service course to students from several differentscience discipline teaching and both groups had extremelyprograms (e.g. engineering, psychology, environmentalsimilar perceptions of the difficulty of each teaching type.science and biomedical science students taking the sameFive of the 55 free text comments emphasised that serviceservice course in introductory statistics) but this is likelyteaching is difficult because students have not chosen toto make it even more difficult and time-consuming for anstudy the service topic and are less prepared than disciplineinstructor to contextualise the material and engage withstudents, as noted by Pollock and Wilson (1976).such a diverse class. Service-taught classes are often muchBoth types of teacher perceived science servicelarger than those in science disciplines and thereforeteaching as being significantly less valuable for promotionhave the potential to greatly affect the reputation of athan science discipline teaching. Here too, the perceiveddepartment and university if they are taught badly: theydifference between the two teaching types was consistentcannot be taken for granted and should be taught bybetween groups. The reason why service teaching wasexperienced, capable and committed staff.considered less valued for promotion may be becauseThere was no significant difference between servicemost service teaching is in first and second year of anand discipline teachers of the perceived level of academicundergraduate degree, whereas discipline teachingqualification (i.e. from A to E) needed to teach scienceoccurs across all three years and is therefore seen as beingto science students and science to non-science students.of ‘higher level’ and of greater value and importance: fiveThis is not surprising considering that most academicof the 55 free-text comments were that service teachingqualifications above bachelor level are based on research,is regarded as less important than discipline teaching.which may have little to do with the ability to teach. TheDiscipline teaching can also provide an opportunityfree responses were consistent with this: seven noted thatfor the teacher to showcase their research to studentshaving teachers who engage with their students and makewithin their own discipline, thereby attracting futurematerial relevant was more important than specifying apostgraduates who are likely to contribute to researchcertain level of qualification needed to teach.output, which may increase the teacher’s likelihood ofTaken together, the perceptions of greater teachingpromotion. It is notable that teaching, in general, wasdifficulty and less value for promotion are of concernperceived as having little value for promotion (with near-because they suggest service teachers are disadvantaged54More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillupvol. 61, no. 2, 2019
AUSTRALIANUNIVERSITIES’REVIEWcompared to discipline teachers, but further research isservice courses are likely to need more time per enrolledneeded to investigate whether these perceptions reflectstudent and perhaps even the opportunity for industryreality: do service teachers have a greater workload perexperience to help them integrate what they teach withstudent and are they less likely to be promoted? If theythe program they are servicing and to use examplesdo reflect reality then, for the same number of students, atheir students can identify with, as well as assistance inservice teacher may a have higher workload, experiencedeveloping teaching materials and techniques to helpgreater levels of stress and have less time for research.them successfully engage with service classes. TheseFurthermore, the perception that service teaching isrecommendations, from our survey of tertiary teachers,significantly less valued for promotion may reduce theare congruent with those from student and graduateself-esteem of service teachers and affect their attitudeperceptions of service teaching which also emphasisetowards their students. We received responses from 13the need for more collaboration between the serviceAustralian universities: further research is also needed toteacher and staff in the recipient department to achieveestablish whether these perceptions of service teachingbetter integration of service content (e.g. Larcombe &are more widespread. We have only considered serviceDick, 2003; Ralph et al., 2017; Wynne, Brand & Smith,and discipline teaching in science: it would also be useful1997). More research is also needed on the staffto investigate whether staff in other fields (e.g. economics,perceptions and realities of service teaching in otherpsychology, statistics) have similar perceptions of servicefields. If service teaching is found to be more difficultteaching.and time-consuming than discipline teaching, it willPerceptions of the administration of serviceteachingneed to be recognised and accounted for in institutionalworkload planning and assessment of applicationsfor promotion, to ensure service teachers are givenFor the administration of service teaching there was noadequate support and gain appropriate recognition forevidence it was being used to ‘top up’ staff workloads andtheir work.there was significant disagreement with the statementthat active researchers are not required to do serviceDisclosure statementteaching. As we noted earlier, there has been an expansionin profession-specific courses and a decline in enrolmentsNo potential conflict of interest was reported by thein traditional courses such as arts and science, so serviceauthors.teaching is increasingly important to maintain academicpositions in science departments, resulting in increasedAcknowledgementsstudent to staff ratios and academics being expected tospend more time teaching. The widespread adoption ofWe thank two anonymous reviewers whose commentsformula-based workload calculations, which often differimproved the manuscript.greatly among departments and institutions but areusually heavily dependent on the number of studentsDelma Clifton is Academic Lead – Scholarship of Learning andtaught, also means that researchers are increasingly likelyTeaching and an Associate Professor in the School of Health,to be asked to teach.Medical and Applied Sciences at CQUniversity, Queensland,Despite the poor perceptions of service teaching, theAustralia.response to the statement to ‘I would be likely to applyfor a job where a major component of the workload wasSteve McKillup is from the Audit and Advisory Directorate inservice teaching’ was neutral. It may reflect the currentthe Vice-Chancellor & President Division, Rockhampton Northshortage of available academic positions in Australia soCampus, CQUniversity.that even a service teaching position is desirable.Contact: s.mckillup@cqu.edu.auConclusionReferencesMore research is needed to establish whether theBarrett, S. (2005). Addressing the problem of service teaching introductoryeconomics subjects. International Education Journal 5(5), 152–165.perceptions that science service teaching in Australianuniversities is more difficult, and less valued forpromotion, reflect reality. If they do, then staff who teachvol. 61, no. 2, 2019Birks, M., Cant, R., Al-Motlaq, M., & Jones, J. (2011). I don’t want to become ascientist: undergraduate nursing students’ perceived value of course content.Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing 28, 20–27.More work for less reward Delma Clifton & Steve McKillup55
AUSTRALIANUNIVBrown, G., & Atkins, M. (1988). Effective teaching in higher educa
(11) What level of qualification is necessary to teach science to science students? 1 - 5 where 1 PhD, 2 Masters by research, 3 Masters by coursework, 4 Honours, 5 Bachelor (12) How well regarded is teaching science to science students for academic promotion at your institution? 1 - 5 where 1 Very low, 2 Low, 3 Neutral,
