Reclaiming Opportunities for Effective Teaching: An Institutional Ethnographic Study of Community College Course Outlines
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dunn, Mary Ellen (2015). Reclaiming opportunities for effective teaching: An institutional ethnographic study of community college course outlines. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Pages: 153. Price: $102.96 CDN (hardcover).The genesis of this book is doctoral thesis focused on the standardization of Ontario community college teaching through an examination of course outlines. The study, an institutional ethnography, was conducted 2006-2010 exclusively with teachers (both new to and experienced with course outlines), at two Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (CAATs), across four academic semesters, and involving text analysis related to union negotiations as they influence course outline workload.Author Mary Ellen Dunn is upfront stating this is a harsh critique of the use of course although they are not inherently bad (Dunn, 2015, p. xvi). Her foundational observation is that systematizing course outlines across programs and institutions effectively devalues, commoditizes and impersonalizes post-secondary education, aligned with privatization, profit-leaning motives. Professors are losing control of their freedom to develop curriculum and assessment as managers require faculty to follow prescribed processes and monitor compliance with the ordered standards. Professors are experiencing more work at faster pace, with decline in opportunities to use their professional judgment to address the needs of their students.When forced upon faculty, who are not always involved in their development, course outlines become ideological texts and instruments of oppression (Dunn, 2015, xvi). They also conflict with the academic employees' collective agreement, which calls for college faculty to foster an effective learning environment for students. On the flip side, the agreement does not address how managers are expected to cultivate an equally effective teaching environment for faculty (Dunn, 2015, p. 55).As full-time professor at major Ontario college, with prior experience at another large college as partial-load instructor for cumulative 13 years, I have direct and extensive knowledge of this subject although not every aspect covered (notably, Workload Preference Listings and Course Picks Lists). While this review is meant to provide an unbiased overview and assessment of the author's research methodology, comments and conclusions, I can attest to the advantages and disadvantages associated with course outlines and their impact on academic freedom, teaching and learning. (Ironically but not coincidentally, one research informant identified throughout the text is also named Lydia, interviewed at Humberview. Moreover, I reside in this area of Toronto and work at an institution with similar name. However, I hereby confirm that the named Lydia is not me nor does she reflect my experiences.)Written in solidly academic style reflecting dissertation, the book is thematically structured, starting with sample course outline presented alongside excerpts from participant interviews, followed by review of the macro setting for teaching, then micro processes and procedures anchored in labour relations dictates that are highly prescriptive. The writing is clear. The attendant illustrations, charts and graphs are relevant and appropriately placed to corroborate key arguments.The second chapter takes large-scale view, mapping the ideological setting for course outlines. The discussion features various theories anchored in business orientation, notably, human capital, human resource management and economic growth theories. The author reviews the college funding formula, student recruitment marketing tactics, strategic enrolment targets and college application forms. She notes that in today's post-secondary environment, colleges are behaving like business competing with and against each other for students and funding that is based on student enrolment numbers. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».