Implementing a Teaching and Learning Enhancement Workshop at Aga Khan University: Reflections onthe implementation and outcomes of an Instructional Skills Workshop in the context of Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Teaching and Learning Enhancement Workshop (TLEW) is an indigenous name for the Canadian-based Instructional Skills Workshop (ISW). TLEW is a teaching development workshop aimed at enhancing faculty members’ stances towards student-centred teaching and reflective practice at the higher education level. This short paper discusses the initiation, implementation and institutionalisation of the TLEW at Aga Khan University (AKU) across entities in Asia and Africa. In total, 77 faculty members drawn from different entities of AKU participated in the workshop in 2016-2017. Empirical evidence collected from TLEW graduates through a survey and interviews suggests that the intense episode of planning, teaching and receiving peer feedback during TLEW helped participants in sensitising them to effective planning for teaching in order to engage and enrich students’ learning. Furthermore, the repertoire of pedagogical strategies has permeated graduates’ classrooms. Nevertheless, for sustainability a mechanism needs to be in place for providing faculty with institutional support and recognition for their contribution in teaching and learning. A need is advocated for TLEW to evolve as a mandatory component for all teaching staff at the university to help serve as a fundamental base for initiating and sustaining change through ongoing professional development opportunities and establishing a community of practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".