Teaching and Learning Forum 2007 Home Page

Category: Professional practice
Teaching and Learning Forum 2007 [ Refereed papers ]
Reflections of a UWA engineering Postgraduate Teaching Intern

Andrew L. Guzzomi
School of Mechanical Engineering
The University of Western Australia

In this paper the first UWA Postgraduate Teaching Intern from the School of Mechanical Engineering reports on various aspects of the Postgraduate Teaching Internship Scheme offered at the University of Western Australia. The paper initially presents a brief overview of the program and then looks more specifically at the teaching aspects and the results from various surveys of both students and staff. The lecture delivery techniques primarily used were "live" board writing and the visualiser and these were supplemented with overheads and computer animation. The intern reports on different mechanisms of feedback such as: critical friend, mentor, student feedback, and self assessment from video footage. At such an early stage in an academic career feedback was used effectively to make changes to the techniques used and increase student engagement. It was found that compared to "live" board writing the use of visualiser created less stress before lecture delivery and was much less draining both physically and mentally. The usage of the visualiser and recorded lectures within the School is investigated and the results presented.


Introduction

The UWA Postgraduate Teaching Internship Scheme (PTIS) offers a one year structured program to high achieving postgraduate students interested in academia. The program begins with a training workshop equivalent to that which new University of Western Australia (UWA) academics are required to attend. Interns also go to regular follow-up sessions where they contribute to discussion and reflect on their recent teaching experiences. The diverse range of backgrounds of the Interns (culturally and School types) ensures that the experiences shared are very broad. Throughout the year Interns perform a range of teaching activities (lectures at different levels, tutorials/laboratory demonstration and curriculum development) plus are encouraged to join their School's Teaching and Learning Committee and contribute to discussion. Successful completion of the program creates a solid foundation from which the PhD candidate can launch an academic career.

From 2001 to 2006 (inclusive) UWA has offered 87 Postgraduate Teaching Internships across the university. To date many of the awards (28) have been given to people within the humanities with The Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics receiving only 7 awards since the program started. This low number could possibly be because postgraduate students within humanities faculties tend to be more inclined to teaching and research, while a greater percentage of engineering students wish to join industry. Unfortunately there is a perception amongst some student/professional engineers that engineering academics are not "real engineers" and that engineers learn out in the "real world". This discourages many engineering students from wishing to be academics. However, it should be recognised that they receive their qualification after attending universities where the academic engineer helped to develop their knowledge which extends outside of that just represented by the subject matter. This year is the first time an award was won by a mechanical engineering PhD candidate and it was thought that his experience could be shared. Before presenting the findings it is necessary to briefly identify and explain the key differences between mechanical engineering and subjects within the humanities faculties.

Engineering, in general, tends to involve applying the laws of physics to physical problems through the use of mathematics; the units taught by the author in each semester were no exception to this and are some of the most mathematical of those offered. These subjects adhere to a rigid set of laws that imply exact answers. This is unlike units within humanities where individual interpretation of the facts is accepted and often encouraged. In engineering such an attitude could lead to catastrophes in which the consequences could be fatal. Hence, part of the motivation for writing this paper arises from this difference in desired outcomes and an aspiration to make these differences known. From the PTIS program it became clear relatively quickly that the dynamics of the mechanical engineering teaching techniques and students are quite different to those of the majority of the current group of interns. This has important consequences for maintaining effective student engagement. According to the US National Survey of Student Engagement, there are five parts to student engagement including: academic challenge, active collaborative learning, student-faculty interaction, enriching educational experiences and a supportive campus environment. Additionally nowadays student engagement is also further complicated by off-campus factors such as paid work. Due to education costs increasing many students now undertake paid work in order to pay for their fees while studying full time (Metcalf, 2003). Some job hours obviously clash with class times and unfortunately it is not unusual for students to miss lectures as a consequence. Both the number of students undertaking paid employment and the number of paid work hours have increased (McInnis, Hartley, 2002). A study at Oxford Brookes University (Lindsay & Paton-Saltzberg, 1996) revealed that "The majority of respondents believed that paid employment made no positive contribution to their academic work, and negatively affected central elements of their studies." This means that many students eager to learn request alternative means of viewing lectures such as online recordings. At UWA iLectures (now renamed Lectopia) begin to address this void by recording microphone audio and any visual that goes through the video projector. Recorded lectures are not a new concept but they have not been used extensively in the School of Mechanical Engineering.

This paper follows the learning experiences of the author and identifies the interaction and lessons learned from the author's teaching. The paper is split into sections which compare the different delivery techniques used, identify considerations for online lectures, discuss mechanisms to increase student engagement, and cover the different feedback systems used for improvement.

Comparison of delivery techniques

Before looking specifically at the lecture techniques used it is necessary to define the engineering classroom setting and the units that the author was involved with.

Lecturing to third year university students can be a daunting task, especially when new to the profession and the students are third year mechanical engineering students. As mentioned, it became apparent early in the Internship program that engineering classroom dynamics are somewhat different to many of the other Interns' classrooms. This may result from the male percentage domination, subject matter, student/lecturer mindset or a combination of all these factors. Engineering students in general tend to be very vocal and feel the need to address problems in lectures when they arise. If the students do not like the lecturer they will make it known quite quickly. Being a recent graduate, and now an Intern, this was known all to well. For this reason it was thought that it was a good idea in the first lecture each semester to be honest and notify the class that the author is somewhat inexperienced but more than willing to give it a go. The students were encouraged to point out any mistakes and ask questions at any time.

The author was involved with the teaching of two advanced third year units. In first semester the unit was Vibration and Signal Processing (VSP) and the teaching duties included four lectures and developing associated tutorials and an exam question. In second semester the unit was Mechanisms and Multi-body Systems (MMS) and the internship duties were four lectures, and a review of the unit. Both classes were comprised of approximately 130 third year Mechanical Engineers, the majority of which (89% both semesters) were male. Both units are core units in the Mechanical and Mechatronic programs offered at UWA.

In each semester the author presented the lecture series in a rather animated way. The Columbia Encyclopedia (2005) states that Mechanical Engineering "....is concerned with the design, construction, and operation of power plants, engines, and machines. It deals mostly with things that move" and hence the author considers it inappropriate to remain stationery! The SPOT (SPOT is explained later) scores, for both semesters, confirmed that a high level of enthusiasm for the subject matter had been displayed (86.6%, and 85.6% respectively).

Delivery considerations

Since these engineering units require building of equations step by step both the author and his Mentor believe that the use of hand written notes in real time is much easier for the student to follow than a PowerPoint presentation in which equations magically and instantly appear. A student in the survey conducted by Young (2004) defined a typical problem with PowerPoint wasn't that the material was dense and challenging; it was because her professor "would write on the PowerPoint slides complete sentences, which she would then read,...... I call it PowerPoint abuse". All of the Interns lectures were delivered using primarily media that allowed easy development of equations. In first semester this involved whiteboard or black board usage (traditional lectures) and the author decided to go "live". Lecturing live means writing on the board and explaining to the class while walking around without reference to notes. To successfully lecture live requires skill, which typically comes with experience, and therefore in the author's case, a great deal of preparation.

For live board writing personal lecture notes were prepared and then attempts made to reproduce them accurately without referring to them. This was done a number of times until it was demonstrated that the notes could be reproduced accurately but not wanting the lecture to sound memorised. Notes were there, on the desk, as a form of life support should they be needed. In second semester a Visual Overhead Projector (VOHP) was used. The VOHP uses a video camera to project an image of what is on the display below it; hence it is possible to write on plain paper and thus both techniques enable writing of notes in real time. Traditional type lectures are still valued according to Newble and Cannon (2001): "Clear, legible and well-planned use of these basic aids is a delight to see and remain valuable allies in assisting [the lecturer] communicate with [their] students". In both semesters the lectures were supplemented by overheads (OHP), board writing and computer simulation/animation. The switch between different media was useful in creating more impact and maintaining engagement.

Time considerations

Different delivery techniques have different implications for time management. Lecturing on the board requires allowance of time for moving between boards and erasing text. Time spent doing those things is time not available to cover material. However some time cleaning boards etc. can be useful; it forces the lecturer to have a break and it allows students to absorb/review the material already delivered. If a large number of boards needed erasing the author would deliberately say something like "please use this time to look through your notes and think of questions". In comparison, the time required for VOHP note preparation was less since it is not necessary to memorise the material. Since, when using the VOHP, the lecturer is at the projector it is possible to have skeleton notes which can be viewed while making notes for the students. This reduces the amount of preparation required for the lecture and the amount of associated stress. It is also possible to cover more material using this technique since no board cleaning is required, nor movement between boards. This however can lead to the risk of going too fast. Both Professor Stone and the author believe that this extra time should be used to cover more examples.

Student views on VOHP

When the surveyed students were asked "is the visualiser an effective way for presenting lectures" the following results, shown in Figure 1, were obtained. 71 of the 74 responses (96%) agreed. The enrolled class number was 130 and it is likely that many of the absent students were those that use the facility and hence the results are considered representative of the total.

Figure 1

Figure 1: Student response to the question "is the visualiser an effective way for presenting lectures" (n = 74)

Other academics' views on VOHP/Lectopia

It was of some interest to see how extensively the VOHP/Lectopia were used within the School of Mechanical Engineering. Thus an email was sent to the Academics asking if they had used the VOHP/Lectopia and if so what their thoughts about the systems were.

In regard to the VOHPLecturer A
  • I use the VOHP in design lectures to show small objects and also show design projects which are about to be returned.
  • The class can learn a lot by seeing how the marking was done and also how others do things.
  • Sometimes I also put the textbook on it.
Lecturer B
  • I don't really like the VOHP as I find it restrictive, the view area is rather small, the focus is awkward at times, and I can't move around much - I'm a bit of a wanderer.
Lecturer C
  • Some time ago, because I was made aware that some students could not attend the lectures, I was forced into using the VOHP. Previously I was using the OHP [portrait] with prewritten slides and it was a lot of work to convert to landscape.
  • Resolution is not as high compared to the OHP.
  • I do not write much because my writing is messy and I am left handed so my hand covers the text.
  • The VOHP enables colour to be used and is much cheaper/simpler than producing coloured OHP transparencies. Colour is useful and I had even been tempted to go PowerPoint 'Heaven forbid'! The zoom is useful and can show photos.
In regard to LectopiaLecturer B
  • They are interesting, I always assumed that it would decrease lecture attendance but some students say that they like to be able to review a lecture. Hearing it all again allows them to make better notes, or make better sense of the notes they took
  • "I'll use it next year and see how it goes"
Lecturer C
  • Recording starts when microphone switched on.
  • If students only have modem Internet access the quality is very poor.
  • It seems it is sometimes possible for students to access past years, so if they wish they can go ahead in lectures.
  • Since students can access online lectures their questions then relate to lack of understanding of a particular part of an online lecture and not the total lecture. Reduce the number of questions coming from students who missed lectures.

Pros and cons of the VOHP

Based on the student feedback, other academics views, the author's and his Mentor's personal experience with the VOHP the author and Mentor have list the benefits and disadvantages of the VOHP as:

Benefits
  • Less effort for old lecturers who have trouble cleaning black/white boards and writing on them!
  • Avoids the coloured hand syndrome of OHP that also leads to 'dirty' transparencies.
  • Less trying on the eyes than an OHP, particularly in large lecture theatres where eye shields are needed.
  • Writing on plain paper allows the lecture notes to be retained for questions and put on the WWW. (These notes can be referred to after the lecture and checked for thoroughness. Should any errors or misrepresentation be found this can soon be corrected at the next lecture)
  • Monitor showing what students are seeing avoids getting in the way of projection.
  • More material can be covered as time is not lost cleaning white/black boards. This time can be used to cover more examples.
  • Pre-printed sheets can be used that show partial diagrams that can be completed. Students may be given the same sheets.
  • Possible to refer back to previous sheets, even from previous lectures.
Disadvantages
  • Compared to 6 to 9 blackboards less information can be displayed at any time (same applies to OHP).
  • Size of writing needs to be carefully monitored as screen not seen. With black/white boards size known.
  • Lecturer stationary as opposed to moving around with black/white boards. Lecturer appears less animated.
  • Danger of writing too fast.
  • Delay in changing from computer display to VOHP is significant.
  • Although the VOHP offers a zoom facility, zooming in and out can irritate the audience.
  • Have to consciously create pauses as no board erasing required

Considerations for recorded lectures

Possibly the greatest benefit from using the VOHP is that, together with the Lectopia system, it allows easy production of recorded online lectures. To be used effectively it is important for the lecturer to know the ways in which recorded lectures work. With UWA's Lectopia system any material presented through the projector, (PowerPoint, VOHP computer animation/simulation), is recorded. Since Lectopia contains any audio received through the microphone and any visual presented through the projector the VOHP, as apposed to board writing, enables a simpler and more complete form for online lectures. In order to record questions during lectures with Lectopia it may be necessary for the lecturer to repeat the question so that an audio record will be audable. It is generally accepted that, in order to keep students engaged, it is necessary to have variety throughout lectures by switching between different media and walking around. One such medium that can be used with some impact is the black/white board but any notes/ diagrams/ equations written on it will not be recorded along with any gestures. In a study by Fardon and Ludewig (2000) some lecturers indicated that they did not consider the lecture recordings a replacement for their normal lectures as "the recordings do not provide all visual material used in lectures" and "there needs to be recognition that these are teaching aids". Students commonly cited the flexibility of being able to access lectures at home, at a time to suit them, and at their own pace as being significant advantages. Students are empowered by the ability to control the speed/pace and place of entry (Fardon & Ludewig, 2000).

Mechanisms to increase engagement

In each semester different mechanisms of engagement were used and the classes surveyed to see if they were at all beneficial.

Does interaction with colleagues during lectures help?

In the first VSP lecture the teaching Mentor, Professor Stone, was present taping it for peer review by him and for the author's record. It was obvious to the class that Professor Stone was present so the author decided to involve him when opportunities arose. When the class was asked if they thought the interaction with Professor Stone was useful the results shown in Figure 2 were obtained. It is interesting to note that 1 student strongly disagreed with the comment.

Figure 2

Figure 2: Survey response to the question "the interaction with Professor Stone was useful"
(n = 101) SA = Strongly Agree; A = Agree; N = Neutral; D = Disagree; SD = Strongly Disagree

Do real life examples, "props", help?

In second semester, to aid with understanding and to get students interested in the subject matter, various valve-train components were taken into the MMS lectures. This was done so that students could visualise the real parts they were learning about. When asked if "Having examples of real cam mechanisms on display helped understanding" the results shown in Figure 3 were obtained. With the average response of just over 76% of the sampled students agreeing with the statement. These 'props' were not available to for the Lectopia viewing audience.

Figure 3

Figure 3: Student response to question "having examples
of real cam mechanisms on display helped understanding"
(n = 79) SA = Strongly Agree; A = Agree; N = Neutral; D = Disagree; SD = Strongly Disagree

Do mistakes help?

Some mistakes are useful as they force student interaction if someone spots one however, they are also distracting because they require time to correct. They can also be dangerous if not spotted because students will get misinformed and even if spotted they may also leave with the first concept cemented in their brains. Although it is recommended that questions should be left to the end of the session or tutorials the Inspiring Learning about Teaching and Assessment (ILTA) Guide (2004) recommends trying to elicit, and respond to, at least some questions in each lecture. One reason for doing this is that "when one student asks a question there are likely to be many others in the group who also need to know what the answer to the question is." An incident occurred in the second lecture which demonstrates this.

The concept was matrix techniques. Having recapped the previous lecture the key equations from it were manipulated so that terms involving the same variable could be grouped. The equations were then written in matrix form, a not too difficult concept. It was at this point that a sense of restlessness in the class was felt. Turning to the class the author indicated, with body language, that there seems to be something wrong. A male student said that a mistake had been made. The author recalls asking if he could explain where it was as it was difficult at the front of the lecture theatre with other students also starting to talk. The student proceeded to come to the board and although the author thought this was a little strange perhaps the wording suggested it. The class reacted quite rudely by booing etc. The author encouraged him to continue and thought it could be beneficial for him to continue and offered him the marker. According to Newble and Cannon (2001) this was probably the correct thing to do; they suggest "try to treat [the disturbance] with humour or you may alienate the rest of the class." He began to explain, so that the whole class could hear, where the error was. It was at this point that the author realised, as did the majority of the class, that there was no error (not there, anyway!). The class was beginning to get quite agitated and calls of "sit down" were voiced and the student made a rude gesture to the class. The author said for him to settle and tried to calm the class by saying "No, it is good that he has pointed this out because obviously I didn't make it clear enough when I explained it". The student returned to his seat and the class returned to being manageable. At the next lecture some students stayed after class and he was one of them. The author decided to speak to him regarding the previous lecture. He was embarrassed that he had got up and pointed out an error that did not exist. The author said it was good that he came up the other day; obviously it was not made clear enough and that further explanation was necessary. He appeared to have appreciated the comments.

Although the incident drew the attention of other students away from the topic, which should be expected according to Sorcinelli (1994), the class soon settled and the lecture continued successfully. The incident was handled in a way as to not make the student feel stupid. The ILTA Guide (2004) even recommends using a phrase such as "Better to look silly for a few seconds [minutes???] than to remain ignorant for a long time". Sorcinelli (1994) noted that one professor described disruptive students as "classroom terrorists". This professor is suggesting that disruptive students destroy the learning environment and do not "spark an explosion of knowledge". Hopefully the latter occurred in the lecture. It can be concluded though that the incident definitely did increase student engagement!

Improving through feedback

Different feedback mechanisms exist and are available for the instructor to use. Some of the ones used are listed in this section.

Self reflection

The technique of writing on the board live was very tiring both physically and mentally. After the first VSP lecture the author was exhausted but the experience was very enjoyable. At times, the author would go back and find an earlier figure/equation and show how it was being used on the current board; the students found this aspect very useful. The VOHP is good because it allows checking after lecture and also a way of assessing the accuracy. It also makes it possible to give students the opportunity to have a copy of the actual notes.

Video recording

Reviewing video footage of ones self lecturing is possibly the best way for the lecturer to improve their style. Having a lecture taped was a little scary; both during delivery of the lecture and when reviewing the footage. It was clear that prior to starting the lesson the author was quite nervous which was indicated by facial expression and body language. This may have been off putting for the students. However once the lecture started the stress levels greatly reduced and confidence grew. During the first lecture it was observable that not many joining phrases/words were used on the board. Initially this can be attributed to stress, a simple memory lapse and a fear of making mistakes with spelling/grammar. In later lectures this was corrected. The presence of a Mentor taping the lecture can increase stress levels and hence the possible likelihood of making mistakes. However stress can be useful; it meant that later lectures without filming were more stress free.

In a similar way to video camera recording the VOHP, together with Lectopia, gives the presenter an opportunity for self reflection when reviewing the footage.

Critical friend

It is important that a critical friend is used to give feedback. The instructor should respect their comments and they should feel comfortable in giving honest (critical) feedback. The author's critical friend was not from engineering but was from science. It was believed that having someone from outside engineering would allow input from a different perspective. The critical friend made reference to the author's casual dressing (jeans and polo shirts) during lectures. The author had chosen to not dress more formally because, as a PhD student, most undergraduate students have seen the author in the corridor and, like the majority of PhD candidates, the author dresses casually. It was thought that dressing formally may lead to the students thinking that it was false and given the circumstances it was thought that the author dressed appropriately (perhaps PhD candidates should dress better?). In second semester the author did dress more formally wearing shirts and trousers. It is interesting to note that the author did notice that some students gave more respect i.e. starting questions with Sir.....

Mentor

The PTIS requires that the Intern have a Mentor. The Mentor is regarded by his/her peers as a quality teacher and who is a proven contributor to Teaching and Learning. The Mentor helps to guide the Intern and the role of Mentor during this preliminary phase is very important. Their experience enables them to quickly recognize areas that need improving and comment on small things that are done during lectures that may promote/demote student engagement. As an example, Professor Stone, commented that the lecturer should avoid saying something is easy or obvious. This is because some students may not find it so. They may then feel inferior to the rest of the class which is detrimental to their learning environment.

SPOT

UWA has a survey system called Student Perception Of Teaching (SPOT) which offers a multiple choice questionnaire and space for written feedback. SPOT provides a simple mechanism for conducting surveys and the results can be used to improve teaching and learning practices. Depending on the type of survey being performed (laboratory/lecture/tutorial) there are certain default questions. It is then possible to select additional questions from a list and add further questions if desired. The number of responses for semesters 1 and 2 were 102 and 79 respectively. It should be noted that enrolment numbers for both semesters were approximately 130, hence some students were absent. The greater number of absent students in semester 2 may be a result of Lectopia (i.e. for VSP in semester 1 no online lectures were available).

The SPOT survey for lectures has 3 default questions which gauge the lecturers performance

  1. the teacher has given clear and understandable explanations
  2. class sessions have been well organized
  3. overall, this teacher has been an effective instructor
After reflecting on the first semester performance it was possible to use the comments to refine teaching practices for second semester. It was promising to see that all three measures increased in second semester (Figure 4).

Figure 4

Figure 4: Comparison of results to SPOT default lecturer questions for each semester
(first semester n = 102; second semester n = 79)

Written comments

Some of the written comments relevant to this paper from each semester are listed

1) What aspects do you feel were best (sem1)
  1. Enthusiasm, passion for subject; your effort to interact with class and keep it interesting; enthusiastic lecturer
  2. being able to relate to students; he seems very in touch with students and difficulties we have; asking if we actually understand the stuff; young and approachable
  3. Humour; his jokes; he tries to lighten up a tough and boring topic in humour; humour used very well and very considerate
  4. Lecturing live means material is actually looked at & absorbed; notes on board
  5. he gave comprehensive notes; summarized notes; the summary was very considerate and helpful; easy to read; has the easiest to understand writing of any lecturer
  6. relaxed atmosphere; relaxed nature of lecture; nice relaxed learning [...] look forward to coming to lectures; freedom to ask questions without feeling stupid
  7. Being videoed
2) What aspects do you feel were best (sem2)
  1. His passion is catching; Likes what he teaches; Enthusiasm to teach beyond course material
  2. VOHP better than OHP; Visual aides effective; Writing on [VOHP]; Lecturing style; WebCT/Lectopia use was very good; Good use of [VOHP]
  3. Good notes; Good diagrams; Good use of pictures
  4. Engaging due to
    • Unique lecturing style
    • Interesting car applications and anecdotes
    • Humour
    • A steady progression of steps which are easily followed.
  5. Use of visualiser and microphone was excellent
3) What suggestions do you have for change (sem2)
  1. VOHP is decent but prefer whiteboard notes; VOHP better than OHP but can lead to a more boring lecture than writing on the board

Concluding remarks

The UWA Postgraduate Teaching Internship Scheme offers a professional program for postgraduate students interested in teaching. The program is considered very useful because the variety of tasks that the Intern is exposed to help develop the emerging academic prior to embarking on his/her teaching career. As an academic they would be required to perform similar activities however in much greater isolation and during times when they are extremely busy. Successful completion of the program creates a solid foundation from which the PhD candidate can launch an academic career.

A number of valuable lessons learned from the program

Following from the last point, it is interesting to note that after the author's first semester lectures, the Professor delivering the next lectures began with PowerPoint. After noticing that students were "glassy eyed" he decided to change to live board writing and thought it was great; "all the time spent preparing PowerPoint for last year was a complete waste of time. The students are much more interested [/engaged]."

Acknowledgements

The author thanks his Mentor and the academics/students within the School of Mechanical Engineering for their feedback. The author appreciates the anonymous reviewers' comments which helped enhance the quality of the paper. The author would like to thank the UWA TALC for offering the PTIS. He also thanks UWA's Scholarship Committee and Faculty of Engineering Computing and Mathematics for their financial support through the Robert Maude Gledden and William Lambden Owen Scholarships.

References

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition (2001-05). [viewed 10 Sep 2006, verified 28 Dec 2006] http://www.bartleby.com/65/en/engineer.html

Fardon, M. & Ludewig, A. (2000). iLectures: A catalyst for teaching and learning? In Learning to choose, Choosing to learn. ProceedingsASCILITE 2000, Coffs Harbour 9-14 Dec 2000. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/mike_fardon.pdf

Lindsay, R. O. & Paton-Saltzberg, R. (1996). The effects of paid employment on the academic performance of full time students in a British "new" university. Oxford Brookes University, Consultancy report.

McInnis, C. & Hartley, R. (2002). Managing study and work: The impact of full-time study and paid work on the undergraduate experiences in Australian universities. Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/publications_resources/profiles/managing_study_and_work.htm

Metcalf, H. (2003). Increasing Inequality in higher education: The role of term-time working. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 315-329.

Newble, D. & Cannon, R. (2001). A Handbook for Medical Teachers, 4th edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Race, P. & Brown, S. (2001). The ILTA guide: Inspiring learning about teaching and assessment. The Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education in association with Education Guardian. [viewed 20 Jan 2004, not found 28 Dec 2006] http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/careers/story/0.9856,620225,00.html

Sorcinelli, M. D. (1994). Dealing with troublesome behaviours in the classroom. In K. W. Prichard & R. M. Sawyer (Eds), Handbook of college teaching: Theory and applications (pp. 365-373), Greenwood Press.

Young, J. R. (2004). When good technology means bad teaching: Giving professors gadgets without training can do more harm than good in the classroom, students say. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(12) [verified 28 Dec 2006 at http://pete.uri.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0511&L=provteach&D=0&P=1326&F=P]

Author: Andrew Guzzomi obtained his BE (Hons 1) degree in 2003 at UWA. He is currently in his final year of a PhD in Mechanical Engineering at UWA (in powertrain dynamics). His interest in excellent teaching arose from his own experiences as a student of both good and poor lecturing. The UWA Postgraduate Teaching Internship Scheme allowed him to develop his teaching skills and reflect on what makes an excellent teacher; something he aspires to be.

Andrew L. Guzzomi, School of Mechanical Engineering (M50), The University of Western Australia, Crawley WA 6009, Australia. Email: aguzzomi@mech.uwa.edu.au

Please cite as: Guzzomi, A. L. (2007). Reflections of a UWA engineering Postgraduate Teaching Intern. In Student Engagement. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 30-31 January 2007. Perth: The University of Western Australia. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2007/refereed/guzzomi.html

Copyright 2007 Andrew L. Guzzomi. The author assigns to the TL Forum and not for profit educational institutions a non-exclusive licence to reproduce this article for personal use or for institutional teaching and learning purposes, in any format (including website mirrors), provided that the article is used and cited in accordance with the usual academic conventions.


[ Refereed papers ] [ Contents - All Presentations ] [ Home Page ]
This URL: http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2007/refereed/guzzomi.html
Created 27 Dec 2006. Last revision: 27 Dec 2006.