Department of Educational Development and Research, University of Maastricht, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands (∗Author for correspondence: E-mail:

d.tigelaar@educ.unimaas.nl)

Abstract. In higher education, approaches to teaching are becoming more student-centred, which demands different teaching competencies. Therefore, it is necessary to have an adequate framework of teaching competencies that can be used for evaluation purposes. The weaknesses of the existing frameworks are that they do not pay attention to the person as teacher, they are too narrowly defined, they are not validated and they are not adjusted to modern approaches to teaching.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a framework of teaching compe- tencies in higher education. A framework for teaching competencies was therefore constructed containing the following domains: The Person as Teacher, Expert on Content Knowledge, Facilitator of Learning Processes, Organiser and Scholar/Lifelong Learner. The framework was validated using a Delphi method. Educational experts (N = 63) were asked: “How impor- tant are the following teaching competencies in each domain for an experienced teacher in higher education?” A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the adequacy of the domains.

After two rounds, the shift in ratings was minimal, so the results were considered stable. The response rate was 82%. From the original list with 134 items, 30 items were omitted because many experts failed to respond to them. The experts reached consensus on 61 out of the resulting 104 items (59%). A confirmatory factor analysis on the three best scoring items in each domain confirmed the model. A framework of teaching competencies was developed and validated that can be used as a starting point for teacher evaluation in higher education.

Keywords: Delphi method, student-centred approaches to teaching, teaching competencies

Introduction

Recent theories on teaching and assessment reveal that teaching is a complex activity that is shaped by the teaching context (Darling-Hammond 2000; Trigwell 2001). Moreover, changing visions on student learning and the teacher role require that teachers are continuously developing themselves professionally (Putnam and Borko 1997). Teaching competency frameworks can be useful for teachers to set their professional learning goals. However, these frameworks should give room to differentiated teacher profiles and should not only be focused on teacher behaviour (Uhlenbeck, Verloop and Beijaard 2002). Moreover, they should be appropriate for contemporary teaching approaches.

In these modern approaches to teaching, one distinction is very important. This is the distinction between the teacher-centred orientation and the student-centred orientation to teaching (Kember 1997). The more active a student is in the learning situation, the more student-centred the teaching orientation is likely to be. Samuelowicz and Bain (2001) describe seven orientations to teaching and learning in which teaching becomes gradually more student-centred. These orientations can be seen as a continuum. In  the first orientation, which is called imparting information, the teacher is a lecturer that passes on knowledge. In the final orientation, which is called encouraging knowledge creation, the teacher stimulates students to build original knowledge. In the student-centred orientations, the student must participate actively in the learning process and teachers have to take the students’ perspective (Ramsden 1992). Trigwell and Prosser (1996) showed that the use of teaching strategies matches the intention teachers have for their teaching. Teachers who conceive of teaching as transmitting information to students approach their teaching in a teacher-focused manner. On the other hand, teachers who regard learning as developing and changing students’ conceptions, conceive of teaching in terms of helping students to develop and change their conceptions and approach their teaching in a student-focused way (Trigwell, Prosser and Waterhouse 1999). Moreover, there appears to be a positive relation between student-focused teaching and students’ learning outcomes. Martin, Prosser, Trigwell, Ramsden, and Benjamin (2000) added to these findings that there is a clear relationship between the teacher’s intended objects of study and their intended approaches to teaching. Teachers who conceive the object of study in terms of ‘knowledge as given’ intend to adopt more teacher-focussed approaches to teaching. Teachers who conceive of the object of study in terms of ‘knowledge as being constructed’ aim to adopt more student-focused approaches to teaching. Moreover, the teaching environment shapes a teacher’s approach to teaching by its curriculum design and institutional ethos, as well as the nature of the students (Ramsden 1992; Kember and Kwan 2002).

The shift from focus on the teacher to focus on the student originates from ideas in constructivism (Ertmer and Newby 1993). A central tenet in constructivist approaches to learning is the active construction of knowledge by the learner. The student is seen as an active, self-regulating learner, who creates meaning from his or her own experiences in a meaningful way. The teacher role is to stimulate the construction of powerful knowledge, rather than to explicitly provide knowledge and information (Harris and Alexander 1998). This teacher role is different from that in traditional, teacher-centred education. In more student-focused approaches to teaching, different teaching competencies are needed. Over the last few decades, the constructivist orien- tation to teaching has become very important in higher education. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate what teaching competencies are required in modern, more student-centred higher education teaching contexts. A frame- work of teaching competencies adjusted to current, more student-centred education environments can be useful as a starting point for evaluation purposes and for teachers to set professional learning goals.

In this study, teaching competencies are defined as an integrated set of personal characteristics, knowledge, skills and attitudes that are needed  for effective performance in various teaching contexts. (This definition is based on several definitions mentioned by Bos 1998; Stoof, Martens, Van Merriënboer and Bastiaens 2002.) According to this definition, teaching competencies are integrated and should be viewed as a whole repertoire a teacher has at his or her disposal. The teaching context is important; that is, teaching competencies must be viewed in the light of the various contexts in which teaching takes place.

The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a framework for teaching competencies in higher education. This framework can be used as a starting point for teacher evaluation in higher education. Several frameworks of teaching competencies have already been defined for higher education. In the United States of America, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and the Committee on Promoting and Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness (PETE) have put considerable effort into defining teaching competencies. In the Netherlands, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands, VSNU (1996) has made a framework that is specific to higher education. The Executive Board of the Utrecht University (1995), and the Association for Teacher Educators in the Netherlands, VELON (1999) have worked on defining teaching competencies in higher education in a more detailed way. Other frameworks in the Netherlands focus on primary and secondary education (Beijaard and Uhlenbeck 2001; Dietze, Jansma and Riezebos 2000; Moltmaker and Meulenkamp 2000; Twisk, Daniels and Bolweg 1999).

Common elements in most frameworks are: competencies in content knowledge, didactic competencies (pedagogical methods and presentation skills, guidance and advising skills, design of curriculum and course material), organisational competencies, and scientific competencies (lifelong learning and reflection). Key principles of effective teaching (Ramsden 1992) such as interest and explanation, concern and respect for students and student learning, appropriate assessment and feedback, clear goals and intellectual challenge, independence, control and active engagement and learning from students can be found in these frameworks. However, many of the existing frameworks are not adjusted to modern approaches to teaching. Moreover, critics of existing frameworks with teaching competencies argue that these lists are too detailed and too prescriptive (Korthagen 2001). A good teacher cannot be described in terms of isolated abilities or a long list of items as is outlined in the definition of teaching competencies formulated above. In addition, another weak point of the existing frameworks is that they do not pay attention to the fact that aspects of a teacher’s personality play an important role in being a good teacher (Korthagen 2001). Aspects of a teacher’s personality that are important for effective teaching are the teacher’s professional identity (how he or she views himself or herself as a teacher), his or her beliefs about teaching and the teacher’s involvement in teaching. Korthagen (2001) mentions some personal characteristics that are important for teachers such as empathy, and the ability to regulate frustration and impatience. Lowyck (1994) also stresses that it is not the teaching behaviour in itself but the teacher’s personality that is the paramount indicator for effectiveness. Another weak point of the existing frameworks is that they are not validated.

See more: 

Higher Education  48:  253–268, 2004.

© 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.