T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

SCHOOL OF DOCTORAL STUDIES

TEACHING
IN HIGHER EDUCATION
(3 US CREDITS = 6 ECTS)
Syllabus June-July 2016
I. General information:
Facilitators:
Assoc. Prof. Konstantinos Giakoumis, Ph.D.; Enila Cenko, Ph.D.
Office:
Conference Room
Phone:
+ 355 4 45 12345
Email:
kgiakoumis@unyt.edu.al
Office hours:
Fridays, 15.00-17.00
Class Schedule:
Fri., 17.30-20.30, Sat., 09.00-12.00 (from June 03 July 8, 2016)
TURNITIN Class ID: 12798821
Enrollment Password: THE@3
II. Prerequisite courses:

Graduate level course work; some teaching experience is desired.

III. Recommended textbook: This course is designed as to expose the students to a variety of
teaching tools, techniques and methods; therefore there is no one specific textbook for the
course, however the following are recommended as guide.
Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for
College Teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. This is the sourcebook for
methods to find out what your students are thinking, what they understand and what they dont, and how they
feel about your class.

Astin, Alexander (1993). What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Bain, K. (2004), What the Best College Teachers Do, Boston: Harvard UP.
Barkley, E.F. (2010), Student Engagement Techniques. A Handbook for College Faculty, San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Christensen, C. R. (1987). Teaching and the Case Method. Harvard Business School: Publishing
Division. This is a good review of the case discussion method.
Eble, K. E. (1976). The Craft of Teaching: A Guide to Mastering the Professors Art. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Eble reflects on the profession of teaching and gives
practical advice for improving teaching effectiveness.
1|Page

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

Erickson, B. L., & Strommer, D. W. (1991). Teaching College Freshmen. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers. Erickson and Strommer discuss good teaching in general and many of the
issues which are particular to first-year students and their adjustment from high school to
college.
Fink, L.D. (2003), Creating Significant Learning Experiences. An Integrated Approach to
Designing College Courses, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Furmann, B. S., & Grasha, A. F. (1983). A Practical Handbook for College Teachers. Boston:
Little, Brown and Company. Both a review of the research on teaching and very concrete
suggestions for improvement.
Gullette, M. M. (Ed.). (1982). The Art and Craft of Teaching. Cambridge, MA: HarvardDanforth Center for Teaching and Learning. In this collection of eight essays, experienced
teachers provide insights and practical advice for beginning teachers.
Grasha, Anthony (1996). Teaching with Style. Alliance Publishers. Outstanding resource.
Comprehensive, easy to use. This book is full of practical ideas on teaching and
explanations of how to. It also does a good job of linking concrete assignments or
exercises to the theories that support them.
Gross-Davis, B. (2009), Tools for Teaching, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Barbara Gross-Davis
presents excellent practical advice on college teaching, suggests several innovative
teaching strategies, and provides an overview of the research on many teaching issues.
Grunert O-Brien, J.M., Millis, B.J., Cohen, M.W. (2008), The Course Syllabus. An LearningCentered Approach, 2nd edition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, J. D. (1993). Instructional Media and the New
Technologies of Instruction (4th ed.). New York: Wiley. The book on choosing and using
media and technology in the classroom.
Hill, W. F. (1969). Learning through Discussion (Rev. ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications. Especially helpful for learning how to structure and lead discussion sessions
effectively.
Indiana University Bloomington, Dean of the Faculties Office. (1986). Evaluation of Teaching
Handbook. Bloomington, IN: Author. A good starting place on teaching evaluation. Why
to do it and different sources: students, peers, self.
Kember, D., Ginns, P. (2012), Evaluating Teaching and Learning. A Practical Handbook for
Colleges, Universities and the Scholarship of Teaching, London: Routledge.
Lang J.M. (2008), On Course. A Week-by-Week Guide to Your First Semester of College
Teaching, Boston: Harvard University Press.
Lewis, K. G. (1993). The TA Experience: Preparing for Multiple Roles. Stillwater, OK: New
Forums Press. The proceedings of the third national conference on the training and
employments of graduate teaching assistants, this volume contains many useful articles
about graduate students teaching.
Lowman, J. (1984). Mastering the Techniques of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Publishers. An excellent introduction to university teaching. He stresses skills needed to
both present material and establish rapport with students.
McKeachie, W. J. (Ed.). (1999). Teaching Tips: A Guidebook for the Beginning College Teacher
(10th ed.). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.
Morganroth Gullette, M. [ed.] (1984), The Art and Craft of Teaching, Boston: Harvard
University Press.
Sarkisian, E. (1990). Teaching American Students: A Guide for International Faculty and
Teaching Fellows. Harvard University, Danforth Center for Teaching and Learning. A
2|Page

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

clear, brief treatment of the assumptions which shape the American university classroom
and strategies for international teachers.
Seldin, Peter (2010). The Teaching Portfolio (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Seldin et al.
gives practical advice with lots of examples for creating a teaching portfolio.
Stevens, D.D., Levi, A.J. (2013), Introduction to Rubrics. An Assessment Tool to Save Grading
Time, Convey Effective Feedback, and Promote Student Learning, Stelring, VA: Stylus.
IV. Electronic resources:
1. Harvard Universitys Derek Bok Center for Teaching & Learning: A fine distillation of
years-long experience, research and experimentation the Centers website contains a
multitude of resources and advices for doctoral students and junior faculty.
http://bokcenter.harvard.edu/
2. Mentoring, Teaching and Learning at SUNY / ESC: The Center for Mentoring and
Learning works to enhance knowledge, deepen understanding and strengthen practical
skills of a community of learners and learner facilitators at SUNY/ESC. It provides
ongoing development with up-to-date scholarship and practice, information-sharing and a
platform for dialogue and collaboration. http://cml.esc.edu/#?q=home
3. University of Kansas, Center for Teaching Excellence: An fantastic open-source website
to support young and experienced teachers develop, improve and advance teaching
practices. https://cte.ku.edu/teaching-ku
V. Course description: This course is designed to equip doctoral fellows with the foundational
pedagogical knowledge and tools to become responsive and reflective teachers in higher
education. By modeling a variety of active learning strategies (cooperative learning, interactive
lecturing, discussion, critical thinking, role-playing, case-studies and problem-solving), we shall
facilitate exchanges on educational theory and practice. Teaching practice, discussion and
analysis shall propel students to explore and develop teaching skills that promote active and
transformational learning and appreciate how teachers choices influence student learning.
Doctoral fellows are to be immersed in a transformational learning environment. Anticipating
this, fellows should be prepared to be challenged, question assumptions and reflect on what they
learn beyond disciplinary boxes. Students are guided to appreciate the importance of reflective
teaching, the elements of course and curriculum design and the roles of teaching, learning,
academic teachers and students as agents of the learning paradigm.
VI. Course objectives: By the end of the course students should demonstrate critical ability in:
Articulating a statement of teaching philosophy.
Developing a course syllabus with critical awareness of the relations between the
courses significance to the curriculum, course content, course objectives and
methodology.
Applying active and transformational learning and practice strategies in designing lesson
plans.
Implementing lesson plans in a variety of active and transformational teaching methods.
Analyzing, contextualizing and managing classroom environments in relation to student
learning and teaching styles.
3|Page

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

Utilizing technology in classroom with critical awareness of how it can enhance or

detract from student learning.
Designing, applying, deciphering and contextualizing the results of formative and
summative assessment tools measuring quality of student learning and teaching
effectiveness.
Conducting and interpreting the findings of various teaching and learning quality
assurance instruments, as well as utilizing them for faculty development.
Appreciating the processes of researching, consulting, developing and implementing new
curriculum.
Delivering a higher education course with comfort and self-confidence.

VII. Grading and Assessment:

This is NOT a test-based-assessment course; however, assessment will be conducted on
preparedness for a course and lecturing practice. Classroom discussion of topics and methods of
teaching is essential for the successful completion of this course. Class participation is not
merely attendance; rather, it is active involvement and thoughtful contributions to the discussion
of selective themes.
Assessment Components: All written assignments should be submitted by TURNITIN.
1. An Autobiography of yourself as a learner: To help us get to better know one another,
promote a community of learners, every doctoral fellow shall submit by the start of the
course a personal autobiography of yourself as learner, focusing on your personal growth
as a learner. Dead-Line: June 10, 2016.
2. Teaching, Observation and Faculty Assessment: The activities below aim at developing
skills as teachers and peer-evaluators and are to be conducted in the course of the term.
a. In-Class Micro-Teaching Assignment with Feedback.
b. Out-of-Class peer observation.
3. Teaching Portfolio: The assignments below will be drafted throughout the course and
shall be submitted at the end of the course in the form of a polished teaching portfolio:
a. Teaching Philosophy with a critical, reflective commentary of its foundations.
b. A Course Syllabus with Rationale.
c. A class plan designed on the basis of the syllabus with a critical annotation on the
teaching method appropriate to it.
d. A sample testing and assessment tool with model answers, marking benchmarks
and feedback rubrics.
4. In-Class Participation: In view of the centrality of dialogue in the teaching and learning
process, fellows are required to actively engage in group-work, activities and in-class
discussions. Your participation also helps me pace the course in line with learners needs.
Grade Weights are as follows:
1. Autobiography of yourself as learner.
2. Teaching Philosophy with a critical, reflective commentary of
its foundations.
3. A Course Syllabus with Rationale.
4|Page

10%
10%
20%

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

4. A class plan designed on the basis of the syllabus with a critical

annotation on the teaching method appropriate to it.
5. A sample testing and assessment tool with model answers,
marking benchmarks and feedback rubrics.
6. Out-of-Class peer observation.
7. Teaching Portfolio
8. In-Class participation.

Grade Breakdowns are as follows:

A
96-100%
A90-95%
B+
87-89%
B
83-86%
B80-82%
C+
77-79%

C
CD+
D
DF

10%
20%
10%
10%
10%

73-76%
70-72%
67-69%
63-66%
60-62%
0-59%

VIII. General Policies:

Class attendance is mandatory.
The courses credit load assumes that students are spending two to three hours studying for every
one hour in class. For this session that means that you should expect to study for about 6-9 hours
a week outside of the class time.
I reserve the right to make changes in the syllabus that do not affect the total amount of work
required by students.
Cellular phones should be off during class. On no account should students answer their cell
phones during class, or leave the room to do so unless you clear it with the professor before class
starts.
I encourage students to work together and help each other out as much as possible in terms of
discussing and reviewing the material. However, each student must turn in or complete in class
work they have completed originally for this class. Plagiarism involves passing the work of
others as your own or any other form of academic dishonesty such as copying from another
student in class or submitting the same paper to two different classes. UNYTs Honour Code will
be strictly applied in cases of plagiarism or cheating.

IX. Tentative schedule:

SESSION/DATE
CONTENT

I / 03.06.2016

Reading Assignment
INTRODUCTION
Course Content, Expectations and Requirements.
The concepts of teaching & learning. Learning Handouts.
experiences and Teaching Philosophy.

5|Page

Assignment Due

T E A C H I N G

II / 11.06.2016

III / 18.06.2016

IV / 04.06.2016

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

Developing Self-Reflective Learning Attitude.

MODULE 1
Research and Theory on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education
The concepts of motivation & learning; Bain 2004, 22-47; Barkley
theories of learning and synergies between 2010, 9-38; Grasha 1996,
motivation and learning.
91-147 [Reader pages: 1100].
Cont.
>>
MODULE 2
Course Design and Teaching Methods
1
Designing the curriculum: mapping the McKimm ; Smith, M. K.
process; the centrality of curricular aims and (2000). Curriculum theory and
practice. The Encyclopedia of
objectives.
Informal Education2; Guide to
Curriculum Development3;
Howard J. Curriculum
Development4. [Handouts].

IV / 10.06.2016

Designing the course: mapping the process; McKeachie 1999, 9-20;

the centrality of course purpose, goals and Grunert OBrien 2008, 49objectives.
63; Fink 2003, 60-154;
Gross-Davis 2009, 3-36.
[Reader pages: 101-192].
V / 17.06.2016
Designing the syllabus.
Grunert OBrien
VI / 24.06.2016 Designing the lesson plan: lesson objectives, Fink 2003, 102-154;
the function of content, selection of teaching Lowman 1984, 129-157,
aids, planning learning activities, utilizing 193-224. [Reader pages:
feedback.
193-226].
VII / 25.06.2016 Teaching Method:
effective lecturing, Fink 2003, 155-195;
cooperative & collaborative learning, leading Gross-Davies 2009, 95discussions, peer-to-peer learning, active and 132; Lang 2008, 63-126;
activity-based learning.
Morganroth Gullette 1984,
1-10, 25-48. [Reader
pages: 227-320].
VIII / 01.07.20136 Assessment
of
Learning:
designing Angelo 1993; Stevens
assignments, tests and exams, feedback and 2013; Kember 2012; Bain
rubrics.
2004, 150-172;
Morganroth 1984, 103115; McKeachie 1999, 74103, 113-139; Gross
Davis 2009, 343-429;
Lowman 1984, 251-285.
[Reader pages: 321-432].
1

http://www.faculty.londondeanery.ac.uk/e-learning/setting-learningobjectives/Curriculum_design_and_development.pdf
2
http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm
3
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/curriculum/currgde_generic/curguide_generic.pdf
4
http://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.cae/files/media_assets/Howard.pdf

6|Page

Autobiography.

Course syllabus with

rationale.

Lesson plan.

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

IX / 02.07.2016

E D U C A T I O N

Assessment of Teaching, for Teaching & McKeachie 1999, 331Learning Improvement and Quality Assurance. 359; Kember 2012, 85-99;
Gross Davis 2009, 459488 [Reader pages: 433470].
MODULE 3
Reflective Observation and Practice
X / 15.07.2016
The Art of Discussion Leading and Lecture. McKeachie 1999, 30-35;
Student Workshop 1: Reading as Active Gross Davis 2006, 55-94,
Learning. Student Workshop 2: Managing the 133-178. [Reader pages:
challenging class & student.
471-517].
XI / 16.07.2016 Student Workshop 3: Technology as a Morganroth 1984, 88-102;
Teaching Aid: Potential & Limitations. Gross Davis 2006, 431Student Workshop 4: Teaching essay-writing 458; Lowman 1984, 287in liberal arts curriculum.
312. [Reader pages: 518553].
In-Class Teaching Practice & Discussion
XII / 22.07.2016 In-Class Teaching Practice & Discussion
Seldin et al. 2010

GOOD LUCK

7|Page

Sample testing and

assessment tool

Statement of
Teaching Philosophy

Out-of-Class PeerObservation

Teaching Portfolio

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF YOU AS A LEARNER

Assignment 1
DESCRIPTION: To help us get to better know one another, promote a community of learners,
every doctoral fellow shall submit by the start of the course a personal autobiography of yourself
as learner, focusing on your personal growth as a learner. Dead-Line: June 10, 2016.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Developing critical awareness of the processes and content of critical and significant
learning.
Explore the expediency of different types of learning in real life.
Deliberate on and appreciate cultural elements impacting the quality and
meaningfulness of learning.
Critically reflect on how learning in life transforms into life-long learning process.

DIRECTIONS: Please write a brief personal autobiography of yourself as learner. The length of
the document should be ca. 1,000 words (2-3 pages). Please be prepared to share your
autobiography in class. In developing this document please bear in mind that, although a
descriptive part following chronological order might be inevitable, critical aspects related to the
type of learning (e.g. traditional / teacher oriented, experiential, active, transformational, etc.)
that proved more efficient in your case are very important. Please find below a list of questions
that could guide you in your reflection, prior to drafting your autobiography:
What were the moments / learning experiences we felt more engaged or distanced?
What does being an adult learner mean to you?
How have your learning experiences shaped your identity as adult learners?
What boundaries you had to cross and transformations to undergo to become an adult
learner?
What helped you in this process?
RESOURCES:
1. Droegkamp J. [ed.] (2013), Liberal Studies Handbook for Students.
http://www.uis.edu/liberalstudies/wpcontent/uploads/sites/39/2013/03/LIS_Handbook_2013.pdf, accessed in June 3,
2016.
2. Plakhotnik M.S., Delgado A., Seepersad R. (2006), Autobiographical Exploration
of Selves as Adult Learners and Adult Educators, paper presented at the
Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community
Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, October 4-6, 2006.

8|Page

Droegkamp.pdf

Plakhotnik et al..pdf

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

COURSE SYLLABUS WITH RATIONALE

Assignment 2
DESCRIPTION: The SAMPLE course syllabus with its rationale will be drafted by the deadline indicated below and can be revised and edited for resubmission at the end of the course,
once students will be asked to submit a neat and polished teaching portfolio. Dead-Line: June
24, 2016.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Developing critical awareness of the relations between the courses significance to the
curriculum, course content, course objectives and methodology in the context of a course
syllabus.
Exploring active and transformational learning and practice strategies in designing a
course syllabus.
Planning to adjust to classroom environments in relation to student learning and teaching
styles.
Explore the uses of technology in classroom with critical awareness of how it can
enhance or detract from student learning.
Reflecting on the most appropriate formative and summative assessment tools measuring
quality of student learning and teaching effectiveness.
Developing critical awareness of the processes and content of critical and significant
learning.
Exploring the expediency of different types of learning in real life.
Deliberating on and appreciating cultural elements imparting the quality and
meaningfulness of learning.
Critically reflect on how learning in life transforms into life-long learning process.

DIRECTIONS:
1. Please write a detailed and rationalized syllabus to a real or hypothetical course you
wish to deliver in your academic careers. The syllabus should contain as many
constituent sections as you rationalize to be appropriate for the nature and the level of
the course, as well as the particularities of the anticipated group of students to attend it
and the institution where this course would be delivered.

2. The syllabus should be appended with a detailed rationale of your syllabus critical
constituents at the length of ca. 1,200-1,500 words (3-5 pages). While you may refer to
theory on teaching and learning, please remember that a syllabus is a rather
personalized instrument, whereby a faculty member, while inducing students to matters
of critical learning in the discipline, unveils personal convictions on teaching and
learning and utilizes own strengths.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA: I regret I will be unable to assess the substantial part of your
syllabus, as I am a not an expert in your disciplines. This is not necessarily bad as you can
9|Page

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

thus get feedback from a non-expert who will focus on what subject-experts more often than not
pay little attention to: pedagogy!
The 20% of the assignments weight towards your final grade will be halved between your
syllabus and its rationale. In specific:
A. Course Syllabus: 10 points.
Criterion
1. The syllabus and its constituents present a logically flowing structure.
The structure is both easily discernible and logical.
The structure is logical but not easily discernible.
The structure is illogical.
2. The syllabus is sufficiently detailed without being overloaded.
The syllabus constituents are sufficiently detailed with all what
matters to students without overloading it with excess and
unnecessary details that make it overloaded.
The content is somewhere sufficiently and elsewhere
insufficiently detailed and/or appears somewhat overloaded.
Content is cumbersome.
3. Clarity of expression.
The set of ideas constitutes comprehensible statements.
Clarity of expression may somewhat fail.
The syllabus is incomprehensible.
4. Engaging and inviting in a personalized manner.
The syllabus emanates a professional and still personalized air of
interpersonal communication.
The syllabus is somewhat stylized and/or schematized.
The syllabus is disengaging or plagiarized.
5. User-Friendly formatting.
The syllabus is properly typed and spaced with justified margins.
Syllabus not quite formatted in a user-friendly manner.
The syllabus formatting is unattractive.

Points
0-2
2
1
0
0-2
2

1
0
0-2
2
1
0
0-2
2
1
0
0-2
2
1
0
TOTAL: __

B. Syllabus Rationale: 10 points.

Descriptive Criterion
Point Value
The syllabus rationale infers to both theory and self-reflection on learning leading
towards a consciously rationalized teaching philosophy, selection of appropriate
teaching methods congruent to cautiously identified circumstantial factors
conditioning course delivery. The choice and exposition of SMART learning 8-10
objectives focus on the learner and drive the courses assessment regime.
Evidence that authorship of the syllabus has been fully assumed by its developer
on account of holistic justification of the choices made therein.
10 | P a g e

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

The syllabus rationale makes loose reference to theory and self-reflection on

learning, thereby revealing partly consciously and partly unconsciously
rationalized teaching philosophy. The selection of teaching methods seems
haphazard, barely taking delivery exigencies under consideration. The choice and
exposition of learning objectives may superfluously seem to focus on the learner
and drive the courses assessment regime, but appear to be the outcome of only
partial consideration of circumstantial factors. The developer of the syllabus does
not assume full authorship of work.
The syllabus rationale is based on unconscious or stereotyped ideas about
learning being somehow vaguely associated with teaching philosophy. The
selection of teaching methods appears rather unjustified even if some
circumstantial factors conditioning course delivery are identified. The choice and
exposition of learning objectives focus mechanically on the learner or incline
towards the teacher and are disassociated with the courses assessment regime.
Scarce evidence of the syllabus authorship.
The syllabus rationale is an amalgamation of heterogeneous and not rationalized
ideas on learning. The selection of teaching methods is haphazard and no
circumstantial factors imparting course delivery are identified. The choice and
exposition of learning objectives are rather teacher-oriented, not SMART and
disassociated with the courses assessment regime. Evidence of minor plagiarism
offence.

5-7

2-4

0-1

TOTAL: __
GRAND TOTAL

/ 20

ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK
1.
2.
3.
4.

Syllabus Constituents:
Sufficiency of Details:
Clarity:
Student-friendliness:

GENERIC FEEDBACK
RESOURCES:
1. Grunert O-Brien, J.M., Millis, B.J., Cohen, M.W. (2008), The Course Syllabus. An LearningCentered Approach, 2nd edition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2. Cf. our Course Pack on different aspects of the syllabus.

GOOD LUCK!

11 | P a g e

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

LESSON PLAN AND RATIONALE OF TEACHING METHOD

Assignment 3
DESCRIPTION: Using the syllabus you have submitted as a compass, please select one of the
sessions indicated therein to develop a particular lesson plan. A lesson plan is a document that
sets out how a learning session will be conducted and the rationale behind this. Dead-Line: June
25, 2016.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Translating a teaching philosophy into teaching and learning practice.

Developing critical awareness of the relations between the lesson plan and the course
syllabus.
Designing active and transformational learning strategies.
Planning to adjust to classroom environments in relation to student learning and teaching
styles.
Explore the uses of technology in classroom with critical awareness of how it can
enhance or detract from student learning.
Identifying the most appropriate formative and summative assessment tools measuring
quality of student learning and teaching effectiveness at the smallest unit of teaching and
learning.
Utilizing critical awareness of the processes and content of critical and significant
learning to draft a lesson plan.

STRUCTURE AND POINT VALUE OF A LESSON PLAN

TOTAL: 10 POINTS
1. TOPIC AND LESSONS DURATION: Here we write the topic of the lesson and the time allocated
for it. They both need to correspond to your course syllabus ( point).
2. LESSONS LEARNING OBJECTIVES: Course objectives recorded in the syllabus and lesson
objectives need to mutually feed each other (1 point).
3. TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS: We indicate here what tools we will need to conduct the lesson.
The selection of learning resources and teaching method(s) will need to adjust to circumstantial
factors that also relate to the available technology ( point).
4. SELECTION OF LEARNING RESOURCES: We need to indicate what resources we will need to
conduct the lesson (e.g. hand-outs, workbook, textbook, etc.) ( point).
5. TEACHING METHODS: We need to specify which teaching method or methods we will use here
(2 points).
6. RATIONALE: I would like you to rationalize the choice of teaching method(s) in an appendix
arguing why the selected method is more appropriate than others to address circumstantial
factors, the particular learning objectives of the lesson and the particularities of the student
group we are to teach to (2 points).
7. LEARNING ACTIVITIES: Please detail here the learning activities you selected pursuant to the
choice of the teaching method. Pay requisite attention, among others, to the activity with which
you will start the lesson (through which you expect to stimulate your students interest on it),

12 | P a g e

T E A C H I N G

8.

9.
10.
11.

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

activities planned for what in our course-pack is cited as the muddiest point of the lesson, as
well as how, at the end of the lesson, the learning objectives will be recapitulated ( point).
Mini-Lesson-Assessment Tools: Please indicate what (formative or summative) assessment tools
you will be using to assess whether or not the lessons learning objectives have been
successfully accomplished. This will help you determine how to adjust the following lessons
plan to repeat, reinforce or re-introduce learning objectives which at the end of the current
lesson were found to be unaccomplished (1 point).
Time Allocation Plan: Please detail here the flow of the lesson indicating the time you intend to
spend for each of its components (1 point).
Home Assignments: Please write what homework assignments you will be requiring your
students to do and why (i.e. indicating their learning objectives) ( point).
Contingencies: Please indicate here alternative plans to address the contingencies you can
anticipate might occur during the lesson ( point).

ASSESSMENT GRID OF A LESSON PLAN

Name & Surname:
#
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION AND POINT VALUE

TOPIC AND LESSONS DURATION: ( point).
LESSONS LEARNING OBJECTIVES: (1 point).
TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS: ( point).
SELECTION OF LEARNING RESOURCES: ( point).
TEACHING METHODS: (2 points).
RATIONALE: (2 points).
LEARNING ACTIVITIES: ( point).
Mini-Lesson-Assessment Tools: (1 point).
Time Allocation Plan: (1 point).
Home Assignments: ( point).
Contingencies: ( point).

Course:
GRADE

TOTAL: __

13 | P a g e

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

SAMPLE TESTING AND ASSESSMENT TOOL WITH MODEL ANSWERS,

GRADING BENCHMARK AND FEEDBACK RUBRIC
DESCRIPTION: Based on the syllabus and the sample lesson plan(s) you have developed, craft
a concrete sample testing and assessment tool rationalizing what there is to be tested and why the
tools is more appropriate than others to test it. The assessment tool needs to be accompanied by
grading guidelines with marking benchmarks, as well as an assessment grid convertible to a
feedback rubric. As an appendix to this assessment you should argue why the chosen testing and
assessment tool is more appropriate than others for the scope and learning objectives of the
course. Dead-Line: July 02, 2016.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES TO BE TESTED:

Translating course objectives into testing and assessment tools.

Developing critical awareness of the relations between the course syllabus, the lesson
plan and the courses assessment regime.
Planning to adjust assessment to classroom environments in relation to student learning
and teaching styles.
Designing, applying and contextualizing formative and summative assessment tools
measuring quality of student learning and teaching effectiveness.
Enhancing critical awareness of the processes and content of assessing critical and
significant learning.

STRUCTURE AND POINT VALUE OF A TESTING AND ASSESSMENT TOOL

TOTAL: 20 POINTS
1. What is there to be tested? Targeting testing and assessment: You are expected to record the
learning objectives to be assessed referring to your course syllabus objectives (4 points).
2. THE TEST: Please write the concrete test you intend to administer (1 point).
3. GRADING GUIDELINES AND MARKING BECHMARKS: Please write how a marker other than you
should assess student scripts, indicating what points should be awarded for each critical
response to the tests questions. Please be as detailed as possible, anticipating potential student
responses. (4 point).
4. Assessment Grid Convertible to a Feedback Rubric: Prepare a grid to tally the points
accumulated by students in a form that can be communicated to students so that they get a
sense of why they got the grade they were awarded and how their scores could have been
higher (4 point).
5. Rationale on the Appropriateness of the chosen testing and assessment tool for the specific
course: In an appendix to your assessment tool, please argue why this is more appropriate than
other tools (4 points).

14 | P a g e

T E A C H I N G

I N

H I G H E R

E D U C A T I O N

ASSESSMENT GRID OF TESTING AND ASSESSMENT TOOL

COURSE: Teaching in Higher Education
#
A.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION AND POINT VALUE

TESTING AND ASSESSMENT TARGETS.
1.
2.
3.
4.

B.

Up to 4 pts.

Completeness: up to 1 point. ____________________________________________________

Clarity: up to 1 point. ___________________________________________________________
Integration to syllabus: up to 1 point. ______________________________________________
Rationalization (Does the assessment make sense at glance?): up to 1 point. ______________

Up to 4 pts.

Completeness: up to 1 point. ____________________________________________________

Clarity: up to 1 point. ___________________________________________________________
Integration to syllabus: up to 1 point. ______________________________________________
Rationalization (Does the assessment make sense at glance?): up to 1 point. ______________

Assessment Grid Convertible to a Feedback Rubric:

1.
2.
3.
4.

E.

Completeness: up to 1 point. ____________________________________________________

Clarity: up to 1 point. ___________________________________________________________
Integration to syllabus: up to 1 point. ______________________________________________
Rationalization (Does the assessment make sense at glance?): up to 1 point. ______________

GRADING GUIDELINES AND MARKING BECHMARKS:

1.
2.
3.
4.

D.

GRADE
Up to 4 pts.

THE TEST.
1.
2.
3.
4.

C.

Student:

Up to 4 pts.

Completeness: up to 1 point. ____________________________________________________

Clarity: up to 1 point. ___________________________________________________________
Integration to syllabus: up to 1 point. ______________________________________________
Rationalization (Does the assessment make sense at glance?): up to 1 point. ______________

Rationale on the Appropriateness of the chosen testing and assessment tool for the specific
course:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Up to 4 pts.

Completeness: up to 1 point. ____________________________________________________

Clarity: up to 1 point. ___________________________________________________________
Integration to syllabus: up to 1 point. ______________________________________________
Rationalization (Does the assessment make sense at glance?): up to 1 point. ______________

TOTAL: __

15 | P a g e