Report on Enhancements in TA Training and Supervision

Charge to the Graduate and Professional Educational Policy Committee : Monitor the implementation of the new initiatives to improve the training and supervision of TA’s and PTL’s.  Seek to provide ongoing input to Dean Holly Smith with regard to the implementation of the new initiatives.

Introduction

For the past several years, various components of the University have been responding to the concerns of undergraduate students regarding the  preparation of teaching assistants, and in particular international TA’s, to teach in the classroom.  The most recent report by an Ad Hoc Committee on TA/PTL instruction was released in Spring 2001 and presented specific recommendations to enhance TA training and English as a Second Language testing and instruction.  As a result of these recommendations,  Vice-President Seneca made funds available starting in the 2001-02 academic year to enhance ESL testing and education and to enhance TA training in New Brunswick.  During the 2001-02 academic year, the New Brunswick Faculty Council Committee on Graduate and Professional Educational Policy met with staff of the ESL program and Vice-Dean Ziva Galili and Associate Dean Barbara Bender of the Graduate School – New Brunswick to learn how these funds were used and to help to assess the effectiveness of these resources in enhancing TA training and ESL preparation of graduate student instructors.

Enhancements to ESL Testing and Education

Resources were first provided to the ESL program to enable more efficient ESL testing and better ESL instruction of International TA’s (ITA’s).

As of January 2002, after a pilot period in Fall 2001,  all initial ESL testing will be done via the SPEAK test, developed by Educational Testing Service.  SPEAK is a standardized 20-minute test, administered via audiotape.  Two ETS-trained ESL instructors rate the tests of each individual, giving the students scores ranging from 20 (no effective communication) to 60 (communication almost always effective) on 12 questions.  The scores from each student are averaged by each instructor and the two instructors’ scores are averaged for a final score, which is used to determine placement in ESL courses and whether the student is recommended to teach in the classroom.  Students with scores above 45 can teach in the classroom (but may still need to take ESL classes); students with scores below 45 may not teach in the classroom.  Students with the borderline score of 45 are re-examined by an ESL instructor and videotaped.  Graduate Program Directors may also request that students with a SPEAK score of 40 be re-tested via videotape.  The SPEAK test is administered several times before the beginning of the semester, as well as during the first week of classes.  Currently, students register for the SPEAK test via e-mail and are given information on how their English is assessed and how to practice for the test on the ETS web-site.  Plans for the Spring 2002 semester were to have a secure web-site operational to handle registration for the SPEAK test, as well as to answer frequently asked questions.  The hope was that with the SPEAK test more ITA’s could be tested, and more could be tested before the first week of classes.

The other enhancement to ESL education of ITA’s is in the ITA ESL courses themselves.  An international student, initially coded not to teach in the classroom, would start with ITA Phonology and, if necessary, then take ITA Language Skills, and finally an Independent Study in English Speaking and Listening.  The first two are 3 E-credit courses which now meet for 4.5 hours each week and include additional discussions of the culture in the U.S. classroom, as well as additional advice on how to present information to a class.  The Independent study is a 1.5 E-credit course and the student is required to spend a minimum of two hours per week in the language laboratory and meet twice with the ITA coordinator to assess progress.  At the end of each semester, each ITA is given a video assessment, which is reviewed by at least two ESL faculty members, two undergraduate students, and at least one outside faculty member, to determine placement in additional ESL courses and whether the ITA can teach in the classroom.

Previously, initial ESL testing was only done via videotaping about 150 students each year (mostly at the beginning of the Fall term), a very labor-intensive, time-consuming procedure.  Only current, new ITA’s could be tested and placed in ITA ESL courses.  With the SPEAK test, which is less labor intensive, as well as with the enhanced resources for ESL efforts, international graduate students who would become ITA’s in future semesters (e.g., students currently on fellowships) could be tested and begin ITA ESL classes before their TA appointments would begin, and therefore, be better prepared to assume their TA responsibilities effectively.  In the past, the ESL courses met for only 3 hours/week.  The enhanced resources for ESL education have enabled the classroom time to be increased by 50%, as well as for future ITA’s to be included in these courses.

These new ESL testing procedures and enhanced instruction were only being implemented in the Spring 2002 term.  Therefore, the effectiveness of these changes to the ESL program in enhancing TA training, as well as any need for additional efforts or resources,  should be re-examined next year, after we have had more experience.

Enhancements to TA Training and Supervision – Discipline Specific

Funds were also made available to enhance the department-specific training and supervision of teaching assistants.  In November 2001 funds were announced for which departments could apply for resources to enhance TA training and supervision.  These funds were restricted to salary compensation ($1500/semester) for Head TA’s and research funds ($1000/year) to compensate Faculty Coordinators of the training and monitoring of departmental TA’s. The call for proposals indicated that Head TA’s could only be appointed in courses that included instruction by 8 or more TA’s or PTL’s and Faculty Coordinators were restricted to departments or graduate programs with 10 or more TA’s.  In November 2001 about 16 proposals were received for this initial opportunity to start in Spring 2002.  In spite of the short time scale for the initial proposals, and the restrictive eligibility requirements, most of the moneys available in the first year were distributed to programs.

The concern expressed by all involved (the administration at the Graduate School and anecdotally from programs and departments) was that the funds were too restricted.  The programs/departments which applied for these resources tended to be the ones which were already doing better than their peers, rather than the ones felt to have the greatest need to enhance TA instruction.  The resources to encourage Faculty Coordinators were not sufficiently attractive to enlist additional faculty in this role.  This is especially true in the sciences where a $1000/year enhancement to a research account is not attractive.  Smaller departments may have felt that they were not eligible to apply for Faculty Coordinators, because they did not have enough TA’s, or were not eligible to apply for Head TA’s since few courses had at least 8 TA’s in a course.  Even in larger departments, not all courses have a sufficient number of instructors to qualify for head TA’s, although the same material is covered in several related courses. Examples include the Gateway courses, or courses for students at risk, where the same material is covered as in the main stream course, but neither course could meet the 8 TA threshold, although the combined course could.  Although the requirements outlined for Head TA and Faculty Coordinator funds in the call for proposals were specific, innovative proposals which requested funds to enhance TA training in the department, such as hosting a seminar series on teaching led by a Faculty coordinator, were funded.

The funds provided to enhance TA training and supervision in the disciplines should be made as flexible as possible, to encourage innovative proposals to use these funds to meet the needs of a specific program/department.  In particular, TA Coordinator funds should not be restricted to research accounts of faculty members.  To encourage faculty to take an active role in enhancing TA training and supervision, proposals to enable teaching relief of faculty could be submitted.  While this could take faculty out of the undergraduate classroom, it encourages faculty to play a more active role in graduate education, especially in fields where careers in the academy are not the normal career path.

A final guideline was that TA’s and PTL’s should be evaluated at mid-semester, as well as at the end of the semester through regular University procedures.  It was not clear if this guideline was implemented.  It may be appropriate for working groups of graduate and undergraduate program directors in related disciplines to meet to exchange ideas on how to implement a mid-semester evaluation.

No funds were  provided to enhance PTL instruction.  It is important that enhancements in ESL testing and education and TA training and supervision be extended to graduate students who serve as PTL’s.  The undergraduates in the classroom cannot distinguish between PTL’s and TA’s.  About 100 graduate students currently enrolled at Rutgers are hired as PTL’s each semester; an additional 150 PTL’s each semester were previously enrolled as graduate students.

No funds were provided for additional TA lines.  Additional TA positions would allow for smaller class sizes and lessen the reliance on PTL’s for instruction.  Smaller class sizes are especially important if many of the student-centered innovations in instruction are to be realized.

Enhancements to TA Training – Campus Wide

About 300 graduate students each year participate in the initial orientation of new TA’s in August.  In addition to general sessions, the new TA’s attend workshops on testing, grading, and teaching, specific to their discipline.

Recently the Graduate School – New Brunswick has enhanced the activities for continuing TA’s, beyond the annual orientation for new TA’s.  These include a non-credit course on Introduction to College Teaching (voluntarily taught by GSNB staff) and a 5-session Professional Development Series for International TA’s, for which students receive a certificate after participating in 4 of the sessions.  In addition, videotaping of TA’s in the classroom is available.

While these campus-wide activities are important and should be fully funded, much of the TA training can only be done within the discipline and the new funds to enhance these efforts are welcomed.

Recommendations

1.	The NBFC Committee on Graduate and Professional Educational Policy should continue to examine the effectiveness of the enhancements in ESL testing and education and TA training and supervision, and report to the NBFC at the end of 2002-03 academic year.
2.	The resources available to enhance TA training and supervision in the disciplines should be flexible, enabling innovative proposals to use these funds, with minimal restrictions imposed on how the funds could be used.  The funding of the proposals should be determined by the potential effectiveness in enhancing TA training and supervision in the specific discipline, or more broadly on campus.
3.	The GSNB at the end of the 2002-03 academic year should organize a best-practices session of Graduate and Undergraduate Program Directors to share the results from these new initiatives in discipline-specific TA training.
4.	Resources should be identified to extend training in instruction and ESL testing to PTL’s who are graduate students.
5.	Resources should be identified to increase the number of TA’s, as recommended in many previous reports.