Premium
The Effect of Formal Training on Undergraduate Teaching Assistants' Performance and Views Towards Teaching
Author(s) -
Smith Theodore C.,
Taylor Melissa,
Reynolds Amberly,
Taboas Charity,
Husmann Polly,
O'Loughlin Valerie
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.2018.32.1_supplement.507.5
Subject(s) - session (web analytics) , medical education , psychology , academic institution , presentation (obstetrics) , graduate students , teaching assistant , post graduate , significant difference , medicine , computer science , surgery , library science , world wide web
Undergraduate teaching assistants (UTAs) hold a vital role in the undergraduate anatomy laboratory setting. However, at our institution, only graduate teaching assistants receive formal training in pedagogical techniques. This project addresses the lack of formal training and its effect on UTAs' performance and attitudes towards teaching. UTAs completed a 2‐hour, in‐person training session before the start of the semester that covered presentation skills, scaffolding techniques, professionalism, and classroom management. The participants completed a pre‐ and post‐training session survey and an end‐of‐semester survey. In addition, evaluations of each UTA were completed by their respective graduate counterpart. Early results show that all participants (n = 14) believed a training session to be necessary and all reported that their expectations were met. A paired samples t‐test was conducted to compare the trainees' perspective on their UTA or graduate instructors' friendliness, knowledge, contribution to their success in the course and their role in the trainee applying to be a UTA. A significant difference was found in the knowledge factor (UTA (M=4.43, SD=.756); Graduate (M=4.93, SD=.267)); t(13)=−2.876, p = .013. The contribution to success factor (UTA (M=3.50, SD=.941); Graduate (M=4.71, SD=.469)), was also significant; t(13)=−4.660, p < .001. The influence in applying factor (UTA (M=4.21, SD=1.051); Graduate (M=4.71, SD=.469)) was also significant; t(13)=−2.188, p = .047. Qualitative analysis of trainees' responses was also performed. This work demonstrates a need for undergraduate teaching assistant training and elucidates the role of graduate instructors in the development of future anatomical science educators. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .