CST REVIEW WORKING GROUPS
Volume 11 Number 3 (January 2002)

The CST Advisory Board has formed five working groups to review specific aspects of the CST mandate and operation. The Advisory Board will coordinate the work of these groups and organize it into a plan for the CST's future. The primary tasks of the five working groups are as follows:

  1. Prepare a mission statement or set of first principles to guide the work of the CST;
  2. Consult with CST users and nonusers regarding what types of support they view as helpful to their teaching work; and, make recommendations regarding teaching support programming priorities;
  3. Survey and consult with units equivalent to the CST at other universities;
  4. Survey the academic literature on faculty development in higher education;
  5. Prepare a plan for integration of the technological support of teaching with the pedagogical support programs of the CST.

If you are interested in joining one of these groups or contributing to them in other ways, please inform the CST of your interest.

First Principles

The Centre for the Support of Teaching was established in 1989 as the result of a report to Vice-President Ken Davey by the Task Force on the Central Support of Teaching. The report states very broadly that "the Centre's function is to support people who teach at York – that is, to respond to faculty needs as fully, and in as many ways as possible." The report goes on to suggest some possible activities for the Centre in such categories as "Assistance for teachers," "Establishing and maintaining a flow of information about teaching" and "General and technological support of teaching activities." Since 1998 the Centre has been guided in its work by the general goal of "advocating quality and innovation in teaching" as outlined in more detail in the accompanying sidebar. The first working group will review these statements and others like them from similar units at other universities with the goal of drafting a set of principles that will be truly helpful to the CST as a guide for its future work. At the very least the Board hopes that wide discussion about the purposes of the CST will help solidify a sense of meaningfulness and importance in the community regarding the work of the Centre.

A related aspect of the work of this group will be a review of the constitution of the Advisory Board itself. Currently the Board is composed of representatives of the various faculty units who are selected by the Deans/Principal of those units in consultation with the CST Director. The Board's current role is purely advisory; it does not report to any administrative person or unit, nor does it have any official power to implement its advice.

Supporting Quality Teaching

How can the University best support and promote quality teaching? In what ways do the current CST programs and services support and promote quality teaching? What aspects of teaching support are not being addressed currently? The CST's current programs are based on the premise that teaching ability is learned, that it is learned best through critical reflection on one's own practice, and that the learning is gradual and open ended. Thus, different programs are offered to instructors with different degrees of experience. All of the programs, however, emphasize collegial discussion reflecting critically on personal practice. This is not to say that the academic literature on teaching is ignored, but rather that ideas gathered from this literature are brought to the attention of instructors in the context of critical reflection on their current and past practice. Prominent among the CST's current programs are:

The working group on supporting quality teaching will survey both participants and non-participants in CST programs to gain a sense of the value of these programs and of teaching support needs that are not being met currently. The primary survey technique will be focus groups conducted during February and March.

If you are contacted about participating in one of the focus groups please do join in so that we can have a representative sense of the community's views. If you are not contacted, don't let that stop you from sending or bringing your comments on appropriate programming to the CST. Perhaps you can imagine other programs that should be offered or other constituencies that should be addressed. For example, the 1989 Task Force Report establishing the CST imagined the CST possibly working at the Department level with a curriculum role, perhaps in the Undergraduate Program Review process, but thus far such work has not been a priority. Should it have a higher priority? The working group would be very happy to have any suggestions regarding programs and initiatives that could support and promote quality teaching at York.