1. The Effect of Training Program on Graduate Teaching Assistants’
 [a1]Bu faktör normalde 1’e load ediyor ama biz buraya geçirdik. Buradaki esas loading’i .20 Hangisini report edelim?
The Effect of Training Program on
Graduate Teaching Assistants’
Self-efficacy Beliefs for Teaching
E. Murat Sözer1,2, Zuhal Zeybekoğlu Çalışkan2*, Ayça Alaylı2
1 Mechanical Engineering, 2 Office of Learning and Teaching
Koç University, İstanbul, TURKEY
Koç University Office of Learning and Teaching (KOLT)
Koç University Office of Learning and Teaching (KOLT) was established in 2009 at Koç University.
The mission of KOLT is to improve the learning and teaching environment at Koç University by providing various services for the faculty, students and graduate TAs in line with the mission and vision of the university.
Introduction
Graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) play a critical role on improvement and sustainability of undergraduate education (Young & Bippus, 2008; DeChenne, Enochs, & Needham, 2012) as they teach in mostly large freshman classes (Park, 2004).
Despite the programs such as Preparing Future Faculty (PFF) to enhance GTAs’ pedagogical capacities (Border & Hoene, 2010; Plamer & Little, 2013) , GTAs lack self confidence and skills required for their duties and face different problems in their teaching experience (Young & Bippus, 2008).
Similar picture in Turkey: Without prior experience or formal training in teaching, GTAs are expected to teach during their master or doctoral studies (Moeini, 2003).
There is need for formal training programs for GTAs to help their discovered and learned experience for teaching in Turkish universities (Park, 2004), even though there are attempts at the institutional level. Moreover, little is known about these attempts and influences for GTAs (Moeini, 2003).
Measures
Pre and post test of the training program:
TA Self-efficacy Scale (Boman, 2008).
35 items
Likert Scale (1 to 5)
Evaluation form for effectiveness of the training program:
Likert Scale (1 to 5: from not at all to very helpful).
Results & Discussion (cont’d)
Correlation analysis resulted in no significant correlations between pre-test and post-test self- efficacy scores. However, only assesment subscale showed a significant correlation between two time points: r(109) = .35, p < .01.
This might be due to the higher pre-test scores than expected.
Even though there was no main effect, there was a main effect of assessment subscale only F(1, 110) = 4.40, p < .05. (Table 3. For descriptives).
This might be due two reasons:
No data were obtained concerning participants’ previous teaching experiences. Undergraduate teaching experiences might also positively affect self-efficacy beliefs.
Since the appointment of graduate students to teaching assistantship is not granted for, it may be perceived by some GTAs that the results of this survey could have an impact on the appointment decision made by Graduate School at KU.
Results & Discussion
Factor Analysis: Explanatory factor analysis with a varimax rotation was used and three factors were obtained with 26 items.
Factors and varience explained:
Interaction: 34%
Assesment: 7%
Delivery: 5%
Training Program Evaluation: Micro-teaching sessions were evaluated as the highest (Table 1.)
Aim
The aim of this study is to measure the effectiveness of a five-day training program on self-efficacy beliefs of GTAs toward teaching.
Table 1
Workshops and Microteaching Sessions (N = 122)
Workshops M SD
Effective Teaching Tips I
4.38
.742
Effective Teaching Tips II
4.36
.693
I wish I had known
4.16
.658
Promoting a Positive Learning Environment
4.05
.654
Micro Teaching Session
4.73
.559
Participants
Table 3
Descriptives for subscales at pre-test and post-test (N = 111)
Subscales
Pre-test
Post-test
Mean SD
Interaction
37.5
5.8
36,73
12,63
Assessment
20.4
3.3
19.14
6.61
Delivery
41.01
6.4
40.33
13.9
Total 99 14
96.21
32.7
127 new coming master and doctorate graduate students in Koç University.
Departments:
Graduate School of Science
Engineering
Origin:
94 Turkish
73 Iran & Pakistan
Reliability Analysis: TA Self- efficacy scale and 3 sub-scales are highly reliable: α = .98
Interaction (10 items): α = .82
Assesment (5 items): α = .76
Delivery (11 items): α = .88
Correlations between the subscales were significant and higher than at least r(109) = .51 (Table 2).
According to the effect of training programs on self-efficacy beliefs of GTAs toward teaching is contentious (DeChenne, Enochs, & Needham, 2012) .
Prior teaching experience is discussed to have an impact on self-efficacy levels among GTAs (Prieto & Altmaier, 1994).
For further research, addition to previous teaching experience in graduate program, information about the experiences in undergraduate level should be asked before the next training program.
Table 2
Correlations Between the Subscales of TA Self Efficacy Scale
Interaction
Assessment
Delivery -
.52**
.82**
.53**
** p < .01 level.
Procedure
A two-day formal training program for GTAs:
A student attended 4 workshops and minimum 1 Micro-Teaching session.
90 min. workshops, 8 sessions:
Effective teaching tips
Assesment
Profile of KU students
Classroom management strategies
Rules and regulations in the uni.
24 Micro-Teaching sessions at the end of workshops
Presentations and feedbacks
References
Boman, J. (2008). Department of Psychology , University of Western Ontorio.
Border, L. L., & von Hoene, L. M. (2010). Graduate and professional student development programs. A guide to faculty development, 2.
Dechene, E.S., Larry, G. E., & Needham, M. (2012). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics graduate teaching assistants teaching self-efficacy. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(4),
Moeini, H. (2003). A need analysis study for faculty development programs in METU and structural equational modeling of faculty needs. METU:The Department of Computer and Instructional Technologies in Education
Park, C. (2004). The graduate teaching assistant (GTA): lessons from North American experience. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3),
Palmer, M. S., & Little, D. (2013). TOMORROW’S PROFESSOR TODAY. To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional, and Organizational Development, 32, 251.
Prieto, R. L., & Altmaier, M. E. (1994). The relationship of prior training and previous teaching experience to self-efficacy among graduate teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 35(4),
Young, L. S., & Bippus, M. A. (2008). Assessment of graduate teaching assistant (GTA) training: A case study of a training program and its impact on GTAs. Communication Teacher, 22(4),