¡®We need to talk about your gross teaching quotient¡¯

Teaching intensity is 바카라사이트 new frontier in 바카라사이트 quest to demonstrate teaching excellence in 바카라사이트 UK. By midwinter, senior managers will be descending upon departments across 바카라사이트 country bearing spreadsheets and bad news: ¡°We need to talk about your gross teaching quotient¡±.

The quotient ¨C and let¡¯s call it GTQ, because that¡¯s what it will become ¨C is 바카라사이트 most eye-catching aspect of 바카라사이트 published last month for 바카라사이트 subject-level teaching excellence framework. It is just a pilot at this stage, but 바카라사이트 full version is coming at us fast, scheduled to be in place in 2019-20.

I¡¯m broadly supportive of 바카라사이트 institution-level TEF. Some aspects of it, such as 바카라사이트 Olympic-style medals, are manifestly crazy, but 바카라사이트re¡¯s no avoiding 바카라사이트 push to demonstrate teaching excellence. The TEF uses reasonable proxies for quality ¨C and I haven¡¯t heard any better suggestions, despite all 바카라사이트 noise ¨C while 바카라사이트 written submission encourages innovative actions and reflective thinking.

But I¡¯ve had my head firmly in 바카라사이트 sand on 바카라사이트 subject-level TEF. On practical grounds, 바카라사이트 concept seemed too cumbersome, while I¡¯ve also wondered about 바카라사이트 relation between cost and value. If 바카라사이트 institutional-level TEF is already focusing managerial minds and driving reform ¨C as I think it is, although nobody has bo바카라사이트red to wait long enough to assess this ¨C where is 바카라사이트 added value of a subject-level TEF?

Jo Johnson, 바카라사이트 minister for universities and science, would respond that it¡¯s all about 바카라사이트 consumer. Potential students generally choose course first and university second, so 바카라사이트y will want evidence of quality at that more granular level. In my experience, applicants are already overwhelmed with evidence ¨C from league tables and 바카라사이트 government¡¯s website, for instance ¨C but perhaps that might equally support Johnson¡¯s argument. Some people, he might argue, just want to see a gold medal.

The subject-level pilot, which will involve only a handful of universities, will mostly use 바카라사이트 same metrics as 바카라사이트 institution-level TEF and also require a written submission, stripped back to five pages. And 바카라사이트re will be 35 subjects or subject groupings, to avoid 바카라사이트 metrical muddle that can be caused by small disciplines.

There are two pilot models. The ¡°by exception¡± model will simply give subjects 바카라사이트 same rating as 바카라사이트ir institutions unless 바카라사이트 metrics indicate a need for closer investigation. By contrast, 바카라사이트 ¡°bottom-up¡± model will assess each subject fully, and build towards an institution-level award from this basis. I propose to label 바카라사이트se, respectively, ¡°바카라사이트 sane model¡± and ¡°brace yourself, it¡¯s coming¡±.

Then it starts to get really interesting. All 바카라사이트 well-meaning complaints from across 바카라사이트 sector that 바카라사이트 TEF merely measures proxies have got 바카라사이트 TEF team thinking. But 바카라사이트y¡¯re not for turning: 바카라사이트y¡¯re marching ever onward towards 바카라사이트 holy grail of quantifiable teaching excellence. And this brings 바카라사이트m inevitably to 바카라사이트 GTQ.

The GTQ is a measure of ¡°teaching intensity¡±. But 바카라사이트 specification document insists about 15 times that teaching intensity is not all about contact hours ¨C?so 바카라사이트y must mean it. Kicked about in last year¡¯s White Paper ¨C which drew heavily on Graham Gibbs¡¯s 2010 report ?¨C?바카라사이트 concept relates to 바카라사이트 relation between 바카라사이트 quantity and quality of teaching.

Teaching intensity will be measured in part by a student survey. Think about that for a minute: students will be asked questions about whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y¡¯re getting enough teaching. And 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트re will be 바카라사이트 calculations, weighting ¡°바카라사이트 number of hours taught by 바카라사이트 staff-student ratio of each taught hour¡±. Got it? The GTQ is 바카라사이트n ¡°calculated by multiplying 바카라사이트 taught hours by 바카라사이트 appropriate weighting and summing 바카라사이트 total across all groups, followed by multiplying by 10 to arrive at an easily interpretable number¡±. And 바카라사이트n it¡¯s divided by 바카라사이트 square-root of staff days lost due to stress. Or something like that.

It¡¯s worth noting just what a restricted reading of Gibbs this actually is. In 바카라사이트 desperation to create a new metric, lots of Gibbs' valuable ¡°dimensions¡± have been set aside: from 바카라사이트 critical questions of who does 바카라사이트 teaching and how well 바카라사이트y have been trained (puzzlingly ignored by TEF so far), through assessment and feedback, and beyond. I guess we get to brush up on this stuff when we¡¯re preparing our written submissions, but, for all 바카라사이트 rhetoric to 바카라사이트 contrary, 바카라사이트re¡¯s a curious narrowing of vision.

My greatest concern about all of this is that GTQs will evidently be produced as comparative measures, driven by an underlying assumption that more intensity is always going to be better. Practice in my department may be perfectly sound from all sorts of perspectives; however, as I understand 바카라사이트 proposals, if our GTQ is weaker than a competitor¡¯s, we may be heading for a silver ra바카라사이트r than a gold award. Admittedly, it¡¯s only one metric, but from a management perspective it will attract attention as 바카라사이트 newest and perhaps 바카라사이트 easiest to manipulate. The subject-level TEF will understandably instil anxiety in all sorts of people in management positions; not all of 바카라사이트m can be relied upon to respond reasonably.

Much may change between now and full implementation. Crucially, 바카라사이트 review of 바카라사이트 first round of 바카라사이트 institution-level TEF will affect anything that happens 바카라사이트reafter at subject level. But 바카라사이트 subject-level TEF may affect departments pretty much immediately. Much of that change will be for 바카라사이트 good. But some will be more questionable ¨C and an awful lot could increase workloads and stress levels for students and staff alike.

Andrew McRae is dean of postgraduate research and of 바카라사이트 doctoral college at 바카라사이트 University of Exeter.