Called to Teach. Группа авторов
never asked questions during class or called me at home. From that day on, the ten minute walk-around became a regular part of my pre-lecture routine.42
The topics of these student conversations were not random. Before each class, Kirk reviewed a notebook that contained the gist of earlier student contacts that he wanted to follow up (e.g., asking students who were ill how they were currently feeling, asking student athletes about an upcoming sports event). Thus, over the semester he made multiple personal contacts with the eighty-five students taking his course!
Another way he demonstrated respect was the way he made it safe to ask questions. He stated multiple times in class that it was typical for students to be confused or feel anxious when learning statistics. One way he tried to alleviate this confusion and anxiety was setting aside time in every class for students to ask questions about concepts they did not understand well. In other words, he wanted students to ask questions and planned his lessons on the assumption that part of class time would be devoted to answering questions.
Another way Kirk tried to help students not feel anxious or confused about statistics was to make himself available to students. In his syllabus, he provided both his office and home phone numbers so students could contact him outside of class with questions. Moreover, he encouraged them to contact him in class, and his syllabus states, “I enjoy answering questions about statistics . . . Answering your questions is an important and enjoyable part of my job; do not hesitate to contact me.”43
It is one thing to ask for student questions, but it is another thing entirely to answer them in a way that respects the person asking the question. Kirk made a point to use body language and tone of voice and to have a level of positivity in his responses that gave students the impression that their questions were important—even those that had been asked before. It was not uncommon for students to ask the same question in consecutive classes; I counted one particular question asked four separate times. Yet, Kirk never gave the impression of appearing frustrated, nor were his answers ever condescending. Instead, he answered every question as if it were being asked for the first time.
Anecdotes and Examples
Statistics can sometimes be a dry subject. To make the content more accessible and “come alive,” Kirk frequently provided anecdotes and examples throughout his classes. The anecdotes ranged from personal (e.g., an experience using a given statistic, errors he made) to professional (e.g., background of individuals who developed a statistic). Sometimes he combined the two and provided anecdotes of his personal interactions with the statisticians who developed a statistic!
In addition to anecdotes, Kirk provided examples in nearly every class. Sometimes these examples involved working through data analysis from a real-world situation, in which case Kirk worked out the solution via slides (which he provided to students ahead of time). Other times, the examples were more didactic and involved Kirk working through the calculations, by hand, in class. Either way, students were afforded multiple demonstrations of how to calculate, use, and interpret every statistic that was discussed in the course.
Material Reviews
The first part of every class started the same way: ten minutes devoted to reviewing material previously covered in the course. This review could range from going over terms to working through an example. He was especially apt to repeat a previous example when it was complex and students were likely to be confused or have unasked questions (e.g., power analysis). In conducting these reviews, he often made a point to note how concepts he taught earlier in the semester fit together with more recent topics.
Discussion
In this study, I directly observed the pedagogical behaviors of a master teacher: Roger E. Kirk. Unlike many other pedagogical case studies, I observed Kirk in the same course for an entire semester. Thus, I was able to collect data from approximately forty separate classes. In those classes, I saw repeated behaviors from Kirk that fit into five themes: levity, rigor, care and respect for students, anecdotes and examples, and material reviews. Moreover, these behaviors coincide with the general themes that people perceive as being constitutive of an expert in teaching (see Table 3.2).
The first thing that stands out from this study is that the first two themes, levity and rigor, seem contradictory. How can a course with a lighthearted climate also be one that is rigorous? Honestly, I am not sure how it is done; but I know it can be done because I saw Kirk do it. Somehow, he was able to weave rigor with due levity and do so in a way that seemed seamless.
A former mentor of mine once described his own teaching philosophy as playing an accordion. Sometimes it needs to be stretched (i.e., students need to be challenged) and sometimes it needs to be relaxed (i.e., students need to have a break). Perhaps that is what Kirk is doing by weaving levity and rigor throughout a course. Knowing when to stretch and when to relax, however, is not intuitive, and likely something that differentiates master teachers.
The second thing that stands out from this study is the deliberate actions Kirk took to foster student relationships. Given Kirk’s professional stature, it could be understood if he did not bother with trying to connect personally with students in courses with larger enrollments. It is not easy to connect with so many of them, nor is it easy to create an atmosphere where students feel comfortable asking questions. Yet, Kirk appeared to accept the challenge and, as a consequence, purposefully devote considerable time and effort to make this happen. I can probably count on one hand the number of professors I know who have provided their home phone number on a syllabus and asked students to call when they have questions. I can count with one finger the number of professors I know who keep a notebook about student interactions so they can follow up with students throughout the semester. This is likely another thing that differentiates Kirk as a master teacher.44
The third thing that stood out was that Kirk planned time for content review and students asking questions. These were not impromptu events that serendipitously occurred that then threw off the schedule of events. Instead, Kirk developed his curriculum with the idea that reviewing older content and answering students’ questions are just as worthy of class time as providing new content.
Such behaviors may not be necessary in other courses but are vital in statistics. Students often see statistics as a disorganized collection of formulae and concepts, so they can get overwhelmed by the seemingly-unrelated details.45 Thus, reviewing material can help tie older and newer concepts together as well as aid in student understanding.
Limitations
The major limitations of this study are the same as those of many other extreme case studies: the sample is purposeful and the approach is exploratory. Thus, the results may or may not generalize to other master teachers, and following Kirk’s example will not necessarily make a professor develop into a master teacher. Moreover, since there was only one observer and the same individual also coded the data and developed the resulting themes, there could be—and likely is—some bias in the results. These factors do not necessarily invalidate the results but do indicate that others need to replicate the results before developing any notion of causality or generalizability from the results.
Implications
Personally, I learned a great deal by observing Kirk. I teach courses similar to the one in which I observed and have already started implementing changes. I try to incorporate more humor and anecdotes, plan for content reviews, and make a more purposeful effort to talk with students about non-class related material that is important to them.
For those who do not teach courses in quantitative methods, this study may not seem to have any relevance—and perhaps it does not. What could have relevance for faculty from other disciplines is observing master teachers in their own departments or universities. They may not have the particular title of master teacher, but they exist. I cannot recommend enough learning from them. Ask if you can observe them teach, whether for a few classes or throughout a semester. It does not really matter if you are familiar with the content or not. If you are, all the better; but, even if you are not you can still learn from observing a master teacher.
Table 3.1: Common Qualities Stakeholders Perceive in Master Teachers
| Quality |
| Passionate about |