| Du er her: Sentraladministrasjonen >
Administrative håndbøker >
Reglementshåndbok >
Personal >
Tilsetting vitenskapelig personale >
|
(adopted by the Working Committee of the Senate, University of Oslo, 7 April 1989)
In the advertisement it shall be stated that weight will be attached to both academic and pedagogical competence.
For an applicant to be declared qualified both basic academic competence and basic pedagogical competence are required. If applicants being assessed or appointed cannot provide documentary evidence of basic pedagogical competence, they may nevertheless be appointed but in such cases they are bound to provide documentary evidence of such a qualification within a period of two years after appointment.
Pedagogical qualifications beyond this basic competence are taken into account in the ranking of those applicants who are found to be qualified.
The applicants` pedagogical competence is assessed by the selection board. In special cases, and if the board so requests, special experts may be appointed.
Applicants shall be able to obtain written guidelines in documentation and assessment of pedagogical competence from the body at the educational institution from which one also obtains the descriptive statement/description of the post. These guidelines are also sent to the assessors.
In these rules the term "competence" is used to mean formally awarded skill in the form of a declaration on the basis of recognised, real qualifications.
On point 2: The important principle established in this point is the demand that basic pedagogical competence shall also be required. As a starting point a competence requirement of this kind should not be aimed higher than a university teaching course of 3 to 4 weeks´ duration (normal full-time) or its equivalent (i.e. other training in education of the same relevance and extent based on an overall assessment).
One way of satisfying this requirement is also to demand of all newly appointed persons who have not documented such basic pedagogical competence on appointment, that they attend the institution`s university teaching course within a period of two years, provided that the institution offers a course of such extent, or that they otherwise obtain equivalent competence.
Such requirements should not formally be attached to a temporary appointment. However, the person appointed should be mande aware of the requirement. If any person should fail to fulfil this expectation, the question of sanctions will hardly arise at that moment. Nevertheless, weight should be attached to the matter on the occasion of subsequent aaplications for promotion, other posts, etc.
On point 3: This point lays down that pedagogical qualifications beyond the basic competence shall be taken into account in the ranking of qualified applicants. The stimulus to develop one`s potential should apply to both teaching and research.
The rules do not indicate any specific ratio in the weighting of academic as opposed to pedagogical competence when such a ranking list is made. The weighting should be done on the basis of a qualitative overall assessment. It may be that the relative ought to vary somewhat in accordance with how much teaching the post involves. Further detailes of this may also be included in the descriptive statment/description of the post.
However, to include pedagogical competence simply for the purpose of being able to distinguish between applicants who are equal with respect to academic competence, would be to place too little weight on the pedagogical aspect.
On point 4: This point lays down that the selection board for the post shall also undertake the assessment of pedagogical competence. The work involved in assessment for academic posts should not be made more complicated. However, boards which particularly want this and which are faced with a special assessment situation, should be entitled to use special experts, as one may also do in other fields, but this is something that in the event the board itself must ask for.
On point 5: Such guidelines are enclosed.
Guidance for applicants and assessors (laid down by the Working Committee of the Senate, University of Oslo, 8 December 1989)
In principle academic and pedagogical qualifications shall be assessed in the same way. Both areas require documentation and assessment by explicit criteria. These guidelines have been produced to contribute to the development of traditions for the assessment of pedagogical competence. Such assessment cannot rely on the procedures, rules and customs which are firmly established when it comes to the assessment of academic competence.
It is the applicant`s responsibility to document his or her own competence in a manner that provides the best basis for an objective, qualitative assessment. Correspondingly there is a requirement that the board of assessors shall give an explicit account of the basis of assessment, criteria and conclusions in accordance with these guidelines. However, it may be necessary to adapt these guidelines to special conditions (academic, institutional and/or organisational) prevailing in different faculties/basic units. The assessment must also be seen in relation to any special circumstances connected with the teaching in question, cf. the descriptive statement about the post.
Pedagogical qualifications include skill in the planning, implementation and evaluation of teaching. Such qualifications reveal themselves partly in the teacher`s "own" teaching but also in the work of providing appropriate opportunities for learning in his or her own basic unit and through support and stimulus for colleagues in their teaching work. These qualifications may also manifest themselves through research and development work concerned with matters of studies and teaching as well as in activity related to popularisation and information.
Like research, teaching cannot be assessed exclusively as a technical skill. It is also a qualification to be able to justify and reflect upon one`s own teaching habits in the light of relevant pedagogical theory and systematised experience.
The following list of ways which may be used to document pedagogical qualifications indicates both areas for and means of documentation. It is emphasised that the list contains many points because it is intended to exemplify possible means of documentation, not because each point has to be covered. The assessment shall be undertaken on an overall basis.
3.1. Training in education
Reference is made to point 2 of the rules with comment. In addition further courses in (university) teaching will be a qualification. Weight may also be attached to practical teacher training or comprehensive studies in education.
Examples of documentation: Examination certificates, course certificates, course work or reports from such studies.
3.2 Teaching, examination work
The applicant`s experience of such work should be documented in respect of
extent and nature (subject, type of institution, course, level etc.)
form (variation and main emphasis in respect of forms of teaching and examination, supervision, distance teaching, etc.)
Examples of documentation: Examples of course plans, course descriptions, examination questions, etc for which the applicant has been responsible. Any in-service testimonials. Student evaluations.
3.3 Planning, evaluation and development of one`s own teaching programme
The applicant`s own work on this is to be documented both with respect to characteristic features of the way in which the work has proceeded and to the results it achieved.
Examples of documentation: Report on experimental/development work. Examples of evaluation and how further development has taken place on the basis of such evaluation.
3.4. Teaching materials
The documentation should be concentrated on teaching materials which have been prepared as an aid to the users`learning more than on textbooks (which are used to course books). If the applicant has a large production of course books and teaching materials, only a representative selection is to be enclosed together with a complete list.
Examples of documentation: Course books, compendia, collections of exercises, illustrative material/models, video material, study guidelines, popular-scientific teaching materials.
3.5. Adminiastration of studies, work on reports
Membership of boards, committees, associations, editorial groups, etc. which are concerned with studies and teaching.
Examples of documentation: Letters of appointment, reports, recommendations, journals. Any special contribution in connection with joint work must be made explicit and if necessary documented.
3.6. Research, experimental and development work
Participation in pedagogical research, experimental or development work and/or any contribution to the building up of joint pedagogical competence among colleagues in one`s own subject should be documented.
Examples of documentation: Plans, reports, statements.
4.1. Quality
The greatest weight should be placed upon the quality of the applicant`s teaching work in the assessment of pedagogical competence. The following factors are assessed:
Results:It is difficult to assess the quality of the results to which the teaching has contributed, because so many factors outside the teacher`s control come into play. However, it is reasonable to assess the quality of the teaching programmes, teaching materials, study plans, evaluation measures, etc. for which the applicant has been (jointly) responsible.
Practical teaching skill:On this point too the assessment of quality is difficult. However, the documentation the teacher provides of his or her own teaching (course plans, choice of teaching methods, design of exercises and examination questions, etc.) can be qualitatively assessed - viewed in relation to didactic theory (in the subject).
Reflection, academic approach:It will be a clear indication of quality if the applicant documents reflection upon his or her own practice as a university teacher. Does the applicant take an investigate, experimental and critically evaluative attitude to his or her teaching tasks in the same way that one does to the subject content of the teaching in a research context? Does the applicant display insight into relevant theory and research concerning learning, teaching and education in the didactics and theory of knowledge and science of his or her own subject? Does the applicant analyse and interpret his or her own practice in relation to such theory?
4.2. Extent
A certain amount of practical experience of teaching work is of course necessary in order for one to be able to document qualifications. Long teaching experience gains increased significance when documentary evidence shows that the quality of the teaching has developed.
4.3. Breadth
Some weight should be attached to breadth or variety of pedagogical experience, which may include such matters as that one
has taught different target groups (also outside the university/college sector)
has experience from several institutions (not least ones abroad)
is familiar with varied teaching methods
has taken part in different forms of pedagogical activity (e.g. supervision, administration of studies, work on reports, course activities, development of teaching materials, development work etc.) in addition to normal teaching.
4.4. Level
Academically, teaching at a high level of study may make greater demands on qualifications, but pedagogically, there is not necessarily the same connection between level of study and qualification demands. Weight may be attached to experience of teaching at several levels in universities and colleges, and possibly of teaching in the upper secondary school as well, if it is relevant for the post to be filled.
4.5. Other factors
A number of other qualifications may also be mentioned as valuable in connection with the assessment of the applicant`s pedagogical competence:
independence, ability to cooperate, involvement and initiative
documentation of development (in contrast to stagnation) in one`s own work as a university teacher.