Panelists
Jerry K. Hoepner, PhD, CCC-SLP, University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire
Sarah Ginsberg, EdD, CCC-SLP, Eastern Michigan University
Mark DeRuiter, MBA, PhD, CCC-A/SLP, University of Pittsburgh
Facilitators
Candace Hicks, PhD, CCC-A, Texas Tech University
Julie Honaker, PhD, CCC-A, Cleveland Clinic
Description
As part of the year-long teaching symposium, seven synchronous online peer discussions were held.
In the third session, the panelists were asked to address evidence-based education, and attendees
were encouraged to engage with the panelists. Below is summary of the discussion.
QUESTIONS/TOPICS DISCUSSED
- Definition of evidence-based education (EBE).
- Panelists’ views of EBE.
- What opportunities do you see within your own work/classroom? What opportunities do
you see working in the discipline? - What do you all think about the importance and approaches to providing pedagogy
training to PhD—and even master’s and AuD—students? - How have you used qualitative rather than quantitative approaches to EBE research?
- How do we remove barriers? Considering clinical education (CE): Is how we educate
students currently about EBE-CE one of the barriers? If so, how do we mitigate this? Are
our current models of preparing and supporting CE promoting EBE-CE? How can we
shift to a more EBE-CE–oriented model?
Definition of evidence-based education (EBE)
Evidence-based education (EBE) is an “educational approach in which
current, high-quality scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research
evidence is integrated with pedagogical content knowledge” (Ginsberg et
al., 2012).
Panelists’ views of EBE
Dr. Hoepner
- EBE is much like evidence-based practice, but [it is] transferred into how
we can operate in the classroom: SoTL, teacher–learner interaction,
pedagogical content knowledge—and in the center of all of this is EBE. - Scholarly teaching includes a dialogue about teaching approaches
and progression to SoTL and then [to] EBE. - EBE fuels our desire for learning.
Dr. Ginsberg
- Discussed three stages to faculty professional development:
(1) identifying growth in one’s own teaching; (2) scholarly teaching—
having a dialogue about teaching and learning, wanting to do more
thoughtful teaching to support students; and (3) growth in SoTL,
identifying areas of need in teaching and wanting to learn more about
how to effectively teach. This comes from identifying the problem,
trying to solve the problem, and measuring the outcome and impact
of teaching. Getting to the “why and how” to do more intentional
teaching for the learners.
What opportunities do you see within your own work/classroom? What opportunities do you see working in the discipline?
Dr. Ginsberg
- Teaching problems can be good problems to have—we can approach
these with a lot of the same tools as EBP to try to address the issue and
move forward. - SoTL research (i.e., randomized controlled trials) is not feasible for most
of us to do in higher education. Quasi-experimental studies are often
the best approach to answer the question of “What is the factor or
what impact is there based on our change to teaching?”
Dr. Hoepner
- Starting conversations with colleagues on how to change our own
approaches to teaching. - Qualitative studies are useful to see patterns in changes in performance,
grades on exams, students’ understanding of the process, etc.
What do you all think about the importance and approaches to providing pedagogy training to PhD—and even master’s and AuD—students?
Dr. Hoepner
- We should be teaching this through undergraduate to graduate
education—learning and teaching pedagogy and how to be part of an
instructional team. - This is one of the benefits of the instructional internship. The more
content knowledge we give, the better the grasp—having that
opportunity to collaborate helps to improve our understanding and
learning.
Dr. DeRuiter
- Gave an example of an AuD student who wanted a certificate in
higher learning. Being alongside someone who is learning how to
teach in the classroom and clinic—learning what is recommended for
implementation—is so important.
How have you used qualitative rather than quantitative approaches to EBE research?
Dr. Hoepner
- We should be teaching this through undergraduate to graduate
education—learning and teaching pedagogy and how to be part of an
instructional team. - This is one of the benefits of the instructional internship. The more
content knowledge we give, the better the grasp—having that
opportunity to collaborate helps to improve our understanding and
learning.
Dr. Ginsberg
- Referenced work by Sam Weinberg on the think aloud process. This is
extremely useful when looking at how students conduct clinical critical
reasoning or clinical problem solving. Think aloud is a process of
presenting a problem and asking the student to solve it aloud. Another
method is autoethnography, in which students are asked to deeply
reflect about their experience or their perspective
How do we remove barriers? Considering clinical education (CE): Is how we educate students currently about EBE-CE one of the barriers? If so, how do we mitigate this? Are our current models of preparing and supporting CE promoting EBE-CE? How can we shift to a more EBE-CE–oriented model?
Dr. DeRuiter
- Need to do a better job of helping everybody who plays an
educational role to understand the premises [of] and the basis for
educational processes.
Dr. Ginsberg
- Put emphasis on educators really understanding the educational
process. Clinical educators need to have a seat in the classroom and
vice versa to have cross-talk. - [Recommend] more education and collaborative opportunities for
clinical educators. - Try having clinical experiences within the classroom setting that [are]
contextualized with what is being taught—rather than waiting until clinic
to have the experiences
Resources
Ginsberg, S. M., Friberg, J., & Visconti, C. (2012). Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Speech-
Language Pathology and Audiology: Evidence-Based Education. Plural Publishing.
From the chat: The Council of Graduate Schools (CGS; organization in DC) supported Preparing
Future Faculty projects across colleges and universities. More information is available on the CGS
website at cgsnet.org/preparing-future-faculty.
The following references have great qualitative researcher reference suggestions:
Bogden, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories
and Methods, 5th Ed. Boston, MA: Pearson. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ginsberg, S. M., Friberg, J., & Visconti, C. (2012). Scholarship of teaching and learning in speech-
language pathology and audiology: Evidence-based education. Plural Publishing.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd
Ed.). Sage Publications.
Saldana, J. (2014). Coding and analysis strategies. In P. Leavy (Ed.) The Oxford handbook of
qualitative research. Oxford University Press. www.oxfordhandbooks.com
