期刊文献+

论高校教师发展中心的功能定位

On the Function Orientation of University Teacher Development Center
下载PDF
导出
摘要 世界一流大学的教师发展中心常常具有以完善高校教学文化与协同育人为使命、以服务教师教学与发展为导向,并体现专业化、个性化、多元化的共性特征。高校教师发展中心应以引领性、服务性、专业性、合作性为定位原则,并妥善安排培训服务、咨询服务、教学研究、教学评估与激励、教育技术与教育资源服务、交流合作与校外服务等具体职能。 The teacher development centers of world-class universities often have the mission of improving the teaching culture of colleges and universities and collaborative education,and the guidance of serving the teaching and development of teachers,and reflect the common characteristics of specialization,individfication and diversification.The development centers of teachers in colleges and universities should be oriented by guiding,serving,professional and cooperative principles,and properly arrange specific functions such as training service,consulting service,teaching research,teaching evaluation and incentive,educational technology and educational resources service,exchange and cooperation and off-campus service.
作者 邹静宜 Zou Jing-yi(School of Physics and Telecommunication Engineering,South China Normal University,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510006)
出处 《教师教育论坛》 2022年第5期27-31,共5页 Teacher Education Forum
基金 2021年度广东高校网络思想政治工作研究课题“后疫情时代高校思政‘线上+线下’协同育人模式研究”(GDWL21YB65) 2020年度广东省高校思想政治教育课题“基于建构主义的广东省高校港澳台学生思政育人模式研究”(2020GXSZ027) 2021年度广东省青少年研究共建课题“后疫情环境下新媒体促进粤港澳青年交流融合与湾区认同研究”(2021GJ009) 2021年华南师范大学青年教师科研培育基金资助项目“后疫情时代大学生社会实践‘线上+线下’机制创新研究”(21sk13) 2019年度广东省哲学社会科学规划青年项目“广东高校港澳台学生国家认同影响因素及教育对策研究”(GD19YJY02) 2020年度广州市哲学社会科学规划羊城青年学人课题“粤港澳大湾区企业需求融入广州市应用型本科人才培养的协同机制研究”(2020GZQN58)成果。
关键词 高校教师 教师发展中心 功能定位 协同育人 College and university teachers Teacher development center Function positioning Collaborative education
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献69

  • 1Boyer, E. L. (1990).Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, N J: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
  • 2Lynton, E. (1995). Making a Case for Professional Service. Washington DC: American Association of Higher Education.
  • 3Driscoll, A., & Lynton, E. (1999). Making Outreach Visible: A Guide to Documenting Professional Services and Outreach. Washington DC: American Association of Higher Education.
  • 4Boyer, E. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. The Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1 (1), 11-20.
  • 5Shulman, L. S. (2000). "From Minsk to Pinsk: why a scholarship of teaching and learning?" Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) 1(1): 48-53.
  • 6Rice, R. E. (2002). Beyond Scholarship Reconsidered: Toward an enlarged vision of the scholarly work of faculty members. In New Directions for Teaching and Learning. Vol. 90, 7-17.
  • 7Glassick, C.E. , Huber, M.T. , & Maeroff, G.I. (1997).Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • 8O' Meara, K.A., & Rice, R.E.(2005). Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bas s.
  • 9Rice, R. E. (2007). Enhancing the Quality of University Teaching and Learning: The U. S. Experience, in Pan, M., Fan, Y., & Zhu, Y. (Eds). Key to University Quality Assurance: Staff/faculty Development in the Global Context. Fuzhou: Fujian Education Press.
  • 10Engvik, G. & Halland, G. (2006). UNIPED A Key Player in Assuring Learning Quality, in Fan, Y. et al. (Eds). Assuring University Learning Quality: Cross-Boundary Collaboration. Trondheim: Tapir Academic Press.

共引文献84

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部