Teaching skills and experience
Pedagogical training:
During my tenure as a PhD candidate, I was assigned to teach marketing and marketing planning, as well as to be one of lecturers on our international management course on advanced level. I was also assigned to design and conduct a 40 hour PhD course for future leaders within the academy. The course included four main topics: Leadership, organizational learning, social creativity for problem solving, and general psychology.
That course was exported to the University of Helsingfors, cut to 20 hours, and offered as an introductory course in Leadership, organizational learning, social creativity for problem solving, and general psychology within the TVEX, bilingual examination with focus on Swedish (2007; 2013-2021).
In parallel to that I was asked to teach courses at various universities and university colleges, for example Quality Management and coaching at the MidSweden University, psychological aspects of leadership and organizational psychology at Högskolan i Gälve, Sustainability at Gotlands högskola, Creativity in Groups and Organizations at Malmö högskola, Entrepreneurship, Creativity, and Innovation, Karlstad Business School, Karlstad University, Leadership and Creativity, PhD-lecture, Royal Academy of Technology, Coaching in Sport, Bosön sports complex, headquarters for the Swedish Sports Confederation, Strategic marketing, Folkuniversitetet, Leadership and Conflicts, Dalarnas Högskola, Leadership and creativity, Program for School Principals (rektorsprogrammet).
For longer stints I taught organizational psychology at Högskolan i Gävle, creativity at Mälardalens högskola, leadership and entrepreneurship at Karlstads business school, Work and Organizational Psychology, Gothenburg University (2016-2017), Work and Organizational Psychology, Uppsala University (2017-2018). In 2018, I was recruited to be a researcher at the University of Helsingfors. There I also taught the topics mentioned above, and introduced an international leadership and organizational course which attracted students from all over Europe (advanced level).
I have also taught methods: Quantitative methods at Mälardalen University and at the University of Gothenburg, and Qualitative methods, University of Helsingfors.
Teaching philosophy
Teaching, in my view, is based on factual knowledge, personality, and life experience. I would call that a pedagogic style or practice. As I know something about psychology, I believe teaching and lecturing is an exchange, that knowledge is declarative but mostly non-declarative, and that the transfer of semantic information gains from being mixed with episodic-oriented storytelling. I also use Lewis Terman and Melitta Odens discrimination between intelligence and creativity (Guildford, 1950).
Terman and Oden proposed that intelligence is the ability to understand concepts and its interrelationships, whereas creativity is the formation of new concepts.
When I lecture about leadership, creativity, work climate, and so forth, I use a similar contextual approach, where I start by introducing students to the examinations, which I have used since 2004. In the traditional test I include this question (a and b).
Students are assigned to bring the handbook used for the course.
Question 1a. This part of the question includes seven concepts from the course, all of which can be found in the handbook. Students are assigned to choose four of the concepts and to find the definitions in the handbook. In the answer they must write the definitions and also mention on which page they found the definition. Surprisingly, many students fail this part of the test.
Question 1 b. Now they are asked to use these four concepts to form a model, and describe how they think the concepts are interrelated to one another, Terman and Oden-style.
I also use essays as a form of examination. The rationale for this approach is that information about something is better preserved if it is put in a context, and also if students themselves get to form that context - the essay.
There are rules. The essay must include five labels: introduction, method, results, and discussion, and references.
Students are free to choose the topic or topics, but it has to be related to the course topics. Also, they must include references that can be found in a research data-base. On the introductory level, 10 references must be included. On advanced courses, 20 references must be used.
There’s a before and after effect on this approach. Before the essay is written, the students usually think it's a bit challenging, and kind of dislike me for giving them this kind of assignment. After they have completed the assignment, they are happy and very satisfied, some realizing that they got their first training in academic writing!
I use a similar contextual approach when I teach methods. For example When I taught quantitative methods for students at the university of Gothenburg, I did not use any statistical formula, like Y=ax+b …, but rather asked them to bring their lap-tops to the lecture. When I asked them to open Excel, the general response was: - I have never used Excel.
In order to practice how to use statistics, and increasing the probability that they will use stats in their workplace, I used Ekvall’s 10 dimensional model for Creative Climate - a five item by ten-dimensional Questionnaire (CCQ; 1996).
The students (n>30) were assigned to gather data from each other, and to exchange data with each other, so that all had the same data-base set, a five cases by 10 columns matrix.
We then together calculated averages and standard deviations, and simultaneously discussed how to interpret an organization from a perspective of averages and standard deviations. They were flabbergasted, claiming that this was a completely new way for them to view an organization.
On top of that, I told a story about Pearson, him with the correlation, and Rensis Likert, him with the famous scale, going on a fishing trip wearing Hawaiian shirts, and assigned the students to conduct a split-haft study, using themselves as a study group. This practice also became the foundation for one of the questions for the examination. The implication was that they hand-crafted the statistical testing, which in my view increased the probability for them to remember how to use statistics, but also, and maybe therefore, use statistics after they finalized the course.
The response was interesting, despite me not using the traditional “Y” and “X” stuff during the lecturing. Several students testified that, although they historically had despised quantitative methods, my way of teaching quantitative methods had paradoxically induced an interest for them to learn more about it. Again, they were flabbergasted.
I use a similar approach for qualitative methods.
- 2001. Special pedagogics. University of Gävle.
-
2004. Pedagogic training for university teachers, six weeks, full time., SLU, Sweden.
-
2019. UP 2.2. Pedagogic evaluation, for university teachers, University of Helsingfors.
- 2019.
UP 3.1.. Academic supervision (Handledning vid universitet och handledarpraktik). for university teachers, University of Helsingfors.
-
2020. UP 3.2. Development of education and practice (Utveckling av den egna undervisningen och undervisningspraktik). for university teachers, University of Helsingfors.
- 2021. UPÄ 3. Pedagogic leadership and development (Pedagogiskt ledarskap och utveckling av universitetsundervisning). for university teachers, University of Helsingfors. Teaching experience: Lecture hours ~1030, with planning included: ~3090.
- Substitute teacher in mathematics for pupils in primary school, 7- 9 grade.
- Coach. Taught children and young people prospective thinking and how to do somersaults on a trampoline and in gymnastics..
- Head of education for a sports federation, traveling Sweden to teach people how to become a coach. I designed, arranged, and taught all the courses.
During my tenure as a PhD candidate, I was assigned to teach marketing and marketing planning, as well as to be one of lecturers on our international management course on advanced level. I was also assigned to design and conduct a 40 hour PhD course for future leaders within the academy. The course included four main topics: Leadership, organizational learning, social creativity for problem solving, and general psychology.
That course was exported to the University of Helsingfors, cut to 20 hours, and offered as an introductory course in Leadership, organizational learning, social creativity for problem solving, and general psychology within the TVEX, bilingual examination with focus on Swedish (2007; 2013-2021).
In parallel to that I was asked to teach courses at various universities and university colleges, for example Quality Management and coaching at the MidSweden University, psychological aspects of leadership and organizational psychology at Högskolan i Gälve, Sustainability at Gotlands högskola, Creativity in Groups and Organizations at Malmö högskola, Entrepreneurship, Creativity, and Innovation, Karlstad Business School, Karlstad University, Leadership and Creativity, PhD-lecture, Royal Academy of Technology, Coaching in Sport, Bosön sports complex, headquarters for the Swedish Sports Confederation, Strategic marketing, Folkuniversitetet, Leadership and Conflicts, Dalarnas Högskola, Leadership and creativity, Program for School Principals (rektorsprogrammet).
For longer stints I taught organizational psychology at Högskolan i Gävle, creativity at Mälardalens högskola, leadership and entrepreneurship at Karlstads business school, Work and Organizational Psychology, Gothenburg University (2016-2017), Work and Organizational Psychology, Uppsala University (2017-2018). In 2018, I was recruited to be a researcher at the University of Helsingfors. There I also taught the topics mentioned above, and introduced an international leadership and organizational course which attracted students from all over Europe (advanced level).
I have also taught methods: Quantitative methods at Mälardalen University and at the University of Gothenburg, and Qualitative methods, University of Helsingfors.
Teaching philosophy
Teaching, in my view, is based on factual knowledge, personality, and life experience. I would call that a pedagogic style or practice. As I know something about psychology, I believe teaching and lecturing is an exchange, that knowledge is declarative but mostly non-declarative, and that the transfer of semantic information gains from being mixed with episodic-oriented storytelling. I also use Lewis Terman and Melitta Odens discrimination between intelligence and creativity (Guildford, 1950).
Terman and Oden proposed that intelligence is the ability to understand concepts and its interrelationships, whereas creativity is the formation of new concepts.
When I lecture about leadership, creativity, work climate, and so forth, I use a similar contextual approach, where I start by introducing students to the examinations, which I have used since 2004. In the traditional test I include this question (a and b).
Students are assigned to bring the handbook used for the course.
Question 1a. This part of the question includes seven concepts from the course, all of which can be found in the handbook. Students are assigned to choose four of the concepts and to find the definitions in the handbook. In the answer they must write the definitions and also mention on which page they found the definition. Surprisingly, many students fail this part of the test.
Question 1 b. Now they are asked to use these four concepts to form a model, and describe how they think the concepts are interrelated to one another, Terman and Oden-style.
I also use essays as a form of examination. The rationale for this approach is that information about something is better preserved if it is put in a context, and also if students themselves get to form that context - the essay.
There are rules. The essay must include five labels: introduction, method, results, and discussion, and references.
Students are free to choose the topic or topics, but it has to be related to the course topics. Also, they must include references that can be found in a research data-base. On the introductory level, 10 references must be included. On advanced courses, 20 references must be used.
There’s a before and after effect on this approach. Before the essay is written, the students usually think it's a bit challenging, and kind of dislike me for giving them this kind of assignment. After they have completed the assignment, they are happy and very satisfied, some realizing that they got their first training in academic writing!
I use a similar contextual approach when I teach methods. For example When I taught quantitative methods for students at the university of Gothenburg, I did not use any statistical formula, like Y=ax+b …, but rather asked them to bring their lap-tops to the lecture. When I asked them to open Excel, the general response was: - I have never used Excel.
In order to practice how to use statistics, and increasing the probability that they will use stats in their workplace, I used Ekvall’s 10 dimensional model for Creative Climate - a five item by ten-dimensional Questionnaire (CCQ; 1996).
The students (n>30) were assigned to gather data from each other, and to exchange data with each other, so that all had the same data-base set, a five cases by 10 columns matrix.
We then together calculated averages and standard deviations, and simultaneously discussed how to interpret an organization from a perspective of averages and standard deviations. They were flabbergasted, claiming that this was a completely new way for them to view an organization.
On top of that, I told a story about Pearson, him with the correlation, and Rensis Likert, him with the famous scale, going on a fishing trip wearing Hawaiian shirts, and assigned the students to conduct a split-haft study, using themselves as a study group. This practice also became the foundation for one of the questions for the examination. The implication was that they hand-crafted the statistical testing, which in my view increased the probability for them to remember how to use statistics, but also, and maybe therefore, use statistics after they finalized the course.
The response was interesting, despite me not using the traditional “Y” and “X” stuff during the lecturing. Several students testified that, although they historically had despised quantitative methods, my way of teaching quantitative methods had paradoxically induced an interest for them to learn more about it. Again, they were flabbergasted.
I use a similar approach for qualitative methods.
Kommentarer
Skicka en kommentar