Skip to main content
Log in

Collaborative Teaching in the Face of Productivity Concerns: The Dispersed Team Model

  • Published:
Innovative Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The development of collaborative teaching efforts is briefly reviewed within the context of higher education today, which is a time of declining resources available for such efforts. Therefore costs must be considered in the promotion of collaboration, which most would likely agree is a positive element in the delivery of courses. Models of team coordinated teaching and team teaching are explained, and the authors identify four dimensions of collaboration—integration, interaction, active learning, and faculty autonomy. A successful model, which addresses both quality and cost concerns, is then offered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Association of American Colleges. (1994). Strong foundations: Twelve principles for effective general education programs. Washington, DC.

  • Astin, A. W. (1985). Achieving educational excellence: A critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, A. E., & Baldwin, R. G. (1991). Faculty collaboration: Enhancing the quality of scholarship and teaching. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7. Washington, DC: The George Washington University School of Education and Human Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways on knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: The George Washington University School of Education and Human Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J., & Mueck, R. (1990). Student involvement in learning: Cooperative learning and college instruction. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 1, 68–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, C. (1984). Integrated cluster of independent courses: An ideal curricular cluster. Innovative Higher Education, 8, 115–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary courses and team teaching: New arrangements for learning. Phoenix: American Council on Education and Oryx Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, M. F., & Ralston, D. A. (1983). Intra-coordinated team teaching: Benefits for both students and instructors. Teaching of Psychology, 10(2), 116–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, B. L. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. New directions for teaching and learning, 41. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmin, M. (1994). Inspiring active learning: A handbook for teachers. Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, E. R. (1994). Policy and productivity. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 27–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, D. B. (1993). Enhancing the productivity of learning. AAHE Bulletin, 46(4), 2–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindauer, D. L. (1990). A new approach to team teaching. Journal of Economic Education, 4(1), 71–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murchland, B. (Ed.). (1991). Higher education and the practice of democratic politics: A political education reader. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, J. H. (1947, originally published 1873) The idea of a university. New York: Longmans, Green.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newstrom, J. (1981, July). The dynamics of effective team teaching. Personnel Administrator, 56–58, 64.

  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinn, F. J. & Weir, S. B. (1984). Yea, team. Improving college and university teaching, 32(1), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. (1992). What is collaborative learning? In A. Goodsell et al. (Eds.), Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. University Park, PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching and Learning Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1980). Using student team learning. (Rev. ed.) Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, S. E. (1991). Are two heads better than one? An empirical examination of team teaching. College Student Journal, 25, 308–315.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McDaniel, E.A., Colarulli, G.C. Collaborative Teaching in the Face of Productivity Concerns: The Dispersed Team Model. Innovative Higher Education 22, 19–36 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025147408455

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025147408455

Keywords

Navigation