Coordinating Teaching Teams

Coordinating Teaching Teams

Teaching at UO

Faculty and graduate student teachers who collaborate across lecture and linked discussion sections and labs face distinct challenges–and also enjoy special opportunities to collaborate and deepen student learning. This page offers a step-by-step process and questions to support setting expectations with your team, as well as tips around shared communications. 

You can also download a Word version of this page, Setting Expectations for Teaching Teams.

Teaching Pillars:

Setting Expectations

These goals and questions should prompt teaching teams to establish explicit expectations about how they’ll work together logistically and pedagogically. We recommend faculty leads create a written record of answers to key questions that resonate for their course, then create an opportunity to discuss—potentially revise—that record together with their graduate employees.

1. Planning and Coordination

Goal: Students experience the course as a unified learning experience.

  • How will we meet as a teaching team and how often? [e.g. on Zoom once per week]
  • What will be the purpose of these meetings? [e.g. check in about trends in student understanding and motivation, brainstorm teaching strategies, norm our grading, etc.]
  • Who will be in charge of what areas of Canvas?

2. Purview and Communications

Goal: The team has a clear communication plan for the course that favors streamlined and “high value” contacts (contacts that reflect on specific contributions, are personalized, and drive student curiosity and connection.)

  • If a student has a question or concern, who should be the first point of contact – their GE, the instructor, either/or?
  • Which particular questions, concerns, topics, etc. should GEs address, and which should go to the instructor?
  • In which cases, and when, should GEs inform the instructor about a concern or issue that has emerged with a student?
  • What is our preferred way to communicate with each other? [e.g. email, text, etc.]
  • What is the preferred way we should communicate with students? [e.g. Canvas, email, etc.]
  • What is a reasonable time frame to expect responses from each other?
  • How should GEs communicate concerns or questions about teaching challenges, work hours, etc.?

3. Course Curriculum and Pedagogy

Goal: Teaching across all aspects of the course aligns and supports students' work toward course learning objectives. 

  • What are the key learning goals of this course?
  • Where or how might modular learning objectives (for particular classes or units) be communicated? 
  • Which content is likely to be most challenging for students?
  • What are the main pedagogical approaches to teaching in this course, and are there specific approaches expected for section/lab?
  • What should be the primary focus of section or lab? [e.g. discuss readings or lecture, review or clarify content, introduce new content, develop specific skills, etc.]
  • Should sections/labs use the same outlines and be more or less uniformly consistent in format, or can GEs plan their own lessons and formats?

4. Course Grading and Feedback

Goal: Assessment in the courses is explicitly linked to course objectives; students understand how they’ll be graded and the criteria for successful work before they begin assignments; experience consistency across members of the team; and have a chance to practice before any high-stakes assessments.

  • What are the grading criteria for assignments, projects, exams, etc.?
  • Who will develop grading criteria – instructor, GEs, both together?
  • How will grading criteria be communicated to students? [e.g. rubrics]
  • What is the expected turnaround time for grading assignments, projects, exams, etc.?
  • What kinds of feedback should be given? [e.g. corrections, pointers, proofreading, etc.]
  • What will be the mode for feedback? [e.g. comments in Canvas]
  • Will grades be hidden until all assignments, projects, exams, etc. are graded?
  • Who will manage the gradebook in Canvas?

5. UO Policies, Course Policies, and Contingencies

Goal: The teaching team is unified in understanding and clearly communicating UO policies and the structure and flexibility they allow, and the team has a plan for implementing them consistently.

  • Who is primarily responsible for enforcing course policies?
  • Are there certain policies that GEs should enforce, and certain policies that the instructor should enforce?
  • What instructional UO policies might be relevant to review as a teaching team (as they are newer or may come up more frequently with students)? [for example, AEC Accommodations policy and Guidance, the Course Attendance and Engagement Policy, or changes to Academic Conduct Procedures] 
  • What kind of discretion or latitude do we have when it comes to policies, and how will ensure consistency in what we do?
  • How will we handle extensions/special circumstances, etc.?
  • Should or can sections/labs have their own “mini syllabus” with special polices, expectations, or ground rules that supplement the main course?
  • What are our expectations for dealing with our own emergency contingencies/illnesses, if they occur?

Tips and Considerations

Consider having one Canvas site, as the Canvas groups feature gives you: 

  • One gradebook (section and lab leaders can add grades, including attendance tracking, only for their students).
  • Homepages (microsites within the main course site), which allow for a shared student workspace, and the ability to set discussion fora for each group, while also joining forces across groups to discuss, view, and share in the main site.  
  • Confidence that students have easy access and clear wayfinding to all course materials (for example, there is no need to import content from main site to section sites). 

Consider “high value” communication labor sharing: 

  • Use regular course announcements that reflect on the progress of the course; or on how the issues under consideration are deepening/changing/reflecting current events; or on trends in student responses—even cite compelling student contributions. These could be done regularly, say, at the beginning or end of each week. The responsibility for writing them could rotate among teaching team members. They could be an alternative to posting lengthy responses to students in the discussion fora. (Related: Consider limiting word length of student discussion posts to make these more readable for the team and students themselves.) 
  • Use the “message student who” gradebook feature. It’s awesome, feels personal, and the faculty leader can do it on behalf of the entire team. 

If your class has synchronous and asynchronous components, consider how they might mutually reinforce each other: 

  • In live sections, begin w/ navigating key parts of Canvas site so students grow familiar with wayfinding to crucial course materials. 
  • Have students take on critical inquiry roles in sections that extend across asynchronous postings (e.g. discussion boards or group chats, etc.) and synchronous discussions. 
  • Have sections take names (red section, blue section) and have professor or designated GE emphasize questions or contributions from live discussion (“the blue team challenged these assumptions when they asked x and argued y…”) in posted weekly announcements. 
  • Pose questions, scenarios, etc. in Panopto video lectures that signal what will be explored more in section or lab (same as posing things in a live, in-person lecture to help set up section/lab).