Editor’s note: This story is part of a series of profiles on faculty and staff who have been nominated by readers for recognition of their outstanding work. Nominations can still be made by e-mailing [email protected] or calling 294-3690.

---

Geology 100, taught by Steven Richardson, professor of geology and chairman of the Center for Teaching Excellence, is definitely not the average beginner’s course.

“Richardson has structured his class in such a way that students not only work for their own grades, but they are also working for the good of their learning teams. This encourages students to help each other with the material, because both the individual and team grades count,” said Katy Dellaca, a student in Richardson’s class.

Richardson’s class of about 200 students is divided into 33 groups of six.

The teams work together on in-class assignments and projects and are strongly encouraged to form study groups and seek one another’s help when needed.

The teams are also part of the focus of Richardson’s grading procedures.

Richardson said the standard method of grading in a large class is using multiple choice exams.

“But the problem with multiple choice exams is that they’re very unforgiving, and the answer is either right or it’s wrong. It gives faculty a way of saying: ‘This student is better than that student,’ and it becomes very competitive. I don’t think that does anybody any particular favors,” he said.

He said he thinks the learning is more important than a quantitative grade, and he tries to de-emphasize grading.

The importance of the grade is lessened by the teams, because after each person in the team takes the quiz, the team is then given an additional answer sheet to take the quiz again together.

This team quiz grade gets calculated in with an average of the individual team members’ scores, as if a phantom student were part of the group. If the team average is above the C-level, each individual in the group gets his or her score raised by the number of points the team grade was above the average.

It works the opposite way as well. If students perform badly, their scores bring down the scores of their teammates, providing incentive for teammates to help each other understand the material.

This system also helps prevent anonymity in a large lecture class so students don’t feel lost.

Richardson said, “That’s part of what motivates this group thing. I find it’s easier to remember who the students are if I have some artificial means of doing it.

One of the things that happens is that I recognize the people in the groups, and I get them identified as a group. It makes it much easier to remember their names that way.

“It’s all about beating anonymity. The team thing, the quiz thing, it’s all a part of helping students feel that they’re actually learning something,” he said.

Dellaca said, “I don’t feel intimidated going to class, and I feel guilty when I think of not going. He knows my name, he knows everyone’s name, and I think that’s incredible.” Richardson credits his four years with the Center for his current teaching methods.

“It’s still developing,” Richardson said. “There are parts of it that still don’t work quite as well as I would like.”

But change and growth are what Richardson’s work at the Center is all about.

The purpose of the Center for Teaching Excellence, Richardson explained, is to make teaching a public activity, to share ideas and talk about methods.

“Most of the faculty on this campus are already good teachers. Some are truly outstanding teachers. Our goal is to get everyone to the next level, whatever that next level would be for them,” he said.