SYLLABUS“The University of Tokyo Global Future Faculty Development Program”
Course title
UTokyo Global Future Faculty Development Program

Common Graduate Course Title (credits)
Teaching Development in Higher Education in English (2 cred.)

Teaching-learning environment
Online (Zoom)

Lecturer(Image with the logo of UTokyo Global FFDP in a circle)

Dr. Gabriel Hervas

Contact information & course’s website•

Contact information: utokyo_fd@he.u-tokyo.ac.jp•Team in charge: Center for Research & Development of Higher Education.

•Location: Hongo Campus. Administration Bureau Building 2 (3rd floor).
You are welcome to reach us out when needed (building with ramps and elevators. Please, do not hesitate to let us know if we can be of aid
to access. Accessibility map: http://ds.adm.u-tokyo.ac.jp/material/pdf/20190403133321.pdf))•Staff & office: Ms. Airi Kawakami. Office 315 (same building).

•

Course’s website: https://utokyofd.com/en/ffdp/about

Course summary
The University of Tokyo Global Future Faculty Development
Program (UTokyo Global FFDP) aims to contribute to theeducational development of future and new university
teachers. Participants learn about teaching and learning
methods and assessment strategies, how to enhance students’
active learning, how to design a syllabus and lessons with alearner-directed approach, and how to engage into theteaching profession maintaining an inclusive stance.

(Graphic syllabus of UTokyo Global FFDP; a visual representation of the contents of the course on its different sessions)

The course emphasizes the development of a critical and scholarly approach to the teaching profession, inviting the participants to learn throughreflection, discussion, and learning by doing. The course is based on flipped classroom; participants watch short videos before the class and to,in it, discuss, reflect, and practice with their peers.
On its previous editions, participants came from 18 different countries and four continents, all from diverse disciplines. This diversity enriches
the participants’ learning experience and their chances to face the teaching practice inclusively, as it brings to discussion disciplinary, contextual,and culturally diverse points-of-view on education. If you want to know how the course looks like, please check this video.

Enrollment, registration, credits, and certificateParticipants can be graduate students, researchers, and faculty members of The University of Tokyo (up to 20). Selection is made considering
the expression of motivation to participate, experience in similar courses, a balance among disciplines, and English skills. In addition, we welcome
observers from ours and other institutions. There are no technological requirements to participate in this course other than having access to Google
Classroom and Zoom (both freely available to UTokyo members). If you are interested in participating and find any difficulties in obtaining thenecessary means, please reach us out (utokyo_fd@he.u-tokyo.ac.jp) so we can find a find a way to support you.
UTokyo Global FFDP is also a Common Graduate Course. Graduate students can earn two credits (in UTAS, the course appears under the title“Teaching Development in Higher Education in English”). To earn credits, once your enrollment has been accepted, please register in the course
following the procedures of your School. A certificate of completion will be issued to those participants who successfully complete the course.

Main goals and intended learning outcomes• UTokyo Global FFDP aims to: Promote professional and educational reflection, discussion, andcritical pedagogical thinking.
 Nurture a scholarly, evidence-based, inclusive and ethicalapproach to teaching.
 Support a cross-cultural and global approach to the academic
profession and to teaching and learning.
 Cultivate continuous development, lifelong learning, andcommunity-building attitudes and opportunities.
 Contribute to the development of key educational competences
to support learner-directed teaching-learning processes.
 Provide learning by doing opportunities for a congruent
educational development.

• Upon successful completion of the course, participants should, at afundamental level, be able to: Reason substantial insights on the significance, implications, andrequirements of fulfilling the role of university teacher.
 Maintain a scholarly, evidence-based, critical, and reflective
pedagogical stance to their educational practice.
 Design syllabi and design/deliver lessons from an ethical,inclusive, and responsible perspective.
 Critically assess and review their educational ideas, practices,and designs.
 Design syllabi and design and deliver lessons considering anactive learner-directed approach.
 Design and develop teaching and learning schemes that aligngoals, strategies, and assessment.

Contents, structure, and schedule
The contents of the course involve knowledge and practical skills and attitudes necessary to teach at universities. The following tablesummarizes these, presents the pedagogical questions that we seek to answer, and encapsulates the course’s structure and schedule (subject toupdates that would be notified with anticipation).
Session No. (date)
DAY 1 (Oct. 8th)
DAY 2 (Oct. 15th)
DAY 3 (Oct. 22nd)
DAY 4 (Oct. 29th)
DAY 5 (Nov. 12th)
DAY 6 (Nov. 26th)
DAY 7 (Dec. 10th)
DAY 8 (Dec. 17th)

Main contents (Overall description)
The science of learning. How do students learn?
We explore and discuss what the science of learning tells us about how people learn and its practical implications over the design of our courses and lessons.
Many of these ideas involve an inclusive approach to education.
Teaching-learning methods, strategies, and techniques. How can we contribute to the students’ learning?
We build on Day 1 to discuss active learning and learn and practice in relation with different methods, strategies and techniques intended to promote it. Amongothers, we address flipped classroom, peer-instruction, TBL, jigsaw, fishbowl, etc.
Assessment, feedback, and rubrics. How can we obtain information on how/what students learn?
We learn and practice in relation with the different purposes of assessment, when/how/who can be involved, and its connections with formative feedback. Also,
we practice the creation of questions for multiple-choice tests and rubrics.
Course and syllabus design. How can we design and improve our courses and syllabi?
We learn and practice in relation with course and syllabus design, exploring their different components, and the integration of what we learnt on days 2 and 3.
Class design. How can we design, deliver, and improve our classes?
Building on the previous sessions, we learn and practice in relation with how to structure a class and its components/sequence. Participants design a brief classthat they will teach in the following days.
Class design & instruction I. How can we design, deliver, and improve our classes?
We teach the brief class designed during Day 5 and receive constructive feedback from our peers to improve it.
Class design & instruction II. How can we design, deliver, and improve our classes?
We teach the same class (modified after receiving feedback) and we receive feedback to continue improving it.
Deconstructing knowledge & career paths. Is what we learnt unquestionable? Which is my path as a university teacher?
We problematize some contents addressed during the course, generating reflection and critical thinking. Also, we address our career paths as academics inhigher education and reflect about our future career paths.

Teaching and learning methodsThe following are the key features of this course in terms of its methods and format:
Flipped classroom. Different sessions require to, beforehand, watch a video to fruitfully participate in class.

Online. The course combines online (Zoom platform) with the use of Google Classroom as a learning management system (materials,communications, assignments, etc.).

Learning by doing & experiential learning. Participants learn by creating teaching materials (rubrics, syllabi, classes, etc.) and by going
through learner-directed and active learning strategies that emphasize self-/peer-reflection, discussion, and collaboration (jigsaw, poster
tour, fishbowl, etc.).



Active engagement. (Meaningful) active engagement and contributions of the participants are encouraged. These are relevant for learningand permit to assess the fulfillment of diverse learning outcomes (note that this does not mean that the participants are forced to talk evenwhen they do not have anything meaningful to say).

Assessment and grading
Assessment in this course is a continuous process with two goals: offering qualitative feedback to guide learning and gathering information toadjust the course to the participants’ learning moment. Grading involves a 100-point allotment system to demonstrate the achievement of thelearning outcomes through: (a) Syllabus design (35 points), (b) Class design & instruction (35 points), other class assignments and engagement andcontributing during the classes (30 points). To complete the course, participants need to pass all activities (mainly assessed by the lecturer withsporadic self-/peer-assessment; assessment criteria are shared at the beginning of the course).

Course “policies”
These are basic policies to follow the course satisfactorily (points might be deducted if they are not respected). They are open to theparticipants’ insights, and we will make our best to accommodate personal circumstances, so please let us know when these emerge.
 Attendance. The course relies on cooperation and each day builds on the prior. To complete the course, you should not be absent for four ormore periods (each day is two periods). In case of absence, please inform the lecturer no later than the day before the class.
Exception. Days 5, 6, and 7 are essential for several intended learning outcomes and involve the participants in peer-feedback. For this reason,participants can miss only one out of these three days.
 Cameras. In principle, we request the use of cameras during the sessions (to be discussed).
 Plagiarism. We expect the participants to cite adequately (information/excerpts/images). Also, if an Artificial Intelligence system (e.g.,ChatGPT) is used, this needs to be made explicit and argued.

Inclusion, equity, & accessibility statement
It is our goal to create a learning experience that is as safe, inclusive, equitable, accessible, and welcoming. If you anticipate (or through thecourse experience) any issues related to the design or instruction of the course, please do not hesitate to write us as soon as possible so we canwork together in exploring any alternatives. This includes methods and assignments, but also participation, access to resources/materials, etc. We
are committed to this, and we are happy to consider any adjustments if they do not alter the purpose of the course; let us know your ideas andfeedback at any moment so we can make the course more accessible and inclusive, they are more than welcome.

Personal message to the participantsThis is Gabriel, lecturer of the course. If you read the whole syllabus to this point, thank you! If not, try to do it as it can solve some doubts thatmight emerge later.
UTokyo Global FFDP was created with dedication and passion by academics who firmly believe that education and teachers are key societal
pillars and, as such, that university students should learn with teachers who know about their discipline, but also about “teaching the discipline”.
Being here, you probably share this idea. UTokyo Global FFDP is meant for you and others with similar interests, but diverse backgrounds. Youmight be interested in this: the first two editions brought together participants from 18 countries (four continents) and multiple disciplines.
The course aims to offer the opportunity to stop, reflect and discuss about topics that, when teaching, we have less time to address. That is why
we emphasize reflection and discussion with your peers, a valuable opportunity if you consider the possibility of teaching anywhere in the world.
Still, let me emphasize that it is not possible to “master” a discipline (pedagogy) and a profession (teacher) in eight sessions. Hence, after the course,
you will continue feeling the need of knowing more and of developing your skills. This is natural and, actually, a good sign.
Within a safe and respectful learning environment, we will invite you to share your ideas, but also to re-explore them. The self-analysis ofassumptions is key in the training of educators and a crucial competence to promote continuous learning. This is critical given that with teaching
we face a noteworthy situation: even if we have never taught or been trained to teach, we have spent several years participating in teaching andlearning processes; consequently, we have ideas about how such processes should look like, which brings benefits and perils. As we expect fromother professionals (medical doctors, accountants, mechanics, architects, lawyers, chemists, etc.), those with the responsibility (and joy) of teachingshould receive training; teaching based only on our own experience is not enough. But again, if you are here, you most likely share these ideas. All
there is left for me to say is: come in and welcome! We are looking forward to learning with you.

References
This a list of relevant (non-compulsory) references. If you do not have access to them or need support to read them, please reach thelecturer. A more comprehensive and diverse list will be shared each session.
Ambrose, S. A., et al. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.

Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Harvard University Press.

Barkley, E. F., & Major, C. H. (2015). Learning assessment techniques: A handbook for college faculty. Jossey-Bass.

Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Open University Press/McGraw Hill.

Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th Ed.). H.B. Jovanovich College.

Griffin, P., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2014). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach. Springer.

Irons, A., & Elkington, S. (2021). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. Routledge.

Langley, G. J., et al. (2009). The improvement guide (2nd Ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Nilson, L. B. (2016). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. John Wiley & Sons.



Nisbet, J., & Shucksmith, J. (2017). Learning strategies. Routledge.

Villa, R., & Thousand, J. (2016). The Inclusive Education Checklist: A Self-Assessment of Best Practices. Dude Publishing.

Oakley, B., Rogowsky, B., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2021). Uncommon sense teaching. TarcherPerigee.

Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. Routledge.