[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-598933-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-598933-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","faculty-teaching-practices-and-perceptions-comparative-analysis-based-on-time-spent-lecturing","Faculty Teaching Practices and Perceptions - Comparative Analysis Based on Time Spent Lecturing","","A campus-wide faculty survey at the University of British Columbia-Vancouver (UBC-V) collected 1177 responses across all 11 faculties, yielding a 24% overall response rate. The study compares patterns among lecturers who reported spending different proportions of class time lecturing (\u003C25%, 26–50%, 51–75%, >75%). It analyzes in- and out-of-class practices, teaching assistant time usage, participation in professional development, and perceptions of institutional value for teaching. Findings describe diverse teaching methods regardless of experience or class size, offering baseline evidence for similar institutions.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/faculty-teaching-practices-and-perceptions-comparative-analysis-based-on-time-spent-lecturing/598933/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/faculty-teaching-practices-and-perceptions-comparative-analysis-based-on-time-spent-lecturing/598933.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"jay","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How many responses and faculties were included in the UBC-V survey?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"All 11 faculties participated, producing 1177 total responses with an overall 24% response rate.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How did the study compare faculty teaching practices?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Faculty were grouped by how much classroom time they reported spending lecturing: \u003C25%, 26–50%, 51–75%, and >75%.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What did the study report about teaching methods across different faculty characteristics?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Participants reported using a wide range of teaching methods regardless of years of experience and class size.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},598933,1792171489,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747858866,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Faculty Teaching Practices and Perceptions: Comparative Analysis Based on Time Spent Lecturing  \nGülnur Birol, Adriana Briseño-Garzón, Andrea Han University of British Columbia  \n2017 CELT Vol X [celt. uwindsor.ca](celt. uwindsor.ca)  \n[www.stlhe.ca](www.stlhe.ca)  \nDOI: 10. 22329/celt.v10i0 .4750  \nThe University of British Columbia-Vancouver (UBC-V) implemented a campus-wide survey of faculty teaching practices and perceptions. All 11 Faculties participated, resulting in a total of 1177 responses for an overall response rate of 24%. We compared response patterns of faculty who reported spending less than 25%, between 26-50%, between 51-75%, and more than 75% of classroom time lecturing. Using this breakdown, we analysed survey responses related to in and out-of-class practices and expectations for students, use of teaching assistant time, participation in professional development opportunities, and perceptions of whether the institution valued teaching. Participants across quadrants reported employing a wide range of teaching methods irrespective of years of experience and class size. Our findings outline the range of teaching practices employed by faculty ata large research-intensive Canadian institution and may provide baseline information for institutions of similar scale and focus.  \nOver the past decade, there has been considerable  \ninterest in understanding the most prevalent instructional practices in higher education, as well as their relative impact on student learning (Ambrose et al., 2010; Bain, 2004; Buskist & Groccia, 2011; Nilson, 2010). It has been reported, for instance, that despite the growing body of research lauding the impact of non-lecture based instructional practices on learning, lecture continues to be the dominant practice in many university classrooms (Freeman et al., 2014; Michael, 2006; Prince, 2004) . In 1980, Blackburn, Pellino, Boberg, and O’Connell surveyed faculty from 24 institutions and found 78% of faculty reported lecture as their principal instructional method. This finding was echoed by Thielens (1987) who surveyed over 800 faculty at 80 U.S. institutions, exploring the percent of time spent lecturing in relation to variables such as academic discipline, gender of the instructor, and class size. Overall,  \nfaculty reported that 80% of class time was devoted to lecture. Studies by Lammers and Murphy (2002) and Smith, Vinson, Smith, Lewin, and Stetzer (2014), both of which compared survey responses to observations of classroom practice, concluded that both instructor estimates and observed practices were in high agreement and lecture remains the primary method of instruction at the universities studied.  \nA number of studies have explored why faculty select lecture as the primary mode of instruction (Henderson, Beach, & Finkelstein, 2011; Miller, Martineau, & Clark, 2000), and it has been suggested that it is unlikely a single factor that determines what instructional practice a faculty member chooses to implement (Lammers & Murphy, 2002) . Instead, it is believed that there is a complex relationship between instructor factors, discipline factors, and class factors that may lead faculty to choose specific instructional methods (Henderson,  \nBeach, & Finkelstein, 2011; Miller, Martineau, & Clark, 2000) . For instance, Blumberg (2011), Boice (1992), and Kane, Sandretto, and Heath (2002) indicate that many faculty have little or no formal education on instructional practices or methods to prepare them for university teaching and, consequently, rely on what is referred to as an“apprenticeship of observation” during their years as students (Lortie, 1975) . As a result, experience as a student may be one of the most influential factors shaping faculty instructional choices (Hiebert & Stigler, 2000), leading faculty to “teach how they were taught, using largely passive lectures”(Blumberg, 2011, p. 27) . According to Goffe and Kauper (2014), little personal exposure to non-lecture based instruc","cbCaibicCHl2kcGd","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibicCHl2kcGd","pdf",379956,18,"English","# Background and Prior Research\n## Lecture as a Dominant Instructional Practice\n## Why Faculty Choose Lecture\n# Survey Design and Comparative Framework\n## Faculty and Response Summary\n## Grouping by Percent of Time Lecturing\n# Findings and Implications","[{\"question\":\"How many responses and faculties were included in the UBC-V survey?\",\"answer\":\"All 11 faculties participated, producing 1177 total responses with an overall 24% response rate.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the study compare faculty teaching practices?\",\"answer\":\"Faculty were grouped by how much classroom time they reported spending lecturing: \\u003c25%, 26–50%, 51–75%, and \\u003e75%.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study report about teaching methods across different faculty characteristics?\",\"answer\":\"Participants reported using a wide range of teaching methods regardless of years of experience and class size.\"}]","Faculty Teaching Practices and Perceptions - Comparative Analysis Based on Time Spent Lecturing | PDF",1792087872,45]