diversifying change in undergraduate stem education carol l. colbeck university of massachusetts...

Diversifying Change in Undergraduate STEM Education

Carol L. ColbeckUniversity of Massachusetts Boston

Core values & assumptions

Keep focus on learning Student Faculty Organizational

Students know a lot about their own learning

All learning occurs in a complex system

Begin with the end in mind

Process Theories of Organizational Development and Change

Implement Goals

Dissatisfaction

Search/Interact

Set/Envision Goals

MODE OF CHANGE

Prescriptive Constructive

UNIT OF CHANGE

Multiple Entities

Single Entities

EVOLUTION

LIFE CYCLE TELEOLOGYTELEOLOGY

DIALECTICDIALECTIC

Variation Selection Retention

Thesis

AntithesisConflict Synthesis

Stage 1 (Start-

up)

Stage 2 (Grow)

Stage 3 (Harvest

)

Stage 4 (Terminate)

Van de Ven and Poole, 1995

Research questions point toward levers for

change What should new graduates have

learned? How should we teach so students

will have learned? What should we keep in mind to enhance

learning for ALL students? What motivates faculty to foster engaged

learning for all students? How do organizational contexts shape

faculty motivation/behavior? How is change effected and sustained?

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/995

Student Perceptions of Learning

•Content•Skills

•Integration•Application•Attitudes

State Policies

• Regulations• Incentives• Funding

Allocations

Higher Education Institutions

• Mission• Governance• Resources

• Policies

Departments

• Workload Policies• Decision-making

• Role of Chair• Norms & Values

Disciplines

• High/Low Consensus• Pure/Applied

Faculty Teaching

• Capability Beliefs• Context Beliefs

Enhancing Faculty Contributions to Student LearningEnhancing Faculty Contributions to Student Learning

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/996

States, Institutions, and DisciplinesStates, Institutions, and Disciplines

University of Tennessee at

Knoxville

University of Texas at Austin

Ohio State University

Tennessee Technological

University

Youngstown State

University

Austin

College

R e s e a r c h U n i v e r s i t i e s

C o m p r e h e n s i v e U n i v e r s i t i e s

Wilberforce University

University of Texas at

San Antonio

Fisk University

Engineering

Literature

Business

PhysicsLiberal Arts Colleges

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/997

Enhancing Faculty Contributions to Learning Productivity

(Colbeck, Fairweather, Brown, Beach, 2001)

• What should students learn?• How should faculty teach to enhance student

learning?• What factors enhance / constrain teaching for

effective student learning?• How do levers for change identified in our case

studies differ from current policies?

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/998

Content learned /taught

• What content should students learn?

– Foundations

– Principles / Ideas

– Theories

– Core skills

• How should faculty teach to enhance content learning? – Use variety of teaching

methods – Ask questions– Check for understanding– Explain processes– Give demonstrations– Provide real-world

examples, context– Assign group projects– Engage students

individually

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/999

Skills learned / taught

• What skills should students learn?– Communication

• Written

• Presentation

• Interpersonal

– Problem solving / analysis

– Critical thinking

– Computer

– Management

– How to learn

• How should faculty teach to enhance skill learning?– Assign:

• Writing

• Problem sets

• Presentations

• Group work

• Open-ended problems

– Provide detailed feedback

– Engage students individually

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9910

Integration learned / taught

• Ways students should integrate what they have learned?– Relate concepts within

disciplines

– Relate ideas across disciplines

– Relate content to real world

• Teaching to enhance students’ ability to integrate what they have learned– Show how concepts,

theories are similar

– Relate lecture to lab

– Assign real world problems

– Team teach

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9911

Application learned / taught

• Ways students should apply what they have learned– To personal life

– To further education

– To career

– To citizenship

• Teaching to enhance students’ ability to apply what they have learned– Assign real world problems

– Coach, provide direction

– Bring in guest speakers

– Collaborate with industry

– Provide internships, coops

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9912

Attitudes learned / taught

• Attitudes students should develop about learning– Learning is for life

– Enroll in further education

– Excitement

– Persistence

– Confidence

– Curiosity

• Teaching to encourage positive attitudes about future learning– Serve as a role model

– Care about students

– Care about subject

– Discuss own research, practical experience

– Involve students in research

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9913

How contexts enhance or constrain teaching for effective learning

• How context enhances– Peer communication

– Meaningful rewards

– Involvement in planning

– Flexible workload

– Time for teaching improvement

– Resources (equipment, facilities)

• How context constrains– Inadequate resources

– Service demands

– Mixed messages

– Research rewarded by reduced teaching load

– Graduate teaching given priority

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9914

Current policies vs. levers for change

• Focus on teaching inputs

• Emphasize efficiency• Reward research and

teaching separately• Focus on rewards or

regulations• Insulate faculty from external

pressures

• Focus on learning outcomes

• Emphasize effectiveness• Encourage integration of

teaching and research• Involve faculty in planning

• Encourage faculty/student involvement in community– Scholarly

– Professional

– Geographic

Research questions point toward levers for

change What should new graduates have learned? How should we teach so students will have

learned? What should we keep in mind to

enhance learning for ALL students?

What motivates faculty to foster engaged learning for all students?

How do organizational contexts shape faculty motivation/behavior?

How is change effected and sustained?

16

Self-perceptions predict students’ choice of major academic performance retention in college and in major choice of career

better than “objective” measures

of ability.

Focus on Students’ Self-perceptions

Enhancing self-efficacy to reduce stereotype threat

Stereotype threat: vulnerability of being judged by widely-held negative assumptions about a group to which one belongs (Steele & Aronson, 1995)

Self-efficacy: beliefs about one’s capabilities to produce designated levels of performance (Bandura, 1977). Sources: Enactive mastery experiences Modeling influences Social persuasion Affective arousal

Upward Bound in Geosciences

(Baber, Pifer, & Colbeck, 2007) Sustained positive experiences

are important New students’ self efficacy

declined, even though their interest in Geosciences increased, and they perceived faculty members as positive role models

Returning students self-efficacy increased

19

Variables associated with Variables associated with gaining confidence to become gaining confidence to become

an engineeran engineer(Colbeck, Cabrera, Terenzini, 2001)(Colbeck, Cabrera, Terenzini, 2001)

Instructor makes expectations & explanations clear

Collaborative Learning

Being an upper division student

Feedback from and interaction with instructor

Collaborative Learning

Female Students Male Students

Research questions point toward levers for

change What should new graduates have learned? How should we teach so students will have

learned? What should we keep in mind to enhance

learning for ALL students? What motivates faculty to foster

engaged learning for all students?

How do organizational contexts shape faculty motivation/behavior?

How is change effected and sustained?

Faculty Motivation to Use Alternative Teaching Practices

Carol L. Colbeck clc15@psu.edu

Alberto F. Cabrera Robert J. Marine marine@psu.edu

Center for the Study of Higher EducationThe Pennsylvania State University

400 Rackley BuildingUniversity Park, PA 16802

Demographics

Experience

Goals for teaching

Capability beliefs

(Skills)

Context beliefs

• Likely rewards

• Adequate resources

Teaching PracticesGroup/design projects

Traditional methods

Motivation

Faculty Motivation to Use Alternative Teaching PracticesFaculty Motivation to Use Alternative Teaching Practices

Colbeck/Marine Copyright© 2002

Predictors of Alternative Faculty Teaching Practices

Group / Design Projects

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Rank + (p<.05)

EXPERIENCE

Reform involvement +

(p<.01)

Traditional Methods

Ethnicity - (p<.01)

Industrial + (p<.01)

Colbeck/Marine Copyright© 2002

Predictors of Alternative Faculty Teaching Practices

Group / Design Projects

TEACHING GOALS

Teamwork & lifelong learning +

(p<.001)

Eng. Science fundamentals - (p<.05)

CAPABILITY BELIEFS

Interpersonal communication + (p<.01)

CONTEXT BELIEFS

Administrative resources - (p<.05)

Computer/lab resources + (p<.01)

Traditional Methods

Teamwork & lifelong learning - (p<.01)

Eng. Science fundamentals + (p<.05)

Ill-defined problem solving - (p<.001)

Formal communication + (p<.001)

Administrative resources + (p<.05)

Colbeck/Marine Copyright© 2002

Colbeck/Marine Copyright© 2002

Implications

Model has strong explanatory power because– It is grounded in integrative motivation systems theory (MST)

(Ford, 1992)– Operationalized concepts are specific & relevant to faculty

experience

Three ways to motivate faculty to use active & collaborative teaching practices

– Organize context to promote related goals– Provide appropriate resources– Support development of associated skills: ill-defined problem

solving and interpersonal skills

Research questions point toward levers for

change What should new graduates have learned? How should we teach so students will have

learned? What should we keep in mind to enhance

learning for ALL students? What motivates faculty to foster engaged

learning for all students? How do organizational contexts

shape faculty motivation/behavior?

How is change effected and sustained?

CSHE 5/0027

Colbeck

Assessing Institutionalization of Curricular and Pedagogical Reforms

(Colbeck, 2002)

• PROBLEM: “Will reform lead to permanent change? If you remove the money or the person, will change be sustained?”

• (Associate Dean, public university)

• GOAL: To develop and test a model for assessing whether recent pedagogical and curricular reforms will last after external funding ends

CSHE 5/0028

Colbeck

Phase 1: Model Development --Methods

• Interviews with 200 administrators, faculty, & staff at seven ECSEL schools

– How did shift in ECSEL goals after Year 6 affect institutionalization of Year 1-5 goals?

– Own involvement with ECSEL– Perceived congruence between own, ECSEL, and

engineering school goals

• Analyzed for indicators of institutionalization

CSHE 5/0029

Colbeck

Reforms are most likely to last when:

• Schools elect early ABET review

• Reformed courses are funded from operating budgets

• Reformed courses are required

• Administrators provide practical & financial support

• Many tenure-track faculty teach reformed courses

• Faculty incorporate reform practices in other courses

CSHE 5/0030

Colbeck

Institutionalization: Process by which a newstructure or practice is incorporated into a

system of existing structures or practices (Scott, 1995)

REGULATIVE NORMATIVE COGNITIVE

BASES OF COMPLIANCE Expedience

Social Obligation Taken for

granted

ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

RulesSanctions

NormsValues

Cultural supportPrevalence

INDICATORS Accreditation

Operating budget

Curricular requirement

Evaluation criterion

Administrator support & involvement

Faculty support & involvement

Faculty beliefs

Faculty behaviors

CSHE 5/0031

Colbeck

REGULATIVEINDICATORS

a. Accreditation

b. Operating budget

c. Curricular requirements

d. Reward criteria

NORMATIVEINDICATORS

e. Administrator involvement &

support

f. Faculty involvement &

support

COGNITIVEINDICATORS

gg. Faculty

beliefs

h. Faculty behaviors

Institutionalization Process Model

FACULTY CHANGES

TEACHING /CURRICULUM

• Use of design

• Use of groups

SENSITIVITY• Needs of

women• Needs of

minorities

CSHE 5/0032

Colbeck

Model testing: Methods

• Interviews with deans, chairs, & PI’s – Years to ABET review– ECSEL courses required for graduation

• Course/program reports – ECSEL courses as % of total courses– % Operational and % external funding for ECSEL courses– % Admin, tenure track faculty teaching ECSEL courses

• Faculty survey (291 of 663 for 44% response rate)– Perceived support for teaching– Beliefs about student learning– Student-centered and computer-aided teaching practices– Changes in teaching methods and in sensitivity to

diverse students

CSHE 5/0033

Colbeck

0.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

low moderate highUse of student-centered teaching practices

Probability of increased use of design projects due to different levels of use of student-

centered practices and ECSEL involvement

nonECSEL

ECSEL

CSHE 5/0034

Colbeck

0.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

no s

uppo

rt

little

sup

port

mod

erat

e su

ppor

t

muc

h su

ppor

t

Effect of perceived support for teaching on probability of increased faculty sensitivity to needs of women and minority students

women

minorities

Overcoming Hollowed Collegiality (Massy, Wilger, &

Colbeck, 1992) Characteristics of departments that

support effective teaching Supportive culture Frequent interaction Tolerance of differences Generational equity Workload equity Course rotation Peer & student evaluation of teaching Balanced incentives Consensus decision making Effective department chairs

Four-Square Typology of Change Categories

INTENDED OUTCOME

Prescribed Emergent

CURRICULUM & CURRICULUM & PEDAGOGYPEDAGOGY

POLICYPOLICY SHARED VISIONSHARED VISION

REFLECTIVE TEACHERSREFLECTIVE TEACHERS

Henderson, Beach, Finkelstein, & Larson, 2008

Applying research to practice at UMass Boston

Strategic planning Involving faculty in articulating mission, setting goals Engaging students, alums in planning

Using accreditation as lever for engaging faculty in curricular reform and more active evaluation of own programs Focus on learning outcomes for all students Emphasize effectiveness

Building capacity rather than using mandates or offering new incentives Hiring (STEM Ph.D.s, MS and/or BS, ethnic & gender

diversity) professional development to enhance skills and

confidence of current faculty Getting involved and celebrating faculty involvement

Proposals for study of minority student success in STEM Chairing university-wide STEM Education research effort

Applying research to practice at UMass

Boston Encouraging communication, collaboration

within college, across university Frequent formal and informal meetings Conflict about substance OK Encouraging agency, regardless of rank or

tenure Transparency about merit pay, tenure

review criteria Weights, justifications for merit Encourage integration of research, teaching,

and community engagement

UMass Boston GCE Mission The Graduate College of Education

(GCE ) generates knowledge, fosters engaged learning, promotes social justice, and empowers students, educators, other professionals, and community members through teaching, research, evaluation, and public service. The urban setting of the University of Massachusetts Boston informs -- and is informed by -- GCE efforts to fulfill the academic and civic purposes of education in a diverse democracy.

41

Students’ Pre-courseCharacteristics

•Ability •Aspirations •Parental Education •Ethnicity •Gender

Students’ Pre-courseCharacteristics

•Ability •Aspirations •Parental Education •Ethnicity •Gender

Competency Gains

•Group skills •Problem Solving Skills •Occupational Awareness

Teaching Practices

•Instructor Interaction & Feedback •Clarity & Organization •Collaborative Learning

Teaching Practices

•Instructor Interaction & Feedback •Clarity & Organization •Collaborative Learning

Classroom Climate

•Faculty•Peers

Classroom Climate

•Faculty•Peers

Teaching for Professional Competence Model

Self Perception Gains

•Intent to Persist •Sense of Responsibility•Expected Grade•Confidence•Motivation

National & State Context

•Funding•Student demand

•Mission Structure•Resource allocationNorms/values

Faculty Characteristics

•Personality traits•Abilities•Motivation

Teaching/Research Activities

•Research mentoring•Teaching informed by research•Scholarship of Teaching•Inquiry-based Learning

Desired Outcomes•New Knowledge•Student Learning•Next Generation

Measured Outcomes•Number of Publications•Student Ratings of Teaching

Intervening Variables•Number of Publication Outlets•Reviewers’ Taste•Students’ Characteristics

Institutional Context B

Faculty Evaluation

Institutional Context A

C. L. Colbeck CSHE 09/25/9943

Central Administrators 20 Deans 25 Chairs 38 Faculty - Business 64 Faculty - Literature 66 Faculty - Engineering 46 Faculty - Physics 50 Student Groups 29

TotalTotal 338 338

With whom With whom did we talk ?did we talk ?