diversifying change in undergraduate stem education carol l. colbeck university of massachusetts...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
217 views
TRANSCRIPT
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 [email protected]
Alberto F. Cabrera Robert J. Marine [email protected]
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 ?