An official website of the United States government
Three diverse public universities(North Carolina State University, University of North Carolina Charlotte, and North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University)have adapted and implemented an institutional change model that proposes five core elements for achieving cultural change in colleges and universities to increase the percentage of underrepresented minority (URM) faculty in STEM fields. Since URM doctoral students spend most of their time exposed to the culture of their academic department as they take classes, conduct research, and interact with departmental faculty, staff, and other graduate students, the climate they experience and the support they receive at the departmental level can have a major impact on their success. When interventions address students directly, once they graduate, there may be no lasting change in the department. However, when faculty attitudes and mentoring practices along with departmental processes and procedures change, the changes are likely to be more sustainable. Using institutional theory as the analytical lens, the purpose of this paper is to examine how one collaborative project implements a faculty-led institutional change model for diversifying the STEM professoriate. Each participating doctoral granting department has a volunteer faculty member interested in URM success designated as a Faculty Fellow. The Fellow receives programmatic support to increase their understanding of the issues facing URMs in doctoral programs and assessment support to identify the departmental practices that may be hindering URM student success. Together with their department head and director of graduate programs, they work with the departmental faculty to understand graduate student pathways, identify practices and policies that promote success, and diagnose trouble spots. Based on this study of the graduate student experience in their own department, the Fellow develops a departmental initiative designed to address departmental weaknesses. The faculty as a whole develop a departmental diversity plan to build these insights into departmental practices and procedures. This paper will explore the process of developing the departmental initiatives and diversity plans as well as report on some initiatives and plans developed. The benefits and drawbacks of the approach are discussed along with best practices identified to this point
more »
« less
Initial Faculty Perceptions of Scrum for Departmental Change. In Content Access.
This RESEARCH paper examines faculty perceptions regarding the use of Scrum for departmental operations. Scrum is an agile methodology that applies processes and procedures that encourage transparency, inspection, and adaptation in the creation of a product. Across the literature for engineering education change, there has been a focus on identifying the barriers and affordances to cultural change in engineering departments. The objective of this paper is to examine the driving factors and barriers to implementing Scrum for departmental operations. The paper will specifically address how a group of faculty about to adopt Scrum perceive the impact of that adoption on potential changes to departmental operations and culture. Findings indicate concerns with the traditional barriers of time and workload. However, they also indicate that there is some expectation for Scrum to decrease elements of the faculty workload and reduce time to complete tasks. These findings also build on the understanding of how faculty collaboration is perceived as both a barrier and affordance to departmental change.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1920780
- PAR ID:
- 10296463
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Students as Partners (SaP) is a pedagogical approach that considers students co-creators of an educational environment along with faculty, rather than passive participants. While an increasing body of literature evidences a multitude of positive outcomes from the SaP approach, there remains limited research on the challenges that arise in such collaborations. Quan et al. (2021) outlined such challenges in a paper showing that different members of a Departmental Action Team (DAT), in which students, staff, and faculty collaborate on a change effort, had different perspectives of their partnership. In this work, we confirm and expand upon those findings in a case study of another DAT. Our case study DAT comes from the first cohort of the Departmental Action Leadership Institute (DALI), a workshop series that supports faculty members in physics departments facing major challenges or opportunities. We find that all points of disconnect from Quan et al. are present in our case study. Additionally, we identify three specific areas of differing perspectives between faculty and students: motivation, commitment duration, and information transparency. We present evidence of these tensions with interviews from faculty, student, and alumni DAT members. Finally, we discuss how these tensions may be navigated by faculty seeking to partner with students in departmental change work.more » « less
-
Holme, Thomas A (Ed.)In STEM disciplines, there has been a growing emphasis on implementing instructional changes in undergraduate education to enhance student success. Despite collecting different types of data, there are few applications of mid-project formative evaluations in instructional reform projects to explore faculty members' perceptions and interactions as change agents. This study conducted a formative evaluation focusing on a group of faculty participants involved in a project as part of a faculty learning community aimed at revising the chemistry curriculum at a public urban U.S. university, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Using interview data, this study revealed that faculty participants in the reform project perceived their interactive involvement, as well as environmental changes and diverse student needs, as facilitators for their instructional improvement. Additionally, based on department-wide survey measures related to departmental culture and discussion networks for undergraduate education change, faculty participants in the reform efforts had more favorable perceptions of departmental culture about making changes and higher centrality scores within departmental discussion networks compared to their peer faculty members. Implications of these findings are discussed in relation to future project implementation and faculty development as change agents.more » « less
-
Changing Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Culture from the Bottom Up: Action Plans Generated from Faculty Interviews We prefer a Lessons Learned Paper. In a collaborative effort between a RED: Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer Science Departments (RED) National Science Foundation grant awarded to an electrical and computer engineering department (ECpE) and a broader, university-wide ADVANCE program, ECpE faculty were invited to participate in focus groups to evaluate the culture of their department, to further department goals, and to facilitate long-term planning. Forty-four ECpE faculty members from a large Midwestern university participated in these interviews, which were specifically focused on departmental support and challenges, distribution of resources, faculty workload, career/family balance, mentoring, faculty professional development, productivity, recruitment, and diversity. Faculty were interviewed in groups according to rank, and issues important to particular subcategories of faculty (e.g., rank, gender, etc.) were noted. Data were analyzed by a social scientist using the full transcript of each interview/focus group and the NVivo 12 Qualitative Research Software Program. She presented the written report to the entire faculty. Based on the results of the focus groups, the ECpE department developed an action plan with six main thrusts for improving departmental culture and encouraging departmental change and transformation. 1. Department Interactions – Encourage open dialogue and consider department retreats. Academic areas should be held accountable for the working environment and encouraged to discuss department-related issues. 2. Mentoring, Promotion, and Evaluation – Continue mentoring junior faculty. Improve the clarity of P&T operational documents and seek faculty input on the evaluation system. 3. Teaching Loads – Investigate teaching assistant (TA) allocation models and explore models for teaching loads. Develop a TA performance evaluation system and return TA support to levels seen in the 2010 timeframe. Improvements to teaching evaluations should consider differential workloads, clarifying expectations for senior advising, and hiring more faculty for undergraduate-heavy areas. 4. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion – Enact an explicit focus on diversity in hiring. Review departmental policies on inclusive teaching and learning environments. 5. Building – Communicate with upper administration about the need for a new building. Explore possibilities for collaborations with Computer Science on a joint building. 6. Support Staff – Increase communication with the department regarding new service delivery models. Request additional support for Human Resources, communications, and finance. Recognize staff excellence at the annual department banquet and through college/university awards.more » « less
-
A Pathway to Initiate Engineering Education Research: A First-Year Reflection on Faculty DevelopmentMany engineering faculty have been involved in some form of engineering education research (EER) during their professional career. This may range from a relatively superficial participation as a collaborator on a small departmental education initiative to a larger role in a leadership position as a principal investigator on a multi-institutional research grant. Regardless of the level of involvement, each engineering educator must evolve and invest substantial time to acquire a level of EER knowledge that is commensurate with their desired degree of participation. For those educators who are motivated to fully immerse themselves into a potentially rewarding EER program with the expectation of perpetuity, their evolution is not without barriers to entry and associated risks. The objective of this paper is to share the experiences of three established civil engineering faculty and their mentor who are within two years of receiving their first NSF grants to support EER projects at their home institution. Barriers to entry, challenges, and the lessons learned associated with their growth as emerging engineering education researchers are discussed. Strategies and resources are provided to assist new engineering educators to: lobby for institutional support, secure initial extramural funding, initiate collaborations, formulate short- and long-term career plans, build an Individual Development Plan (IDP), and develop an effective mentor-mentee relationship with an established researcher in the social sciences. It is hoped that this work will provide a holistic summary of their pathway, and to also caution and guide faculty who are contemplating either a partial or complete shift in their research paradigm to EER.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
