An official website of the United States government
Objective: In Spring 2020 when COVID-19 hit, community colleges moved almost all classes online. This disruption impacts recent math reforms, including contextualization, raising concerns about sustained faculty and institutional leadership commitment. This study investigated how community college faculty teaching contextualized math courses adapted their instruction in response to COVID-19-related disruptions and how community college and instructional leadership addressed math contextualization efforts in response to COVID-19. Methods: Using multiple case studies, we conducted interviews with faculty and institutional leaders from two large community colleges in a Midwestern state. We also integrated field notes, observations, lesson plans, project documentation, and other contextual information as complementary data. Results: Three themes revealed how faculty and institutional leaders navigated the process of adapting contextualization efforts throughout the pandemic: reaching out to create community remotely, reimagining contextualization or pushing the pause button, and skilling up to persist through and toward change. Contribution: This study provides insight into the unique challenges and innovations due to sudden yet enduring disruptions that impact instruction, faculty development, and institutional support around instructional reform in the community college. This research informs faculty and institutional leaders navigating sustained efforts around math reform to identify actions to help institutions and their faculty continue advancing high-impact approaches and initiatives to math instruction in any environment.
more »
« less
Leveraging BIPOC Faculty Counterspaces: Lessons for Organizational Change from Aspire’s IThrive Collective
This exploratory study examines the relationship between Aspire’s IThrive Collective counterspace community of support and the organizational transformation efforts of members of the IChange Network. Our study examines how a counterspace community of support could inform institutional transformation. We collected focus group data from participants in a IThrive counterspace conversation series, consisting of five gatherings from 2021-2022. Using Griffin’s (2020) institutional model for faculty diversity, we developed a codebook to capture areas of activity desired by faculty and university action plans. Preliminary results show an emerging framework to disaggregate impressions of faculty from dominant and underrepresented groups to inform transformation.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1834518
- PAR ID:
- 10533344
- Publisher / Repository:
- Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research
- ISSN:
- 1557-5284
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Equity-minded institutional transformation requires robust faculty learning. Research has shown that the single most important factor in student success is faculty interaction. Positive, supportive, and empowering faculty interaction is particularly important to the success of female students, poor and working class students, and students of color, but most faculty are not prepared to offer the kind of support that has been shown to be most effective for marginalized students. If institutions are serious about equity and about transformation, then they are obligated to provide professional development that will support the learning necessary for faculty to fulfill these important roles and to support faculty financially or by buying their time to participate in it. An effective way to do this is to align such professional development with the urgent needs of the campus and their related campus-wide initiatives. This article describes a community of practice model of identity-conscious professional development that engages faculty in a scholarly approach to the science of learning and evidence-based teaching and curriculum development while at the same time insistently and consistently incorporating critical reflection on and exploration of how systems of power and oppression impact learning. We believe this faculty engagement is key to transforming our institution into a more equitable and inclusive learning environment for students and faculty alike.more » « less
-
Tanner, Kimberly (Ed.)This paper examines the extent to which community college biology education research (CC BER) has progressed since initial calls for broadening participation by comparing the number of CC BER publications, identifies barriers to and opportunities for community college faculty BER participation, and highlights the importance of institutional networks as a driver for incorporating CC faculty in BER.more » « less
-
Our evidence-based practice paper will present a Teaching Excellence Network (TEN) implemented at a large, multi-campus, North-Eastern US, R1 institution. TEN was funded by a 5-year NSF IUSE grant (institutional and community transformation track) that was part of a multidisciplinary collaboration of science and engineering faculty and Learning Centers staff. We discuss our practices, the reasons behind them, and impacts on participating faculty, emphasizing building connections between the institution’s offices, departments, and schools. TEN addressed perceptions of fragmentated and siloed faculty development initiatives at our institution. Faculty development efforts are distributed across departments, including an office for teaching with technology, one for assessment and evaluation, two school-based offices, a center for faculty research excellence, and an office for DEIB efforts. While each contributes significantly to faculty development, the siloes and disconnected communication channels lead to a perception of scarcity when it comes to support around teaching. In addition, most units focus on specific areas of development and not the kind of holistic teaching support we implemented. Recently, engineering departments have hired full-time teaching-focused faculty to improve teaching practice and education quality. While some science and math departments have many teaching-focused faculty, our engineering departments often have only a few faculty in these positions. We designed our BDI to bring siloed faculty together and create easier access to the many and varied programs across campus. TEN, and our study, are grounded in questions about how institutional structures impact faculty agency and motivation. Our work is guided by three theories: Structuration, Agency, and Expectancy-Value. These theories conceptualize human motivation as being connected to instructors’ expectations of success in an endeavour (e.g., transforming aspects of their course) and the perceived value of that endeavour, while allowing us to examine the interdependence of human decision-making and institutional structures. We planned TEN around maximizing value for faculty, while generating structures that supported faculty becoming involved in our programs and focusing efforts on teaching development. TEN has two major components: summer institutes are focused on pedagogical content delivery, and the production of usable materials and course design plans; semester support groups focus on the production or implementation of specific smaller projects, or the in-depth discussion of particular research-based ideas to provide faculty continuing support and a sense of connectedness with peers. Our analysis will start from a thematic analysis of interviews with faculty, in the style of Braun and Clark, to develop a sense of our data and the impacts that this program has had on participants. We will be using our theoretical lens to look for themes around how the structures of TEN have impacted faculty. Through the iterative process of thematic analysis, other themes may also emerge for investigation, which will enrich our understanding of participants’ experiences. Presentation of these themes, alongside illustrative cases of STEM faculty, will demonstrate the impacts of TEN on participants, provide context for engaging roundtable discussions of what participants are taking away from the programs, and present implications for faculty development initiatives.more » « less
-
Carnegie Mellon University, Johns Hopkins University, and New York University created the Project Equity-focused Launch to Empower and Value AGEP Faculty to Thrive in Engineering (ELEVATE) Alliance (National Science Foundation Awards #2149995, #2149798 #2149899 from the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM in the Directorate for STEM Education) to develop a model to promote the equitable advancement of early career tenure-track engineering faculty from populations of interest to the Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) program. The goal of this AGEP Faculty Career Pathways Alliance Model (FCPAM) is to develop, implement, self-study, and institutionalize a career pathway model that can be adapted for use at other similar institutions for advancing early career engineering faculty who are: African Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Native Pacific Islanders. This NSF AGEP FCPAM will provide a framework for institutional change at private, highly selective research institutions that will enable all faculty to be members of a collaborative community. Improving the experience of these faculty can lead to increased diversity in the engineering faculty and ultimately result in graduating more engineering students from diverse populations and increasing diversity in the engineering workforce. The Alliance interventions will focus on three major areas, 1) equity-focused institutional change designed to make structural changes that support the advancement of AGEP faculty, 2) identity-affirming mentorship that acknowledges and provides professional support to AGEP faculty holistically, recognizing all parts of their identity and 3) inclusive professional development that equips all engineering faculty and institutional leaders with skills to implement inclusive practices and equips AGEP faculty for career advancement. In this paper, we will discuss the process of creating a leadership team to address these focus areas and assess the processes and procedures that currently exist at the three institutions as we begin to institutionalize these change efforts. We provide an overview of the project and efforts to date. We will also present our process for engaging in our initial self-study evaluation and next steps.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
