This article presents new quasi-experimental evidence regarding the effectiveness of teaching-oriented faculty with tenure-track appointment, a model pioneered at the University of California (UC) system. Using data from six cohorts of students at a UC campus, we examine the impact of initial course-taking with three distinct types of instructors—tenure-track research faculty, tenure-track teaching faculty, and contingent lecturers—on students’ current and subsequent academic outcomes. Descriptive analyses indicate that tenure-track teaching faculty assume a substantially larger teaching load than either research faculty or lecturers. Using a three-way fixed effects model, we find limited evidence supporting differences by faculty type on either current or downstream student outcomes.
This content will become publicly available on June 1, 2025
- Award ID(s):
- 2013630
- PAR ID:
- 10544105
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE Conferences
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland, Oregon
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background The University of California system has a novel tenure-track education-focused faculty position called Lecturer with Security of Employment (working titles: Teaching Professor or Professor of Teaching). We focus on the potential difference in implementation of active-learning strategies by faculty type, including tenure-track education-focused faculty, tenure-track research-focused faculty, and non-tenure-track lecturers. In addition, we consider other instructor characteristics (faculty rank, years of teaching, and gender) and classroom characteristics (campus, discipline, and class size). We use a robust clustering algorithm to determine the number of clusters, identify instructors using active learning, and to understand the instructor and classroom characteristics in relation to the adoption of active-learning strategies.
Results We observed 125 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate courses at three University of California campuses using the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM to examine active-learning strategies implemented in the classroom. Tenure-track education-focused faculty are more likely to teach with active-learning strategies compared to tenure-track research-focused faculty. Instructor and classroom characteristics that are also related to active learning include campus, discipline, and class size. The campus with initiatives and programs to support undergraduate STEM education is more likely to have instructors who adopt active-learning strategies. There is no difference in instructors in the Biological Sciences, Engineering, or Information and Computer Sciences disciplines who teach actively. However, instructors in the Physical Sciences are less likely to teach actively. Smaller class sizes also tend to have instructors who teach more actively.
Conclusions The novel tenure-track education-focused faculty position within the University of California system represents a formal structure that results in higher adoption of active-learning strategies in undergraduate STEM education. Campus context and evolving expectations of the position (faculty rank) contribute to the symbols related to learning and teaching that correlate with differential implementation of active learning.
-
The purpose of this workshop is to introduce instructional and disciplinary tenure-track STEM faculty to high-quality qualitative research design in order to explore their intellectual curiosity around STEM education. We will do so using the ProQual approach, a methodologically unencumbered and widely accessible way of thinking about qualitative research design that was deployed and refined over the last three years as part of the NSF-funded ProQual Institute for Research Methods. This workshop will be conducted by STEM faculty who have graduated from the ProQual Institute, who are culturally sensitive to the challenges faced by disciplinary STEM faculty. Leveraging a propagation model of effecting academic change, these workshop leaders will also serve as a community of practice to help workshop participants move their educational research ideas forward during and after the workshop.more » « less
-
Expectations for faculty members in the 21st century are high: Early career STEM faculty are expected to establish a sustainable research trajectory, a teaching practice, and a leadership role all while pursuing tenure success. Many colleges and universities have established faculty development programs, but there remains a deficiency in holistic professional support that integrates these disparate professional activities and aligns them with desired individual and institutional goals, especially for faculty in STEM. This paper will summarize an NSF funded workshop (NSF grant #EEC-1638888) designed to bring together multiple stakeholders in academia, government, and industry to begin to establish a research agenda for holistic STEM faculty development. This workshop was held February 17-18, 2017.more » « less
-
In this brief, we argue that creating avenues to support VITAL faculty is an essential role for leaders within academic affairs, and particularly those in faculty affairs. While we review a host of supports needed, we argue for the importance of sustained professional development opportunities like faculty learning communities and certificate programs as we start to make these roles more long-term and career oriented. We use the term VITAL faculty — an asset-based term — to refer to contingent or non-tenure track faculty (including visiting faculty, instructors, adjuncts, lecturers, research faculty, and clinical faculty) as a way to affirm what they are, rather than what they are not. Our work at the Delphi Project on the Changing Faculty and Student Success has identified the need for faculty affairs to take responsibility for VITAL faculty, as they often have not had an advocate or any structures to support their work. The absence of leadership positions and structures dedicated specifically to VITAL faculty support has led to the problems we have seen over the last few decades — declines in graduation and retention rates for students, low morale among faculty, and a lack of belonging for students and faculty.more » « less
