An official website of the United States government
Efforts to lead diversity, equity, inclusivity, and justice (DEIJ) change in higher education, and in STEM departments in particular, are prone to failure. We argue that these complex efforts entail orchestration of learning, change, and power, and therefore, understanding how organizational change teams function necessitates a combination of theories. We examine how faculty experience change projects in postsecondary engineering education, including the ways in which their experiences—and the change efforts they’re engaged in—are shaped by identity and intersectional power. Using a narrative approach, we report on the experiences of three composite cases of faculty members on change projects across multiple institutions, drawing on theories of learning, change, and power to glean understanding of these experiences. Our findings suggest that bringing these three theoretical lenses together through what we call the TRIPLE (Theories and Research on Intersectional Power, Learning, and Evolutionary) Change Framework helps develop a more critical and nuanced understanding of faculty experiences on organizational change leadership teams.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on December 6, 2025
Availing orientations and facilitating behaviors: An emerging framework for change
Scholars and practitioners in higher education recognize that transformational change of organizations—especially departments and institutions—is difficult but essential to achieve needed, national-scale improvements in access, quality and equity in STEM instruction and career development. Based on studies of change projects in college mathematics education and gender equity on STEM faculties, we identify and describe a suite of common leadership approaches among change agents who led these projects. We propose that these approaches function as constructs for an emerging framework about change leadership. By observing how change agents lead complex change projects in higher education, we seek to develop theory about leadership for organizational change and to offer practical guidance to such leaders.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2100242
- PAR ID:
- 10600633
- Editor(s):
- Cook, S; Katz, B; Moore-Russo, D
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education
- Date Published:
- ISSN:
- 2474-9346
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 214-222
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- institutional change departmental change leadership
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Transforming academic organizations to be more equitable and inclusive requires a range of change agents working together and engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Central to this DEI work is learning how to create change. Yet, change agents do not always know at the outset what resources are necessary to enact change; they often acquire the necessary resources and skills over time. This research paper investigates how change agents participating in a community of practice (CoP) across academic institutions learn about and mobilize resources to transform engineering education. This analysis of resource mobilization mechanisms comes from research with the National Science Foundation (NSF) Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) grant recipient teams. To date, 26 teams have been funded through the RED mechanism to create revolutionary organizational and cultural changes within their departments with the goal of improving equity, inclusion, and educational outcomes. Projects vary in how they define and the degree to which they focus on equity. We find that resource mobilization practices in the CoP center and strengthen DEI values in two main ways. Firstly, participants learn about and gain access to resources that are explicitly DEIrelated: they mobilize resources to advance equity at the institutional level as an outcome of the projects and collaborate on additional projects to embed DEI into the process of change-making itself, starting from the initial stages of writing a proposal. Secondly, the way participants engage with each other, and approach change goals puts equity and inclusion into practice: participants identify and tackle structural barriers to change through DEI-aligned behaviors, from addressing how institutional circumstances create resistance to DEI, to developing a shared vision for systemic change that is inclusive and collaborative.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
-
null (Ed.)Abstract This article systematically reviews how change theory has been used in STEM higher educational change between 1995 and 2019. Researchers are increasingly turning to theory to inform the design, implementation, and investigation of educational improvement efforts. Yet, efforts are often siloed by discipline and relevant change theory comes from diverse fields outside of STEM. Thus, there is a need to bring together work across disciplines to investigate which change theories are used and how they inform change efforts. This review is based on 97 peer-reviewed articles. We provide an overview of change theories used in the sample and describe how theory informed the rationale and assumptions of projects, conceptualizations of context, indicators used to determine if goals were met, and intervention design. This review points toward three main findings. Change research in STEM higher education almost always draws on theory about individual change, rather than theory that also attends to the system in which change takes place. Additionally, research in this domain often draws on theory in a superficial fashion, instead of using theory as a lens or guide to directly inform interventions, research questions, measurement and evaluation, data analysis, and data interpretation. Lastly, change researchers are not often drawing on, nor building upon, theories used in other studies. This review identified 40 distinct change theories in 97 papers. This lack of theoretical coherence in a relatively limited domain substantially limits our ability to build collective knowledge about how to achieve change. These findings call for more synthetic theoretical work; greater focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion; and more formal opportunities for scholars to learn about change and change theory.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Background Transforming the culture of STEM higher education to be more inclusive and help more students reach STEM careers is challenging. Herein, we describe a new model for STEM higher education transformation, the Sustainable, Transformative Engagement across a Multi-Institution/Multidisciplinary STEM, (STEM) 2 , “STEM-squared”, Network. The Network embraces a pathways model, as opposed to a pipeline model, to STEM career entry. It is founded upon three strong theoretical frameworks: Communities of Transformation, systems design for organizational change, and emergent outcomes for the diffusion of innovations in STEM education. Currently composed of five institutions—three private 4-year universities and two public community colleges—the Network capitalizes on the close geographic proximity and shared student demographics to effect change across the classroom, disciplinary, institutional, and inter-institutional levels. Results The (STEM) 2 Network has increased the extent to which participants feel empowered to be change agents for STEM higher education reform and has increased collaboration across disciplines and institutions. Participants were motivated to join the Network to improve STEM education, to improve the transfer student experience, to collaborate with colleagues across disciplines and institutions, and because they respected the leadership team. Participants continue to engage in the Network because of the collaborations created, opportunities for professional growth, opportunities to improve STEM education, and a sense that the Network is functioning as intended. Conclusion The goal to increase the number and diversity of people entering STEM careers is predicated on transforming the STEM higher education system to embrace a pathways model to a STEM career. The (STEM) 2 Network is achieving this by empowering faculty to transform the system from the inside. While the systemic transformation of STEM higher education is challenging, the (STEM) 2 Network directly addresses those challenges by bridging disciplinary and institutional silos and leveraging the reward structure of the current system to support faculty as they work to transform this very system.more » « less
