Bridging the educational research‐teaching practice gap: Curriculum development, Part 2: Becoming an agent of change

Abstract

Many faculty members in science departments are experiencing pressure to improve their courses, particularly with respect to the ways in which students are taught and assessed. The purpose of this article is to provide some insights and practical ideas on how curriculum change can be brought about-how motivated individuals can become agents of change. Change almost always elicits opposing and supporting forces, examples of which are given. Finally, we discuss examples of strategies to deal with these forces and highlight various factors that need to be considered when implementing such strategies, including the concepts of a zone of feasible innovation, the zone of tolerance, and the development of communities of practice.

Post–Vision and Change: Do We Know How to Change?

“…Of course, the inventories alone cannot be the basis for course transformation; both the HPI and DQC programs emphasize other critical elements, such as collaborative groups of faculty members working together on issues they care deeply about (Rogan and Anderson, 2011), regarding faculty as part of the solution and not as problems that need to be fixed (Henderson et al ., 2010), and active teaching and learning.…”

“…, 2012). In addition to scholarship, other rewards include outstanding teacher awards and recognition by deans and department chairs in special lecture series (Rogan and Anderson, 2011). Of course, such rewards require a high degree of top-down involvement within institutions and/or departments.…”

“…In addition, individual faculty members have helpful/constraining attributes, such as willingness/lack of confidence to try new ideas. Rogan and Anderson (2011) recommend that professional-development programs include explicit recognition and discussion of such opposing and supporting forces for each participant and also specific change strategies to address these forces (such as rewards from upper management). However, few biology faculty–development programs do this (Table 1).…”

A Faculty-Development Model for Transforming Introductory Biology and Ecology Courses

“…Examination of HPI pre-and posttest data by the 19 faculty participants "anchored and deepened" (Marbach-Ad et al 2009b, p. 408) discussions about student learning, leading to more-effective reforms. This team fits Rogan and Anderson's (2011) definition of a facultydevelopment learning community-professors working collaboratively toward course reform, bound together socially and professionally. Learning communities employing concept inventories may thus be powerful vehicles for the transformation of college biology instruction.…”

Cooperative learning for faculty: Building communities of practice

“…These changes, driven largely by a growing body of research on how people learn and by influential reports such as Vision and Change [2], demand substantial curricular reform [3,4]. However, science faculty members rarely receive formal training on pedagogical theory and practices and are almost never exposed to theories of institutional change, which come largely from business and economics.…”