Developing And Managing Faculty-Driven Innovation: A Continuous Improvement Model With Self-Directed Work Teams

Continuous Improvement in Academic Computing Programs is Rarely Comprehensive

“…A research institute will most probably focus on faculty's disciplinary CI, while a teaching institute will dedicate more resources towards pedagogical CI [32]. When addressing pedagogy, many papers in the literature advocate for adopting specific newer teaching methodologies as student-centered education based on active learning [20], [33], the constructivist theory of experiential learning [8], [32], or that of Kolb's learning cycle [13] and doing away with teacher-centered approaches.…”

“…When discussing faculty's CI, the challenge of time must be addressed. The struggle to fit anything else into a schedule is real and usually results in faculty's resistance to any form of new CI efforts [8]. One way to overcome this challenge is to provide faculty with just-in-time training on accreditation tasks and tools [24], [34].…”

“…For example, 50% of the research literature reviewed for this paper proposed or described a CI effort as a result of meeting mandated accreditation requirements. Computing programs, even if oblivious to CI prior to receiving such mandates, can use the opportunity as a springboard to establish a comprehensive CI culture [6], [8]. When a seemingly healthy person receives a health scare, they usually change their eating and exercise habits for a while.…”