Finding the leaders: an examination of social network analysis and leadership identification in STEM education change

Abstract

Background: Social network analysis (SNA) literature suggests that leaders should be well connected and can be identified through network measurements. Other literature suggests that identifying leaders ideally involves multiple methods. However, it is unclear using SNA alone is sufficient for identifying leaders for higher education change initiatives. We used two sets of data, teaching discussion network data taken at three different times and respondent nominations for leaders, to determine whether these two methods identify the same individuals as leaders. Results: Respondent-nominated leaders have more direct and indirect ties on average than non-leaders, which aligns with the SNA literature. However, when looking at individuals as leaders, many respondent-nominated leaders would not be identified using SNA because they are poorly connected. Also, many individuals who were not nominated would have been considered leaders because they are well connected. Further examining these results did not indicate why there is such a difference between the SNA-identified and respondent-nominated leaders.

Designing for institutional transformation: Six principles for department-level interventions

“…Research shows that change aimed at the scale of the department (rather than at individual faculty or individual courses) is more likely to be effective [8,11]. Studies of systemic change efforts (e.g., Project Kaleidoscope [12]; the Science Education Initiative [13]) reveal strategies of successful change efforts, for example: providing continued resources to support change [13,14], aligning with institutional interests [15], cultivating effective change leaders [16], and celebrating short-term wins [17]. Within this body of work, some have externalized models for the stages and components of effective change efforts [15,18].…”

Investigating how faculty social networks and peer influence relate to knowledge and use of evidence-based teaching practices

“…Third, Kezar (2014) describes opinion leadership and high centrality as two characteristics that can affect change leadership and predicts that opinion leadership is likely to be more influential than high centrality (cf. Knaub et al, 2018). Opinion leaders are faculty perceived by others as having influence on their attitudes and opinions, whereas central actors (i.e., those with high centrality; Fig.…”

“…The K-12 literature recognizes social networks as an important component in educational change (Daly, 2010;Henderson et al, 2019), but STEM education researchers have only recently applied social network analyses at the postsecondary level (e.g., Andrews, Conaway, Zhao, & Dolan, 2016;Knaub, Henderson, & Quardokus Fisher, 2018;Ma, Herman, Tomkin, Mestre, & West, 2018;Mestre, Herman, Tomkin, & West, 2019;Quardokus & Henderson, 2015). These studies describe social networks within and across STEM departments and identify leaders of instructional change, often referred to as change agents.…”

“…Furthermore, discipline-based education research (DBER) faculty were overrepresented as resource providers (e.g., provided instructional materials, social support, feedback, information) and change agents. In a third study, Knaub et al (2018) contrasted two methods for identifying leaders of STEM education reform. The first method had respondents nominate individuals as current or potential leaders in STEM reform.…”

Analisis Sosiogram untuk Penentuan Agen Perubahan; Studi Kasus pada Program Desa Sehat Berdaya

“…Program Desa Sehat Berdaya dalam pelaksanaannya mengembangkan sosiogram sebagai alat bantu untuk pemilihan Agen Perubahan, termasuk juga untuk pemilihan seorang leader (pemimpin) (Kwok, Hanig, Brown, & Shen, 2018) (Knaub, Henderson, & Fisher, 2018). Sosiogram adalah diagram yang digunakan untuk menunjukkan keluasan dan kedalaman hubungan masing-masing anggota kelompok (Ferrándiz-Vindel, Jiménez, 2011) (Smith, Trygstad, & Hayes, 2018).…”