Resource Collection

Choose one of the critical resource collections:

Working Group 3: Change LeadersWorking Groups 2 & 4: Costs, Benefits, and Demonstrating ImpactWorking Group 6: Aligning Faculty Work

Use the search or choose from a selection of topics below:



Help

Results 1 - 10 of 266 matches

Learning from Evaluation of Effective Teaching Event: Change Leaders Perspectives
Madhura Kulkarni, Northern Kentucky University; Rachel Renbarger, Western Michigan University
At the end of August, three ASCN working groups came together to put on an event called, "Evaluation of effective and inclusive teaching: How can teaching and learning center professionals be involved in change for social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion?" (We will refer to social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion as JEDI for ease throughout this post.) We recommend that people interested in the event watch the recording and access the resources on the event page, but the purpose of this blog post is to highlight what we learned from this event so that other change agents can implement the findings into their work immediately. Big questions that we wanted to focus on included the who, what, and how of transforming teaching. To understand how change happens, and how we might help create teaching evaluation change on our campuses, we asked Dr. Susan Elrod to describe her work modeling institutional change.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Change Leaders, Equity and Inclusion
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Institutional Systems:Evaluating Teaching, Professional Development:Diversity/Inclusion

Learning from Evaluation of Effective Teaching Event: Perspectives on Aligning Incentives
Christine Broussard, University of La Verne; Rachel Renbarger, Western Michigan University
At the end of August, three ASCN working groups came together to put on an event called, "Evaluation of effective and inclusive teaching: How can teaching and learning center professionals be involved in change for social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion?" (We will refer to social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion as JEDI for ease throughout this post.) We heard from working group leaders Christine Broussard, Kadian Callahan, and Holly Cho, and a special guest, Susan Elrod. We were fortunate to have 100 participants join us for the session as well, who represented 77 different institutions. The purpose of this blog post is to give brief highlights regarding what we learned from this event. We recommend that if the topic and event interests you, please watch the recording and access the resources on the event page.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Assessment, Equity and Inclusion
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Institutional Systems:Strategic Planning, Evaluating Teaching

Building Structural Equity: What do our organizations need?
Nita Kedharnath, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor; Rachel Renbarger, Western Michigan University
ASCN and SEISMIC began collaborating in spring 2021 to understand how both organizations could synergistically support STEM education transformation. These collaborative meetings included the project coordinators of both organizations and the authors of this piece, Nita Kedharnath (project manager of SEISMIC) and Rachel Renbarger (research director of ASCN). We started meeting monthly to discuss equity challenges within our organizations, to problem-solve together, and to share resources to ensure equity progress continues for both our groups even while we target different priorities. In March, the murder of Asian American women working at spas in Atlanta amplified calls for anti-racist actions from institutions in the United States, including institutions of higher education. During one of our collaborative meetings, we asked each other what steps our respective organizations have taken toward racial justice. While both ASCN and SEISMIC had been working on diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice in STEM education since the organizations' inceptions, this work was outward-facing and dedicated to helping university faculty members change their institutional settings. What were our organizations' roles in tackling racial justice? What should we be doing as leaders? This lack of a clear path forward led us to ask these questions to experts who have been doing this reflective work within STEM higher education.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Equity and Inclusion
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Professional Development:Diversity/Inclusion

How do we recruit, support, and retain diverse faculty? Reflections from our discussion series
Patricia Marsteller, Emory University
Equity, inclusion, diversity, and justice are foundational in effective higher education settings, including STEM disciplines. Our ASCN working group brings together communities whose work focuses on justice, equity, inclusion, and diversity (JEDI) in higher education. In spring 2021, we focused on a series of informal conversations centered on recruiting diverse faculty. In the series we discussed: Why recruiting diverse faculty is important. Promising practices for department leaders, such as creating detailed and inclusive recruitment plans, utilizing cluster hires, broadening searches, using faculty search advocates, and providing JEDI education for faculty and for search committees. Working with other institutional actors (e.g., data analysts, deans) for institutional and departmental reflections, hiring plans, and data needs.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Faculty Rewards, Policy, Equity and Inclusion
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Institutional Systems:Personnel/Hiring, Professional Development:Diversity/Inclusion

A Framework for Assessing Teaching Effectiveness (FATE)
Shawn Simonson, Boise State University
In higher education, teaching evaluation is often inadequate and inaccurate, neither improving teaching directly nor incentivizing teaching improvement. Complicating this is that effective teaching is difficult to assess and one or two subjective measures do not accurately consider all aspects of teaching and are often nebulous without established standards. COVID-19 may actually have helped by drawing more attention to this and reducing resistance to change as people became uncomfortable with student course evaluations not telling the complete teaching story that faculty and departments want told.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Faculty Rewards
Resource Type: Blog Post

Transforming Institutions Takeaways
Rachel Renbarger, Western Michigan University
Last week concluded the 2021 Transforming Institutions Conference that marked the 10th year of convening like-minded change leaders. The event was a rousing success; we had over 250 participants from at least 3 continents with over 40 concurrent presentations, 60+ posters, and 4 workshops containing research-based strategies for improving higher education. What did we learn from such an amazing event?

Change Topics (Working Groups): Assessment, Change Leaders, Guiding Theories, Policy, Costs and Benefits, Faculty Rewards, Equity and Inclusion
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Professional Development:Cultural Competency, Institutional Systems:Interdepartmental Collaboration, Outreach:Policy Change, Inter-Institutional Collaboration, Professional Development:Diversity/Inclusion, Supporting Students:Professional Preparation

Themes in the National Discussion on Reforming STEM Teaching Evaluation
Ann Austin, Michigan State University
The January 2021 National Dialogue on Reforming Stem Teaching Evaluation in Higher Education, hosted by the National Academies of Sciences Roundtable on Systemic Reform in Undergraduate Stem Education, in collaboration with AAU, APLU, ACSCN, and the TEval Project, involved faculty and administrative leaders from a variety of institutional types in very engaged conversation about teaching evaluation and innovative institutional projects. The lively conversation was evidence of the growing interest nationally in identifying models for more wholistic, effective, and inclusive forms of teaching evaluation as well as resources for initiating campus-wide discussions about reform in teaching evaluation.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Assessment, Equity and Inclusion, Faculty Rewards
Resource Type: Blog Post
Program Components: Professional Development:Course Evaluation, Institutional Systems:Evaluating Promotion and Tenure, Evaluating Teaching

Departmental Change: Sustaining Impacts
Joel Corbo, University of Colorado at Boulder; Courtney Ngai, Colorado State University; Gina M. Quan, San Jose State University; Sarah Wise, University of Colorado at Boulder
The Departmental Action Team (DAT) Project supports departments as they make changes to their undergraduate programs. In previous posts, we described the principles that underlie the DAT Project, the initial stages of DAT formation, and how DATs accomplish change initiatives with the support of facilitators. In about 70% of cases, departments that host DATs continue to catalyze change after external DAT facilitation ends, and sometimes even after the DAT itself ends. In this final post, we explore several ways DATs catalyze sustained impacts.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Change Leaders, Guiding Theories
Resource Type: Blog Post

Do you need a change theory?
Tessa Andrews, University of Georgia; Daniel Reinholz, San Diego State University
Do you have an innovative new approach to teaching? Are you an educator who is frustrated by the lack of support for new teaching methods? Are you an administrator trying to improve education on your campus? Although research has taught us a lot about how to improve teaching and learning, actually making these improvements a reality can be much more challenging. That is where change theory comes in.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Change Leaders, Guiding Theories
Resource Type: Blog Post

National Dialogue Continues
Christine Broussard, University of La Verne
Our nation has a need for college-educated members of society with diverse backgrounds and perspectives to successfully address the big challenges of our time: social justice, public health, and economic security. How can we guarantee that the college education students receive is inclusive and effective? For many years institutions have used student ratings from end of course surveys to evaluate educational effectiveness and to make retention and promotion decisions regarding faculty. But this approach has done little to encourage the adoption and use of evidence-based teaching practices that improve student performance and retention, particularly for PEERs (persons excluded based on ethnicity or race). In fact, given the inherent biases of those surveyed and the discomfort experienced by learners in challenging learning scenarios and effective pedagogies, the opposite may occur. Faculty are rewarded for 'likes' instead of for fostering concrete learning, for making students comfortable instead of challenging their intellectual comfort zones in appropriate ways, and get limited feedback, if any, on how equitable and inclusive their classroom environments are. A shift toward meaningful evaluation of inclusive and effective teaching requires systemic change at the institutional level. It is not enough to redesign student surveys to extract feedback on professional aspects of teaching (though that's a good starting point), we must also integrate thoughtful and informed peer evaluation, and provide infrastructure for professional development and self-reflection.

Change Topics (Working Groups): Faculty Rewards
Resource Type: Blog Post