From Diagnostics to Dialogics: a generative approach to STEM education reform
Tuesday
3:45pm - 4:45pm
Norway 2
Presentation
Narmin S. Ghalichi, Bowling Green State University-Main Campus
From its early origins in social psychology (Lewin 1946), organization development theory and practice has sequentially focused on capacity building (Senge 1990) and whole-system managed change (Dannemiller & Jacobs 1992). We suggest that the more recent generative change model grounded in dialogic practice (Bushe & Marshak 2009) might be particularly well suited to the issue of improving undergraduate STEM education in the complex university context.
Project SEA Change (DUE 1525623) used emergent strategies to host a series of containers for generative conversations by faculty and administrators in a variety of formats and time scales that followed open space principles of flexibility and voluntary self-selection of participants. We complemented this work with a range of diagnostic measures in pre-/post format, and report here on the extent to which intervening to reframe language can change mindsets (Aragón et al. 2018), and ultimately behavior.
Over the course of SEA Change student quantitative literacy improved by 22%, faculty social networks increased in density and highlighted the value of connectors. RBIS surveys revealed two significant changes in faculty thinking compared to baseline; firstly, in the belief that students would react negatively, and secondly in acceptance of the evidence for efficacy of RBIS, but without detectable changes in classroom pedagogies, suggesting that the primary driver of change is to be found elsewhere. Faculty interviews surfaced modifications of epistemological beliefs (Nespor 1987) as a result of conversations as the most likely cause.
Devising containers for discourse is inexpensive. However, effective implementation requires faculty practiced in the art of hosting, role flexibility, use of self, and selective suspension of the diagnostic mindset. Our results suggest that although the latter two may be challenging for many STEM faculty, methodologies at the interface of diagnostic and dialogic approaches offer significant opportunity to reframe the narrative and improve undergraduate STEM education.
Project SEA Change (DUE 1525623) used emergent strategies to host a series of containers for generative conversations by faculty and administrators in a variety of formats and time scales that followed open space principles of flexibility and voluntary self-selection of participants. We complemented this work with a range of diagnostic measures in pre-/post format, and report here on the extent to which intervening to reframe language can change mindsets (Aragón et al. 2018), and ultimately behavior.
Over the course of SEA Change student quantitative literacy improved by 22%, faculty social networks increased in density and highlighted the value of connectors. RBIS surveys revealed two significant changes in faculty thinking compared to baseline; firstly, in the belief that students would react negatively, and secondly in acceptance of the evidence for efficacy of RBIS, but without detectable changes in classroom pedagogies, suggesting that the primary driver of change is to be found elsewhere. Faculty interviews surfaced modifications of epistemological beliefs (Nespor 1987) as a result of conversations as the most likely cause.
Devising containers for discourse is inexpensive. However, effective implementation requires faculty practiced in the art of hosting, role flexibility, use of self, and selective suspension of the diagnostic mindset. Our results suggest that although the latter two may be challenging for many STEM faculty, methodologies at the interface of diagnostic and dialogic approaches offer significant opportunity to reframe the narrative and improve undergraduate STEM education.