Are Department Heads Ready for Change? Leveraging a Leadership Action Team to Advance Teaching Evaluation Practices.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Hannah C Ericson, Paula P Lemons, Erin L Dolan, Peggy Brickman, Sandhya Krishnan, Tessa C Andrews
{"title":"Are Department Heads Ready for Change? Leveraging a Leadership Action Team to Advance Teaching Evaluation Practices.","authors":"Hannah C Ericson, Paula P Lemons, Erin L Dolan, Peggy Brickman, Sandhya Krishnan, Tessa C Andrews","doi":"10.1187/cbe.24-07-0175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Teaching evaluation at many institutions is insufficient to support, recognize, and reward effective teaching. We developed a long-term intervention to support science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) department heads in advancing teaching evaluation practices. We describe the intervention and systematically investigate its impact on departmental practices within a research-intensive university. The outcomes varied considerably by department, with four departments achieving extensive teaching evaluation reform and seven departments achieving more limited reform. We used qualitative content analysis of interviews and meetings to investigate department head readiness for change and how it related to the reforms they achieved. All department heads perceived inadequacies in their current evaluation practices, but this dissatisfaction did not reliably predict the changes they pursued. Heads only pursued changes that they perceived to have clear benefits. All heads worried that faculty might resist new practices, but heads who were most successful in facilitating change saw ways to work around resistance. Heads who led the most change questioned their own expertise for reforming teaching evaluation and delegated the work of developing new evaluation practices to knowledgeable colleagues. We discuss emergent hypotheses about factors that support heads in challenging the status quo with more robust and equitable evaluation practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"24 1","pages":"ar8"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11974521/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-07-0175","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Teaching evaluation at many institutions is insufficient to support, recognize, and reward effective teaching. We developed a long-term intervention to support science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) department heads in advancing teaching evaluation practices. We describe the intervention and systematically investigate its impact on departmental practices within a research-intensive university. The outcomes varied considerably by department, with four departments achieving extensive teaching evaluation reform and seven departments achieving more limited reform. We used qualitative content analysis of interviews and meetings to investigate department head readiness for change and how it related to the reforms they achieved. All department heads perceived inadequacies in their current evaluation practices, but this dissatisfaction did not reliably predict the changes they pursued. Heads only pursued changes that they perceived to have clear benefits. All heads worried that faculty might resist new practices, but heads who were most successful in facilitating change saw ways to work around resistance. Heads who led the most change questioned their own expertise for reforming teaching evaluation and delegated the work of developing new evaluation practices to knowledgeable colleagues. We discuss emergent hypotheses about factors that support heads in challenging the status quo with more robust and equitable evaluation practices.

部门领导准备好改变了吗?利用领导行动小组推进教学评估实践。
许多机构的教学评估不足以支持、认可和奖励有效的教学。我们制定了一项长期干预措施,以支持科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)部门负责人推进教学评估实践。我们描述了这种干预,并系统地调查了它对研究型大学部门实践的影响。不同院系的结果差异很大,有4个院系进行了广泛的教学评估改革,7个院系进行了有限的改革。我们使用访谈和会议的定性内容分析来调查部门主管对变革的准备情况,以及它与他们实现的改革之间的关系。所有的部门主管都意识到他们目前的评估实践的不足,但是这种不满并不能可靠地预测他们所追求的变化。主管们只追求他们认为有明显好处的改变。所有的校长都担心教师可能会抵制新的做法,但在推动变革方面最成功的校长们看到了克服抵制的方法。领导改革最多的校长们质疑自己在改革教学评估方面的专业知识,并将开发新的评估实践的工作委托给知识渊博的同事。我们讨论了关于支持领导者以更稳健和公平的评估实践挑战现状的因素的新兴假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信