Mike Wilton, Jeffrey Maloy, Laura Beaster-Jones, Brian K Sato, Stanley M Lo, Daniel Z Grunspan
{"title":"教学影响者:教学教授作为多样化、平等和包容方面的潜在系变革推动者。","authors":"Mike Wilton, Jeffrey Maloy, Laura Beaster-Jones, Brian K Sato, Stanley M Lo, Daniel Z Grunspan","doi":"10.1187/cbe.24-03-0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>At many research-intensive universities in North America, there is a disproportionate loss of minoritized undergraduate students from Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) majors. Efforts to confront this diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) challenge, such as faculty adoption of evidenced-based instructional approaches that promote student success, have been slow. Instructional and pedagogical change efforts at the academic department level have been demonstrated to be effective at enacting reform. One potential strategy is to embed change agent individuals within STEM departments that can drive change efforts. This study seeks to assess whether tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty housed in STEM departments are perceived as influential on the instructional and pedagogical domains of their colleagues. To answer this, individuals across five STEM departments at large, research-intensive campuses identified faculty who were influential upon six domains of their instruction and pedagogy. Social network analysis of individuals in these departments revealed heterogeneity across the instructional domains. Some, like the teaching strategies network, are highly connected and involve the majority of the department; while others, like the DEI influence network, comprise a significantly smaller population of faculty. Importantly, we demonstrate that tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty are influential across all domains of instruction, but are disproportionately so in the sparsely populated DEI influence networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"23 3","pages":"ar35"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440739/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instructional Influencers: Teaching Professors as Potential Departmental Change Agents in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.\",\"authors\":\"Mike Wilton, Jeffrey Maloy, Laura Beaster-Jones, Brian K Sato, Stanley M Lo, Daniel Z Grunspan\",\"doi\":\"10.1187/cbe.24-03-0102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>At many research-intensive universities in North America, there is a disproportionate loss of minoritized undergraduate students from Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) majors. Efforts to confront this diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) challenge, such as faculty adoption of evidenced-based instructional approaches that promote student success, have been slow. Instructional and pedagogical change efforts at the academic department level have been demonstrated to be effective at enacting reform. One potential strategy is to embed change agent individuals within STEM departments that can drive change efforts. This study seeks to assess whether tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty housed in STEM departments are perceived as influential on the instructional and pedagogical domains of their colleagues. To answer this, individuals across five STEM departments at large, research-intensive campuses identified faculty who were influential upon six domains of their instruction and pedagogy. Social network analysis of individuals in these departments revealed heterogeneity across the instructional domains. Some, like the teaching strategies network, are highly connected and involve the majority of the department; while others, like the DEI influence network, comprise a significantly smaller population of faculty. Importantly, we demonstrate that tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty are influential across all domains of instruction, but are disproportionately so in the sparsely populated DEI influence networks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"ar35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440739/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-03-0102\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-03-0102","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
摘要
在北美的许多研究密集型大学中,科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)专业的少数民族本科生流失比例过高。为应对这一多样性、公平性和包容性(DEI)挑战所做的努力一直进展缓慢,例如,教师采用以实证为基础的教学方法来促进学生的成功。实践证明,在学部层面进行教学和教学法改革能有效地进行改革。一个潜在的策略是在科学、技术、工程和数学系中培养能够推动变革的变革推动者。本研究旨在评估在科学、技术、工程和数学系任职的、注重教学的教师是否被认为对其同事的教学和教学领域具有影响力。为了回答这个问题,大型研究密集型校园的五个科学、技术、工程和数学系的个人确定了对其教学和教学法的六个领域有影响力的教师。对这些院系中的个人进行的社会网络分析显示,各教学领域之间存在异质性。有些网络,如教学策略网络,联系紧密,涉及到整个系的大多数人;而另一些网络,如 DEI 影响网络,则由人数少得多的教师组成。重要的是,我们证明了终身教职、专注于教学的教师在所有教学领域都具有影响力,但在人口稀少的 DEI 影响力网络中,他们的影响力不成比例。
Instructional Influencers: Teaching Professors as Potential Departmental Change Agents in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
At many research-intensive universities in North America, there is a disproportionate loss of minoritized undergraduate students from Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) majors. Efforts to confront this diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) challenge, such as faculty adoption of evidenced-based instructional approaches that promote student success, have been slow. Instructional and pedagogical change efforts at the academic department level have been demonstrated to be effective at enacting reform. One potential strategy is to embed change agent individuals within STEM departments that can drive change efforts. This study seeks to assess whether tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty housed in STEM departments are perceived as influential on the instructional and pedagogical domains of their colleagues. To answer this, individuals across five STEM departments at large, research-intensive campuses identified faculty who were influential upon six domains of their instruction and pedagogy. Social network analysis of individuals in these departments revealed heterogeneity across the instructional domains. Some, like the teaching strategies network, are highly connected and involve the majority of the department; while others, like the DEI influence network, comprise a significantly smaller population of faculty. Importantly, we demonstrate that tenure-track, teaching-focused faculty are influential across all domains of instruction, but are disproportionately so in the sparsely populated DEI influence networks.
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.