Dataset Information

Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Calls to improve student learning and increase the number of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) college and university graduates assert the need for widespread adoption of evidence-based instructional practices in undergraduate STEM courses. For successful reforms to take hold and endure, it is likely that a significant shift in culture around teaching is needed. This study seeks to describe the initial response of faculty to an effort to shift teaching norms, with a long-term goal of altering the culture around teaching and learning in STEM. While the effort was envisioned and led at the institutional level, dialog about the proposed change and actions taken by faculty was emergent and supported within departments.

Results

Faculty identify a variety of barriers to proposed changes in teaching practice; however, faculty also identify a variety of drivers that might help the institution alter teaching and learning norms. Analysis of faculty responses reveals 18 categories of barriers and 15 categories of drivers in faculty responses. Many of the barrier and driver categories were present in each department's responses; however, the distribution and frequency with which they appear reveals departmental differences that are important for moving forward with strategies to change teaching practice.

Conclusions

Addressing faculty's barriers to change is essential, but identifying and leveraging faculty's drivers for the change is potentially equally important in efforts to catalyze changes that are supported or constrained by the local context. Further, the collection of faculty perspectives opens a dialog around the current and future state of teaching, an important step in laying the groundwork for change. Departmental differences in barriers and drivers make clear the importance of "knowing" the local contexts so strategies adopted by departments can be appropriately tailored. Results are discussed in light of what kind of strategies might be employed to effect changes in STEM education.

SUBMITTER: Shadle SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6310369 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments.

Shadle Susan E SE Marker Anthony A Earl Brittnee B

International journal of STEM education 20170413 1

<h4>Background</h4>Calls to improve student learning and increase the number of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) college and university graduates assert the need for widespread adoption of evidence-based instructional practices in undergraduate STEM courses. For successful reforms to take hold and endure, it is likely that a significant shift in culture around teaching is needed. This study seeks to describe the initial response of faculty to an effort to shift teaching norms, w ...[more]

PMID: 30631664

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPoint of care ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming a major extension of patient care. From diagnostic efficacy to its widespread accessibility, POCUS has expanded beyond emergency departments to be a tool utilized by many specialties. With the expansion of its use, medical education has begun to implement ultrasound education earlier in curricula. However, at institutions without a formal ultrasound fellowship or curriculum, these students lack the fundamental knowledge of ultrasound. At our institution, we set out to incorporate an ultrasound curriculum, into undergraduate medical education utilizing a single faculty member and minimal curricular time.MethodsOur stepwise implementation began with the development of a 3-hour fourth-year (M4) Emergency Medicine clerkship ultrasound teaching session, which included pre- and post-tests as well as a survey. The success with this session progressed to the development of a designated fourth-year ultrasound elective, which was evaluated with narrative feedback. Finally, we developed six 1-hour ultrasound sessions that correlated with first-year (M1) gross anatomy and physiology. A single faculty member was responsible for this curriculum and other instructors included residents, M4 students, and second-year (M2) near-peer tutors. These sessions also included pre- and post-tests and a survey. Due to curricular time limitations, all but the M4 Emergency Medicine clerkship session were optional.Results87 students participated in the emergency medicine clerkship ultrasound session and 166 M1 students participated in the voluntary anatomy and physiology ultrasound sessions. All participants agreed or strongly agreed that they would like more ultrasound training, that ultrasound training should be integrated into all four years of undergraduate medical education. Students were in strong agreement that the ultrasound sessions helped increase understanding of anatomy and anatomical identification with ultrasound.ConclusionWe describe the stepwise addition of ultrasound into the undergraduate medical education curriculum of an institution with limited faculty and curricular time.

Project description:BackgroundFaculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation.MethodsWe surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation letter by postal mail. For non-responders, we sent reminder letters, then called them and faxed them the questionnaire. The questionnaire included 8 questions with 23 tabulated close-ended items about the types of productivity measured (clinical, research, teaching, administrative) and the measurement strategies used. We conducted descriptive analyses.ResultsChairs of 78 of 152 eligible departments responded to the survey (51% response rate). Overall, 82% of respondents reported measuring at least one type of faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. Amongst those measuring faculty productivity, types measured were: clinical (98%), research (61%), teaching (62%), and administrative (64%). Percentages of respondents who reported the use of standardized measurements units (e.g., Relative Value Units (RVUs)) varied from 17% for administrative productivity to 95% for research productivity. Departments reported a wide variation of what exact activities are measured and how they are monetarily compensated. Most compensation plans take into account academic rank (77%). The majority of compensation plans are in the form of a bonus on top of a fixed salary (66%) and/or an adjustment of salary based on previous period productivity (55%).ConclusionOur survey suggests that most academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity and convert it into standardized units for the purpose of salary compensation. The exact activities that are measured and how they are monetarily compensated varied substantially across departments.

Project description:BackgroundAccording to the American Association of Medical Colleges, women comprise 26% of full professors and 19% of medical school department chairs. African American and Latino faculty comprise 4.6% of full professors and 6.9% of department chairs.ObjectiveBecause of the lack of representation of women and racial/ethnic minority faculty at the highest levels of academic medicine, this study examines the perceptions of barriers to advancement by men and women academic medical school faculty of differing races and ethnicities to explore potential differences in perceptions by demographic group.DesignSemi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted between July and September 2017.ParticipantsIn order to give all faculty a chance to participate, faculty of all ranks and specialties were recruited from one southeastern medical school to participate in the study.ApproachInterviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by 3 members of the research team using an inductive approach to thematic analysis. Participants were organized into 4 groups for analysis-underrepresented in medicine (URiM) women, majority women, URiM men, majority men.Key resultsSixty-four faculty consented to participate in the study (56.2% women, 34.4% URiM). Subthemes were grouped under three main themes: Perceptions of Barriers to Advancement of Women Faculty, Perceptions of Barriers to Advancement of African American and Latino Faculty, and Perceptions of the Institutional Climate for Diversity. Majority men tended to voice distinctly different perspectives than the other three demographic groups, with the most notable differences between majority men and URiM women. Majority men tended to suggest that the advancement of women and URiM faculty was acceptable or getting better, the lack of URiM faculty in leadership was due mainly to pipeline issues, and women choose not to advance to leadership positions.ConclusionWe found that participant gender and race/ethnicity shaped perspectives of medical school faculty advancement in distinct ways.

Dataset Information

Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments.

Background

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets