Framing a Theory-Grounded Research Agenda Related to FACULTY

Framing a Theory-Grounded Research Agenda Related to

FACULTY

Patti H. Clayton, Mary Price, Lisa McGuire

IUPUI Series on Service Learning Research

Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment

Vol 2A: Students & Faculty Vol 2B: Communities, Institutions, &

Partnerships (Stylus 2013)

Theory

Design

Practice

Measurement

Focusing on theory“Bringle (2003) has advocated for theory from cognate areas to be clearly used as a basis of research. These could include theories from psychology about motivation, interpersonal relationships, and cognitive and moral development; from business about interorganizational relationships, leadership, and change management; from philosophy about value systems and decision-making; from political theory about individual and collective action; from history about social movements; from communication about conflict resolution.”

Focusing on theory

“The theory or conceptual framework might precede the data collection, or it might emerge from or be modified based on data analysis and interpretation. Procedures for measuring quantitative or qualitative aspects of attributes do not stand alone, and their meaningfulness is often a function of how solidly they are situated in theory.”

Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment

• I. STUDENTS• II. FACULTY• III. COMMUNITIES• IV. INSTITUTIONS• V. PARTNERSHIPS

Section: FACULTY

• Faculty development• Faculty motivations• Faculty learning

Chapter template• Theoretical / conceptual frameworks• Critical review of past research• Measurement approaches and instruments• Implications for practice• Future research agenda• Recommended reading

Lets do some of this same thinking together ….

Critical review of research to date: FACULTY

(+) ( )Δ

Participants?Authors?

Investigating Faculty Development for Service Learning

Mary F. PriceService Learning Specialist

IUPUI Center for Service and Learning

The Field of Faculty DevelopmentFaculty

Development

Faculty Member as Teacher

Faculty Member as Scholar/

Professional

Faculty Member as Person

Instructional Development

Course Development/

Outcomes

Curricular Development and Outcomes

Student Learning

Organizational Development

Institutional Culture

Institutional Structure

Support and Reward Systems

IUPUI SERIES ON SERVICE LEARNING RESEARCH

POD NETWORK—Professional and Organizational Development in Higher Education

What interventions have you used at your unit/campus to

build an instructor’s capacity to effectively use SL pedagogy?

Sample Interventions• Consultations (one-on-one/group)• Workshops• Grants• Learning Communities/Communities

of Practice• Online modules• Service Event• Change in assignment• Others?????


• Does student engagement in an SL experience and reflection

lead to

• Increased levels of community engagement

• Improved critical thinking skills

• Enhanced understanding of self and society

which results in improved student

learning outcomes?

Current Approach to Research/ Evaluation on SL Outcomes

Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation (Guskey

2000)LEVEL 5: Student Learning Outcomes

LEVEL 4: Participants’ Use of New Knowledge and Skills

LEVEL 3: Organization Support and Change

LEVEL 2: Participants’ Learning

LEVEL 1: Participants’ Reactions


Some Questions Faculty Developers Ask?

What faculty development strategies are most effective with faculty:– at different stages,– in different roles,– with different conceptual frameworks for service (e.g.

Morton [charity, project-based, social change]),– from different disciplines,– with different learning styles,– Dimensions of social identity (race, ethnicity, class,

gender, etc.)How would I design interventions that will engage and promote learning among the various groups of instructors that are in line with X goals (campus, discipline, individual)?


Entry point as felt need

Formulation of a plan to

change practice

Active experimentation with the

new idea

Observation of impact of new practice

Reflection and

implications for future teaching

Experiential Learning Cycle for Instructors(Dewey 1933; Lewin 1947; Schon

1983,)

• How is faculty adoption of SL

influenced by

• Initiatives of a SL unit or others in a capacity bldg. role

• The overall campus environment

• Motivations and interests of individual faculty members

in ways that bring about

• Lasting commitment

• Effective course design

That will facilitate student engagement

in SL.

That will improve student learning

outcomes.

That foster improved relationships with

community members

That will lead to improved community

outcomes

Proposed Approach to Research/Evaluation on SL Outcomes with Faculty Development Included

and/or

and/or

and/or

How should/would I (re)design a faculty intervention to advance/achieve X outcome?


What artifacts will I collect to track learning/change relevant to X outcome?

Key Questions

What evidence do you have that your intervention with instructors contributed to:

• Improved student learning outcomes in the discipline?

• Improved teaching practice?

• Improved the retention of underrepresented faculty at your institution?

• Improved relationships between your campus and the communities your institution serves?

• Improved the quality of life in ________.

What evidence do you have that your intervention with instructors in dept. X contributed to:

• Improved student learning outcomes in the discipline?

• Improved teaching practice in the discipline?

• Deepened integration of civic learning into the curriculum?

• Increased the number of faculty engaged in creative activity/scholarship on SL/CE?

Theoretical Perspectives on Faculty Learning in Service Learning

Lisa E. McGuire, Associate Professor and Director of the BSW Program

IUPUI CampusIndiana University School of Social Work

Faculty Learning in Service Learning

Concept of Reciprocity – among students, community members and faculty

Focus on FACULTY Learning – “involves inquiring into the content of faculty members’ learning and the processes through which they learn” (p. 246)


Faculty Learning in Service Learning

Similar to student learning, faculty may learn:• Meta-cognition• Academic (content)• Civic learning• Personal growth (personal identity)• Inter-cultural competency


3 Categories of Frameworks to View Faculty Learning

• Faculty Identity as a Learner

• Process of Faculty Learning

• Dynamics of Co-learning


Faculty Identity as a LearnerFaculty Learning as ONE part of faculty professional development

(O’Meara, Terosky and Newman, 2008)• Agency• Relationships• Commitments• Learning

“Service learning is conceptualized here as having the potential for significant faculty learning … in part because of its intentional … counter-normative nature, its use of critical reflection on experience, … and its insistence on critical thinking (p. 249).


Content/Process Perspective of Faculty Learning

These theories/conceptual frameworks focus on the CONTENT and the PROCESS of faculty learning

Content may include: definition of service learning, partnering with community, designing reflection and assessing student learning (Bringle & Hatcher, 1995)

But what about the PROCESS?


Process of Faculty Learning:3 Theories on Learning Process

Level of Learning Argyris and Schon (1974)

Mezirow (1991) Taggart and Wilson (2005

WHAT? Single-loop learning

Context learning Technical Learning

HOW? Double-loop learning

Process learning Context learning

WHY and WHO? Triple-loop learning

Premise learning Dialetical learning


Faculty as Co-Learners

Roots in adult education/critical pedagogy:

“The teacher-of-the-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with student-teachers. The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is … taught in dialogue with the students (Friere, 1970, p. 80)


What have you learned from your students?

How did you learn it? What have you done with this

learning in your teaching?


Faculty as Co-Learners: Practical Example

Faculty Learning Community at IUPUI around reflection and critical thinking

• Learning about the DEAL model and critical thinking as applied to reflective writing

• Faculty participants reviewed and assessed student reflection products to develop skills

• Faculty reflected on their learning process (McGuire, et al, 2009)


Faculty as Co-Learners: Practical Example (continued)

Involvement in the DEAL faculty learning community improved faculty communication with students through:

• More specific syllabi and stronger assignments• Improved feedback to students

As faculty learned, studentslearned which increased facultylearning - reciprocity.

Syllabi/assignments

Feedback

Learning

Implications for PracticeWhat do you see as implications for teaching service-

learning courses?• Opportunities for multiple types of faculty development

(informal/formal; self-directed/didactic; FLCs)• Targeting learning toward multiple levels building on process

theories (what? how? why/who?)• Emphasis on critical reflection for reciprocal learning• Analysis of power dynamics in the university and community LANGUAGE COUNTS – “for” vs. “with”• Importance of conducting and presenting SoTL


Future Research AgendaWhat do you see as a research agenda around faculty learning?

• What are indicators of faculty identity as learner? As co-learner?• What conditions facilitate faculty identity as learner and/or co-learner?• What are the moderating variables the influence content and/or process of

faculty learner?• What is the relationship between student learning outcomes and faculty

learning processes?• Are there differences in how faculty learn in their disciplines vs. how they learn

S-L pedagogy?• What faculty development interventions are most effective?• What are the obstacles to faculty learning?• How do faculty use knowledge about student learning to facilitate their own

learning?


ReferencesAyrgris, C. & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing

professional effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bringle, R. & Hatcher, J. (1995). A service learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2(1), 112-122.

Clayton, P., Hess, G., Jaeger, A., Jameson, J. & McGuire, L. (2013). Theoretical perspectives and research on faculty learning in service learning. In P. Clayton, R. Bringle & J. Hatcher (Eds.) Research on Service Learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Friere, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.


References (continued)McGuire, L, Strong, D., Lay, K., Ardemagni, E., Wittberg, P. & Clayton, P. (2009). A case study

of faculty learning around reflection: A collaborative faculty development project. In B. Moeley, S.H. Billig & B.A. Holland (Eds.), Creating our identities in service-learning and community engagement (pp. 136-146). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

O’Meara, K., Terosky, A.L., & Neumann, A. (2—8). Faculty careers and work lives: A professional growth perspective ASHE Higher Education Report, 34(3). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Taggart, G., & Wilson, A. (2005). Promoting reflective thinking in teachers: 50 action strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.


iarslceproceedings2012.wikispaces.com/Framing+a+research+agenda+-+faculty

Documents

Framing a Theory-Grounded Research Agenda Related to FACULTY