Herman, G. L., & Crowley, L. (2014, June), Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program  Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--23262

\bibitem{asee_peer_23262}
  Herman, G. L., \& Crowley, L. (2014, June), \emph{Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program}
  Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana.
  10.18260/1-2--23262

Geoffrey L Herman and Leslie Crowley.  "Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program".  2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2014.  https://peer.asee.org/23262 Internet.  07 Jun, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_23262}
  Geoffrey L Herman and Leslie Crowley.
  "Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program".
  \emph{2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2014.
  https://peer.asee.org/23262 Internet.  07 Jun, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_23262
author = "Geoffrey L Herman and Leslie Crowley"
title = "Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program"
booktitle = "2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2014"
month = "June"
address = "Indianapolis, Indiana"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/23262}
number = {10.18260/1-2--23262}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -                                   “Think Deep, Not Fast:”             Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program        “Live deep, not fast,” is an admonition coined in the early 1900’s by Henry Seidel Canby.The Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program (SIIP) has been an invitation to our faculty tothink deep, not fast, about what is core and what is periphery in our efforts to provide the bestundergraduate engineering experience that we know how to provide. Faculty were challenged toact as reflective practitioners engaged in collaborative efforts to create education reform.        In February 2012, the College of Engineering allocated an unprecedented level offunding to solicit proposals for the SIIP. Faculty proposed large-scale renovations of a specificundergraduate course or closely-related group of courses, with the goal of improving studentengagement, learning outcomes, and faculty teaching experiences. While our faculty possessrequisite expertise in their course content, they are less aware of effective teaching practices.This weakness was particularly detrimental to our large enrollment gateway courses,undermining student persistence and subsequent academic success. Consequently, in addition toproviding funding, the SIIP initiative attempted to provide just in time faculty and communitydevelopment.         As we have continued to develop and refine the SIIP, we have used both a reliance onresearch literature and critical reflection to reframe the core objectives of the program and toredefine the problem of change in engineering education. While the initial goals of SIIP were toimprove 1) course and curriculum redesign, 2) assessment of student learning, and 3) instructortraining and development, we have discovered that collaborative reflection and community arecritical first steps in the reform process.        Many of our faculty struggle to adopt best practices pedagogies, not because they do notcare about improving instruction (they care deeply), but rather they have deep conflictingcommitments, beliefs, and habits that inhibit and resist change. These conflicting commitmentsare best addressed in collaborative communities in which faculty have a safe place to explore andchallenge their commitments with the support of their peers.        Historically, our teaching culture has a fierce independence. Faculty are hired for theirexpertise in content knowledge and then asked to teach with the implicit assumption that theirexpertise makes them uniquely qualified to teach disciplinary courses. Further, faculty teachindependently with little input or guidance from their peers. During the first year of SIIP, wediscovered that this independent teaching culture was a primary barrier to change. Of the fivefunded projects, two made significant progress in creating pedagogical reforms: bothcollaboratively developed pedagogies and tools, creating communal knowledge. The remainingthree projects were led by isolated faculty or isolated faculty teams with attempts to pass oninnovations through transmittal of knowledge between semesters or by passing along packets ofnotes. Just as transmittal of information through lecturing leads to poor learning and retention,these transmission models of reform led to frustrated adoption of evidence-based pedagogies.       In this paper, we will discuss our observations and reflections on successful and haltedreforms more deeply, and will describe our new approach to administrating and leading thispedagogical change effort.
AU  - Geoffrey L Herman
AU  - Leslie Crowley
CY  - Indianapolis, Indiana
DA  - 2014/06/15
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Using Faculty Communities to Drive Sustainable Reform: Learning from the Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/23262
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--23262
ER  -