Fostering Change through Social Learning Strategies and Faculty Professional Development

Introduction

As universities grapple with rapid change and external pressures, faculty professional development is one method being employed to foster change and scaffold adaptive behaviors . Many university departments responsible for offering faculty development opportunities are working in siloed organizations within a larger institution, thus finding ways to link organizational priorities with targeted development can be challenging (Baron, 2005; Kowch, 2016). In order for professional development to have impact, designers and facilitators must take account of organizational priorities, individual performance, and desired change for all stakeholders (Bond and Lockee, 2014). These professional development efforts seeking to foster change can be grounded in systemic thinking and social cognition theories (Gioia & Thomas, 1996; Wenger, 1998; Kezar, 2001, Senge, 2006). This presentation will describe a framework utilizing instructional systems thinking and social cognition theories that has been developed to encourage meaningful development engagements for faculty in order to lead change at higher education institutions.

 

Theoretical Foundations

Systems Thinking

Systems thinking requires an understanding of the whole organization and its interdependent parts. When individuals have a better understanding of systems, they are better able to identify the areas of focus that lead to desired outcomes (Stroh, 2015). Instructional designers and other faculty development professionals are often uniquely positioned to make organizational change through their work with faculty and organization leaders (Kowch, 2005). Employing a systems thinking approach when planning for professional development activities will ensure that efforts are aligned with organizational strategic priorities. Smith and Ragan (2004) posit that instructional system design helps connect institutional goals and priorities by including an analysis of organization philosophies and restrictions. In order to be successful, professional development efforts must take into account the whole system and understand how to gain support of the organization within which they exist (Kowch, 2005; Stroh, 2015).

Social Cognition

Social cognition theories of change stress the power of social interactions for creating change (Gioia & Thomas, 1996; Kezar, 2001; Wenger, 1998). Building on the theories of Vygotsky and constructivist concepts, social cognition theorists have argued that social context in which cognitive activity takes place is integral part of the learning process (Brown et al., 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Brown & Duguid, 2001). Many such authentic collaborative learning experiences are found in the workplace and educational settings everywhere. Cognitive apprenticeships, communities of practice, learning communities, and even computer supported collaborative learning environments are used in adult learning and in daily informal and formal learning situations (Sawyer, 2006). Such interventions have been used in higher education to foster change in pedagogical practice and curriculum design (Micomonaco & Austin, 2010; Bond & Lockee, 2013).

Though not considered a social cognition theory, social network analysis (SNA) has been used to measure change that has been facilitated through dialogue within social networks (Kezar, 2014). Even though SNA may not be directly connected to social cognition theory, it is grounded in the same underlying premises that form the foundation of successful social cognitive interventions like communities of practice, including trust, strong core leadership, relationship-building, connectedness, and nature of interactions (Kezar, 2014). Using social cognitive theory and components of SNA to measure change, it is possible to create effective professional development interventions. 

Framework Development

By combining systems thinking and social cognition change theories, it may be possible to develop social cognitive professional development opportunities that are driven by organizational needs and priorities to help bring about individual and organization changes. Generally defined as the ideas and principles that form the structure for a plan (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.), this framework supports both theories, while also strategically leveraging faculty development. Using a comprehensive review of literature and practical application of theory to inform the development of a systems thinking/social cognition framework may have implications on the way we design and develop meaningful professional development. Practical professional development opportunities grounded in social cognitive approaches include, but are not limited to:

• Communities of Practice (Wenger, 1998; Bond & Lockee, 2014)

• Learning Communities (Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Kear, 2011)

• Facilitated Dialogue Sessions and Cross-disciplinary Conversation (Watland, Hallenbeck, & Kresse, 2008).

• Cohort Experiences (Beachboard, Beachboard, Li, & Adkinson, 2011)

• Mentorship Opportunities (Vygotsky, 1978; Driscoll, Parkes, Tilley-Lubbs, Brill, Pitts Bannister, 2009)

• Engaging with Outside Experts (Wenger, 2002)

• Electronic Portfolio (Blevins & Cosmato, 2016; Stanley, 2001)

Using systems thinking to understand institutional goals and how faculty fit within the organizational structure may directly impact the way professional development conversational strategies are employed to foster change. 

 

Conclusion

In this session, the developmental process for creating a framework grounded in systems thinking and social cognition change theory will be described. The framework will provide guidance for designing faculty professional development that results in organizational and individual change. Participants in this session will learn how tasks for designing professional learning engagements can be operationalized, discuss tips and strategies for practical translation of theory, and will be asked to provide feedback to the authors to improve the framework.

 

References:

Baron, L. (2005). The advantages of a reciprocal relationship between faculty development and organizational development in higher education. In S. Chadwick-Blossey & D. Robertson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development (Vol. 24, pp.147-165). Bolton, MA: Anker.

Beachboard, M.R., Beachboard, J.C., Li, W., & Adkinson, S. R. (2011). Cohorts and relatedness: Self-determination theory as an explanation of how learning communities affect educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education,52 (8) 853-874 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-011-9221-8

Bond, M. A., Lockee, B.B. (2014). Building virtual communities of practice for distance educators. New York, NY: Springer.

Blevins, S. J. & Cosmato, C. W. (2016). Faculty development shark tank: Jumping into the deep end with teaching and research. Roundtable session presented at the international convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Las Vegas, NV.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198-213.

Driscoll, L., Parkes, K. A., Tilley-Lubbs, G. A., Brill, J. M., & Pitts Bannister, V. R. (2009). Navigating the lonely sea: Peer mentoring and collaboration among aspiring women scholars. Mentoring & Tutoring for Partnership in Learning, 17(1), 5-21. doi: 10.1080/13611260802699532

Kear, K. L. (2011). Online and social networking communities: A best practice guide for educators. New York: Routledge.

Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2002). Examining the institutional transformation process: The importance of sensemaking, interrelated strategies, and balance. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 295-328. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/stable/40196456

Kowch, E. G. (2005), Do we plan the journey or read the compass? An argument for preparing educational technologists to lead organisational change. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36: 1067–1070. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00577.x

Kowch, E. (2016). Surviving the next generation of organizations—as leaders. In N. Rushby and D. W. Surry (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of learning technology (484-507). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Micomonaco, J. P. & Austin, A. E.. "Examining Inter-Institutional Learning Communities: The Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning as a Collaboration for Institutional Learning.", 01/01/2010-12/31/2010, "Paper at the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE)", 2010, "Indianapolis, IN: November 18, 2010."

Framework [Def. 2]. (n.d.) In Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved February 19, 2018, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/framework 

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Senge, P. (2006). The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Crown Business.

Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Boston, MA: Anker

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2004). Instructional design. Hoboken, N.J.: J. Wiley & Sons.

Stanley, C.A.(2001). The faculty development portfolio: A framework for documenting the professional development of faculty developers. Innovative Higher Education (2001) 26 (1) 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010934420457

Stroh, D. P. (2015). Systems thinking for social change: A practical guide to solving complex problems, avoiding unintended consequences, and achieving lasting results. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Watland, K. H., Hallenbeck, S. M., & Kresse, W. J. (2008). Breaking bread and breaking boundaries: A case study on increasing organizational learning opportunities and fostering communities of practice through sharing meals in an academic program. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3-4), 167-184. doi: 10.1002/piq.20009

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.