{"id":13381,"date":"2019-02-26T17:14:42","date_gmt":"2019-02-27T01:14:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/educatorinnovator.org\/?p=13381"},"modified":"2019-02-26T17:17:01","modified_gmt":"2019-02-27T01:17:01","slug":"untangling-academic-transformation-through-untethered-equitable-professional-development","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/educatorinnovator.org\/untangling-academic-transformation-through-untethered-equitable-professional-development\/","title":{"rendered":"Untangling Academic Transformation through Untethered, Equitable Professional Development"},"content":{"rendered":"

Faculty development in the digital, connected age needs to evolve. Flexible, untethered professional development models are emerging that offer all educators (not just teaching staff) opportunities to experiment, reflect, and grow at their own pace.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"

Credit: Michelle Pacansky-Brock 2019, photo by Kodomut, Flickr, CC-BY<\/p><\/div>\n

Reimagining the traditional face-to-face, lecture-based instructional model is at the heart of academic transformation in higher education, and faculty development is central to this change. Getting faculty to want to modify how they teach will enable grassroots experimentations to gain traction and inspire systemic change. Yet this process first requires faculty developers to recognize and support the affective dimension of teaching and learning and, in turn, experiment with more human-centered approaches. Expect it to be messy.<\/p>\n

Recognizing Faculty Culture<\/h2>\n

Creativity and risk-taking in the classroom begin with innovations in faculty development. The work of Lauren Herckis, an anthropologist at Carnegie Mellon University, unveils the messy, human side of teaching. In a study<\/a> comprised of faculty at research universities, Herckis found that faculty members are reluctant to try new teaching approaches that utilize technology even when research shows the practices are effective.<\/a>\u00a0That might not come as much of a surprise to many of us, but here’s where her work is vital to academic transformation. Herckis noted that faculty members aren’t resisting change because they don’t care about teaching; in fact, they resist change because they do care about teaching. <\/em>Changing what you care deeply about is a struggle, as it requires one to let go of long-held beliefs.<\/p>\n

Faculty members are human beings with busy lives navigating a complex academic culture that now expects them to be experts and innovators at the same time. This is a paradox riddled with emotion. They are just as susceptible to imposter syndrome\u2014the psychological fear that they are less knowledgeable than their peers\u2014as any other person. They’re expected to possess all the answers, experiment with new teaching approaches, and integrate technologies with pedagogy. If you haven’t previously walked in these shoes, it isn’t easy. Experimenting with educational technologies requires faculty to remove their emotional armor and be vulnerable.<\/p>\n

Bren\u00e9 Brown, a professor at the University of Houston, has conducted research<\/a> that points to vulnerability as “the birthplace of innovation and change,” but it’s also the thing that faculty have been enculturated to avoid like the plague. In our quest for academic transformation, vulnerability must become an organizational value that is modeled regularly. If we want faculty to alter their approaches and mind-sets, leaders and faculty development must do so as well. If you organize faculty development efforts, consider your reaction the next time the same handful of faculty members show up to one of your workshops. Pause before you shake your head and proclaim, “That’s it. Things will never change.” Examine your reaction and reflect upon how you might design different learning pathways that empower more academics to grow in tune with their own rhythm.<\/p>\n

Relying on the workshop model to transform teaching and learning poses many barriers to change:<\/p>\n