Change as a Scientific Enterprise: Practical Suggestions about Using Change Theory.

Change theory has increasingly become an area of scholarship in STEM education. While this area has traditionally been a topic for organizational psychology, business management, communication studies, and higher education, STEM education researchers are increasingly aware of the need to use formal theories to guide change efforts and research. Formal change theory encompasses our current research-based knowledge about how and why change occurs, and therefore, can guide the selection and design of promising interventions. Yet learning about and using theory is challenging because many of us have no formal training in this area and relevant scholarship comes from many different disciplines. Inconsistent terminology creates an additional barrier. Thus, this essay aims to contribute to a common lexicon in STEM higher educational change efforts by clearly distinguishing between formalized change theory, which emerges from research, and a theory of change, which guides the logic of a specific project. We also briefly review the current state of the field regarding the use of formal change theory and provide examples of how change theory has been used in biology education. Lastly, we offer practical guidance for researchers and change agents who wish to more intentionally and effectively use change theory in their work.

Access Needs: Centering Students and Disrupting Ableist Norms in STEM.

This essay describes the concept of access needs as a tool for improving accessibility in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education broadly, from the classroom, to research group meetings, to professional conferences. The normalization of stating access needs and creating access check-ins is a regular practice used in disability justice activist circles, but it has not yet been normalized in STEM education spaces. Just as normalizing the use of pronouns has been an important step for supporting gender justice, we argue that normalizing access talk is an important step for advancing disability justice in STEM fields. Moreover, we argue that all individuals have access needs, regardless of whether they are disabled or nondisabled. We provide concrete suggestions and techniques that STEM educators can use today.

A Pandemic Crash Course: Learning to Teach Equitably in Synchronous Online Classes.

This article describes an equity-focused professional learning community that used the EQUIP observation protocol to provide data analytics to instructors. The learning community met during Spring 2020, and due to the global coronavirus pandemic, it moved online midsemester. This article describes patterns of student participation and how they were impacted in moving online. We found that student participation dropped significantly in moving online, but instructors were able to implement new teaching strategies to increase participation. We document seven concrete strategies that instructors used to promote equitable participation in their online classes and that can be incorporated by biology educators into their online teaching. The strategies were: 1) re-establishing norms, 2) using student names, 3) using breakout rooms, 4) leveraging chat-based participation, 5) using polling software, 6) creating an inclusive curriculum, and 7) cutting content to maintain rigor. In addition, we describe the faculty learning process and how EQUIP data and the learning community environment supported instructors to change their practices.

Developing the DELTA: Capturing Cultural Changes in Undergraduate Departments.

Departments are now recognized as an important locus for sustainable change on university campuses. Making sustainable changes typically requires a shift in culture, but culture is complex and difficult to measure. For this reason, cultural changes are often studied using qualitative methods that provide rich, detailed data. However, this imposes barriers to measuring culture and studying change at scale (i.e., across many departments). To address this issue, we introduce the Departmental Education and Leadership Transformation Assessment (DELTA), a new survey aimed at capturing cultural changes in undergraduate departments. We describe the survey's development and validation and provide suggestions for its utility for researchers and practitioners.

STEM Is Not a Monolith: A Preliminary Analysis of Variations in STEM Disciplinary Cultures and Implications for Change.

Research suggests that science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments are a productive unit of focus for systemic change efforts. In particular, they are relatively coherent units of culture, and cultural changes are critical to creating sustainable improvements. However, the STEM disciplines are often treated as a monolith in change literature, and unique aspects of these different disciplinary cultures-and consequences for change efforts-remain somewhat underdeveloped. This exploratory study focuses on similarities and differences among STEM disciplinary cultures, drawing on data gathered from scholars in discipline-based education research who attended two sessions at the 2017 Transforming Research in Undergraduate STEM Education conference. Our analyses of these data help begin to characterize disciplinary cultures using the theoretical lens of four frames: structures, symbols, power, and people. We find preliminary evidence for both similarities and differences among the cultures of STEM disciplines. Implications for change efforts and future directions for research are discussed.

Breaking Down Silos Working Meeting: An Approach to Fostering Cross-Disciplinary STEM-DBER Collaborations through Working Meetings.

There has been a recent push for greater collaboration across the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in discipline-based education research (DBER). The DBER fields are unique in that they require a deep understanding of both disciplinary content and educational research. DBER scholars are generally trained and hold professional positions in discipline-specific departments. The professional societies with which DBER scholars are most closely aligned are also often discipline specific. This frequently results in DBER researchers working in silos. At the same time, there are many cross-cutting issues across DBER research in higher education, and DBER researchers across disciplines can benefit greatly from cross-disciplinary collaborations. This report describes the Breaking Down Silos working meeting, which was a short, focused meeting intentionally designed to foster such collaborations. The focus of Breaking Down Silos was institutional transformation in STEM education, but we describe the ways the overall meeting design and structure could be a useful model for fostering cross--disciplinary collaborations around other research priorities of the DBER community. We describe our approach to meeting recruitment, premeeting work, and inclusive meeting design. We also highlight early outcomes from our perspective and the perspectives of the meeting participants.

Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments.

BACKGROUND: This paper adapts the four-frame model of organizational change to the context of higher education. We offer the model as a tool for researchers and change agents who wish to study and enact systemic change within STEM departments. We provide the four frames in contrast to overly simplistic models of change that have been shown to be unlikely to result in sustainable improvements. As we outline the four frames, we discuss both how the frames provide insight into potential products for change and how they influence the process of change. We provide an extended example of how the four frames can be used to analyze an existing change effort and implications of this approach for future work. CONCLUSIONS: This paper adapts a model for promoting and understanding change efforts in STEM departments. This is a model that can be used by nearly any researcher or administrator to help increase the impact of their work.