Asee peer logo

Impact of Curriculum Transformation Committee Experience on Faculty Perspectives of their Teaching and its Influence on Student Learning

Download Paper |

Conference

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Location

New Orleans, Louisiana

Publication Date

June 26, 2016

Start Date

June 26, 2016

End Date

August 28, 2016

ISBN

978-0-692-68565-5

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

Faculty Development I: Attitudes Towards Teaching

Tagged Division

Educational Research and Methods

Page Count

15

DOI

10.18260/p.25538

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/25538

Download Count

199

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Debra A. Fowler Texas A&M University

visit author page

Dr. Debra Fowler serves the Associate Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at Texas A&M University. Following 16 years working in industry she completed a Ph.D. is in Interdisciplinary Engineering with a specific focus on engineering education from Texas A&M University. Her research areas of focus are faculty perspectives and growth through curriculum design and redesign, interdisciplinary teaching and learning, reflective eportfolios, and professional development of graduate students related to teaching.

visit author page

biography

Maria L. Macik Texas A&M University

visit author page

Maria Macik is an associate instructional consultant at the Center for Teaching Excellence at Texas A&M University. She earned a B.S. degree in psychology and sociology from Texas A&M University, an M.S. degree in educational psychology, and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in educational psychology at Texas A&M. Her research interests include: curriculum (re)design, creativity and innovation in higher education, and reflection and transformative learning.

visit author page

biography

James Kaihatu Texas A&M University

visit author page

Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at Texas A&M University. Have been here since 2006. Prior employment experience includes: Oceanographer for US Naval Research Laboratory (1995-2006), Post-Doctoral Fellow at US Naval Research Laboratory (1994-1995), Hydraulic Engineer at US Waterways Experiment Station, US Army Corps of Engineers (1987-1989). Ph.D. from University of Delaware (1994), M.S. from University of California, Berkeley (1987), B.S. from California State Polytechnic University (1986), all in Civil Engineering. Research interests include theory and modeling of ocean wave dynamics, beach erosion, coastal engineering, nearshore circulation, and ocean wave generation by wind.

visit author page

biography

Chelsea A. H. Bakenhus Texas A&M University

visit author page

Ms. Chelsea Bakenhus is currently a second-year doctoral student studying educational psychology at Texas A&M University. She currently works as a graduate assistant for curriculum redesign projects for the Center for Teaching Excellence. Her areas of interest include curriculum design and redesign, professional development of faculty, creativity in higher education, and the impact of curricular alignment on long-term student outcomes.

visit author page

Download Paper |

Abstract

This research paper examines the impact on faculty from participation in a curriculum update. A research-intensive university’s civil engineering program recently underwent a well-defined curriculum revision process in order to align the program with both ASCE’s second edition Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge (BOK2) and ABET learning outcome criteria. The curriculum process is detailed in an earlier paper. In conjunction with the curriculum revision process, faculty who participated on the program’s Curriculum Transformation Team (CTT) experienced a major shift in attitude due to their participation in the process.

Such a shift in attitude has ramifications for the curriculum changes enacted during the curriculum redesign experience. While most faculty are equipped to deal with the daily requirements and rigors of educating in the classroom, not all professors are aware or familiar with all aspects of the overall program or curriculum structure. Additionally, not all faculty are well-versed in the requirements of a large-scale project such as a curriculum update or the process to evaluate and/or maintain the changes. Ergo, a critical aspect of the project was to familiarize the CTT faculty with the procedures associated with a curriculum update and to further inform future faculty development to support curricular changes. The familiarity occurred through interactions such as one-on-one meetings, immediate clarification during CTT meetings, and faculty forums.

To obtain a greater understanding of just how the faculty impressions had changed over the course of the process, faculty members were interviewed toward the end of the process in order to capture their perspectives and perceptions. The interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using grounded theory concepts to ascertain the overarching themes and ideas faculty felt most pertinent regarding the curriculum process. The goal was to capture the change faculty experienced in their perception of the value of a curriculum revision process, and to identify the impact participation had on faculty views and attitudes toward education. Overall, faculty indicated that their experiences were positive and that they felt the project had been highly valuable. However, there were varying levels of comprehension of the process and its merit in the long term. Faculty members who more readily participated in the process were more self-reflective and had more interest in the long-term impacts of the revision process on the entire civil engineering program. Other faculty focused more closely on the short-term or course-level impacts of the revision process and engaged less in post-process reflection. This disconnect indicates a disparity between the update’s purpose and the faculty’s ability to focus above the course level.

The disparity underlines the need for clear communication in curriculum revision processes; there is a danger of the project falling short of completion if faculty participants misunderstand the goals of the project, or fail to understand the different aspects of an overall program update. Therefore, the goal of this presentation will be to disseminate effective methodologies of engaging faculty in curriculum revisions by illustrating aspects faculty felt were positive and underlining common misunderstandings that arose during the course of the program’s revision project.

Fowler, D. A., & Macik, M. L., & Kaihatu, J., & Bakenhus, C. A. H. (2016, June), Impact of Curriculum Transformation Committee Experience on Faculty Perspectives of their Teaching and its Influence on Student Learning Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.25538

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2016 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015