Towards an effective change framework for scholarly teaching in higher education professional degrees

References

• AAAS. (2019). Levers for change: An assessment of progress on changing STEM instruction. American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• AAU. (2013). Framework for systemic change in undergraduate STEM teaching and learning. Association of American Universities.
   Google Scholar
• Adler, R., & Liyanarachchi, G. (2020). Towards measuring professionalism in accounting. Accounting & Finance, 60(3), 1907–1941. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allan, C. N., Crough, J., Green, D., & Brent, G. (2019). Designing rich, evidence-based learning experiences in STEM higher education. In C.N. Allan, C. Campbell, & J. Crough (Eds.), Blended learning designs in STEM higher education (pp. 339–363). Springer. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308374
   Google Scholar
• Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496–515. https://doi.org/10.2307/258555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajada, C., Kandlbinder, P., & Trayler, R. (2019). A general framework for cultivating innovations in higher education curriculum. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1572715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3503_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations (6th ed.). Jossey-Bass. https://rmit.edu.au
   Google Scholar
• Borda, E., Schumacher, E., Hanley, D., Geary, E., Warren, S., Ipsen, C., … Stredicke, L. (2020). Initial implementation of active learning strategies in large, lecture STEM courses: Lessons learned from a multi-institutional, interdisciplinary STEM faculty development program. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0203-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014). Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(2), 220–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives, and … Tensions with professional identity? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cafley, J. M. (2015). Leadership in higher education: Case study research of Canadian university presidents with unfinished mandates [Doctoral dissertation]. https://ruor.uottawa.ca/
   Google Scholar
• Chapman, C., Muijs, D., Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., & Teddlie, C. (2015). The Routledge international handbook of educational effectiveness and improvement: Research, policy, and practice. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chasteen, S. V., Perkins, K. K., Code, W. J., & Wieman, C. E. (2016). The science education initiative: An experiment in scaling up educational improvements in a research university. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (Eds.), Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century (pp. 125–139). Purdue University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Connolly, M., & Seymour, E. (2015). Why theories of change matter (Working Paper 2015-2). https://www.wcer.wisc.edu/publications/workingPapers/papers.php
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curry, L., & Docherty, M. (2017). Implementing competency-based education. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4716
   Google Scholar
• Dancy, M., Henderson, C., & Turpen, C. (2016). How faculty learn about and implement research-based instructional strategies: The case of peer instruction. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• DESE. (2020). Selected higher education statistics – 2019 student data. https://www.education.gov.au/selected-higher-education-statistics-2019-student-data
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, E., Zandstra, R., Brown, T., & Nurser, T. (2011). Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education. ESCalate Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Education/University of Exeter. https://escalate.ac.uk/8064
   Google Scholar
• Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2018). The influence of sociocultural and structural contexts in academic change and development in higher education. Higher Education, 76(6), 1051–1069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0254-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanghanel, J. (2009). The role of ideology in shaping academics’ conceptions of their discipline. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(5), 565–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510903186790
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulton, K., & Britton, T. (2011). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: From good teachers to great teaching. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, G. (2015). Maximising student learning gain. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, & S. Marshall (Eds.), A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (4th ed., pp. 193–208). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ginns, P., Kitay, J., & Prosser, M. (2010). Transfer of academic staff learning in a research-intensive university. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(3), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562511003740783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning for teachers: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, M. (2012). Students as change agents. https://www.mickhealey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Students-as-Change-Agents-Handout.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process?. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104
   Google Scholar
• Higher Education Student Statistics: UK. (2019/20). Higher education student statistics: UK, 2019/20. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/27-01-2021/sb258-higher-education-student-statistics
   Google Scholar
• Hiller, K., Mahlendorf, M. D., & Weber, J. (2014). Management accountants’ occupational prestige within the company: A social identity theory perspective. European Accounting Review, 23(4), 671–691. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2013.849204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kezar, A., Holcombe, E., & Kitchen, J. (2018). Scaling change in higher education: A guide for external stakeholder groups. Pullias Center for Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Kolmos, A., Hadgraft, R. G., & Holgaard, J. E. (2016). Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(3), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9319-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
   Google Scholar
• Krishnaveni, R., & Anitha, J. (2007). Educators’ professional characteristics. Quality Assurance in Education, 15(2), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880710748910
   Google Scholar
• Levin, B. (2000). Putting students at the centre in education reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1(2), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010024225888
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Morelock, J. R. (2017). A systematic literature review of engineering identity: Definitions, factors, and interventions affecting development, and means of measurement. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(6), 1240–1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1287664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connell, B., Carnegie, G., Carter, A., Helliar, C., Watty, K., Hancock, P., & DeLange, P. (2015). Shaping the future of accounting in business education in Australia (Final Report). CPA Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Quinn, L. (2012). Understanding resistance: An analysis of discourses in academic staff development. Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.497837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L., & Andrews, T. C. (2020). Change theory and theory of change: What’s the difference anyway? International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0202-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L., & Apkarian, N. (2018). Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0103-x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L., Corbo, J. C., Dancy, M. H., Finkelstein, N., & Deetz, S. (2016). Towards a model of systemic change university STEM education. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (Eds.), Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century (pp. 115–124). Purdue University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L., Ngai, C., Quan, G., Pilgrim, M. E., Corbo, J. C., & Finkelstein, N. (2019). Fostering sustainable improvements in science education: An analysis through four frames. Science Education, 103(5), 1125–1150. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richlin, L., & Cox, M. D. (2004). Developing scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching and learning through faculty learning communities. In M. Cox & L. Richlin (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 127–135). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, P. (2014). Theory of Change:Methodological briefs: Impact evaluation no. 2. UNICEF Office of Research.
   Google Scholar
• Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: What works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007
   Google Scholar
• Stains, M., Harshman, J., Barker, M. K., Chasteen, S. V., Cole, R., DeChennePeters, S. E., Eagan Jr, M. K., Esson, J. M., Knight, J. K., Laski, F. A., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., Lee, C. J., Lo, S. M., McDonnell, L. M., McKay, T. A., Michelotti, N., Musgrove, A., Palmer, M. S., Plank, K. M., … Young, A. M. (2018). Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468–1470. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8892
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation theory, models and applications (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. IBE Publications Unit.
   Google Scholar
• Trigwell, K., Caballero Rodriguez, K., & Han, F. (2012). Assessing the impact of a university teaching development programme. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(4), 499–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.547929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2020). Exploring university teaching and learning. Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50830-2_6.
   Google Scholar
• Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wieman, C. E. (2016). Foreword. In G. C. Weaver, W. D. Burgess, A. L. Childress, & L. Slakey (Eds.), Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century (pp. ix–xiv). Purdue University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, Y. I., Zegwaard, K. E., & Fox-Turnbull, W. (2020). Conventional, remote, virtual and simulated work-integrated learning: A meta-analysis of existing practice. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 331–354.
   Google Scholar