Homework answers / question archive / Part 1 Discussion: Due Wed 5/12: Discussion + 3 replies

Part 1 Discussion: Due Wed 5/12: Discussion + 3 replies

Sociology

Share With

Part 1 Discussion: Due Wed 5/12: Discussion + 3 replies. Must be in APA. You will need my action plan to answer the discussion question. I have attached it below. There is also an article that will help write a response, it is attached below. Finally, When responding to the 3 replies, each response must be at least 175 words.

EDUC 745 CASE STUDY: FINAL REFLECTIVE ANALYSIS ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS You will complete a 3–5-page reflective analysis on the following topic: What I Learned about Organizational Analysis and Problem Solving. Each of the five areas below must be specifically addressed • What have you learned in this class that has yielded the most significant transformation in your thoughts and/or understanding about organizations and problem solving in organizations? • What learning experiences (readings, assignments, presentations, class discussion, etc.) contributed most significantly to your learning (and why do you think that is so)? • What, if any, changes in your thinking about your organization and/or your administrative role in your organization as a result of your experience in this class? • How (if at all) do you think the insights you gained about organizations in general—and problem solving in organizations in particular—have prepared you to be a better educational administrator? • What insights have you gleaned during this course that you are most likely to continue to investigate through research literature and/or experiential exploration? The essay must: • Include a title page and an abstract; references are not required but if you cite any sources, you must then also include a current APA formatted reference page. • Be approximately 3–5 pages of substantive text. • Reflect critical and reflexive thinking. • Include biblical integration • Be correctly formatted in current APA format. EDUC 745 CASE STUDY: FINAL REFLECTIVE ANALYSIS GRADING RUBRIC Criteria Content 70% Transformation in Thoughts Learning Experiences Changes in Organizational Thinking/Admin istrative Role Administrator/ Leader Preparation Advanced 12 points Candidate includes a deep substantive reflection of how thoughts and/or understanding about organizations and problem solving in organizations have been transformed? Biblical integration included. 12 points Candidate includes a deep substantive reflection of learning experiences that contributed most significantly to their learning (and why)? Biblical integration included. 12 points Candidate includes a deep substantive reflection of changes in thinking about their organization and/or their administrative role? Biblical integration included. 12 points Candidate includes a deep substantive reflection of how they have been prepared as a better educational administrator/leader. Biblical integration included. Levels of Achievement Proficient Developing 10 to 11 points 1 to 9 points Candidate includes an adequate Candidate includes some/minimal reflection of how thoughts and/or reflection of how thoughts and/or understanding about organizations understanding about organizations and problem solving in organizations and problem solving in organizations have been transformed. have been transformed. Biblical integration included. Not present 0 points Not present 10 to 11 points Candidate includes an adequate reflection of learning experiences that contributed most significantly to their learning (and why)? Biblical integration included. 1 to 9 points Candidate includes some/minimal reflection of learning experiences that contributed most significantly to their learning (and why)? 0 points Not present 10 to 11 points Candidate includes an adequate reflection of changes in thinking about their organization and/or their administrative role? Biblical integration included. 1 to 9 points Candidate includes some/minimal reflection of changes in thinking about their organization and/or their administrative role? 0 points Not present 10 to 11 points Candidate includes an adequate reflection of how they have been prepared as a better educational administrator/leader. Biblical integration included. 1 to 9 points Candidate includes some/minimal reflection of how they have been prepared as a better educational administrator/leader. 0 points Not present Page 1 of 2 EDUC 745 Criteria 5. Continued Research and/or experiential exploration? Structure 30% APA Grammar, Spelling Mechanics 8 points Candidate includes a deep substantive reflection of continued research and/or experiential exploration? Biblical integration included. Advanced 12 points An abstract, title, and reference page is included. Paper, citations, reference pages, and sources are formatted in current APA style (0-1 errors). Body of paper is 3-5 pages. 12 points Correct grammar, spelling, and mechanics are used throughout the assignment. There are 0-1 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Levels of Achievement 7 points 1 to 6 points Candidate includes an adequate Candidate includes some/minimal reflection of continued research reflection of continued research and/or experiential exploration? and/or experiential exploration? Biblical integration included. Proficient 10 to 11 points An abstract, title, and reference page is included. Paper, citations, reference pages, and sources are formatted in current APA style (2-3 errors). Developing 1 to 9 points A title page, reference page, abstract, or biblical integration is not included. Paper, citations, reference pages, and sources are not formatted in current APA style (4 or more errors). Body of paper is 3-5 pages. 10 to 11 points There are occasional errors in spelling, grammar, or mechanics. There are 2-3 errors in spelling, grammar, or mechanics that distract the reader from the content. Body of paper is less than 3 pages. 1 to 9 points There are 4 or more errors in spelling, grammar, or mechanics that distract the reader from the content. 0 points Not present Not present 0 points Not present 0 points Not present Page 2 of 2 Discussion Question You have now done an analysis of your organization and considered the causes of a particular problem in light of the four lenses. You have also developed an action plan drawing upon these same lenses to try to address the problem. Obviously, this action plan calls for some changes in your organization, yet organizations often resist change. In the Learn Section, you read an article that suggests a framework for fostering organizational change. In light of your proposed action plan, discuss which of the four professional development opportunities would be most beneficial in implementing change in your organization and why. Reply 1 While it would appear that my organization would benefit from each of the professional development opportunities, the opportunity I believe would be most beneficial is the mentorship opportunity - with a few caveats. Engagement in mentorship opportunities should be for junior employees and all employees, including the institution's administration and external business office leadership. Kram (1983, as cited in Bond & Blevins, 2020) stated, "Mentoring is the developmental assistance offered…" (p. 235). Given the level of organizational dysfunction from the absolute top-down, the suggestion of mentoring for all employees (to include the administration), while unlikely, is necessary. Mentoring circles would provide an unbiased approach towards exposing the fundamental flaws in the operation of the school. While my thinking is that the collaborative nature of the mentoring approach will meet much consternation from all parties involved, this makes the importance of transparency that illuminates the true purpose for the mentorship approach a much greater necessity. Moreover, this proposition must be in the form of a formal program model, a model that utilizes external professionals to engage employees (and administration). Using professional development as the change agent for such monumental change is practical given the familiarity of all employees with its engagement. Lastly, using the mentorship opportunity will provide the needed opportunity for employee and administrative reflection, this in keeping with the conceptual framework of the professional development strategy's intent to be a reflective practice. That said, prayer and fasting must also accompany this effort from start to finish if it has any chance for success. References Bond, M. A., Blevins, S. J. (2020). Using faculty professional development to foster organizational change: A social learning framework. TechTrends 64(229-237). https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1007/s11528-019-00459 Reply 2 First of all, facilitating professional development (PD) is my absolute favorite way to address the need for change or new initiatives in my organization. I practice all four strategies of PD noted in this week’s reading, depending upon the initiative. For the purpose of the discussion and my action plan to mitigate the problem situation in my organization, learning communities and communities of practice are both the most beneficial to implementing change. The reason I chose both is that one represents opportunities to build knowledge and understanding, while the other offers opportunities for application and practical skill-building. My problem situation involved a teacher not following protocols toward learning support and overstepping lines of authority. Evaluating the matter through organizational analysis shows a need to increase and improve facilitation of, 1) a series of discussions, engagement in workshops, and exploration of the topic(s) involved and 2) opportunities to problem-solve and practice within similar cohorts, improving staff abilities to make recommendations and create processes that support organizational initiatives (Bond & Blevins, 2020). Both strategies build capacity in the staff and strengthen skills that directly affect student achievement. In this case, teachers would participate in semi-regular or ongoing professional development to learn more about delivering services to students with diverse learning needs, whether for remedial, special needs, enrichment, gifted purposes. They need to know what educational pedagogy and models relate to this topic, studying assigned or self-chosen resources. Then, teachers will have the opportunity to work in individual or group workshops and cohorts to practice Response to Intervention or individualized learning plans. Reference Bond, M. A., & Blevins, S. J. (2020). Using faculty professional development to foster organizational change: A social learning framework. Techtrends, 64(2), 229237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00459-2 Reply 3 Montessori Incorporated is growing by utilizing techniques to foster staff growth and offer professional development opportunities that yield positive outcomes for students and faculty. The company offers various opportunities for faculty and executive and school leaders to discuss ideas with faculty and develop decisions together as a team. I believe that MI would benefit the greatest from communities of practice where faculty can work together to not only mentor each other and share ideas but build positive systems for continuous improvement. As stated by Bond & Blevins (2020), "Participants in communities of practice engage around a specific domain or joint enterprise. The act of building and growing a community of practice may have positive implications for addressing change in higher education institutions" (p.234). Implementing change starts with growth within the faculty; I think that if MI offered a community of practice where teachers can collaborate, share, ideas and resources that it can foster the mentor relationship so that Montessori teachers can come together and grow as a company. One thing that I mentioned in my action plan was the resistance that faculty members had when I became the school leader. Before making large decisions such as operating hours, faculty schedules, policies etc. it is important that educational leaders observe first before they react and make decisions. I have found that by having weekly faculty meetings and discussing problems and concerns early on that this opens the door for adequate communication between faculty and leader. Another change at MI is Regional Leader experience. The company is going through a shift in leadership with many Regional Leaders retiring along with School Leaders offering openings for inexperienced educational leaders just to fill positions. My Regional Leader is amazing at business concepts and marketing but is not aware of educational laws and licensing for the states where she manages schools. I think a well rounded orientation and training before leaders are placed in their roles would be effective. As stated by Bond & Blevins (2020), "Communities of practice offer faculty the space to explore a topic in-depth, co-create knowledge and artifacts, while engaging in perspective taking through social interactions" (p.234). Including faculty in implementation ideas enables teachers to share ideas and relate experiences. Bond, M. A., Blevins, S. J. (2020). Using faculty professional development to foster organizational change: A social learning framework. TechTrends 64(229-237). DEVELOPING AN ACTION PLAN ASSIGNMENT Case Study: Developing an Action Plan Assignment Reginald McKelvin School of Education, Liberty University Author Note Reginald McKelvin I have no known conflict of interest to disclose. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Reginald McKelvin. Email: rmckelvin@liberty.edu 1 DEVELOPING AN ACTION PLAN ASSIGNMENT 2 Case Study: Developing an Action Plan Resolving conflicts within any educational institution requires the management to reflect on the entirety of the conflict and the various elements of the conflict that were a problem for the school. Understanding the competition and where the war originated can help institutions develop solutions that are favorable to everyone and would be long-lasting. Practical solutions will also be satisfactory to everyone, and they will ensure that such problems never spring up. The school leadership and management best address the issue of racism in schools. The school's administration has to address the problem structurally, and it has to ensure that the address to the issue reflects the school's principles and practices. Effective and viable solutions should be the topmost priority of the school's management when solving the problems. The point of racism in schools can be solved in several phases, and the actions can be based on various factors that are fundamental in ensuring that the problem is completely solved to everyone's satisfaction. The issue discussed is structural, systematic, cultural, and essentially political, even though it is based in a school setting. Structure-Based Actions Much of the racism experienced in schools emanates or stems from structural racism engraved deeply in society. Schools are not exempt from the structural racism present in many spheres and aspects of everyday life. Within the educational system, some systems and structures are inherently racial, but many schools have normalized them, and people don't often think that they are a problem. However, they subconsciously result in many racial practices experienced in many schools in the U.S. Actions against structural racism in schools can start by dismantling some structures and norms that have been normalized. Schools can also implement measures that will impose equal punishments to students, despite their race or ethnicity. Most of these structures are engraved ins school rules and cultures, and one way of DEVELOPING AN ACTION PLAN ASSIGNMENT 3 removing the problems is by changing the traditions and cultures of these schools. Changing the systems that contribute to the unfair treatment of students based on their race will significantly improve the experience of most students, and it would dramatically reduce the cases of racism present in most of the schools that face the problem of racism in various places. However, these changes would require a massive restructuring of many rules and cultures in schools, which would significantly disrupt the learning in many of these schools. As such, structure-based actions should be implemented on a step-by-step basis, changing one structure at a time until there are no structures left that promote racism (Bartz, 2018). Systems-Based Actions Most systems in the U.S. are racial in nature. These systems were made when racial segregation was at its highest in the U.S., and some of the structures are still standing. Creating long-lasting solutions would require that some of the systems be destroyed. However, dismantling systems of oppression is an uphill task because there are still people who find the strategies beneficial, and they would fight to have the systems maintained rather than destroyed. Other than eliminating the systems, changes can be proposed to these systems. Introducing programs for racial sensitivity, multicultural studies, and treating all students the same will significantly reduce the causes and incidences of racism in the schools. Communication is also vital in promoting awareness and cohesion between teachers and students. The use of language may differ between races, and it is therefore essential for most of these schools if they adopt social and relevant communication skills that will be used to provide effective communication between the students and the teachers. Effective communication leads to clear understanding, and it reduces many cases of racism, many of which result from misunderstandings between students and teachers (DeMatthews, Serafini & Watson, 020). DEVELOPING AN ACTION PLAN ASSIGNMENT 4 Culture-Base Actions Cultural sensitivity is an essential factor that should be employed to solve racism in most schools. Racism is sometimes promoted because many white people are not aware of cultures and cultural practices from other races, and they may sometimes feel threatened or intimidated by the cultural traditions of different communities. In some other cases, cases of racism occur because many white people try to address people from other races in an artistic way, but their cultural appropriation comes off as racist towards the other people. However, culture in education has minimal contribution to racism. This is because schools have their own cultures, and these cultures are hardly racist because they involve students from different cultural backgrounds (Marchand et al., 2019). Politics-Based Actions Politics is a huge problem in the U.S. The problem exists in homes, churches ad schools. The problem with politics is the racial divide that may sometimes extend to schools. Many policies in schools are based on implementations that politicians recommended, and most of these recommendations are occasionally racist. One way of solving racism contributed through politics is to reduce the amount and rate of political involvement in learning institutions. Politics should be restricted to the outside world. School politics should also shy away from engaging in acts that may seem racial or appear to promote racism (Marchand et al., 2019). Conclusion Racism is a severe problem in schools, and it requires both the parents, teachers and students to find long-lasting solutions. These conflicts and cases of racism can only be solved when the community comes together and addresses the veracity of the problem. DEVELOPING AN ACTION PLAN ASSIGNMENT 5 References Bartz, D. E. (2018, January). Racism--The Enemy of Diversity in PreK-12 Schools. In National Forum of Teacher Education Journal (Vol. 28, No. 3). DeMatthews, D. E., Serafini, A., & Watson, T. N. (2020). Leading inclusive schools: Principal perceptions, practices, and challenges to meaningful change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 0013161X20913897. Marchand, A. D., Vassar, R. R., Diemer, M. A., & Rowley, S. J. (2019). Integrating race, racism, and critical consciousness in black parents' engagement with schools. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 11(3), 367-384. TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00459-2 ORGANIZATIONAL TRAINING AND PERFORMANCE Using Faculty Professional Development to Foster Organizational Change: a Social Learning Framework M. Aaron Bond 1 & Samantha J. Blevins 2 Published online: 6 December 2019 # Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2019 Abstract Change is a constant presence within today’s higher education institutions. Local faculty professional development opportunities may provide avenues for enacting these organizational changes through personal continuous improvement. While working to meet these organizational priorities, it is also essential that professional development must provide opportunities for individual growth. Combining systems thinking and social learning theories may provide solutions for meaningful faculty development that also meets identified organizational priorities. This article will describe the creation of a conceptual framework that utilizes systems thinking and change in combination with social learning theories that may be employed to encourage meaningful development engagements for faculty in order to lead change in higher education institutions. In addition to defining each component of the framework, suggestions for intervention strategies, change strategies and design considerations are also offered. Action planning pages provided within the framework will help practitioners make decisions regarding their own individual higher education settings. Keywords Professional development . Organizational change . Higher education . Systemic change . Social learning As universities grapple with rapid change and external pressures, faculty professional development is a method that can be employed to foster organizational change and scaffold individual behaviors. Though many professional development initiatives utilize social theories to foster learning, there are gaps when trying to foster change aligned with organizational priorities. Similarly, when organizations seek to foster change, professional development and the value of socialization of ideas are often underutilized. Examining the organization and the significant role that faculty play within the system may lead to professional development opportunities that help drive individual and organization changes. Many university departments responsible for offering faculty development opportunities are working in siloed entities within a larger institution. Instructional designers, faculty developers, and others involved in supporting faculty are uniquely situated within the institution to influence change with individual faculty and the larger organization, especially when the * M. Aaron Bond Mabond@vt.edu 1 Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA 2 Radford University, Radford, VA 24141, USA change is related to the sphere of influence of those practitioners (Gillespie 2010; Kowch 2005). Finding ways to link organizational priorities with targeted development can be challenging, but this linkage is critical for meaningful change (Baron 2005; Kowch 2016). In order for professional development to have an impact, designers and facilitators must seek an understanding of organizational priorities, individual performance, and the desired change for all stakeholders (Bond and Lockee 2014). Professional development efforts that foster change can be grounded in systems change and social learning theories (Gioia and Thomas 1996; Wenger 1998; Kezar 2001; Senge 2006). Using practical application of theory, we seek to introduce the use of a conceptual professional development framework that incorporates systems thinking and social learning theories to inform the design and development of change oriented professional development. This conceptual framework provides guidance for education leaders at universities for grounding faculty development efforts in social theories of change and learning. This conceptual framework may provide guidance to help professional development practitioners incorporate systems thinking and social learning in a more strategic way. This article will describe how the framework may be employed to encourage meaningful development engagements with faculty in order to influence change in higher education institutions. 230 Theoretical Foundations Systems Thinking and Change Theories The field of systems thinking contains a breadth of theories, approaches and methodologies that are often related to the specific discipline of a given researcher (Cabrera et al. 2015). A simplified definition of systems thinking is a systematic approach to understanding of the whole organization or system and its interdependent parts. This definition, however, does not adequately describe the complexity of systems thinking. Cabrera et al. identify four components that underlie system thinking models: distinction, system, relationship, and perspective (Cabrera et al. 2015). In order to understand a problem, organization, or system it is imperative that one understand how to consciously make distinctions between things or ideas, recognize systems in part or whole, identify relationships in action and reaction, and metacognitively take or explore different perspectives or views (Cabrera et al. 2015). This process can seem daunting, but building understanding of the processes, people, culture, infrastructure, and external systems is crucial to enacting change. A key component of any organizational system is people. Finding ways to influence change often starts with the people who interact with and within the system. Senge (2006) identifies the importance of considering the mental models of individuals in a system as key to changing the larger system. When individuals have a better understanding of systems and the role they play within the system, they are better able to identify the areas of focus that lead to desired outcomes (Senge 2006; Stroh 2015). Taking a systems thinking approach when planning organizational change can provide insights and analysis that might be overlooked otherwise. In order to be successful, professional development efforts must consider the whole system and designers must understand how to gain support of the organization in which they exist (Kowch 2005; Stroh 2015). Employing a systems thinking approach when planning for professional development can help ensure alignment with organizational strategic priorities. Additionally, taking perspective and seeking to understand the mental models that an audience may hold, along with accounting for interconnected relationships may lead to more successful change initiatives promoted within a learning organization (Senge 2006). The utilization of these practices can help faculty development leadership focus on a distributed change management strategy that incorporates the social aspects of relationships. This new focus can influence individual and organizational change in a higher education context. Systems Thinking and Change in Higher Education Considering the culture of the organization or system is essential when championing change. Higher education institutions TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 are often seen as particularly resistant to change (Kezar and Eckel 2002). The unique governing structure in higher education institutions may be the source of this resistance. Brown (2013) discussed findings that identify particular considerations concerning such resistance to change within a university culture that values collegiality and fuzzy lines of accountability: (1) managing tends to be by consent and through gradual change, (2) decisions tend to be committee-based and generally consensual, (3) the status of potential change agents is often derived from personal credibility and their standing in a subject community, and (4) high value is placed on dialogue and the legitimacy of critique. The shared governance structure with faculty make higher education institutions unique and often immune to traditional change management strategies. Change efforts within any context should consider how the change will impact all of the other independent parts of the system, including those that who will be affected by and implementing the change (Senge 2006). Change in the university is often slow and met with strong resistance from faculty (Marshall 2010). Dashborough et al. (2015) found that faculty have three attitudes toward change: promising (something to look forward to), a threat (something to manage for), or inevitable (something that cannot be avoided) and that these attitudes are often informed by conversations with peers. It is imperative to involve faculty in discussions of an impending change and to capitalize on social networking in order to help foster faculty buy in (Dashborough et al. 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). Understanding the organization culture (Kezar and Eckel 2002), the mental modes of the faculty (Senge 2006), and the desire for change may have implications for successful professional development activities. Many initiatives fail because the focus of change tends to be on the change itself and not the people impacted by the change (Senge 2006). Given the resistance typically present within higher education settings, finding innovative ways to influence change through social learning professional development strategies may be of benefit to higher education institutions. Social Learning Social learning is often discussed through two different, but closely related theories: social cognition and social constructionism (Jonassen et al. 2007; Rogoff 1990). Though there are many researchers who advocate the importance of social interaction and its impact on learning, which theory they use to situate the social learning varies depending on the educational outcome. Generally, social cognitive theories as defined by Albert Bandura (1977), focus on group observation and the cognitive or behavior change that can happen from exposure in a social group (Ormrod 2008). TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Social constructivist theories encourage co-creation of knowledge through interaction, collaboration, and authentic work. The main concern of learning research focuses on the individual, the behavioral and, cognitive processes associated with personal learning (Jonassen et al. 2007). Initially, constructivist theory was concerned with individual meaning making, but has come to include collaborative knowledge construction (Suthers 2006). Constructivists argue that while there is an important role for behaviorist and cognitivist strategies for learning, knowledge is both individually constructed and socially co-constructed from interactions and experiences with the world (Jonassen et al. 2007). For the purpose of this conversation, we will use the term “social learning theory” when referring to suggested strategies. Social learning theories of change stress the power of social interactions for creating change (Gioia and Thomas 1996; Kezar 2001; Wenger 1998). Building on the theories of Lev Vygotsky (1978) and constructivist concepts, social learning theorists have argued that social context in which cognitive activity takes place is an integral part of the learning process (Brown et al. 1989; Lave and Wenger 1991; Brown and Duguid 2001). Many such authentic collaborative learning experiences are found both in the workplace and in 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 and Austin 2010; Bond and Lockee 2014). The utilization of these practices in order to manage organizational change builds on the research-based interventions in organizational learning using social learning strategies. 231 around change can be beneficial. Linking accepted theory and practical application to inform the development of a systems thinking and/or social cognition approach may have implications on the way we design and develop meaningful professional development. Practical professional development opportunities grounded in social learning theory include, but are not limited to: conversational connections; communities of practice; learning communities; and mentorship opportunities. 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. Additionally, the authors chose to include reflective practice in the conceptual framework, as such practice is encouraged by both social learning and change management theories (Collins 2006; Kerawalla et al. 2009; Senge 2006). The importance of reflective practice cannot be overlooked, as it encourages each faculty member to think individually about their experience and how they will carry that experience forward into new learning, practice, and professional development contexts. Following an extensive review of the literature, a conceptual framework to support those designing and facilitating faculty development opportunities was created (see Fig. 1). Generally defined as the ideas and principles that form the structure for a plan (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.), this framework incorporates social theories of learning and change for strategically planning faculty development. The resulting framework (see Figs. 2 and 3) is divided into four professional development strategies that have been identified as professional development opportunities grounded in social learning Conceptual Framework Development Even though social cognitive and social constructivist theories have long-informed how learning is conducted within organizations, little research has been conducted around how professional learning can be combined with change management and systems thinking within higher education institutions (Kezar and Eckel 2002). By combining systems thinking with social learning and 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 organizational changes. Much of systems thinking and change theory involves empathizing with the perspective of individuals in the system and the attitudes and/or beliefs the individuals hold about any given change initiative (Boland and Tenkasi 1995; Cabrera et al. 2015; Senge 2006). Providing faculty who are in the midst of organizational change the opportunity to interact with and learn from other faculty engaged in the same predicament Fig. 1 Conceptual Framework for Using Faculty Professional Development to Foster Organizational Change Components 232 TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Fig. 2 Conceptual Framework for Using Faculty Professional Development to Foster Organizational Change Strategies (Conversational Connections and Communities of Practice Components) Fig. 3 Conceptual Framework for Using Faculty Professional Development to Foster Organizational Change Strategies (Learning Communities and Mentorship Opportunities Components) TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 theory and can be utilized to foster organizational change. In addition to defining each of the four components, the framework also offers practical examples of each type of professional development opportunity, change strategies that can be utilized within that professional development opportunity, as well as design considerations for offering these types of professional development opportunities. There are some strategies for conducting social learning engagements that are not explicitly contained in an individual set of interventions or explicitly addressed within the framework. However, these considerations are pertinent to all four of the interventions and are included in the action planning page (see Fig. 4) of the framework. These techniques include understanding of audience, building trust with that audience, and development of strong facilitators to lead the initiative. Understanding of faculty audience is essential to the design and deployment of faculty development opportunities. Many faculty members are stretched for time, with numerous academic commitments including, but not limited to: teaching, research, committee appointments, external organizations in their professional field, and grant opportunities. Faculty development interventions must be well designed in order to ensure that faculty do not feel participation is wasted effort that could instead be put toward their already full list of commitments. Another important consideration that crosses all four interventions is building trust. Building trust among participants is a key finding in systems thinking and change 233 literature as well as social learning research (Senge 2006; Booth 2012). Finally, research stresses the importance of a strong facilitator or core membership who are versed in fostering dialogue, as well as open-minded champions for the initiative, topic, or general practice (Cox 2004; Gray 2004; Wenger et al. 2002). For each of the suggested interventions, make sure a strong facilitator, mentor, or core group of members are prepared for debate and discussion facilitation. These items of importance should be employed across all four interventions. The framework also offers an action planning page that can be utilized to help the user strategically think through change initiatives currently happening within an organization, as well as professional development opportunities that can be used within an organization in order to assist in the change effort. An area for identifying next steps, target completion dates for each step, as well as notes, is also provided. This action plan is meant to be a job aid to help start the conversation around social learning interventions with a systematic view of potential organizational changes. Conversational Connections The opportunity to offer connections through conversation as part of professional development cannot be overlooked (Watland et al. 2008). These types of sessions can often serve Fig. 4 Conceptual Framework for Using Faculty Professional Development to Foster Organizational Change Strategies (Action Planning Page) 234 as a gateway to other professional development opportunities by bringing together professionals from different siloed entities across a campus. Participants are encouraged to get to know each other and build connections, while also exploring the surface of many different topics. Often, these sessions can help participants connect with each other, eventually leading to greater collaboration opportunities and the desire to more deeply explore topics of interest. Examples of conversational connections include, but are not limited to: panel discussions, facilitated dialogue discussions, topic discussions, and lunch and learn sessions. Specific strategies for designing and deploying conversational connections are discussed in Fig. 2. Learning Communities Learning communities are defined as a group with shared learning goals and attitudes (Palloff and Pratt 1999). These types of groups meet on a semi-regular basis in order to hold discussion, debate, and extended conversation on a specific topic. Within higher education, this type of community often acts as a cohort of faculty exploring a topic, tool, or strategy to improve individual practice while allowing for interdisciplinary conversations and collaborations (Cox 2004). Information sharing is critical to organizational learning. Adult learners may find learning communities to be an effective form of professional development. Long before Lave and Wenger (1991) introduced the concept of communities of practice, Malcolm Knowles understood the important role that community plays in the learning process for adults. According to Knowles (1950), “attitudes and opinions are formed primarily in the study groups, work groups, and play groups with which adults affiliate voluntarily” (p.9). More recently, Knowles et al. (2005) insist that adult learners are more responsive to learning when it is grounded in authentic tasks. Learning communities provide an opportunity for participants to develop a shared knowledge and often are applicable in real world situations. Faculty members who become involved and active participants in learning communities report positive results. Wildman et al. (2000) explored a faculty collaboration group at a large Research One institution and reported greater problem solving among faculty participants after participation in a learning community. Participants in faculty communities find collaboration across academic units, new ideas, and lasting friendships (Cox 2004). Instructional designers, faculty developers, or others who work with faculty may find such interactions to be of benefit when promoting a new or changing priority at the institution. As with all social learning and change related activities, giving faculty a voice and a place to hear the perspectives of others can help them more easily navigate an uncomfortable situation. Learning communities can offer faculty a place to learn and to grapple with changing priorities. Specific strategies for creating a learning community are discussed in Fig. 2. TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Communities of Practice A community of practice is defined as a group of people that interact on an ongoing basis in order to deepen their individual knowledge and expertise (Wenger 1998). The purpose of their interaction can be for a variety of reasons, including: a shared concern, a shared set of problems that need to be solved, or a shared passion regarding a topic (Wenger 1998). At first, communities of practice may seem similar to learning communities. Remarkably, learning communities can lead to or inform communities of practice. However, there are differences between the two. For instance, in a learning community, participants learn through conversation about a given topic. While communities of practice must consist of both participation (conversations, activities, reflections) and creation efforts artifacts, documents, processes, and methods to improve practice (Wenger et al. 2002). Additionally, participants in communities of practice engage around a specific domain or joint enterprise. The act of building and growing a community of practice may have positive implications for addressing change in higher education institutions. Developing communities of practice for university faculty can help faculty adjust to the rigor of academic life, improve teaching practices, participate in collaborative research opportunities, and better understand organizational priorities. Communities of practice have been used widely in higher education for faculty professional development, but many of these efforts do not explicitly make the connection between professional development, institutional priorities, and desired change (Eib and Miller 2006; Steinert 2010). Kezar et al. (2018) describes the shift from communities of practice to communities of transformation, but much of the literature about communities of practice involves small or incremental changes. For example, Bond and Lockee (2018) described communities of practice for faculty development around technology implementation and pedagogical approaches without explicitly connecting the desired change with institutional priorities. There is a gap in the literature for communities of practice in the form of professional development as catalysts for change for higher education institutions. If an institution is undergoing a major change in organizational structure or governance, deploying a major technological shift, or encouraging a change in practice, a community of practice may provide a venue to allow faculty a place to use systems thinking to explore the planned change. Communities of practice offer faculty the space to explore a topic in-depth, co-create knowledge and artifacts, while engaging in perspective taking through social interactions. Figure 2 provides guidance and insight into how to operationalize a community of practice in a higher education institution to assist with change. TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Mentorship Opportunities Defined by Kram (1983), mentoring is the developmental assistance offered to a junior employee by someone more senior and experienced in an organization. Mentoring can happen either informally or formally. Regardless of the type of mentoring relationship, it is important to note that the mentor and mentee is typically made up of three types of behaviors: career development, social support, and role modeling (Raabe and Beehr 2003). Research also suggests that the relationship with a mentor can help mentees further develop both socially (Thomas 1993) and professionally (Kram 1985). Many formal mentoring programs convey the idea that having one strong mentor relationship is the key to enhancing personal and professional development (Raabe and Beehr 2003). In a study of a group of scholars navigating the academic tenure process through peer mentorship, Driscoll et al. (2009) reported that through collaboration and mentoring, individuals found independence and clear sense of direction for scholarship. However, Kram (1985) proposes that it is possible to have and learn from more than one mentor. Encouragingly, some research now shows that individuals learn in all types of relationships, including from peers and supervisors (Darwin and Palmer 2009). Mentoring circles, defined as a mentor working with a group of mentees or groups of people working to mentor each other, have also been successfully used as an alternative to formal or informal mentoring programs (Darwin and Palmer 2009). This is an innovative revisioning of the mentoring process, moving away from formal and informal programs and can be beneficial to those who are comfortable working in a collaborative group environment (Darwin and Palmer 2009). Specific strategies for designing mentorship opportunities are provided in Fig. 4. Reflective Practice Reflective practice is defined as contemplating on an experience, through which the learner gains a general knowledge of the concepts encountered during the experience, and then carries forward this new knowledge into a new experience (Kolb 1975). In this way, the learner transforms their knowledge and informs their own professional practice, making meaning of each experience and how those experiences connect together. Professional practice has been described by Donald Schön as a flat place where we can’t see very far into the distance, while professionals work blindly by trial and error, living with the consequences (1987). Leveraging reflective practice as part of professional life can help practitioners make sense of where they are within their organization, as well as where they want to go. Employing reflective practice can also help when 235 solving complex problems, as examining a problem from many viewpoints, including the self-viewpoint, is encouraged. Most importantly, it should be noted that reflective practice is not an inherent action. However, as a learner practices reflection, this practice becomes part of their life and their work. The act of reflective practice enables professionals to learn from a multitude of their own experiences, including personal and professional, and then apply those lessons to other areas of their lives as well as to future experiences (Bolton 2014; Senge 2006). As the landscape of higher education continues to change, higher education professionals will continue to face complex and often unpredictable situations, and will need complex and diverse reflective processes in order to discover previously unseen solutions (Bolton 2014). The engagement in reflective practice gives a holistic experience to higher education professionals. This holistic experience can bring greater satisfaction and unity to the practitioner, as well as greater empathy between themselves and their students (Bolton 2014). Throughout professional development sessions, reflection should be encouraged in order to assist participants in making meaning out of each experience. This reflection can happen in a multitude of ways, including: electronic portfolio entries, blog or video blog posts, and journaling. Most importantly, it should be noted that participants should answer three key questions for each experience: what?; so what?; now what?. These three questions encourage capturing the impact of the activity without extensive investment. Conclusion and Suggested Next Steps Finding innovative ways to influence change in higher education institutions may be of interest to instructional designers, faculty developers, and others who support faculty through changes in strategies, pedagogies, technologies, and other organizational changes. Using systems thinking and change literature to inform social learning strategies may offer a solution, providing guidance for designing faculty professional development that results in organizational and individual change. The practical application of theory presented here is a microcosm of the many social learning strategies that might be used to develop professional development that leads to individual and organizational change. The suggested framework presented here is purposefully broad in order to encourage further thought, debate, discussion, and research in this area. Clearly more research is needed to determine the effectiveness of this framework. An expert review of the framework would lead to further refinement from a variety of viewpoints and contexts. A comprehensive or systematic review of literature may uncover additional approaches for specific organizational contexts, or other areas of emphasis in systems thinking and change literature. Organizing empirical studies that measure individual attitude or behavioral changes through 236 social learning strategies and the effects on the larger organizational systems and cultures may be helpful, especially if the research is conducted in differing higher education environments and with a variety of change initiatives. Additionally, qualitative research based on observation and interviews may provide a rich body of information to validate this framework. Such research can provide information to help operationalize the framework in a variety of higher education institutions. The hope is to jumpstart more work in this area. Further study could lead to evaluation instruments, job aids, and guidelines to help instructional designers, faculty developers, and others who design and deliver professional development. Compliance with Ethical Standards Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. References Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. 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: Anker. Boland, R., & Tenkasi, R. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350–372 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2634993. Bolton, G. (2014). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development. Los Angeles: Sage. Bond, M. A., & Lockee, B. B. (2014). Building virtual communities of practice for distance educators. New York: Springer. Bond, M. A., & Lockee, B. B. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of faculty inquiry groups (FIGs) as communities of practice for faculty professional development. Journal of Formative Design in Learning., 2, 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-018-0015-7. Booth, S. E. (2012). Cultivating knowledge sharing and trust in online communities for educators. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 47(1), 1–31. Brown, S. (2013). Large-scale innovation and change in UK higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 21. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198–213. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Powers, E. (2015). A unifying theory of systems thinking with psychosocial applications. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(5), 534–545 https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib. vt.edu/10.1002/sres.2351. Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2004(97), 5–23. https://doi. org/10.1002/tl.129. Darwin, A., & Palmer, E. (2009). Mentoring circles ffin higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 28(2), 125–136. TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Dashborough, M., Lamb, P., & Suseno, Y. (2015). Understanding emotions in higher education change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(4), 579–590. https://doi. org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0235. 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. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13611260802699532. Eib, B. J., & Miller, P. (2006). Faculty development as community building - an approach to professional development that supports communities of practice for online teaching. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 7(2). https://doi.org/10. 19173/irrodl.v7i2.299. Gillespie, K. J. (2010). Organizational development. In K. J. Gillespie & D. L. Robertson (Eds.), A guide to Faculty Development (379-396). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, image, and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 370–403. Gray, B. (2004). Informal learning in an online community of practice. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 20. Jonassen, D., Cernusca, D., & Ionas, G. (2007). Constructivism and instructional design: The emergence of the learning sciences and design research. Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 2, 45–52. Kerawalla, L., Minocha, S., Kirkup, G., & Conole, G. (2009). An empirically grounded framework to guide blogging in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 31–42. 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. Kezar, A. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st Century: Recent research and conceptualizations. Washington, DC: ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Kezar, A., Gehrke, S., & Bernstein-Sierra, S. (2018). Communities of transformation: Creating changes to deeply entrenched issues. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(6), 832–864. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00221546.2018.1441108. Knowles, M. (1950). Informal adult education. Chicago: Association Press. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Amsterdam: ElStephany Michelle Akerssevier. Kolb, D. Fry (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. Theories of group process. London: John Wiley. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00577.x. Kowch, E. (2016). Surviving the next generation of organizations—As leaders. In N. Rushby & D. W. Surry (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of learning technology (pp. 484–507). Hoboken: Wiley. Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 608–625. Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview: Scott, Foresman. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Marshall, S. (2010). Change, technology and higher education: Are universities capable of organisational change? ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 18(3), 179–192. Micomonaco, J. P. & Austin, A. E.. (2010). Examining Inter-Institutional Learning Communities: The Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning as a Collaboration for Institutional TechTrends (2020) 64:229–237 Learning. 01/01/2010–12/31/2010, Paper at the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), Indianapolis: November 18, 2010. Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational psychology: Developing learners (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Merrill/Prentice Hall. Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Raabe, B., & Beehr, T. A. (2003). Formal mentoring versus supervisor and coworker relationships: Differences in perceptions and impact. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24(3), 271–293. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in the social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Introduction: The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Senge, P. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Crown Business. Steinert, Y. (2010). Faculty development: From workshops to communities of practice. Medical Teacher, 32(5), 425–428. https://doi.org/10. 3109/01421591003677897. Stroh, D. P. (2015). Systems thinking for social change: A practical guide to solving complex problems, avoiding unintended consequences, 237 and achieving lasting results. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing. Suthers, D. D. (2006). A qualitative analysis of collaborative knowledge construction through shared representations. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(02), 115–142. Thomas, D. A. (1993). Racial dynamics in cross-race developmental relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 169–194. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/ piq.20009. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Wildman, T., Hable, M., Preston, M., & Magliaro, S. (2000). Faculty student groups: Solving “good problems” through study, reflection, and collaboration. Innovative Higher Education, 24, 247–263. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.