Collaborative Research: IUSE EHR – Inclusive Learning and Teaching in Undergraduate STEM Instruction (ISTP)
In Fall 2021, we released an asynchronous six-week free online course with supplemental local learning community content for instructors across higher education, from community and 2-year colleges to R1s. ISTP centers identity, power, privilege, and positionality prior to focusing on evidence-based teaching and learning strategies. Our researched project outcomes demonstrate shifts in educator mindsets and abilities at a national scale (Calkins et al., 2024). Our approach challenges our learners to consider what kind of mindset they need to create transformational learning environments that promote inclusion and equity. The ISTP course centers equity and inclusion, “doing no harm” and fostering ongoing self-reflection (see Fig 1). The “do no harm” core value strives to ensure that our learners feel safe from verbal and psychological harm while engaging with content that focuses on their identities, backgrounds, and experiences, as well as those of their students. Evaluation confirms our ability to create deep learning through productive discomfort.
Key features: The five key features of ISTP are each informed by core values (see Fig 1). (1) Embodied case studies (scenarios that provide a common experience for learners and support their active reflection and discussion where appropriate); (2) the “My Inclusivity Framework” (MIF), which offers a space for learners to reflect on their inclusive teaching journey as they complete each module; (3) moderated discussion boards, which allow participants to asynchronously reflect, respond and share their experience; (4) local learning communities, which are led by facilitators trained to promote deeper involvement in the course (see below); and (5) facilitated affinity groups, which allow participants to choose a community based around intersectional racial and gender identities and sexual orientations to foster community and shared vulnerability.
Participation, engagement, reach and research outcomes:
Broader impacts: Learner engagement and completion have been very strong. Since 2020, seven free, open online courses have run with 12,719 participants, with 2,872 (23%) completing. Completion rates for those answering one question (68%) or who visit one page (56%) are five times higher than the average for free online courses. If these 3,000 STEM faculty ISTP course completers teach ~200 STEM students per year, they will deliver more inclusive teaching to 800,000 STEM students per year. Analysis of completers’ demographics from 3 of 7 course runs reveals that our audience predominantly identifies as a White, Cis-Woman, in a STEM faculty role, at a research or comprehensive university that is predominantly White serving. This overrepresentation of White women in our course is consistent with the overrepresentation of White women in education development overall. See figure.
Intellectual merit of award: To obtain a holistic view of the ISTP project’s impact, we conducted both quantitative and qualitative studies. We studied program’s impact by (1) examining participant responses to course surveys – administered pre-course, immediately post-course and distal post-course – focusing on awareness, confidence, likelihood to implement, and self-reflection; (2) studying the fidelity of learning communities, their training, implementation and participant outcomes; (3) comparing outcomes based on demographic characteristics and background variables (e.g., job position, teaching experience, DEI experience); (3) triangulating survey data with interviews from a selected participant sample and a case study comprising interviews, course observations, course artifacts, student and instructor surveys; and (4) conducting a qualitative analysis of course reflection responses across three cohorts to gain deeper insights into participants’ development of confidence in inclusive teaching.
Research and analysis
The project team used a pre-course survey, five post-module surveys, and a post-course survey. We developed quantitative items to measure course learning objectives and participants’ perceptions of course-elements effectiveness. Open-ended questions asked participants to discuss the course impact and their experiences in ISTP. Analysis consisted of descriptive and basic inferential statistics (e.g., t-tests) and thematic analyses of open-ended responses. Respondents reported that: videos helped introduce concepts and ideas; the course content was informative; the course positively impacted them professionally and personally; and instructors effectively promoted learning (means 5.15-5.34, 6-pt scale). Overall, respondents highly rated all modules (means 4.75-5.45) in helping them become more inclusive instructors. Respondents indicated positive and significant (p<.001, two-tailed paired sample t-test) differences between all pre and post measures of respondents’ confidence (6-pt scale) to implement inclusive practices (Calkins et al., 2024).
From the interviews and course reflection responses, we examined more deeply how faculty members develop as inclusive instructors. In the interviews, course participants from multiple disciplines and institution types demonstrated increases in reflective capacity and in their awareness of inclusive teaching concepts and strategies, changes in mindsets and perspectives, validation of pre-existing beliefs, increases in self-efficacy, and the implementation of inclusive practices. From the course reflective prompts, five primary categories emerged from participants’ open-ended responses with the top three (course climate, course structure, and identity) being the same for increased and still gaining confidence. However, the qualitative responses suggest that educators described different aspects within those categories for increased versus still gaining confidence. Furthermore, findings from both the qualitative interviews and course reflective prompts support the importance of creating inclusive teaching programs that go beyond providing strategies and instead focus on exploring the connections between instructors’ and students’ identities and their impact on course design, teaching practices, and classroom climate. Furthermore, participants emphasized that fostering an inclusive classroom requires an ongoing, iterative process, empowering them to become ongoing learners in inclusive teaching and to engage actively with a community of colleagues.
ISTP Nationwide Learning Communities:
ISTP participants have the option to participate in facilitator-led learning communities (LC). LCs increase participant interest in student-centered teaching, encourage self-reflection of pedagogical skills, and promote community and agency among participant, including in online learning environments.
ISTP Recruited and Trained Facilitators in Pedagogy and Content:
We use a high-fidelity training model in which project personnel directly select, train, and support facilitators as they lead local LCs. Prior to leading an ISTP LC, facilitators must apply and be accepted to participate in six hours of training. Trained facilitators receive a portfolio of facilitation resources, including early access to the full online course, a facilitator workbook, and ongoing support from the ISTP team. The ISTP training model utilizes team facilitation to encourage institutions to develop shared capacity for engaging in dialogues related to DEI, as well as to create a local support network. Interested facilitation teams apply with a cover letter describing their facilitator team and their interests in the ISTP program, CVs, plus individual DEI/inclusive teaching statements. Facilitation teams are evaluated by ISTP personnel using a rubric such that we are creating a common baseline of knowledge, experience, and skill which we believe necessary for upholding the ISTP core principle of ‘do no harm.’
Outcomes of ISTP Facilitator Training:
Our research found that facilitators gained confidence and skills from training and facilitation (Codding et al., 2024a), even those who reported many years of DEI experience prior to training, see figure. The ISTP training model increased facilitator confidence, with statistically significant increases in four areas specific to leading DEI-focused LCs: facilitating DEI conversations, creating open dialogue, leading conversations centered on identity, and managing difficult moments in DEI conversations. Additionally, research revealed that facilitators experienced the greatest growth in confidence after completing the full cycle of support, which includes facilitator selection, team-based training, and actively facilitating an ISTP LC (Codding et al., 2024a). From the qualitative data, we identified the ways in which facilitators developed this confidence, including regularly giving participants leadership opportunities to guide discussions, adapting learning community content to suit the needs of participants, and using their own identity to model sharing and trust building in the community. We are currently completing a manuscript on LC participants that demonstrates remarkable alignment of their experience with the LC created by facilitators.
ISTP-Trained Facilitators Led High-Fidelity to the Project Learning Communities with Effective Outcomes for STEM Current and Future Faculty.
Both LC participants (n=135) and facilitators (n=71) reported LCs operating in high-fidelity to ISTP project goals (Codding et al., 2024b). For example, participants reported feeling a sense of community, upholding community norms, and sharing their own experiences with inclusive teaching (means 5.05-5.56, 6-pt scale), which were further supported by facilitator responses to corresponding questions (means 5.21-5.54, 6-pt scale). Participants also reported increased feelings of readiness, confidence, and motivation to implement inclusive teaching practices following their participation in the LC (means 4.91-5.45, 6-pt scale).