Institutional Change as a

Framework for GE ReformMary E. Boyce

AAC&U General Education and Assessment Conference

March 2007

Propositions Engaging stakeholders in an inclusive and

open process makes constructive institutional change possible and enables organizational learning to occur.

These processes do not occur because one is well intentioned. Constructive change and collective learning occur if a change process is carefully framed and implemented with skill and humanity.

We work today with experienced

colleagues.

Moving between theory and practice, the product can be shared learning.

Workshop Outcomes Participants will:

Describe their institutional context Review theories of organizational change and

organizational learning and identify implications for GE reform

Consider institutional change as a process framework for GE reform

Share examples and experiences of GE reform

Select strategies and action steps for curricular reform in their setting

Current Context Institutional culture

Orientation to past, present, or future Value set: excellence, competitiveness,

uniqueness, innovation, collaboration, learning Wired for mission, effectiveness, urgency,

challenge or opportunity? Learners

Describe the learners at your institution. Which assumptions are evidence-based? Which

assumptions are not evidence-based?

Current Context continued Current state of GE in your institution:

EX:Take 10 minutes and discuss with people at your table. What is working and how do you know? What is not working and how do you know? What has catalyzed the timing of GE reform?

What are your current challenges?

Theoretical Overview Organizational change

Organizational learning

EX: Reflecting on Institutional Change Identify a positive institutional change that

you have experienced. Describe all of the aspects of the situation

that you can. What did you learn from that experience?

Organizational Change Theories Kuh’s seamless change (1996), rooted in Kuh’s seamless change (1996), rooted in

cultural change theoriescultural change theories Lewin’s change model (1947), rooted in Lewin’s change model (1947), rooted in

human relations change theorieshuman relations change theories Planned change (1975), rooted in rational Planned change (1975), rooted in rational

change theorieschange theories Restructuring (1993), rooted in structural Restructuring (1993), rooted in structural

change theorieschange theories

Organizational Learning Theories

Single- and double-loop learning (Argyris and Schon, 1978)

Action learning (Mohrman, Cohen, & Mohrman, Jr, 1989)

Learning organizations (Senge and associates, 1990, 1994)

Beyond Intention: Skills Enhance Organizational Learning Data collection & analysis Error detection & outcome assessment Unpacking assumptions Advocacy balanced with inquiry Dialogue & skillful discussion Perspective-taking Program design & evaluation Learning cooperatively and collectively

EX: Implications for Practice What ideas from the research on

organizational change and organizational learning can you carry away as you approach GE reform at your institution?

EX: Reflecting on Skills and Stakeholder Membership1. What are your most developed skills?

Which additional skills are needed in the group to enhance constructive change and organizational learning?

2. What stakeholder groups are you part of?3. Propose the members of a working group

for GE reform that (a) possess the needed skills and (b) represent additional stakeholder groups.

Institutional Change as a Process Framework SWOT analysis

Internal environment Strengths Weaknesses, gaps and/or constraints

External environment Opportunities Threats

Benchmarking Aspirational group Peer and/or competitor group

Change Process continued Recognizing and engaging stakeholders

Which groups are stakeholders of GE? How can you engage each group?

Crafting shared outcomes What must be changed? Brainstorming desired outcomes What is essential? What is our common ground? Vetting proposed outcomes with stakeholders

and aligning stakeholder support

Change Process continued Designing GE reform that fits; the “middle

work” of institutional change: Cultural and political analysis Fiscal analysis: modeling cost Alignment with work underway? Shared governance Staff and administrative support Design and development--Inviting collaboration

and leadership

Final Steps: A Feedback Loop Evaluation

What is working and how do we know? What is not working and how do we know? How are things different than we expected? What have we learned?

Revision and improvement Do we still hold to the outcomes as we framed

them or should they be revised? What changes/alterations can we make to

achieve our outcomes? Design and implement the needed changes.

EX: Sharing Examples of GE

ReformWhat can we distill from each

example?

First Principles of ChangeA successful change fits its context. There is always more than one path to an

outcome. Broad participation increases support. Coordination and timelines enhance

implementation. Report progress.Transparency matters and it enhances

success.

EX: Identifying Strategies and Action Steps in Three Areas Individual/professional development Evaluating the campus context for your GE

work Approaching GE reform as an

organizational change process

Individual/Professional Development What do you need to learn and to

practice?

Evaluating the Campus Context for Your GE Work What stands out as you reflect on

institutional culture, learners in your setting, the current state of GE?

Approaching GE Reform as an Organizational Change Process Where will you begin? Identify the initial

steps.

Returning to Our Opening Propositions Engaging stakeholders in an inclusive and

open process makes constructive institutional change possible and enables organizational learning to occur.

These processes do not occur because one is well intentioned. Constructive change and collective learning occur if a change process is carefully framed and implemented with skill and humanity.