Back after a year! Updates and more to come…

Posted on July 16, 2021 by admin

It’s been a while since I last posted. My apologies. The past 12-18 months have been a real journey for all of us, and I’m really looking forward to getting back to writing, researching, and sharing. I have a couple of exciting developments to share!

In August 2020, I successfully defended my dissertation on The Role of Leadership and Group Processes in Innovation. Over the past few years, I’ve shared a lot of my dissertation research focused on PROPEL innovation teams I lead at American College of Education. Presenting the full body of my research at my dissertation defense was exciting, and I’m eager to share the current status with you all in upcoming posts! You can also access my entire dissertation through ProQuest Dissertations (citation below).

In December 2020, I officially graduated from Arizona State University with my doctorate in education leadership and innovation! Woohoo!

In February 2021, my husband and I welcomed our first child into this world a whole month early! The rollercoaster ride has only just begun.

Just last week, my first solo author scholarly journal article, The Role of Team Processes in Innovation Development to Sustain Learning Organizations, was published in an upcoming special issue of The Learning Organization! It’s available through Early Cite HERE and recommended citation info is below. In this article, I share a bit about the factors that impacted success of PROPEL innovation teams in relation to American College of Education as an active learning organization. I’ll share excerpts from my research in upcoming posts as well as highlights from the leadership thread of my work not included in this publication.

The innovation process and PROPEL teams at ACE have also evolved over this time, and I will be back soon to share more with you all!

Recommended Citation Format for Above Referenced Work:

Witherspoon, A. (2020). The role of leadership and group processes in innovation: An emerging theory of leadership for active learning organizations in higher education. Dissertation. ProQuest.

Witherspoon, A. (2021). The role of team processes in innovation development to sustain learning organizations. The Learning Organization, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-09-2020-0164

Posted in Education, Organizational Learning, PROPEL, Research | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Back after a year! Updates and more to come…

The Efficacy of Online Education

Posted on March 8, 2020 by admin

Market conditions are driving universities to expand educational programs beyond traditional face-to-face and into blended and online formats. This is relatively common knowledge in the field of higher education, although not all faculty, administrators, or students support the direction. Conversations about online learning have multiplied recently due to the (presumably temporary) shift some universities are making to online teaching as they respond to COVID-19. Twitter threads and conversations with faculty about online education reminded me of the need for ongoing advocacy of this delivery model.

I should start by sharing my bias. I whole-heartedly believe in online education. I hold a senior leadership position at an online university, American College of Education, and in 2020 I will earn my doctorate completely online at Arizona State University. I have seen and experienced the benefits and challenges of completing courses/programs online. I contrast these experiences to completing my undergraduate education face-to-face at a state university (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville) and earning my master’s degree face-to-face at a private university (DePaul University) while working full-time and taking night classes. Across these my personal educational experiences, I have seen amazing and awful courses and instructors regardless of delivery method. Simultaneously, I have the privilege of working for a university that offers some of the best online courses available anywhere (as we’ve been repeatedly told by external reviewers and students).

As I reflected on my experience and recent conversations, I recognized the need to summarize recent literature on this topic to communicate my perspective grounded in more than just my personal experiences and opinions. Today I am sharing a brief summary of several studies examining the efficacy of online education. This post is not comprehensive. I hope to extend it as I have more time and new research becomes available. Experimental research comparing student learning outcomes across delivery models (e.g., online, blended, face-to-face) is limited. This makes sense given the difficulty of randomly assigning a representative sample of students to different delivery methods and to holding constant all other elements such as instructor, motivation, and digital literacy. This results in an inability to definitively claim one mode of learning is better than the other. Given the multitude of factors impacting learning outcomes, results are mixed. A review of the literature helps clarify some important factors relevant to student learning outcomes across modalities, which should be considered by faculty, administrators, support staff, and students.

Means, Toyama, Murphy, and Baki (2013) conducted a meta-analysis of 45 studies providing a comprehensive and rigorous analysis of the effectiveness of online and blended learning. The authors examined the influence of specific conditions, including pedagogical approach, synchronous / asynchronous delivery, and fully online v. blended, on over 50 effect sizes. Results indicate that students in blended learning environments performed significantly better than students receiving face-to-face instruction only, and that no significant difference was found between online and face-to-face conditions. Additionally, there was no significant difference between fully online and face-to-face conditions. The authors found that differences in effect size relate more to moderator variables such as pedagogical approach and curricular/instructional materials than to delivery modality. These findings support my experiences, that regardless of delivery method, learning depends heavily on instructional method and materials.

This meta-analysis provides a great comparative snapshot of education delivery models at a point in time. However, as technology and teaching practices change, the applicability of these studies is reduced. Therefore, I’m including a few more recent studies on this topic to contrast.

Research examining undergraduate student performance indicates that the average student performs worse on course exams when completing an online course versus a face-to-face course (Alpert, Couch, & Harmon, 2016; Arias, J., Swinton, & Anderson, 2018). While these studies attempt to create similar samples across learning modalities, the degree to which they account for individual student and/or instructor differences or pedagogical approaches differs across studies. Numerous studies have found no significant difference in learning outcomes when comparing blended and face-to-face delivery models (Alpert, Couch, & Harmon, 2016; Joyce et al., 2015; Means, Toyama, Murphy, & Baki, 2013; Bowen et al., 2014), which supports Means et al (2013) meta-analysis results in support of blended learning.  Researchers also recognize the choice of outcome measures (e.g., GPA, exam score) have limitations and other measures of student learning should be considered.

Given the complex nature of evaluating the efficacy of different learning modalities, researchers often use student satisfaction or engagement as proxy measures. Factors that impact satisfaction may not clearly impact learning. Therefore, engagement has been identified as a factor that more clearly impacts learning. Research comparing online, blended, and face-to-face learner engagement identified areas where online learners are at a disadvantage as well as areas where online learners have opportunities not shared by face-to-face students (Paulsen & McCormick, 2020). When controlling for individual differences, Paulsen and McCormick (2020) found that face-to-face and blended learners are more engaged in collaborative learning and rate student-faculty interactions more highly than online learners.

On the other hand, online learners found their interactions to be of higher quality than face-to-face or blended learners. Additionally, online learners showed greater higher order learning and reflective and integrative learning than face-to-face learners. No significant difference existed between learner groups regarding learning strategies used or perceived supportiveness of their learning environment (Paulsen & McCormick, 2020). Results from a meta-analysis conducted by Broadbent and Poon (2015) support these results related to learner strategies. Their research revealed that learner strategies of time management, effort regulation, and critical thinking were positively correlated with student academic achievement regardless of a course setting being online or face-to-face.

These results emphasize the role of pedagogical approach and instructional materials in student achievement and provide guidance for faculty and support staff to tailor practices to different learner groups based on program or course modality. For example, faculty teaching online may need to employ more creative eLearning practices to facilitate student collaboration such as in group assignments. Conversely, faculty teaching face-to-face may need to try different instructional strategies and assignment complexity to facilitate higher order learning.

Additionally, this research provides a reminder that learning strategies are critical to student success and should be fostered regardless of delivery modality. Finally, factors such as motivation and experience with online education impact student achievement, but results related to these factors is limited. At American College of Education, for example, we recognize that learners come from a variety of backgrounds and may need time to acclimate to the online learning environment. During the first two courses in a program, we provide special student support and faculty dedicated to helping students transition to online learning if that is the best option for them.

Education is not one size fits all, yet historically limited models have been available for educators to offer choices for the range of students seeking education. I view the opportunity to offer face-to-face, online, or blended learning to be the exact type of progress we need to expand access to all types of education, be it college, technical, professional development or otherwise, to the increasingly diverse pool of learners. The scholarly research does not conclusively show that one delivery model is better than another, but rather there is more research to be done and much to be considered when offering educational opportunities in different formats. The clearest result from the studies considered herein is the benefits of blended learning models. This research suggests that universities considering expanding online should consider if blended programs would meet their goals and needs of their target students.

References

Alpert, W. T., Couch, K. A., & Harmon, O., R. (2016). A randomized assessment of online learning. The American Economic Review, 106(5), 378-382.

Arias, J. J., Swinton, J., & Anderson, K. (2018). Online vs. face-to-face: A comparison of student outcomes with random assignment. e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 12(2), 1-23.

Bowen, W. G., Chingos, M. M., Lack, K. A., & Nygren, T. I. (2014). Interactive learning online at public universities: Evidence from a six-campus randomized trial. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(1), 94-111.

Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies and academic achievements in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1-13.

Joyce, T., Crockett, S., Jaeger, D. A., Altindag, O., & O’Connel, S. D. (2015). Does classroom time matter? Economics of Education Review, 46, 44-67.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115, 1-47.

Paulsen, J., & McCormick, A. (2020). Reassessing disparities in online learner student engagement in higher education. Educational Researcher, 49(1), 20-29.

Posted in Education, Research | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Efficacy of Online Education

There’s No “I” in Collaborate

Posted on January 26, 2020 by admin

As part of my ongoing research on innovation in higher education, I have been gathering and analyzing data from innovation teams participating in our PROPEL initiative at American College of Education.  After a recent round of qualitative coding, I found myself reflecting on what it means to collaborate with the goal of innovating. If an innovation team decides on a goal and begins developing an innovation with that shared goal in mind, is it collaboration if each team member conducts portions of the work independently? Innovation is complex and certainly requires sharing responsibilities and dividing up tasks, but what truly constitutes collaboration? Is collaboration pursuing a shared goal even if most of the work completed to that end is done in isolation?  Does contributing to shared working documents through Office 365, Google, or similar platforms constitute collaboration?

There is a lot to consider around this topic, but right now, my answer would be no. To collaborate, individuals must come together to share ideas, knowledge, and skills to create something together. I believe part of that process requires synthesizing the work done independently, together.  That sharing of knowledge, experience, and questions sparks the deep conversations that are necessary to truly create something meaningful.  Synthesizing with others (what I’m coming to see as true collaboration) also brings different perspectives to the conversation. Rather than sharing static documents as products of one’s work, coming together to discuss the products of one’s work and critically consider next steps is a vital part of innovating collaboratively.  

With so many ways to connect, how do you collaborate in a meaningful way? Do you collaborate on social media platforms? I could imagine using messaging platforms like Slack or microblogging/social networking sites like Twitter effectively to collaborate, although I can’t say my efforts to do so have been successful.  What tools works for you?

How do you define collaboration and how do you foster it in a virtual environment?

Posted in Organizational Learning, PROPEL | Tagged , | Comments Off on There’s No “I” in Collaborate

Creating Diverse Innovation Teams

Posted on January 3, 2020 by admin

Each year, I recruit PROPEL team members from our pool of what is now over 300 employees. Participation is open to all employees including full-time and part-time staff as well as full-time and part-time/adjunct faculty. Teams are formed intentionally with the goal of building the most diverse teams possible to ensure inclusion of broad perspectives. Based on college-wide faculty to staff ratios and employee demographics, I aim to create representative teams with three staff and two faculty with at least one team member being an employee of Color and one team member being male. Each team consists of five people, and while I would love to bring more diversity to each team, I also recognize that the diversity of PROPEL teams is contingent upon the diversity of our employee base overall. Our employee population is made up of 24% employees of Color and 76% employees who are White with overall 32% male and 68% female. (Note that at my organization employees are currently asked to self-identify as male or female).

Let me pause for a moment to explain why I categorize employees in these two buckets regarding race/ethnicity. I recognize that by lumping all non-White employees into an employees of Color category, we lose the detail regarding which races and ethnicities truly exist within our team. However, when convening PROPEL teams, we simply do not have a representative number of employees volunteering from each demographic category, and therefore, it is practical to try to mimic the general proportions of employees who are White and employees of Color. I do, however, have the raw data to inform team composition if (and hopefully when) more employees of Color begin volunteering for PROPEL.

What has become clear is that we do not currently have a representative number of employees of Color volunteering to participate in PROPEL. We see a similar and even greater disparity when we examine the number of interested employees by gender. The current volunteer pool consists of 18% employees of Color and 82% employees who are White with overall 16% being male and 84% female.

Demographic Categories College-Wide PROPEL Volunteers
Employees of Color 24% 18%
Employees who are White 76% 82%
Female 68% 84%
Male 32% 16%

These disparities have real implications not only for the types of innovations developed by each PROPEL team, but also for the individuals who are and who are not participating. Innovation is stimulated by diverse perspectives, and homogeneous teams may struggle to produce truly innovative ideas to stay on the cutting edge of education. While the main goal of PROPEL is to foster ongoing innovation, several sub-goals exist related to employee satisfaction as well as personal and professional growth. PROPEL team members have reported that some of the biggest benefits of participating is the connections they make with colleagues they would not typically engage with during routine work. Team members have shared mentoring relationships they have built within teams and supportive relationships they cultivated. Additionally, PROPEL team members gain exposure for their innovations across the College and with the executive leadership team.

The lack of representation of employees of Color and males in the PROPEL team pool means that individuals in these groups are missing opportunities to build relationships, enhance experience, and gain visibility. Existing PROPEL team members are missing the chance to learn from a wide range of colleagues. It also means our innovations may lack diverse perspectives and may miss opportunities to be relevant to a broad range of stakeholders.

Why might these disparities exist?

I examined my recruitment strategies in hopes that I was simply missing some group and could easily reach out to any overlooked population. Over the last 14 months, I have recruited participants through virtual coffee chats, announcements at department meetings (including every dept across the College), a College-wide newsletter, and emails. I have also shared status updates of PROPEL team formation and innovation development to maintain relevance and awareness. These methods were chosen because they reach every employee. I do not see any gaps in opportunity created by the recruitment method.

Is there something about the nature of PROPEL teams that makes participation less appealing to males and employees of Color? Is there something about the nature of innovation, collaboration, or team work that appeals more to some groups than others? Could the fact that PROPEL is led by a White female (me) contribute to White females being over represented in the volunteer pool?

A dozen research projects could grow out of these questions, and I feel a sense of urgency to understand what is missing. I may never be able to pinpoint the cause of the disparity, but I can develop outreach strategies to appeal to a wider audience. For now, that is where I will focus my attention. I would love to hear from you all…what strategies should I employ to reach a wider audience within my organization? What factors may be contributing to the lack of representation in PROPEL?  I look forward to your comments below.

Posted in Organizational Learning, PROPEL | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Creating Diverse Innovation Teams

PROPEL Part V: 2019 Innovations

Posted on December 29, 2019 by admin

In 2019, 18 PROPEL team members created numerous innovations designed to improve service to students and attainment of college-wide strategic goals. During the development of PROPEL in 2018, the College established its own definition of innovation based on employee feedback from focus groups and surveys. To us, innovation is applying creative approaches to create value-added change. This means that something is innovative if it is new to us even if it is not new to you. While we may dream of developing ground-breaking innovations in artificial intelligence, for example, we recognize that we need innovations of all sizes to address the changing needs of students and society. The range of innovations developed this year reflect this understanding.

In 2019, PROPEL teams…

  • Developed and implemented an online course test drive, which enables prospective students to experience an example of an online course before enrolling. We know online education is new to some and providing prospective students with an opportunity to experience an online course in Canvas not only shows off our amazing course design, but it also empowers prospective students to begin the journey of an online program.
  • Developed, budgeted, and planned a virtual affinity group platform for students, alumni, and employees, which provides a place for everyone to engage online around topics beyond one’s program of study or primary job duties. Online affinity groups will facilitate mentoring, collaboration, student-to-student support, relationship-building, and more.
  • Developed and implemented additional benefits for students who are part of the military and first responder community. These benefits required changing policies to reduce fees for these students who are dedicating their lives to ensuring the safety and security for us all.
  • Currently in development is the final proposal of 2019, which focuses on providing doctoral students with an opportunity to showcase their dissertation research via a short video. If approved, doctoral candidates would receive support from the College to develop a video that showcases their use of technology and research expertise. Videos would enable graduates to market themselves and share their research broadly.

PROPEL teams develop the innovation and propose an approach to implementation, but they are not necessarily the same people who must follow through with implementation.  Each team consults with the critical stakeholders connected to their innovation, but once approved, team members may choose not to be involved in implementation. We included this option so team members could pull back if they no longer had the capacity to remain heavily involved. From there, I coordinate implementation and involve team members based on their preferences. While some of these innovations begin as pilots, others are approached as strategic initiatives that require greater planning, approval, and budgeting. Turning PROPEL innovations into reality requires investment from colleagues across the College. Whether we pursue a small pilot or full launch, implementing each innovation is an area of PROPEL we continue to refine.

Posted in Organizational Learning, PROPEL | Tagged , | Comments Off on PROPEL Part V: 2019 Innovations

The Great Wisdom of Bill Murray and My Father – Put Yourself Out There

Posted on December 22, 2019 by admin

A great man once said  “I try to be available for life to happen to me. We’re in this life, and if you’re not available, the sort of ordinary time goes past and you didn’t live it. But if you’re available, life gets huge. You’re really living it.”  That great man was Bill Murray. I’m not an actor.  Thank goodness.  I don’t think I would make very entertaining movies.  But the minute I read this quote many years ago, it stuck with me.  I have reshaped it a bit in my mind and have come to capture the sentiment in one phrase – put yourself out there.  To me that means taking risks, big and small.

I should also diverge here briefly to point out that I was raised by a father who is a financial manager, a CPA, and who raised me with the boy scout motto to always be prepared.  This says a lot about who I am today and the types of risks I take.  For many years, I perhaps lingered on the side of being too conservative….I had to plan everything to the letter.  Then one day, I learned the hard lesson that even all the best laid plans may still not lead to the expected outcome.  Recovering from that hard lesson I discussed with my father a change in my plans. If my dream was too risky, well, I just wouldn’t pursue it.  I would pursue something sensible and responsible.  It was then that my father taught me a new lesson, sometimes you just have to go for it and trust your gut.  Sometimes, you just have to put yourself out there.

Over the years I’ve learned that putting myself out there, being available for life to happen to me, requires living in a grey area that can sometimes be uncomfortable.  For me, it means never saying never.  There are endless opportunities ahead if we are open to seeing them. 

Posted in Leadership | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Great Wisdom of Bill Murray and My Father – Put Yourself Out There

PROPEL – Part IV: Implementing an Organizational Change Initiative in Higher Education

Posted on December 15, 2019 by admin

In Part III of this series on PROPEL, I shared how I developed the PROPEL initiative including gaining approval from my College president and executive team as well as solidifying employee engagement and support.  Today, I would like to share more about implementing PROPEL, including recruiting team members, developing team training, and creating an Idea Bank.

A few months prior to launching the first PROPEL team, I began recruiting team members through what I called my PROPEL Roadshow.  I presented at regular department meetings for all teams across the College, held a virtual Coffee Chat, and sent email announcements.  I shared the purpose of PROPEL and how it connected to the feedback they provided earlier in the year.  My goal was to ensure every employee had the information they needed to decide if they wanted to join a PROPEL team.  Then, I asked interested employees to complete an online interest form. By completing the form, employees had to indicate their interest, when they preferred to participate, and acknowledge the participation requirements. The form was automatically routed to the individual’s supervisor to approve participation, and all completed forms and approvals were routed to me via email.  This approval process helped me stay organized while giving each of our more than 250 employees the opportunity to join.

I also began working with the College training and development department to build an online, self-paced training in Canvas for all PROPEL team members.  This was an amazing experience and my first time building an online training.  I wrote the content and worked closely with a designer who added the videos, audio, and other bells and whistles.  The training gives team members the tools they needed to understand how to complete their work (e.g., resource locations, strategic goals) while building knowledge and awareness of how to plan and lead change.  The content aligns with Kotter’s 8 steps for leading change (Kotter, 1996). This alignment generates energy within the team while demonstrating application of each step.  The training then concluded with a walk through of the 8 steps and how they relate to being a PROPEL team member.  Team members complete various activities during the training including discussion posts about their motivations for joining PROPEL, knowledge assessments such as matching “quizzes,” and a final assessment.  All team members also complete a Pre-Participation Survey before the training begins.

In addition to the training, we had to set up an Idea Bank that would house all employee ideas for innovation.  Employee feedback in 2018 indicated the desire for employees to share innovative ideas and to better understand the types of innovations in progress in other departments.  Of all PROPEL components, the Idea Bank has experienced the greatest variation over the past year, and I will devote an entire post to the continued evolution of the Idea Bank at some point.  For now, I’ll just say that we established a common place, accessible online to all employees, where anyone could share their ideas and learn about exciting projects in development around the College.

Implementation of PROPEL was supported by numerous colleagues.  I simply didn’t have the time or expertise to do everything necessary to support this initiative.  I couldn’t even figure out how to set up automatic routing from the team member interest form to secure supervisor approval.  I cannot underscore enough the importance of collaboration and shared ownership that brough this dream to life.  For that, I owe a debt of gratitude to my colleagues and College leadership. 

In January 2019, the first PROPEL team launched. Since that time, 18 employees on four PROPEL teams have participated and new teams are developing now for 2020.  Now that I’ve shared the journey to get the PROPEL initiative off the ground, I can finally get to the most exciting part – the innovations developed by these teams and what they mean for students!  More on that coming soon!

Reference

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Posted in Education, Organizational Learning, PROPEL | Tagged , , | Comments Off on PROPEL – Part IV: Implementing an Organizational Change Initiative in Higher Education

Relationships Matter

Posted on December 8, 2019 by admin

Several years ago, I completed the Clifton Strengths Finder assessment to better understand myself and the ways in which I engage with others professionally. The Clifton Strengths website indicates that the strength themes “explain the ways you most naturally think, feel and behave.” I recently (finally) made time to truly evaluate the results of my assessment, and it gave me a lot to think about.

The Clifton Strengths are organized into four categories: executing, influencing, relationship building, and strategic thinking. The assessment revealed my top five natural strengths all fall within two of these categories: executing and strategic thinking.

The assessment enabled me to articulate the ways in which I unconsciously operate and highlighted areas where I may need to exert more effort. I pride myself on being efficient and effective. Take one look at my strengths (numbered above) and this should be no surprise.

Above all else, I have an incredibly high sense of responsibility, and I aim to achieve. In most of my professional life, I have been able to achieve what was expected of me regardless of position or department because I have been able to analyze problems, understand the context, learn what I needed to do, and get the job done.

Over the last two years, my responsibilities evolved. I faced new challenges and found myself hitting road blocks. Getting things done was no longer as easy as before, and I had to wade through several frustrating projects before realizing I too needed to evolve. Taking time to reflect on my strengths helped me recognize that I have been missing out on opportunities to build meaningful connections. This has implications for not only my own professional success, but also for those I lead. An important part of leadership is empowering others and supporting them in developing their own rich lives. Having a positive influence on others and impact on my field requires investing the time and energy into developing genuine relationships.

Over the past several months, I’ve considered how to grow my strengths including seeking advice from others, and I learned a valuable lesson. Relationships matter. To put it in terms I naturally understand, relationships are productive.

That’s why, in 2020, I am making relationship building a personal and professional goal. I know it won’t come easy to me because this is not the way I most “naturally think, feel, and behave,” but I see the value. I also see that I have a responsibility to myself and others to welcome experiences that come from connection.  I believe improving myself in these areas will be both personally and professionally rewarding and am excited for the opportunities that await. Stay tuned for progress and if you know me in real life, I hope to connect real soon.

Posted in Leadership | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Relationships Matter

Qualitative Research Has My Heart

Posted on December 4, 2019 by admin

For the past 24 months I have been developing, implementing, and collecting data for my research exploring how a reflective action learning intervention impacts innovation in higher education. 24 months…I can’t believe it has been that long. Sometimes I feel that not enough is being done to ignite innovation, and that my research will drag on forever with little impact. In 2019, 18 faculty and staff on four teams participated in this intervention and more will join in 2020. The innovative outcomes produced by these teams may take months or years to implement, and the effectiveness of each innovation will take even longer to realize. No wonder I sometimes feel like there is no end in sight. But as I learned while recently conducting a little preliminary qualitative data analysis, there is no need to wait for some contrived end…the meaning is already there, embedded in the work, waiting for you.

One day I will share the preliminary findings of my research with you all, but not right now. Right now, I want to share a short reflection on my research and how it led to a shift in my identity.

The vast majority of data for my current research are qualitative. I don’t consider myself to be a qualitative researcher. My career in institutional research and assessment has been focused almost exclusively on quantitative data. I’m way out of my comfort zone here. To become more comfortable with qualitative data, I recently completed several rounds of coding using different approaches. With The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (Saldaña, 2015) as my guide, I coded a sample of my preliminary data using process coding followed by focused coding. I then turned around and coded the same data using descriptive coding followed by pattern coding.

Being relatively new to qualitative coding, I always feel like I’m doing something wrong. I want everything to fit into a nice formula or table, and well, that just isn’t how qualitative coding works. After completing these coding exercises, a litany of areas for improvement stood out to me. I realized my first cycle of coding was always too high level, and I need to be more granular at first. I need more time to step away between first and second cycles, and frankly, I need at least three or four passes to truly begin to make sense of the codes, categories, and themes. I also learned that some coding styles feel more natural and that one coding method may fit with a purpose of one’s research better than another. Although I felt I had missed so much and made so many mistakes, I forged ahead.

I reexamined the descriptions, applications, and methods of analysis associated with my coding approaches, and then I returned to my data. The iterative nature of qualitative research became my reality. And then it happened. Trends and themes started appearing, almost like they were jumping out of my coding software (HyperResearch) and into the air in front of me. I did it! And wait…I remember this feeling from earlier this year when I first started coding qualitative data. I’ve done this before! Holy cow! Does this mean…I’m a qualitative researcher?

Identity is a powerful thing. Although for most of my career I lived with quantitative data, I never truly felt at home there. Each time I sit down with my qualitative data and work through that iterative process – coding, memo-writing, codeweaving – each time those trends and themes start jumping out at me, I see the potential. I feel the possibilities. And all I want to do is dig in deeper to understand more. While I will always value the complimentary benefits of mixed methods, I want the world to know…qualitative research has my heart.

The biggest lesson I have learned from reflecting on my journey as a researcher is not about the steps I should follow to complete the process. It’s that while it can be daunting to dive into an endless sea of qualitative data, those pearls you find after scavenging the depths and sifting through the sand are worth it. So dig in. You never know what is waiting for you.

Posted in Education, PROPEL, Research, TEL780 | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Qualitative Research Has My Heart

Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad…Month

Posted on November 16, 2019 by admin

Over the last year, I’ve done a lot of reflecting on leadership. In January, I accepted a promotion to lead a new department. The opportunity to lead this new team has been an amazing challenge.  It allows me to work closely with seven talented team members, many in new positions, to improve student outcomes. It also positioned me to have a new peer group of senior academic leaders to learn from and support. As I took on this new role, I evaluated what type of leader I want to be. I considered the leaders I had served under throughout my career and identified my three priorities as a leader.

  1. To ensure my team members never feel alone. I seek to build trust so team members feel comfortable reaching out for support and guidance and by touching base regularly to minimize isolation.
  2. To be fair. I seek to treat each team member equitably, recognizing their unique strengths and challenges, while working with them to continually improve.
  3. To be clear. Brené Brown has a well-known saying, “clear is kind.” The more I have reflected on this statement, the more I recognize how it captures the importance of effective communication. I seek to provide clear guidance to my team to facilitate effective communication.

Throughout the past 11 months, I have taken several moments to step back and examine my performance.  I’ll admit that these moments have been few and far between given the multitude of competing priorities, but sometimes these moments force themselves….perhaps, like today, that happens while eating chocolate cake for breakfast and drinking coffee after having already worked two hours early on a Saturday morning.

Have you ever felt like you had a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day, week or month?  I have. Over the past 11 months, I’ve had bad days and rough weeks (I’ve had good days too, I should add), and then October rolled around and factors from all areas of life combined to present what at times has felt like never ending challenges.  I decided this morning that this has been my terrible, no good, very bad month (reminding me of a book I remember reading as a child Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day, by Judith Viorst and illustrated by Ray Cruz, 1972).  I acknowledged that I am human and that comes with imperfection. I also realize that I may not be the only one who has felt this way. 

Staying true to my leadership priorities, I’m sharing my thoughts and experience here in case this makes even one person feel better or less alone. I also want to be very clear that this terrible, no good, very bad month is not the fault of anyone other than me. Sure, things have happened outside of my control, but what I can control is how I respond to those events.  To be fair to myself, I recognized this weeks ago as I felt the pains that come when one grows out of challenging times. So what did I do when I felt this strain? I tried to handle it all on my own. And here’s a vulnerable secret, I could have done it better.

I increased the frequency of my meditation practice hoping to minimize the stress by improving my clarity of mind, focus, continuity of behavior, acceptance of myself and others, and attention to the present moment. It helped. I found myself craving meditation every day, sometimes multiple times each day. Did it solve my problems and make me the best leader possible? No, not yet.

I started running more. Longer runs. Faster runs. More frequent runs. Running usually helps me work through complex problems and clear my mind. Regular exercise also boosts serotonin and moderates levels of stress hormones. It can also help improve quality of sleep. (Side note, apparently at the age of 36, it can also cause new pain in body parts you didn’t know you had). Did it solve my problems and make me the best leader possible? No, not yet.

I engaged in more activities I typically enjoy to remind myself that I am a multifaceted person with many interests and good qualities. I spent more time with family and friends. I donated my time by volunteering in my neighborhood. Did it solve my problems and make me the best leader possible? No, not yet.

I tried all these approaches to cope with stress and manage the challenges I face personally and professionally. But even when engaging with others, I did not share with them what I have been feeling. While I do discuss some difficulties I face with husband, I was still holding back. It wasn’t working. I needed support from others. I could not face every challenge alone. And in reality, I am not facing them alone, but by failing to have meaningful discussions with others facing similar challenges I felt all alone. This is what I’ve learned. This is why I’m putting myself out there and sharing this with you because it’s hard to accept that we can’t or perhaps shouldn’t do everything alone. We are stronger together – both in what we can accomplish and who we can become.

While I have not yet mastered being a leader, I know that I can continue to dedicate myself to living by my three priorities in all areas of my life by supporting those around me (by being more human) so we all feel less alone, by treating others and myself fairly, and by clearly communicating with others about what I need and helping them articulate what they need. Modeling these practices may help others grow as well.  Acknowledging that we all have room to improve and sharing that journey, may in fact bring us closer together.

Do you have a growth experience to share? I would love to hear from you in the comments below.

Posted in Leadership, Mindfulness, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad…Month