Cargando…

Disciplinary Bias, Money Matters, and Persistence: Deans’ Perspectives on Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES)

The phenomenon of embedding Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) in science departments is well documented. However, the perspectives of academic leaders have not been systematically studied. To investigate these perspectives, we conducted an interview study of college of science deans...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bush, Seth D., Stevens, Michael T., Tanner, Kimberly D., Williams, Kathy S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Cell Biology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8711804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32762598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-10-0202
Descripción
Sumario:The phenomenon of embedding Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) in science departments is well documented. However, the perspectives of academic leaders have not been systematically studied. To investigate these perspectives, we conducted an interview study of college of science deans in the California State University system, which offers a defined higher education context in which to sample across a range of institution types and cultures. While deans were aware of and positive about SFES as potential change agents, most deans also evidenced casual bias against science education efforts and experts. Deans mentioned that education reform efforts by SFES were primarily driven by external policy and funding mandates, causing concern that support for such positions and scholarly work could evaporate if external pressures recede. The majority of deans stated that the SFES phenomenon had persisted over the last decade and continued to grow. Findings reported here document tacit assumptions that science education efforts may not count as science and reveal a lack of cultural integration of science education efforts into the sciences in higher education. Such findings should give biology educators, reformers, and researchers pause, as well as fresh incentive to engage more fully and regularly with administrators about their work.