Implicit theories of change as a barrier to change on college campuses: An examination of STEM reform

Review of Higher Education

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 479-506

  Kezar, Adrianna ^a   Gehrke, Sean ^a   Elrod, Susan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84932099260     PISSN: 01625748     EISSN: 10907009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/rhe.2015.0026     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Aber, L., Brown, J. L., Jones, S. M., Berg, J., & Torrente, C. (2011). School-based strategies to prevent violence, trauma, and psychopathology: The challenges of going to scale. Development and Psychopathology, 23(2), 411.
2. American Association for Advancement of Science. (2011). Vision and change in biology education. Washington DC: American Association for Advancement of Science.
3. Austin, A. (2011). Promoting evidence based change in undergraduate science education. Washington, D.C.: National Academies.
4. Cavanaugh, J. C. (2000). Metamemory from a social-cognitive perspective. In D.C. Park, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Cognitive aging: A primer (pp. 115-130). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
5. Cavanaugh, J. C., Feldman, J. M., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Memory beliefs as social cognition: A reconceptualization of what memory questionnaires assess. Review of General Psychology, 2(1), 48-65.
6. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7. Collins, E., & Clark, H. (2013). Supporting young people to make change happen: A review of theories of change. Retrieved from http://www.actknowledge.org/ resources/documents/SupportingYoungPeopletoMakeChangeHappenAct-KnowledgeOxfamAustralia.pdf
8. Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. C. (1998). Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects, and problems. In K. Fulbright-Anderson, A. C. Kubisch, & J. P. Connell (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Theory, measurement, and analysis, Volume 2, (pp. 15-44). Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
9. Connolly, M., & Seymour, E. (2003). Why theories of change matter. Retrieved from http://www.mobilizingstem.wceruw.org/documents/Why%20Theories%20 of%20Change%20Matter.pdf
10. Dweck, C. S. (2009). Why we don't need built-in misbeliefs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(06), 518-519.
11. Fairweather, J. (2009). Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education. Washington, DC: National Academies.
12. Finkelstein, J. A., Quaranto, B. R., & Schwartz, C. E. (2014). Threats to the internal validity of spinal surgery outcome assessment: Recalibration response shift or implicit theories of change? Applied Research in Quality of Life, 9(2), 215-232.
13. Freedman, B., Binson, D., Ekstrand, M., Galvez, S., Woods, W. J., & Grinstead, O. (2006). Uncovering implicit theories of HIV prevention providers: It takes a community. AIDS Education & Prevention, 18(3), 216-226.
14. Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2009). Error management theory and the evolution of misbeliefs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(06), 522-523.
15. Hill, L. G., & Betz, D. L. (2005). Revisiting the retrospective pretest. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(4), 501-517.
16. Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)/American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). (2009). Scientific foundations for future physicians. Chevy Chase, MD: Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
17. Kezar, A. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st Century: Recent research and conceptualizations. Washington, D.C.: ASHEERIC Higher Education Reports.
18. Kezar, A. (2011). What is the best way to achieve reach of improved practices in higher education? Innovative Higher Education, 36(11), 235-249.
19. Madaus, G. F., & Kellaghan, T. (2000). Models, metaphors, and definitions in evaluation. In D. L. Dtufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, & T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2nd ed., pp. 19-32). Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20. National Academies. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited. Washington, DC: National Academies.
21. National Science Foundation (NSF). (2010). Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
22. Ramanath, R., & Ebrahim, A. (2010). Strategies and tactics in NGO-government relations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 21(1), 21-42.
23. Saunders, M., Charlier, B., & Bonamy, J. (2004). Some concepts and tools for evaluating the effects of complex change projects. Retrieved from: http://www-new1. heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/changeacademy/2010/Amended_resources/ Saunders-ToolsForEvaluatingComplexChange.pdf
24. Saunders, M., Charlier, B., & Bonamy, J. (2005). Using evaluation to create 'provisional stabilities': Bridging innovation in higher education change processes. Evaluation, 11(1), 37-54.
25. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of learning. NY: Doubleday.
26. Sullivan, H., & Stewart, M. (2006). Who owns the theory of change? Evaluation, 12(2), 179-199.
27. Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.
28. Weiss, C. H. (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, & C. H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts, Volume 1 (pp. 65-92). Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
29. Zenios, M., Goodyear, P., & Jones, C. (2004). Researching the impact of the networked information environment on learning and teaching. Computers & Education, 43(1), 205-213.