N 584 Module 2: Faculty Support and Development in Curriculum Development

N 584 Module 2: Faculty Support and Development in Curriculum Development
Start by reading and following these instructions:
You are responsible for minimally at least 3 posts for each question in your discussion boards; your initial post and reply to two of your classmates. Your initial post(s) should be your response to the questions posed in the discussion question. You should research your answer and cite at least one scholarly source when appropriate, and always use quality writing.The discussion board is never a place to use text language or emoticons. You will also be asked to respond to your classmates. This is designed to enhance the academic discussion around the topic. It is all right to disagree with something posted by another, however your responses should always be thoughtful and respectful and reflect your opinions professionally.
Discussion Question:
Please respond to ONE of the following prompts:
You are the director of an Associate-degree nursing program. There has been intense interest within the community to develop an RN-to-BSN degree completion program. What would be the first steps that you would take as you begin to explore this option? In addition to curriculum development, also address resources, anticipated positive and negative consequences, timeline, and so on.
OR
You are the director of an Associate-degree nursing program. In two years, you will be applying for re-accreditation with CCNE. Although there have been no major changes to the nursing program since initial accreditation 5 years ago, you must ensure that the program is aligned with the new Baccalaureate Essentials (AACN, 2008). Please describe how you would undertake this process of curriculum review, specifically addressing how you would garner faculty support and participation, develop faculty to participate meaningfully, and how you would manage resistance to this process.
When you are ready for the discussion, do the following:
Click on the discussion link above.
Start your answer by clicking “Start a New Thread” button with the title of your answer and the body of text following the guidance above.
To properly post your answer, please click on the “Post” button.
After posting your contribution, you must read what others have posted, reply to at least two of those posts, and respond (when appropriate) to those you have responded to you.
To reply to a classmate’s post:
Click on the title of another student’s post.
Click “Reply to Thread” and type your response to the student.
Click the “Post” button to post your reply.
N 584 Module 2: Assignment
Remember to submit your work following the file naming convention FirstInitial.LastName_M01.docx. For example, J.Smith_M01.docx. Remember that it is not necessary to manually type in the file extension; it will automatically append.
Start by reading and following these instructions:
1. Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the assignment rubric to help you focus.
2. Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional research on the Internet or in other reference sources. Choose your sources carefully.
3. Consider the discussion and the any insights you gained from it.
4. Create your Assignment submission and be sure to cite your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling.
Assignment:
Critical Thinking Exercises :
Case Study #1: Meadowvale University School of Nursing
Dr. Manuela Lopez is director and professor of Meadowvale University School of Nursing. Enrollment is 550 undergraduate and 85 graduate students. The teaching staff comprises 26 full-time faculty (19 doctorally-prepared, 7 masters-prepared) and 40 part-time faculty (22 masters-prepared, 18 baccalaureate). Approximately 30% of faculty members were hired in the previous 3 years. Dr. Lopez is an active member of the university administrators group, the community health administrators association, and nursing professional organizations. She keeps abreast of changes in nursing, nursing education, and health care. She has excellent relationships with faculty members, university administrators, and clinical and professional colleagues.
The undergraduate curriculum was first implemented 15 years ago. Since then, there have been minor curriculum revisions, but the philosophical approaches, goals, and basic structure of the largely behaviorist curriculum have remained unchanged.
Although faculty have attended workshops and conferences on new and evolving educational paradigms, some are generally comfortable with the present curriculum. Some act more in accordance with a caring, humanistic-educative approach, and others are strong feminists. Some advance ideas of social justice in the courses they teach.
Members of the School of Nursing were shocked when, for the first time, nearly 20% of graduates failed the NCLEX. Those graduates were public in voicing their displeasure with the School. Along with this, there has been informal feedback from a few employers that Meadowvale graduates are having difficulties beyond those experienced by new graduates of other schools. Further, there has been increasing pressure from the university’s central administration to increase the number and size of research grants and the publication rate of faculty. The school is 3 years away from an accreditation review and Dr. Lopez thinks that the time might be right for discussion about curriculum development. She calls a special meeting to discuss the possibility of curriculum development.
1. What factors or influences would propel Meadowvale nursing faculty toward curriculum development? What might be the objections and responses to these?
2. What could be the sources of support for curriculum development? Sources of resistance?
3. How would Dr. Lopez’s initiation of the idea of curriculum development influence faculty members’ decision about whether or not to proceed?
4. What is a suitable timeframe for curriculum revision in light of the reasons for curriculum development and the upcoming accreditation review?
5. How would Dr. Lopez assess faculty members’ acceptance of the need for curriculum development and their readiness to support the process?
Case Study # 2: Rosemount University School of Nursing
Rosemount University School of Nursing has offered baccalaureate and masters programs in nursing for 40 years. Most faculty have
N 584 Module 2 Faculty Support and Development in Curriculum Development
kept abreast of current curriculum paradigms and teaching-learning methods in order to deliver the “best” nursing program to qualified students. Faculty development through attendance at occasional in-house meetings or attendance at local, national, or international conferences has been considered important to most of the faculty. However, an ongoing faculty development program was not implemented due to resistance from a few “senior” faculty members.
Recently, Dr. Angela Fabatini, director of the school, attended a national meeting of baccalaureate nursing program deans and directors. One recommendation, among many others developed by the group, was that faculty development include activities intended to facilitate participation in curriculum development.
On returning from the conference, Dr. Fabatini called a faculty meeting. A review of faculty development activities was undertaken. The results revealed a fragmented approach to faculty development, sporadic faculty attendance, and very little attention to the specifics of the curriculum process. Inexperienced faculty members wanted an ongoing faculty development program to assist them in revising the present baccalaureate-nursing program. Two “senior” experienced faculty members voiced their resistance to this activity, claiming that the past practice of ad hoc meetings was satisfactory and that there was no necessity for change, since the program is accredited.
1. What are the strengths and limitations in the present faculty development system?
2. What strategies might be instituted to encourage participation in faculty development?
3. When agreement is reached to undertake faculty development for curriculum change, what would be the goals of this activity? What development activities could be instituted?
4. What responses might be appropriate for those faculty members resisting change?
5. If the Rosemount University faculty decide to proceed with curriculum development, which change theory would be useful, and how could it be used?
Faculty Support and Development in Curriculum Development
Module 2 provides insight into considerations that must precede a decision to undertake curriculum development and that can lead to faculty support for the idea of curriculum development. Faculty readiness needs to be assessed when creating a completely reconceptualized curriculum or revising an existing one. Since faculty members have the main responsibility for curriculum development, their support is essential. This module also addresses ideas about faculty development, which is core to the curriculum development process.
Time Requirements:
The amount of time required to complete assignments in this module is approximately 17 to 20 hours.
Objectives:
After completing this module, students should be able to:
Analyze factors and influences that precipitate curriculum development or revision
Propose strategies to gain faculty support for curriculum development
Assess faculty readiness for curriculum development or revision
Justify the decision to proceed with or suspend the curriculum development process.
Apply knowledge of potential barriers to curricular innovations in obtaining approvals for innovative curricular redesign
Develop strategies for responding to resistance to curriculum and faculty development
Evaluate the impact of regulatory and accreditation agencies in the development and evaluation of nursing curriculum.
Learning Materials:
Iwasiw, C., Goldenberg, D., & Andrusyszyn, M. (2009). Curriculum development in nursing education (2nd ed.). Boston: Jones & Bartlett. (Chapters 2 and 5)
Keating, S. B. (2011). Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing (2nd ed.). New York: Springer. (Chapter 2)
PowerPoint:
(Iwasiw): Faculty Support for Curriculum Development
(Iwasiw): Faculty Development for Curriculum Development and Change
Summary:
Faculty support for curriculum development is mandatory for the process to begin and for a successful outcome to be achieved. This is gained through open and thoughtful consideration of the reasons for curriculum development and honest attention to factors that could be limiting. Attention to the values of individuals and collective faculty; the extent of curriculum development that might be necessary; and the timeframe for the undertaking, will influence whether approval is gained. The impetus and decision to proceed must be thoughtfully reviewed, since curriculum development is intensive, extensive, and requires ongoing faculty dedication and involvement. Ongoing challenges of the increasing volume of information in nursing and health sciences, the trend toward developing interdisciplinary curricula, the faculty-student gap in today’s technologically savvy environment, and meeting the requirements of regulatory and accrediting agencies are all important issues to address in developing nursing curricula in the 21st century.
Although faculty development is inherent to curriculum development, ongoing and planned faculty growth and evolution are necessary to bring curriculum to fruition. In this module, attention was given to the meaning of, need for, and goals of faculty development, followed by a description of some useful faculty development activities. Change theories were presented, with application to faculty development specifically for curriculum development. Then strategies to support faculty during curriculum change, and ideas for responding to resistance to change were offered.