Skip to main content


Table 2 Model components

From: Supporting improvements to undergraduate STEM instruction: an emerging model for understanding instructional change teams

Group/category/sub-category Brief description of the category or sub-category
Nature of the task  
Team origin story How the team formed.
Prescribed task Whether or how the team’s task is prescribed (who chooses the task).
Who participates  
Team composition Characteristics of team members, e.g., their expertise, interests, or authority.
Team boundaries Extent to which team membership is well defined.
Process constraints  
Prescribed process Whether or how the team’s process is prescribed by formal leaders, typically people outside the team.
Formalized roles Whether or how team members’ roles are clearly defined near the start of their work together.
External engagement  
Opportunities to gather information How team members gain useful information or expertise.
Opportunities to share information How team members share their work with others.
Access to resources  
Administrator support Whether or how administrators try to help the team.
Rewards How team members are rewarded for the work. Rewards can be tangible and/or symbolic.
Team processes How team members coordinate their work together.
Emergent states What team members think and feel related to their work together.
Sustainability of changes The sustainability of the instructional changes.
Quality of changes The quality of instructional changes relative to the team’s goals.
Collaboration changes Changes in the capacity of team members to work together in the future.
Individual changes Changes in individual team members’ knowledge, skills, affect, or well-being.
  1. Definitions for the categories (italic text) in our model. The first five categories are broken down into two sub-categories (regular text) each. These are the team inputs identified through our analysis. The two categories in the mediator group are adopted from (Marks et al. 2001) and align with our empirical findings. Three of the four categories in the outcome group (quality, ability to work together, individual outcomes) are based on Wageman & Hackman (Wageman et al. 2005)’s dimensions of team outcomes. We also include sustainability as an outcome based on our empirical observations and the literature on organization change within and outside of higher education. We have not attempted to empirically explore mediators and outcomes in depth, but include them as important aspects of the model and placeholders for future research. See also Fig. 1 and the “Results” section of the main text