Skip to main content

Table 6 Overview of instructional barriers and professional identity constructs

From: The STEM Faculty Instructional Barriers and Identity Survey (FIBIS): development and exploratory results

Category

Construct/dimension, n (alpha)

Description (example question)

Perceived external instructional barriers

Students, n = 6 (α = .76)

Limited student preparation and negative attitudes about active learning (Students are resistant or unwilling to engage/interact in an active learning class)

Departmental, n = 4 (α=.78)

Departmental structures and expectations not conducive to implementing EBIPs (My department norm for teaching is lecture)

Limited supports, n = 6 (α = .68)

Lack of funds, human resources, and collegial supports (The amount of TA support needed is not available)

Perceived internal instructional barriers

Faculty beliefs, n = 9 (α=.80)

Faculty beliefs about active learning, discipline, fears of failing (I have to cover too much content and don’t have time to implement EBIPs)

Prior experiences, n = 2 (α = .80)

Bad prior experiences with EBIPs (I have had a bad experience with evidence-based instructional practices as a student and do not want to try it)

Professional identity

Work-based, n = 9 (α = .68)

Identity related to connecting with the larger academic/professional community (I am committed to the university mission, vision, and goals for teaching)

Self-based teaching, n = 7 (α = .79)

Identity related to connecting with the university teaching community (I see myself as an educator in a university setting)

Skill-based teaching, n = 4 (α = .89)

Identity related to improving teaching (I demonstrate strong commitment to ongoing growth in my teaching skills)

Self-based research, n = 7 (α = .93)

Identity related to connecting with the university research community (I feel a part of a community of researchers)

Skill-based research, n = 4 (α=.92)

Identity related to improving research (I have a passion for continuous learning and excellence in research)