Skip to main content

Advertisement

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)