Bridging the gap between what is praised and what is practiced: supporting the work of change as anatomy & physiology instructors introduce active learning into their undergraduate classroom

When college Anatomy & Physiology instructors begin using active learning in their classrooms, what do they experience? How do their beliefs about teaching and learning change? What obstacles do they encounter and how do they respond? How do their responses influence future decisions regarding the use of active learning? This study documented the experiences of seven instructors from diverse types of institutions as they began using active learning in their classrooms. Conceptual change and social cognitive motivation theory provided guidance for the 15-month project. A classroom-situated professional development framework that included goal setting, planning and doing active learning and formative assessment, and reflecting on experiences was used. Multiple data sources (verbatim transcripts from emergent and semi-structured interviews, observation notes, surveys, written correspondence, instructional materials, and student surveys) and research methods allowed rigorous exploration of the research questions. A number of important findings emerged from the study. Data indicated that instructors struggled with a lack of instructional, pedagogical and clinical content knowledge, student resistance, personal and professional risk-taking issues, and widely shifting attitudes toward active learning. Data also suggested a developmental progression in beliefs about teaching and learning as instructors implemented active learning, and the progression shared similarities with reports of preservice teacher development documented in the learning-to-teach literature. Initially, instructors’ beliefs shifted from knowledge transmission and intuitive theories to constructivist theories; however there was marked variation in the intelligibility, status, and endurance of the new beliefs. Data also allowed identification of two distinct conceptual change experiences. Analysis of instructor beliefs within and between the change groups strongly suggested that causal attribution constructs either facilitated or precluded belief development, conceptual change, and a more encompassing and sophisticated definition of active learning, and supported the emergence of an Attribution-Based Conceptual Change Schematic. The findings have significant implications for both change-desiring instructors and faculty development staff. The findings allow faculty to familiarize themselves with the obstacles and response patterns that may shape their own change experiences and allow development staff to design empirically grounded learning opportunities that may facilitate the development of beliefs about teaching and learning and promote faculty conceptual change.