Margaret Leary. Applying Theory to CoCurricular Program Review

Applying Change Theory to
Co-Curricular Program Review
WASC Academic Resource Conference
Margaret Leary, [email protected]
April 20, 2017
USD Context
● Private, Catholic
● 5,711 Undergraduate
● 2,797 Graduate
● Student Affairs Division
○ Typical student affairs units
○ About half is auxiliary services (2014)
Student Affairs
Unit Review
process
1.
2.
Scope
Unit Review
3.
External Review
4.
Decision-making & implementation
a.
Self-Study
i. Mission, values, planning, & outcomes alignment
ii. Unit overview
iii. Stakeholder feedback
iv. Cost analysis
v. Benchmark
vi. Assessment summary
vii. Program viability
viii. Key findings & draft unit recommendations
ix. Action plan
a.
b.
c.
Off-site review
On-site review
Report
a.
Cross-unit action plan
http://www.sandiego.edu/student-affairs/resources/assessment/
unit-review.php
Change Strategies
1. Widespread conversations
2. Cross-departmental teams
3. Staff training
4. Outsiders and their ideas
5. Concrete ideas and guiding documents
6. Public presentations
First-Order
Second-Order
1. Institutional
1. Cultural
2. Evolutionary
2. Social Cognition
3. Scientific-Management
3. Political
Cultural
Theories
● Enduring, irrational,
erratic, and dynamic
(Simsek & Louis, 1994)
● Values, beliefs,
traditions (Schein,
2010)
Social Cognition
Theories
● Sensemaking, Weick
(1995)
● Focus on the individual
(Martin, 2002)
Political
Theories
●
●
●
●
Interests, Conflict, Power
Morgan (2006)
Bolman and Deal (2003)
Poole & Van de Ven,
2004)
Lessons Learned
Outcomes
1.
Cycle 1: Reorganization, reallocation of
Change
1.
resources
2.
Cycle 2: Refocus on CCLOs, Consultant
long-term
2.
- Student Lifecycle Management
3.
Don’t have all units on board
Challenging, complex, circular, and
Requires multifaceted understanding
of change
3.
The process needs to adapt
References
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Eckel, P. D., & Kezar, A., (2003). Key strategies for making new institutional sense. Higher Education Policy, 16,
39-53.
Kezar, A. (2014). How colleges change: Understanding, leading, and enacting change. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Martin, J. (2002). Organizational culture: Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2004). Handbook of organizational change and innovation. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Simsek, H., & Louis, K. S. (1994). Organizational change as paradigm shift: Analysis of the change process in a
large, public university. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(6), 670-695).
Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly,
21(1), 1-19.