# data[].attributes.body
Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation as predictors of personal action

Hardré, P.L., et al., Faculty motivation to do research: Across disciplines in research-extensive universities. Journal of the Professoriate, 2011. 5(1): p. 35-69.

Harackiewicz, J.M., Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance. 2000: Academic Press.

Pintrich, P.R. and D.H. Schunk, Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. 2002: Prentice Hall.

Deci, E.L. and R. Flaste, Why we do what we do. 1995: Putnam Publishing Group

# data[].attributes.body
Survey
Inventory of Inclusive Practices in use in STEM classrooms
Landrum et al (2017): Instructional climate survey and the evidence-based instructional practices adoption scale

Interviews or Focus Groups:  Faculty implementing CRP in courses
1) Chemistry Ed faculty
2) STEM faculty across various disciplines

Observations
CRP and inclusive instructional practices in action in a course.

# data[].attributes.body
Universal design for learning
Organizational context

# data[].attributes.body
Mindset Theory
Motivation Theory
Self-Efficacy
Culturally relevant pedagogy
Learning Strategy and Curriculum Development Resources

# data[].attributes.body
Can you describe the ways in which you engage in professional development in your discipline?

How does the department structure impact one's ability to make changes to their STEM courses?

How are they learning about practices and developing competencies (beyond communities of practice)?

# data[].attributes.headline
Question 2: How are Chemistry faculty implementing pedological changes while meeting department-wide and content expectations broadly? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Question 2: How are Chemistry faculty implementing pedological changes while meeting department-wide and content expectations broadly? 

# data[].attributes.body
Subquestion: Are there similarities and differences in comparison to other STEM disciplines?

# data[].attributes.headline
Question 1: How do faculty evolve from interest to execution for pedagogical change? (Faculty motivations and interests to engage in inclusive CR practices)

# data[].attributes.subject
Question 1: How do faculty evolve from interest to execution for pedagogical change? (Faculty motivations and interests to engage in inclusive CR practices)

# data[].attributes.body
Citations List Linked Here

# data[].attributes.body
1) How do faculty evolve from interest to execution for pedagogical change? (Faculty motivations and interests to engage in inclusive, CR practices)

2) How are faculty implementing pedological changes while remaining in line with department wide expectations and content expectations broadly? by discipline? (Analysis of CRP Pedagogy to practice based on STEM disciplines. What's the same? What's different?)

3) How does the department structure impact one's ability to make changes of their STEM courses?

4) How are they learning about practices and developing competencies (beyond communities of practice)?

# data[].attributes.headline
What is known based on the relevant lit?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is known based on the relevant lit?

# data[].attributes.body
Assessment of the current landscape highlighting the need to 1) engage faculty for pedagogical advancement
2) assess and change teaching practices based on disciplinary cultures and practices
3) Inclusive and/or CR teaching practices being implemented case by case (but no indication of widespread discipline changes/adoption)

Innovative instructional practices are being implemented.

Communities of practice are a key source of faculty development and exposure to innovative teaching practices.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is not known based on the relevant lit?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is not known based on the relevant lit?

# data[].attributes.body
Analysis of CRP Pedagogy to practice based on STEM disciplines. What's the same? What's different?

How are they learning about practices and developing competencies (beyond communities of practice)?

Faculty motivations and interests to engage in CRP

How do faculty move from interest to execution for pedagogical change?

How are faculty implementing pedological changes while remaining in line with department wide expectations and content expectations broadly? by discipline?

How does the department structure create barriers and limit flexibility for instructors to make changes of their STEM entry level courses?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the differences based on STEM discipline?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the differences based on STEM discipline?

# data[].attributes.body
Copeland et al. (2022): Culturally Relevant Pedagogies (CRP) and Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT) in Science Education: Black Success Stories in Ontario

Eppard et al (2021): EdTech Culturation: Integrating A Culturally Relevant Pedagogy into Educational Technology

Marosi et al (2021): Culturally relevant pedagogies in science education as a response to global migration

Hamstra et al (2021): Incorporating Culturally Relevant Education (CRE) in STEM Gateway Courses

Codding et al (2021): From professional development to pedagogy: Examining how Computer Science teachers conceptualize and apply culturally responsive pedagogy

Brown et al (2019): Moving culturally relevant pedagogy from theory to practice: Exploring teachers’ application of culturally relevant education in science and mathematics

Yuen et al (2016): A culturally relevant pedagogical approach to computer science education to increase participation of underrepresented populations

Charleston et al (2014): Using culturally responsive practices to broaden participation in the educational pipeline: Addressing the unfinished business of Brown in the field of computing sciences

# data[].attributes.body
Xie et al. (2022): STEM faculty’s perspectives on adopting culturally responsive pedagogy

Sturtevant et al (2019): The STEM faculty instructional barriers and identity survey (FIBIS): Development and exploratory results

Samuels, A (2018): Exploring Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Teachers' Perspectives on Fostering Equitable and Inclusive Classrooms (K - 12 perspective)

Shadle et al (2017): Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments

Miorelli et al (2015): Improving faculty perception of and engagement in STEM education

# data[].attributes.headline
Communities of Practices/ Faculty Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Communities of Practices/ Faculty Development

# data[].attributes.body
Lane et al. (2022): Context and content of teaching conversations: exploring how to promote sharing of innovative teaching knowledge between science faculty

Price et al (2021): Analyzing a faculty online learning community as a mechanism for supporting faculty implementation of a guided-inquiry curriculum

O'Leary et al (2020): Creating inclusive classrooms by engaging STEM faculty in culturally responsive teaching workshops

Lane et al (2019): Investigating how faculty social networks and peer influence relate to knowledge and use of evidence-based teaching practices

Gehrke et al (2017): The roles of STEM faculty communities of practice in institutional and departmental reform in higher education

Whittaker et al (2014): Cultivating institutional transformation and sustainable STEM diversity in higher education through integrative faculty development

Nadelson et al (2013): A journey toward mastery teaching: STEM faculty engagement in a year-long faculty learning community

# data[].attributes.body
Reinholz et al (2019): STEM is not a monolith: A preliminary analysis of variations in STEM disciplinary cultures and implications for change

Landrum et al (2017): Assessing the STEM landscape: The current instructional climate survey and the evidence-based instructional practices adoption scale

Allen-Ramdial et al (2014): Reimagining the pipeline: Advancing STEM diversity, persistence, and success

Henderson et al (2011): Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature

Henry, R (2010): An assessment of STEM faculty involvement in reform of introductory college courses

Fairweather, J (2008): Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education

# data[].attributes.body
Petersen et al (2020): The tyranny of content:“Content coverage” as a barrier to evidence-based teaching approaches and ways to overcome it

Phillips et al (2020): Progressing STEM Education Using Adaptive, Responsive Techniques to Support and Motivate Students

Manduca et al (2017): Improving undergraduate STEM education: The efficacy of discipline-based professional development

Landrum et al (2017): Assessing the STEM landscape: The current instructional climate survey and the evidence-based instructional practices adoption scale

Talbot et al (2015): Transforming undergraduate science education with learning assistants: Student satisfaction in large-enrollment courses

National Research Council (2011): Promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education: Summary of two workshops

Smith, K (2011): Cooperative learning: Lessons and insights from thirty years of championing a research-based innovative practice

Henderson et al (2011): Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature

Smith et al (2009): Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education

# data[].attributes.body
Motivation
Mindset Theory
Interests

# data[].attributes.body
Mindset theory describes core assumptions about the malleability of personal qualities (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). The theory represents a social-cognitive approach that stems from goals and goal-oriented behavior and relates to individual differences in beliefs and values (Dweck & Leggett, 1988)

Dweck C. S., Leggett E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256

# data[].attributes.body
Learning is collaborative and community-based.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The level of potential development is the level at which learning takes place. It comprises cognitive structures that are still in the process of maturing, but which can only mature under the guidance of or in collaboration with others.

Background

Social constructivism is a variety of cognitive constructivism that emphasizes the collaborative nature of much learning. Social constructivism was developed by post-revolutionary Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky was a cognitivist, but rejected the assumption made by cognitivists such as Piaget and Perry that it was possible to separate learning from its social context. He argued that all cognitive functions originate in (and must therefore be explained as products of) social interactions and that learning did not simply comprise the assimilation and accommodation of new knowledge by learners; it was the process by which learners were integrated into a knowledge community. According to Vygotsky (1978, 57),

Every function in the child's cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level and, later on, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relationships between individuals.

Vygotsky's theory of social learning has been expanded upon by numerous later theorists and researchers.

View of Knowledge

Cognitivists such as Piaget and Perry see knowledge as actively constructed by learners in response to interactions with environmental stimuli. Vygotsky emphasized the role of language and culture in cognitive development. According to Vygotsky, language and culture play essential roles both in human intellectual development and in how humans perceive the world. Humans' linguistic abilities enable them to overcome the natural limitations of their perceptual field by imposing culturally defined sense and meaning on the world. Language and culture are the frameworks through which humans experience, communicate, and understand reality. Vygotsky states (1968, 39),

A special feature of human perception ... is the perception of real objects ... I do not see the world simply in color and shape but also as a world with sense and meaning. I do not merely see something round and black with two hands; I see a clock ...

Language and the conceptual schemes that are transmitted by means of language are essentially social phenomena. As a result, human cognitive structures are, Vygotsky believed, essentially socially constructed. Knowledge is not simply constructed, it is co-constructed.

View of Learning

Vygotsky accepted Piaget's claim that learners respond not to external stimuli but to their interpretation of those stimuli. However, he argued that cognitivists such as Piaget had overlooked the essentially social nature of language. As a result, he claimed they had failed to understand that learning is a collaborative process. Vygotsky distinguished between two developmental levels (85):

The level of actual development is the level of development that the learner has already reached, and is the level at which the learner is capable of solving problems independently. The level of potential development (the "zone of proximal development") is the level of development that the learner is capable of reaching under the guidance of teachers or in collaboration with peers. The learner is capable of solving problems and understanding material at this level that they are not capable of solving or understanding at their level of actual development; the level of potential development is the level at which learning takes place. It comprises cognitive structures that are still in the process of maturing, but which can only mature under the guidance of or in collaboration with others.

View of Motivation

Whereas behavioral motivation is essentially extrinsic, a reaction to positive and negative reinforcements, cognitive motivation is essentially intrinsic - based on the learner's internal drive. Social constructivists see motivation as both extrinsic and intrinsic. Because learning is essentially a social phenomenon, learners are partially motivated by rewards provided by the knowledge community. However, because knowledge is actively constructed by the learner, learning also depends to a significant extent on the learner's internal drive to understand and promote the learning process.

Implications for Teaching

Collaborative learning methods require learners to develop teamwork skills and to see individual learning as essentially related to the success of group learning. The optimal size for group learning is four or five people. Since the average section size is ten to fifteen people, collaborative learning methods often require GSIs to break students into smaller groups, although discussion sections are essentially collaborative learning environments. For instance, in group investigations students may be split into groups that are then required to choose and research a topic from a limited area. They are then held responsible for researching the topic and presenting their findings to the class. More generally, collaborative learning should be seen as a process of peer interaction that is mediated and structured by the teacher. Discussion can be promoted by the presentation of specific concepts, problems, or scenarios; it is guided by means of effectively directed questions, the introduction and clarification of concepts and information, and references to previously learned material. Some more specific techniques are suggested in the Teaching Guide pages on Discussion Sections.

Reference

Vygotsky, Lev (1978). Mind in Society. London: Harvard University Press.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The level of potential development is the level at which learning takes place. It comprises cognitive structures that are still in the process of maturing, but which can only mature under the guidance of or in collaboration with others. Social constructivism is a variety of cognitive constructivism that emphasizes the collaborative nature of much learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The UDL Guidelines are a tool used in the implementation of Universal Design for Learning, a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn. Learn more about the Universal Design for Learning framework from CAST. The UDL Guidelines can be used by educators, curriculum developers, researchers, parents, and anyone else who wants to implement the UDL framework in a learning environment. These guidelines offer a set of concrete suggestions that can be applied to any discipline or domain to ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.

Reenvisioning the UDL Guidelines

Because the UDL Guidelines are meant to be informed by feedback from the field as well as new research, they have been updated several times in the past. We are in the process of updating the Guidelines once again in our UDL Rising to Equity initiative.

This update will focus specifically on addressing systemic barriers that result in inequitable learning opportunities and outcomes. CAST aims to develop a transparent, inclusive, and community-driven process. If you are interested in collaborating and staying updated on our progress, we invite you to complete a brief survey.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UDL Guidelines are a tool used in the implementation of Universal Design for Learning, a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn. Learn more about the Universal Design for Learning framework from CAST. The UDL Guidelines can be used by educators, curriculum developers, researchers, parents, and anyone else who wants to implement the UDL framework in a learning environment. These guidelines offer a set of concrete suggestions that can be applied to any discipline or domain to ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.

# data[].attributes.headline
How are they learning about practices and developing competencies?

# data[].attributes.subject
How are they learning about practices and developing competencies?

# data[].attributes.body
Professional Development
Organizational Context
Communities of Practice

# data[].attributes.headline
Who are faculty connected to in doing this work?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who are faculty connected to in doing this work?

# data[].attributes.body
Organizational Context
Communities of Practice

# data[].attributes.body
Autonomy
Organizational Context
Motivation

# data[].attributes.body
Self-Efficacy

# data[].attributes.body
Inventory of Inclusive Practices in use in STEM classrooms

# data[].attributes.body
Specific constructs and factors/measures
Identity/Intersectionality
Autonomy
Motivation
Self-efficacy
Organizational context

Social constructivism
Mindset theory
Three strands of motivation theory: intrinsic/extrinsic, autonomy, self-determination

Sources cited and rationale for measures used

**Review the Ed Research proposal

# data[].attributes.body
Faculty engagement and teaching innovations (e.g., Math Emporium, SCALE-UP, POGIL, Peer Instruction, and other active pedagogies) have been shown to increase student engagement and success. While a large body of education research has focused on innovative teaching practices, more needs to be understood about the interplay of inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogies, classroom practice, and institutional contexts. Notably, discipline-based education research (DBER) in the science, technology, and engineering (STEM) fields has advanced understanding of how discipline-specific pedagogical approaches impact cognition and ways of thinking and the nature and development of expertise. More work needs to be completed on translating DBER findings into classroom practice through faculty adoption and implementation. Moreover, more DBER is necessary to advance our understanding of pedagogical practices that broaden the participation of women and underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities within and across different STEM disciplines. What types of inclusive teaching practices positively impact the culture of STEM classrooms, student affect, persistence, graduation, and learning outcomes of groups vulnerable to attrition from STEM disciplines? What contexts and supports are necessary for faculty to engage in inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices? This project will investigate these questions.

References

1.            Rouseff‐Baker, F., Leading change through faculty development. New directions for community colleges, 2002. 2002(120): p. 35-42.

2.            Eble, K.E. and W.J. McKeachie, Improving Undergraduate Education through Faculty Development. An Analysis of Effective Programs and Practices. 1985: ERIC.

3.            Twigg, C.A., The Math Emporium: Higher Education's Silver Bullet. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 2011. 43(3): p. 25-34.

4.            Gaffney, J.D., et al., Scaling up education reform. Journal of College Science Teaching, 2008. 37(5): p. 48.

5.            Moog, R.S. and J.N. Spencer, Process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL). 2008: Oxford University Press, USA.

6.            Mazur, E. and R.C. Hilborn, Peer Instruction: A User's Manual. Physics Today, 1997. 50: p. 68.

7.            Dancy, M. and C. Henderson, Pedagogical practices and instructional change of physics faculty. American Journal of Physics, 2010. 78(10): p. 1056-1063.

8.            Borrego, M., J.E. Froyd, and T.S. Hall, Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in US engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 2010. 99(3): p. 185-207.

9.            Macdonald, R.H., et al., Teaching methods in undergraduate geoscience courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge survey of US faculty. Journal of Geoscience Education, 2005. 53(3): p. 237-252.

10.          Science, A.A.f.t.A.o., Achieving Systemic Change: A Sourcebook for Advancing and Funding Undergraduate STEM Education. Ed. C. Fry, Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2014.

# data[].attributes.headline
Are there differences in faculty willingness to engage in inclusive teaching practices based on their intersectional identities? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Are there differences in faculty willingness to engage in inclusive teaching practices based on their intersectional identities? 

# data[].attributes.body
Differences in self-efficacy, motivations, autonomy, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
https://acue.org/inclusive-teaching-practices-toolkit/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Online Teaching Toolkit | Resources for Online Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Resources for instructors needing to make a quick transition to utilizing an online environment. Improved the online experience for teachers and students.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching (Inclusive Teaching Practices)

# data[].attributes.subject
How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching (Inclusive Teaching Practices)

# data[].attributes.body
https://firstliteracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/How-Learning-Works.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the internal and external factors impacting willingness to implement inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the internal and external factors impacting willingness to implement inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices?

# data[].attributes.headline
What contexts and supports are necessary for faculty to engage in inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices?

# data[].attributes.subject
What contexts and supports are necessary for faculty to engage in inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices?

# data[].attributes.body
The proposed research study seeks to explore the interplay of inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogies, classroom practice, and institutional contexts impacting STEM faculty's willingness and ability to engage in teaching innovations.

Faculty willingness to engage in  inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices

Faculty ability to implement inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices

# data[].attributes.body
Self-efficacy:
evidence of skillsets needed to engage in personal action

Bandura, A., Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. 1997: Macmillan.

Reeve, J., Motivating others: Nurturing inner motivational resources. 1996: Allyn & Bacon.

Hardré, P., et al., What motivates university faculty members to do research?: Tenure-track faculty in research-extensive universities. Journal of the Professoriate, 2007. 2(1): p. 75-99.

# data[].attributes.body
Culturally responsive pedagogy theory (Ladson-Billings)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00028312032003465

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the midst of discussions about improving education, teacher education, equity, and diversity, little has been done to make pedagogy a central area of investigation. This article attempts to challenge notions about the intersection of culture and teaching that rely solely on microanalytic or macroanalytic perspectives. Rather, the article attempts to build on the work done in both of these areas and proposes a culturally relevant theory of education. By raising questions about the location of the researcher in pedagogical research, the article attempts to explicate the theoretical framework of the author in the nexus of collaborative and reflexive research. The pedagogical practices of eight exemplary teachers of African-American students serve as the investigative "site." Their practices and reflections on those practices provide a way to define and recognize culturally relevant pedagogy.

References

Comer, J Home school relationships as they affect the academic success of childrenEducation and Urban Society198416323 337
Google Scholar

Harding, V There is a river: The Black struggle for freedom in AmericaHarcourt Brace Jovanovich1981
Google Scholar

Lipman, P The influence of restructuring on teachers' beliefs about and practices with African American students1993Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Google Scholar

Murrell, P Cultural politics in teacher education: What's missing in the preparation of African American teachers? 1990 April Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Boston
Google Scholar

Murrell, P Deconstructing informal knowledge of exemplary teaching in diverse urban communities: Apprenticing preservice teachers as case study researchers in cultural sites 1991 April Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Chicago
Google Scholar

Noordhoff, K, Kleinfeld, J Preparing teachers for multicultural classrooms: A case study in rural Alaska 1991 April Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Chicago
Google Scholar

Strike, K Professionalism, democracy, and discursive communities: Normative reflections on restructuringAmerican Educational Research Journal199330255 275
Google Scholar

Zeichner, K Educating teachers for cultural diversity1992 East Lansing, MI National Center for Research on Teacher Learning(Special Report)
Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy - Gloria Ladson-Billings, 1995

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the midst of discussions about improving education, teacher education, equity, and diversity, little has been done to make pedagogy a central area of investigation. This article attempts to challenge notions about the intersection of culture and teaching that rely solely on microanalytic or macroanalytic perspectives.

# data[].attributes.body
Mixed methods

Quantitative:
Demographic survey
Inventory of Inclusive Practices (Awareness and Engagement in)
Measures on identity/intersectionality, motivation,
autonomy, self-efficacy, and organizational context

Qualitative:
Focus groups: Institutional contexts (opportunities and challenges) to teaching innovations
Individual Interviews; Faculty participating in inclusive teaching practices- gain an understanding of the development and implementation

Ethnographic research (Exemplar sites)
-Observational analysis
-Narrative research / Vignettes

# data[].attributes.body
Criteria

1. Institutions with high enrollment (determine a percentage) of racial and ethnic minorities in STEM disciplines

2. Cross-section of institutions representative of private and public HBCUS, HSIs, MSIs and PWIs.

Auburn University

Albany State University

Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University

Louisiana State University

Morgan State University
North Carolina A & T

Southern University

Spelman College

Texas A & M

Tulane University

University of South Florida

Vanderbilt University

# data[].attributes.body
What is a faculty member's willingness to
1) Want to change pedagogy? (Motivation)
2) Position and power to change pedagogy? (Autonomy)
3) Ability to know how to change pedagogical style? (Self-efficacy)
4) In an environment supporting pedagogical change? (Organizational context)
5) Empowered to change pedagogy? (Confidence)

Who is the marginalized group that is less likely to engage in culturally responsive pedagogy?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the challenges impacting the one's ability to engage in culturally responsive pedagogy?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the challenges impacting the one's ability to engage in culturally responsive pedagogy?

# data[].attributes.headline
Known Potential Factors impacting willingness to change pedagogy

# data[].attributes.subject
Known Potential Factors impacting willingness to change pedagogy

# data[].attributes.body
Motivation
Autonomy & Agency
Self-efficacy
Organizational context / mission
Intersectionality (differences in self-efficacy, motivations, etc.)
Knowledge/Competencies
Departmental Context - Communities of Practice

# data[].attributes.body
Inclusive teaching practices
Culturally responsive pedagogy
Teaching innovations

# data[].attributes.headline
What assertions are we making about why faculty may or may not participate in CRP practices— based on the theories and relevant literature?

# data[].attributes.subject
What assertions are we making about why faculty may or may not participate in CRP practices— based on the theories and relevant literature?

# data[].attributes.body
Affirmative
Faculty may be participating in CRP practices because of their own lived experiences/ identities and recognize its importance for representation/relevance.

Faculty may be participating in CRP practices because they recognize the non-inclusive nature of the current curriculum

Faculty may be participating in CRP practices to connect with the student demographic they are educating.

Faculty may be participating in CRP practices because it is a department or institution-wide shift in adapting curriculum to its students

Non-affirmative
Faculty may not be participating in CRP practices because they do not see/have the opportunity to change the content and remain in line with expectations.

Faculty may not be participating in CRP practices because they do not know how to adapt their curriculum.

Faculty may not be participating in CRP practices because they do not share common identities with their students or cannot relate to their experience.

Faculty may not be participating in CRP practices because of the fear of backlash from their department or institution.

Faculty may not be participating in CRP practices because their state's political context is not accepting of CRP.