ArticleCBE life sciences education2025
Are Department Heads Ready for Change? Leveraging a Leadership Action Team to Advance Teaching Evaluation Practices.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faculty professional development and career advancement through Student Evaluations of Teaching (SETs).BMC proceedings · 2026Article
- Teaching Evaluation Readiness Assessment (TERA): Development of a Tool to Measure Faculty Readiness for Advancing Departmental Teaching Evaluation Practices.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Teaching evaluation at many institutions is insufficient to support, recognize, and reward effective teaching. We developed a long-term intervention to support science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) department heads in advancing teaching evaluation practices. We describe the intervention and systematically investigate its impact on departmental practices within a research-intensive university. The outcomes varied considerably by department, with four departments achieving extensive teaching evaluation reform and seven departments achieving more limited reform. We used qualitative content analysis of interviews and meetings to investigate department head readiness for change and how it related to the reforms they achieved. All department heads perceived inadequacies in their current evaluation practices, but this dissatisfaction did not reliably predict the changes they pursued. Heads only pursued changes that they perceived to have clear benefits. All heads worried that faculty might resist new practices, but heads who were most successful in facilitating change saw ways to work around resistance. Heads who led the most change questioned their own expertise for reforming teaching evaluation and delegated the work of developing new evaluation practices to knowledgeable colleagues. We discuss emergent hypotheses about factors that support heads in challenging the status quo with more robust and equitable evaluation practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.