DATs address a persistent challenge in educational reform: despite significant investments of time and resources, educational “problems” rarely “stay solved” on their own. This can be true for a number of reasons: a reform tied to a particular person is likely to decay in the absence of that person, a reform that is at odds with the dominant culture is likely to be resisted, a reform that cannot adapt to changing circumstances runs the risk of becoming obsolete or turning into a new problem itself. Moreover, typical approaches to supporting change in departments have focused on working with individual faculty members and/or courses, without regard to the departmental context in which these people and courses are embedded.

The DAT model is rooted in the idea that the locus of change in academia is the department, rather than the individual, and that changes must attend to issues such as sustainability, culture, and continuous improvement from the outset. Thus, rather than simply “solving a problem,” a DAT aims to create new structures and processes in a department so that positive changes do not atrophy over time and so that it will be easier for the department to make further improvements down the road. Additionally, DATs think explicitly about departmental culture when planning and implementing their changes. In fact, part of the DAT’s work may involve facilitating a cultural shift within the department to support the achievement of the goals that motivated the creation of the DAT in the first place.

These are ambitious goals, but our team’s work is supported by an in-depth study of the literature on organizational change, which has a long history of understanding and supporting change in mostly business settings. Part of our research is adapting the lessons from this body of literature to the context of higher education.

DATs address a persistent challenge in educational reform: despite significant investments of time and resources, educational “problems” rarely “stay solved” on their own. This can be true for a number of reasons: a reform tied to a particular person is likely to decay in the absence of that person, a reform that is at odds with the dominant culture is likely to be resisted, a reform that cannot adapt to changing circumstances runs the risk of becoming obsolete or turning into a new problem itself. Moreover, typical approaches to supporting change in departments have focused on working with individual faculty members and/or courses, without regard to the departmental context in which these people and courses are embedded.

The DAT model is rooted in the idea that the locus of change in academia is the department, rather than the individual, and that changes must attend to issues such as sustainability, culture, and continuous improvement from the outset. Thus, rather than simply “solving a problem,” a DAT aims to create new structures and processes in a department so that positive changes do not atrophy over time and so that it will be easier for the department to make further improvements down the road. Additionally, DATs think explicitly about departmental culture when planning and implementing their changes. In fact, part of the DAT’s work may involve facilitating a cultural shift within the department to support the achievement of the goals that motivated the creation of the DAT in the first place.

These are ambitious goals, but our team’s work is supported by an in-depth study of the literature on organizational change, which has a long history of understanding and supporting change in mostly business settings. Part of our research is adapting the lessons from this body of literature to the context of higher education.

DATs address a persistent challenge in educational reform: despite significant investments of time and resources, educational “problems” rarely “stay solved” on their own. This can be true for a number of reasons: a reform tied to a particular person is likely to decay in the absence of that person, a reform that is at odds with the dominant culture is likely to be resisted, a reform that cannot adapt to changing circumstances runs the risk of becoming obsolete or turning into a new problem itself. Moreover, typical approaches to supporting change in departments have focused on working with individual faculty members and/or courses, without regard to the departmental context in which these people and courses are embedded.

The DAT model is rooted in the idea that the locus of change in academia is the department, rather than the individual, and that changes must attend to issues such as sustainability, culture, and continuous improvement from the outset. Thus, rather than simply “solving a problem,” a DAT aims to create new structures and processes in a department so that positive changes do not atrophy over time and so that it will be easier for the department to make further improvements down the road. Additionally, DATs think explicitly about departmental culture when planning and implementing their changes. In fact, part of the DAT’s work may involve facilitating a cultural shift within the department to support the achievement of the goals that motivated the creation of the DAT in the first place.

These are ambitious goals, but our team’s work is supported by an in-depth study of the literature on organizational change, which has a long history of understanding and supporting change in mostly business settings. Part of our research is adapting the lessons from this body of literature to the context of higher education.

DATs address a persistent challenge in educational reform: despite significant investments of time and resources, educational “problems” rarely “stay solved” on their own. This can be true for a number of reasons: a reform tied to a particular person is likely to decay in the absence of that person, a reform that is at odds with the dominant culture is likely to be resisted, a reform that cannot adapt to changing circumstances runs the risk of becoming obsolete or turning into a new problem itself. Moreover, typical approaches to supporting change in departments have focused on working with individual faculty members and/or courses, without regard to the departmental context in which these people and courses are embedded.

The DAT model is rooted in the idea that the locus of change in academia is the department, rather than the individual, and that changes must attend to issues such as sustainability, culture, and continuous improvement from the outset. Thus, rather than simply “solving a problem,” a DAT aims to create new structures and processes in a department so that positive changes do not atrophy over time and so that it will be easier for the department to make further improvements down the road. Additionally, DATs think explicitly about departmental culture when planning and implementing their changes. In fact, part of the DAT’s work may involve facilitating a cultural shift within the department to support the achievement of the goals that motivated the creation of the DAT in the first place.

These are ambitious goals, but our team’s work is supported by an in-depth study of the literature on organizational change, which has a long history of understanding and supporting change in mostly business settings. Part of our research is adapting the lessons from this body of literature to the context of higher education.

DATs are designed to create sustainable change in departments. Similarly, in designing the DAT project, we wanted to ensure that DATs themselves would be sustained as a model for change at CU and CSU. To do so, we are partnering with teaching professional development units on both campuses [the Academic Technology Design Team (ATDT) at CU and The Institute for Learning and Teaching (TILT) at CSU]. DATs on each campus are co-facilitated by two members of one of those units, both of whom are supported by grant funds. Over the course of the grant, facilitation will shift entirely to ATDT and TILT, who will ideally be able to secure permanent funding to incorporate DATs into their normal suite of services. Our team will work with the leaders of these units and relevant administrators on both campuses to demonstrate the effectiveness of the DAT model and make the case for its institutionalization.

We have discussed how DAT increases institutions’ capacity for change in a white paper.

Right now, our project team is working with only a few departments, most of which agreed to participate when we submitted our grant proposal to NSF. This is because we want to focus first on implementing a few DATs successfully and to analyze this process so that when we do add partner departments, we can support them to the best of our ability. Check back here for more information or email your questions directly to DATinfo@colostate.edu.