There is a growing concern among faculty across the country that students are increasingly entering the classroom lacking dispositions to enhance their learning and influence their professionalism (Filer, Barnes & Cooper, 2012; Jung & Rhodes, 2008; Misco, 2007; Shiveley & Misco, 2010). These students often engage in behaviors, habits, actions, and in some instances, hold values which compromise their learning in the classroom. These undesirable dispositions also have the propensity to affect their post-graduation performance.
Some of these adverse dispositions can be changed by simply increasing students’ awareness of the negative impact those behaviors have on their learning and life. However, there are others that need more in-depth reflection and discourse to influence students’ thinking about how these dispositions can help or hinder their success in the classroom and beyond. Texting in the classroom, for example, is frequently a behavior that can be addressed easily by drawing a student’s attention to a course policy or explaining how that action prevents one from focusing on the task at hand. On the other hand, a student failing to demonstrate initiative and diligence and a strong work ethic is a far deeper issue to address. By engaging in the Faculty Transformative Process (FTP), faculty members can begin the process of acknowledging the dilemma exists, and then, moving toward building relationships with students to mentoring and supporting students to engage in desirable dispositions needed learning in the classroom and beyond the wall of the university.
Over the last several decades, there have many numerous studies regarding the relationship between faculty and students (Cox, McIntosh, Terenzini, Reason, & Lutovsky Quaye, 2010; Cotten & Wilson, 2006). More recent articles probed how race, higher-order thinking, social class, and gender might factor into these relationships. While there might be many factors that influence the frequency, duration, and/or type of relationship—informal or formal, there is nothing more important to effective mentoring than healthy relationships between the faculty member and student. Close relationships can help faculty members provide emergency relief to teacher candidates who often juggle household responsibilities, child-rearing, an income-producing job, and yes, course requirements. Students learn from such close relationships that their limitations do not define their destinations. They also learn to accept criticism as constructive rather than destructive.
The development of dispositions is a close and personal process for students. It requires students to become increasingly aware of their weaknesses. It also requires that they become more vulnerable in the acknowledgment of such weaknesses and transparent about those weaknesses. Within the wall of a university, few students are willing to become vulnerable and transparent without a healthy relationship with a faculty member. It also softens the perception of students that faculty members, according to Cotton & Wilson, (2006), are rushed and limited in the amount of time that can dedicate to support students’ development and learning. This paper presents a process by which faculty and mentors can coach students through the development of dispositions that will factor into their life and career.
Faculty Transformative Process
Faculty members must take some responsibility for developing students’ dispositions (Filer et al, 2012). Using the Faculty Transformative Process, faculty members become more solution-focused than problem-based. Expressions of frustration are replaced with the propensity to change the environment in which students learn to value the dispositions that optimize learning. As illustrated in Figure 1, the Faculty Transformative Process combines two theories as a framework for discourse, reflection, and action.
According to Mezirow (1991), transformative learning occurs when one’s current perspective is challenged to accommodate new information and experiences. It begins when one is faced with a dilemma and proceeds to take action to resolve that dilemma. The Affective Hierarchy (Krathwohl, et al, 1964; Wilkerson & Lang, 2007) explains how an individual moves along a continuum of internalizing various schemes, constructs, ideas and experiences. It is often represented in hierarchical stages that include attending, responding, valuing, organizing, and characterizing. The integration of these theories offers a framework to move faculty from simply acknowledging a dilemma exist, to taking action. At the heart of the relationship between these two theories is reflection and discourse (Cranton, 1994; Van Halen-Faber, 1997). The ultimate goal is for faculty members to develop a deliberate system designed to help develop dispositions in their students through relationships and mentoring.
Figure 1—Relationship between theories
The Faculty Transformative Process (FTP) is a five steps framework. Each step is designed to influence faculty members thinking and promote change. It is a process which can be applied to various problems and issues. For the purposes of this article, this process is applied to the dilemma of disposition deficiencies present among college students. It is used to describe how faculty members can engage in transforming their thinking and take a more proactive approach to developing desired dispositions among their student body.
Acknowledging the Dilemma Exists
First, faculty members must acknowledge that a dilemma exists. It is critical they shift from assuming students come to the college classroom with the dispositions to pursue excellence, to a position of providing them with an environment where they, the students, are supported in developing the dispositions expected for learning, career and life (Filer et al, 2012). Second, faculty members must acknowledge who these students are. They must accept that these students enter the classroom with values and beliefs that guide their thoughts, feelings, and actions. Third, it is essential that faculty members acknowledge and accept that these students’ values are often deeply rooted in a socio-cultural context. These students come to university setting representing great diversity. Their families have instilled values and ideas in them that when challenged, increases the incidence of cognitive dissonance. Therefore, faculty members must relinquish the notion they are attempting to change students’ valuing and thinking to match their own. Rather, they are attempting to influence students’ thinking about how dispositional acuity, or a lack thereof, can affect them throughout learning and life. This creates opportunities for dialogue and deep thinking about dispositions.
Assessing Thinking about the Dilemma
Second faculty members should critique or assess the assumptions held about disposition development among college students (Filer, Barnes & Cooper, 2012; Mezirow, 1991; 2009). Many faculty members are initially challenged by the pretense that disposition development means changing students’ morals and values, which are often times embedded in students’ backgrounds and culture, to dispositions more aligned to that particular faculty member’s dispositions. This is the most troubling part of the dilemma which exists. This part of the dilemma is complicated by the many definitions of dispositions—definitions that include language centered on morals, values, beliefs and virtues (Damon, 2007; McKnight, 2010; NCATE, 2001; 2007). Other definitions (Katz, 1993; McKnight, 2010; NCATE, 2001; 2007) address the professional practices, ethics, traits, virtues, beliefs, and intentions. Still other authors define dispositions in terms of professional standards of practice. For the purposes of this article we considered the common elements among these definitions to define dispositions as—patterns of thinking, characteristics, attitudes, and the awareness of experiences and behaviors that guide how we navigate the classroom and our personal and professional lives.
Once faculty members challenge the resistance to developing dispositions, they can move to the next step. However, an assessment or critique of all assumptions is time consuming and involves a great deal of discourse and reflection. For example, each faculty member needs to be comfortable with the definition of dispositions and the identification of critical dispositions to develop and later assess. Responsibility, diligence, initiative, flexibility and integrity are universal dispositions that, regardless of your discipline, are essential to maximizing learning and can positively impact students’ professional pursuits. However, there may be others that are as, or more significant to certain disciplines. Faculty members must reflect on their beliefs, perspectives and understanding of dispositions, and reach a level of comfort before moving on to the next step of analysis.
Analyzing New Ideas and Perspectives
Analysis involves a review of new ideas and perspectives (Filer et al, 2012; Mezirow, 1991; 2009). Faculty members must conduct a review of literature on the topic, organize the findings, and present it to other concerned faculty members. This can be an overwhelming task, which may be more efficiently organized by committee. It is an important task, however, because it facilitates faculty member’s supporting the process.
The goal of this step is to deepen the sustenance and discourse around resolving the dilemma. By organizing a committee to lead this process, the information collected and presented in a clear and efficient manner. Additionally, this step affords an opportunity to further define the dispositions for development and determine how other programs and college departments manage disposition development. Most importantly, it allows faculty members to begin organizing a plan to disseminate the information to others
Disseminate and Assimilate Information to Others
The fourth step is a convergence of two paths. The first involves the influencing of faculty members’ thinking. Those faculty members who are integral in the analysis phase must present the information to others using the best and most appropriate professional development methods. This is a critical step for two reasons: One, consensus among the entire faculty body on moving forward with developing a proactive plan for disposition development is important. However, a lack of consensus should not discourage faculty members from moving forward with organizing a plan while continuing to work to influence other’s thinking about disposition development (Filer et al, 2012). Two, it is this step which continues building the framework for the final step, action. As faculty members sharpen their acuity of the information presented, it facilitates continued discourse, and hopefully, a plan begins to emerge.
The second path involves moving faculty members from understanding the information to creating an action plan for developing disposition. This second path includes more in-depth reflection and discourse about the activities, events, and experiences that will facilitate change. This step ultimately moves faculty from voicing their frustrations, to engaging in a process to support students’ development of dispositions needed for college and career. These converging paths serve as the catalyst for action and strengthen the disposition development framework. As the framework emerges activities, events and experiences, mentoring and relationship building opportunities will impact students’ thinking about disposition for development.
Taking Action to Solve the Dilemma
Once faculty members reach the final step, they are ready to take action. This action is creating a plan comprised of several elements including: orientation of students to the development process, defining and describing the dispositions for learning and success, explicit or direct instruction within courses, reflection activities designed to provoke students’ thinking about their own dispositions, assessment of the dispositions to enhance learning, mentoring and professional development activities, and a remediation plan or process for those students who continue to demonstrate deficits in dispositions.
Each element serves a particular purpose to move facilitate disposition development. For example, the orientation introduces the system or plan to the students. Faculty members might provide a presentation to identify and describe the critical dispositions and include indicators for success. Embedded course activities to facilitate greater discussion and a deepening of student’s knowledge of dispositions can be an effective strategy. A case study would allow students to apply the information in a real context. Students could also engage in self-assessment for greater reflection and discourse with peers and faculty members. Finally, faculty members could formally assess students’ dispositions and organize remediation plans when necessary to further help students develop the critical dispositions to maximize learning.
Creating an action plan is essential for transitioning students from a level of awareness to valuing how these dispositions are reflected in their learning, life and careers. It is through the development of this action plan that faculty members can: build relationships with students, engage them in discourse and discussion, and offer strategies which will help them grow and develop the dispositions in a profound way.
Cotton and Wilson (2006) found that interacting with students, both socially and academically, has a greater impact than one or the other. They suggest that combining the two creates opportunities for increased engagement and mentoring opportunities. This is profoundly important to disposition development which is deeply rooted part of one’s values and beliefs. The goal is for faculty members and students to engage in discourse, reflection, and thoughts comparisons. This has a greater chance of success when the student and faculty member has a healthy relationship. It is through the action step that faculty will begin to build relationships with students to support their disposition development through various mentoring and professional development exercises. Students might develop a professional growth plan to encourage them to apply the information to their lives and identify areas for improvement.
In closing, faculty members must not resign themselves to the false notion that students who demonstrate dispositional deficiencies are hopeless and helpless. Faculty members must first engage in a process to transform their thinking about dispositional development for students. Once faculty members have acknowledged the dilemma, they can then assess each faculty member’s assumptions about disposition development. Next, they must disseminate and integrate new information while continuing to reflect and discuss this new learning. Once those steps are achieved, faculty members can develop a plan to influence students’ thinking about how dispositions affect their lives both in and out of the classroom. Once faculty members have engaged in this transformative process, they may be better positioned to mentor students as they grow their dispositional strengths and translate that growth into successes that will impact their future relationships, learning and professional pursuits.
REFERENCES
Cotten, S., & Wilson, B. (2006). Student–faculty Interactions: Dynamics and Determinants. Higher Education, 51, 487-519. doi:10.1007/s10734-004-1705-4
Cox, B., McIntosh, K., Terenzini, P., Reason, R., & Lutovsky Quaye, B. (2010). Pedagogical Signals of Faculty Approachability: Factors Shaping Faculty-Student Interaction Outside the Classroom. Research in Higher Education, 51, 767-788. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9178-z
Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for educators of adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Damon, W. (2007). Dispositions and teacher assessment: The need for a more rigorous definition. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 365-369.
Filer, J., Barnes, C.D. & Cooper, M. (2012). The role of faculty in dispositional development of teacher candidates: A neglected voice in teacher preparation. In C. Boden & S Kippers (Ed.), Pathways to transformation: Learning in relationship (147-168). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Howe, N.,& Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising. The next greatest generation. New York, NY: Vintage Books, Inc.
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2003). Millennials go to college. Strategies for a new generation on campus: Recruiting and admissions, campus life, and the classroom. New York, NY: LifeCourse Associates, Inc.
Jung, E., & Rhodes, D.M. (2008). Revisiting disposition assessment in teacher education: Broadening the focus. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 647-660.
Katz, L.G. 1993a. Dispositions as educational goals. ERIC EDO-PS-93-10. Online: http://ceep.crc.uiuc.edu/eecearchive/digests/1993/katzdi93.html.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Franciso, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative learning theory. In J. Mezirow, E.W. Taylor, and Associates, Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Misco, T. (2007). Did I forget about dispositions? Preparing high school graduates for moral life. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 80(6), 267- 270.
Monoco, M., & Martin, M. (2007, April-Jun). The millennial student: A new generation of learners. Athletic Training Education Journal, 2, 42-46.
McKnight, D. An inquiry of NCATE’s move to virtue ethics by way of dispositions. (Is this what Aristotle meant?). Educational Studies, 35, 212-230.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2001). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC:
Van Halen-Faber, C. V. (1997). Encouraging critical reflection in pre-service teacher education: A narrative of a personal learning journey. In P. Cranton (Ed), Transformative learning in action: Insights from practice (pp. 51-60). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishing.
