"Multi-institutional STEM reform networks have become a popular way to address the challenges facing undergraduate STEM education. Despite an intuitive sense that networks are effective educational reform pathways, few empirical research studies investigate their impact. Many have argued that institutional representatives, serving as boundary spanners, are key to securing the benefits of interorganizational membership. Boundary spanners are individuals who connect their organizations to the external environment and gain valuable external knowledge and resources to support local organizational performance. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the inter- and intra-organizational boundary-spanning roles of institutional representatives at one multi-institutional higher education STEM reform network. The Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) is a network of 43 universities that seeks to prepare graduate students to be effective teachers so they can go on to positively affect undergraduate STEM education. Using a case study design involving qualitative social network maps and semi-structured interviews, this qualitative study addressed three primary research questions: (1) what inter- and intra-organizational connections do formal, institutional representatives of a multi-institutional STEM reform network have (in relation to the network) and for what purposes, (2) how, if at all, do these formal institutional representatives engage in and make sense of inter- and intraorganizational boundary-spanning roles to help advance the network's reform agenda locally, and (3) what individual and organizational attributes help or hinder their boundary-spanning activities? Institutional representatives maintained several types of interorganizational connections related to network operations, network contributions, collaboration, and knowledge exchange. Due to these connections, they found numerous individual and institutional benefits and worked with their local teams to translate network gains for local implementation. They diffused network-related information to and gained institutional support from administrative and academic units and stakeholders. There were multiple individual and institutional attributes that influenced boundary-spanning behaviors. At the individual level, factors such as commitment, institutional role, role alignment, and managerial skills shaped how local CIRTL leaders engaged in boundary-spanning roles. Organizational factors such as institutional alignment with the purposes of CIRTL, programmatic infrastructure, and a decentralized organizational structure likewise played a major influencing role on boundary-spanning activities. In summary, this study demonstrated the complexity and integration of four primary boundary-spanning activities of institutional representatives in service to local STEM reform. They were able to inform campus groups and units, advance a dialogue of the importance of preparing future faculty, and influence local policies and practices."--Pages ii-iii.
Read
