Over the prior two decades, many changes had occurred as new faculty began teaching the upper-division courses, new technologies emerged, and new physics specialties became prominent in the current faculty’s research programs. Several long-standing issues as well as new challenges had become apparent. During winter and spring terms 2016, a small faculty committee surveyed current faculty and student perspectives, conducted a detailed review of the current junior and senior curriculum, developed a set of proposals for changes, and sought input from the faculty in individual consultations. Near the end of spring term, the current physics faculty voted unanimously to go forward with this proposed reform of the Paradigms in Physics program. The four committee members reflected upon their experiences during interviews shortly after the faculty vote. Their insights are reported here as recommendations for others interested in undertaking similar curricular reforms:

Winter Term:

• Gain the support of the head of the department
  • discuss the feasibility of undertaking curricular reform and communicate progress often
• Form a small committee (3 to 4 people)
  • choose volunteers, people who have changes they want to see and help make happen
  • choose people willing to listen to the rest of the group as well as to put out their own ideas
  • choose people who represent the various perspectives of faculty in the department (e.g., experimentalist/theorist; different faculty ranks, research foci, teaching experiences)
  • choose people who have knowledge of different aspects of the curriculum
  • choose people whom other faculty seem to trust
• Inform the community about the intended process via a department colloquium
  • present overview and timeline
  • explain expectations for faculty participation such as:
    • responding to an online survey,
    • meeting with a committee member to create a set of index cards listing main topics in a course one is currently teaching if teaching upper-division
    • consulting with the committee at least once to provide input to proposed plans
    • participating in faculty meetings during discussions and eventual vote
• Document faculty and student perspectives via an anonymous online survey
  • collaborate within the committee to generate and refine questions
  • include open-ended questions to elicit positive input (e.g., preferred learning goals for majors, knowledge/skills students need to start doing research, aspects of the current program that should be preserved, ways to enhance faculty knowledge of curriculum and use of active engagement strategies)
  • include open-ended opportunities for negative feedback as well
  • include requests for ratings of importance for topics (e.g., various subject matter themes and issues needing attention)
  • clarify consent process; gain IRB approval; create and test online versions
  • provide two versions: one for faculty and graduate students; one for juniors and seniors
  • launch survey immediately after department colloquium, state deadline for responses
  • analyze responses; use results to inform committee priorities and actions

Spring term:

• Meet frequently but briefly and productively
  • agree to meet, for example, for one hour twice a week such as M & W, 2-3
  • strategize about what needs to be done by whom by when
  • focus on agreed upon priority for that meeting
  • encourage all to contribute their ideas
  • pause frequently to give people time to think, to venture an unusual possibility
  • identify what is important, what principles should govern a particular decision
  • talk together about suggestions on the table as long as needed, even multiple meetings
  • end on time and be content with making some progress, even if only a little, for now
• Interview faculty teaching upper-division courses to ascertain current curriculum
  • decide who should interview whom, based on which committee member is most familiar with a course’s content and most comfortable with the current faculty member teaching the course
  • decide on color scheme for index cards (e.g., pink for math methods, orange for thermodynamics, yellow for quantum mechanics, green for classical mechanics, blue for electricity and magnetism, white for professional development skills)
  • become aware of grain size issues, of how detailed an accounting of topics is needed
  • meet with the faculty member teaching a course, bring index cards and pen, talk about the course content, maybe look at textbook and/or class notes, write major topics, one on each card, aim for about ten cards per course
• Assemble index cards on large table that can be left undisturbed for many weeks
  • meet in quiet room with large table, chairs for committee members and visitors
  • arrange cards in columns, one for each course, in temporal order
  • keep the conversation open as contemplate changes to address identified issues
  • move cards around freely to try out various suggestions
  • keep meeting and talking until a solution emerges
• Keep faculty and administrator informed and engaged during re-envisioning process
  • engage upper-division faculty in brainstorming needs of majors during a regularly scheduled faculty curriculum meeting
  • invite individual faculty members with special expertise and administrator to meet with the committee to ponder possible changes early in the discussions
  • provide brief updates at regularly scheduled faculty meetings
• Meet one-on-one with every faculty member to discuss proposed changes
  • decide who should meet with whom, based on who is most comfortable with a faculty member and most knowledgeable about that person’s likely concerns
  • listen and respond to concerns expressed, including letting individual faculty move the cards around to try out different scenarios; discuss with committee and modify as needed
• Meet with current students to discuss proposed changes
  • listen and respond to feedback expressed, including modifying plans as needed
• Prepare presentations at sequence of two faculty meetings before vote
  • provide informal summary of proposed changes, with handouts, at first meeting
  • make formal presentation at second meeting, open floor for discussion, continue discussion until someone motions from the floor for a vote. (If seems appropriate, committee members signal to facilitator to wait to vote at a later meeting).