The Opening Of The CNA Nursing Curriculum

Online cna classes development, there may be some members who do not agree with the need for change or faculty development. Although a minority group, resisters have the potential to undermine the momentum of the majority. This cannot be allowed. Every effort should be extended to help the resisters feel that their contributions are needed and valued, and to counteract the negativity that they might project. There is a diplomatic balance to be achieved between sensitivity to individual readiness for change and the school’s need to progress with faculty and curriculum development.

Forms and Causes of Resistance Active resistance to curriculum change and faculty development is easy to identify. Examples of active resistance include:

  • Open criticism of cna degree online change and faculty development
  • Refusal to acknowledge shortcomings of the present curriculum or need for faculty development
  • Predictions of dire consequences of curriculum change
  • Direct refusal to participate in faculty and curriculum development

Passive resistance is subtler. Although resisting participation in faculty or online cna certification development, the passive resister lacks the courage to openly state opposition. Behavior typical of passive resistance can be:

  • Lateness for, or absence from, meetings
  • Failure to meet commitments to complete work
  • Minimal participation in activities attended
  • diverting attention from the main purpose of meetings to trivial, peripheral, or historical matters

Passive-aggressive resistance is sabotage. The resister publicly supports faculty development and online cna courses change, and is involved in these activities. Yet, this endorsement is coupled with behind-the-scenes attempts to undermine faculty development plans, the proposed curriculum, and/or those participating in faculty and curriculum development.

Responding to Resistance the source of resistance must be determined in order to respond effectively. This can be difficult if the source is related to self-concept or motivation, even when trusting relationships exist among faculty. Ignoring the resistance is to condone it (Chambers,

1997)     . The administrator should:

  • invite the resister to a private meeting, so that the resistance can be addressed directly
  • employ exemplary listening skills so the resister feels heard
  • Clearly state expectations about:
  • participating in online cna schools development
  • Teaching according to new tenets
  • accepting consequences of not meeting expectations

Responding to Publicly Voiced Criticism Particularly troubling are reports of a faculty member’s public criticism of faculty development and curriculum change. Responses should convey respect for the resister and confidence in faculty development and the future curriculum. Appropriate comments might be:

  • “The new curriculum will maintain our tradition of excellence. One way we are ensuring this is through our faculty development.”
  • “We are receiving solid support for the proposed curriculum from practitioners and nursing leaders, and are working hard to ensure that we will be ready to implement our new approaches.”

Public criticism of the developing curriculum is not acceptable and should be directly ad- I dressed with the faculty member. The goal is to obtain the resister’s agreement to refrain from further public criticism. The school leader needs to be precise, objective, and unemotional in describing the reports and their effects on the members and image of the school. The dean or director should convey the following messages:

  • The curriculum is changing and the opportunity to influence the curriculum is now
  • There could be consequences of not participating (e.g., isolation from colleagues, unsatisfactory performance appraisal)
  • Future teaching performance will be evaluated in accordance with the intent of the new curriculum

In this way, the resister can have no doubts about present and future expectations. The discussion can be concluded with a statement about the resister’s strengths and an invitation to contribute these strengths to faculty and curriculum development. Possible responses to reasons for resistance to faculty development and curriculum change are presented in Table 4.3.

An Alternate Perspective to lessen the stress often experienced when resistance is prolonged or unrelenting, it may be helpful to reframe the situation to make the discord or dissent seems less personal. Viewing resistance as a conflict of values, beliefs, rights, and obligations could lead to changed understandings and reactions by all involved. Table 4.4 presents examples of possible areas of conflict and possible perspectives of resisters and the faculty majority. A different perspective and emotional distance may make the situation more tolerable, and lessen the tendency to view the resister as a villain. Explicit use of conflict resolution strategies may be in order.

Describing The Nursing Industry Today

Growth when a new curriculum is envisioned, curriculum work begins, and curriculum change occurs. Therefore, consideration of how faculty might undergo change is a significant element of faculty development. Activities to support faculty during a curriculum change merit attention. Strategies to respond to resisters in order to enhance their participation in faculty development and acceptance of the new curriculum direction are also important. The following brief section on change theories is foundational to understanding how to support faculty and respond to resistance to curriculum change.

Change Theories

Lewin’s Force-Field Analysis Kurt Lewin describes change as a social-psychological process with three phases: unfreezing, moving, and refreezing. In the unfreezing phase, a problem or desired change is identified, and a force field analysis is conducted to determine the driving and restraining forces. Together, the leader and the target group examine the issue, and develop strategies and actions to minimize the forces limiting change and maximize the forces driving the change. In the moving phase, actions are carried out as the system moves toward the desired state. Finally, in the refreezing phase, the change is stabilized in both individuals and the system.

Rogers and Shoemaker’s Diffusion of Change Rogers and Shoemaker propose a three-phase model of change: invention of the change; diffusion or communication of information about the change; and consequence, which can be acceptance or rejection of the change. This model is premised on the assumption that people are rational and therefore, knowledge will lead logically to acceptance of a proposed change. Accordingly, communication about all aspects of the change and the intended outcomes are fundamental to success. People involved in the change are characterized below, according to their readiness for change.

Participation in faculty and curriculum development can be conceptualized as encompassing a change in faculty attitude toward the current curriculum, an intention to create a new curriculum, and a change in behavior to include curriculum development activities. Curriculum implementation, then, requires a change in attitude toward students, other faculty, and roles; an intention to behave and interact in new ways; and a change in teaching behavior, approach to content, and interactions. Faculty development activities provide the knowledge, skills, and environment that support individual and collective change. Participation in faculty development represents action to change attitudes and behavior.

Supporting Faculty during Curriculum Change     I

Development of a new curriculum, while faculty is concurrently fulfilling teaching and research responsibilities, requires their dedication to a new vision, and tangible organizational support. Faculty development is one form of substantive support. In Table 4.2, the Model of Behavior Change  is applied to faculty and curriculum change, with activities proposed to match the stages of the model. Incorporated into the strategies, and indeed within the curriculum development process itself, are factors that are inherently empowering: publicity about activities; strong relationship between activities and a central issue in the organization; high interpersonal contact; and participation in programs, meetings, and problem-solving groups. The school must invest in the faculty, and the faculty members, in turn, will invest themselves in the school and its future.


Faculty Development Programs For Nurses

The purpose is to assist novice faculty to acquire teaching skills, and experienced faculty to revitalize their current teaching practices and courses to be congruent with the new curriculum. Faculty development activities to support changed teaching approaches should be considered in light of curriculum philosophical approaches and goals.

Faculty Development Activities for Curriculum Development

Faculty engaging in curriculum development may require additional knowledge and skills about the process they are undertaking. This learning can be facilitated through planned faculty development activities such as workshops, mentoring, group discussions, and attendance at conferences. See Table 4.1 for examples of formal and informal strategies for faculty de-elopement that could be relevant for faculty development related to curriculum development.

Faculty development programs should be ongoing, but quite naturally assume more importance when a new curriculum is envisioned. Whether faculty development activities are formal or informal, the focus should be on the curriculum development process itself. It is gins with organizing for curriculum change, and includes collecting and interpreting contextual data, establishing curriculum directions, goals, and philosophical approaches, designing curriculum and courses, and evaluating curriculum. Notably, inherent in the design and implementation of a faculty development program is a faculty vision of themselves “… as the planners and power persons with the opportunity to plan, practice, and perfect new teaching roles … and new alliances with students and practice persons”.

Curriculum developers should meet initially in faculty development sessions to gain an overview of the curriculum development process. It is incumbent upon all stakeholders to reach shared understandings about nursing education, nursing and health care, teaching- learning processes and student-teacher-practitioner relationships. Faculty discussions of this nature serve the added purpose of moving the curriculum development process forward.

Because faculty development is ongoing, a schedule must be agreed upon. Each session’s topic, format, time, location, and leader need to be decided early. However, schedules and topics should not be so fixed that changes cannot be instituted to meet participant obligations, newly identified or urgent needs, and other contingencies. Nonetheless, what must be kept in mind is that in order to design and develop a curriculum that will be acceptable to all stakeholders and relevant at the time of curriculum implementation and beyond, faculty development is necessary. Faculty must come together, learn and grow together, accept that change is inevitable, and take ownership and pride in the future. Individuals who participate in faculty development feel:

  • valued in an organization that invests in curriculum development participants
  • Competent because of attainment of new abilities and progress toward goal achievement
  • secure in group learning and interaction
  • empowered by the institution’s interest in their professional development and provision of opportunities, resources, information, and support
  • And connected to colleagues through shared learning, acceptance, appreciation, and respect

Faculty Development for Curriculum Change

Faculty may experience feelings ranging from anticipation to resistance as the existing curriculum ends and the transition to the new curriculum takes place. Faculty development is intended to support faculty members’ personal and profess.