Stakeholder and faculty buy-in, time constraints, and lack of measurable definitions are the main challenges to integrating and assessing dispositions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2030: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Buy-in from SMEs and faculty was the most frequently cited challenge in the study. → Jafar Tavakoli 2025 q2 i? The lack of a clear, measurable definition of dispositions is a significant barrier to assessing them. → Jafar Tavakoli 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Jafar Tavakoli 2025¶

Jafar Tavakoli, Marisa Exter, Ankita Kotangale. (2025). Integrating dispositions in instructional design: an exploratory study in higher education. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09762-3

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Discussion of RQ2 challenges: course modality, time, energy, and stakeholder buy-in; "buy-in was the most frequently cited challenge in this study", consistent with Tagare et al. (2023b) on faculty buy-in.

"The challenges of fostering and teaching dispositions mentioned by the participants included the modality of the course, whether online or face-to-face, along with time, energy, and buy-in from SMEs and faculty. Among these, buy-in was the most frequently cited challenge in this study."

Jafar Tavakoli 2025 (2)¶

Jafar Tavakoli, Marisa Exter, Ankita Kotangale. (2025). Integrating dispositions in instructional design: an exploratory study in higher education. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09762-3

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Discussion of RQ3 challenges: participants such as Mia and Noah described dispositions as hard to measure because they are internal mental states lacking measurable, observable definitions.

"many participants highlighted that, in addition to issues such as grading and instructor’s time, the lack of a clear and measurable definition of dispositions presents a significant barrier, making assessment particularly difficult"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Whole-person initiatives often fail to achieve desired outcomes because they operate in fragmented, uncoordinated siloes — a broader claim this one bears on
• Core Teams identified communication challenges, school and district leadership turnover, and teacher burnout as barriers that influenced solution success — related
• Interviewees identified leadership prioritization, staff buy-in, and investments in staffing, training, partnerships, and funding as facilitators of trauma-engaged implementation — related
• Education problems resemble problems in many social settings: they lack clear definitions, have many potential causes, lack simple solutions, and defy straightforward measurement — related
• Participation supports were most effective when deliberately matched to the specific constraints participants faced — related
• The gap between dispositions as learning goals and their assessment indicates misalignment among Integrated Course Design components — related
• Most assessment methods for dispositions were suggestions rather than implemented practices, and some designers had no assessment ideas — related
• Stakeholder groups prioritized different design guidelines: instructors most frequently commented on usability (G4), students on educational support (G13), and researchers on instructional best practices and learning engineering — related