Volume 104(6), October 2004 1 You talk about Bridget and her not feeling like she is good at math. I also have issues with math and I know that affected my perspective of the class. I think that is why I had a problem with the way Peter was teaching. With math you expect the teacher to at least give you a couple of examples as to how to work out certain problems. And I know he laid out how the course was to be set up, but I guess we were still not expecting quite what we got. Mary, Team 12, Post-course email In traditional models of teaching, much of the responsibility and authority for teaching lies with the professor (Roth & Desautels, 2002; Taylor, Gilmer, & Tobin, 2002). This traditional authority of college and university professors in the classroom tends to under- mine the accountability and responsibility accepted by students (Bruffee, 1999). The Information Age of the 21 st century makes information accessible to more of the population, and thus, the skills people need have changed. Technology and the rapid changes it engen- ders require people with more mental agility, better problem-solving skills, increased interdependence, and more sophisticated ways of viewing and understanding the world (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1994; National Council of Teach- ers of Mathematics [NCTM], 1991; National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Despite a litany of reform efforts, little has changed in education (Woodbury & Gess-Newsome, 2002). The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a better understanding of some of the obstacles impeding re- form through a case study of a university statistics class. The way the purposes of education are conceptu- alized needs to change. The purpose of education is to assist individuals to evolve in a holistic, integral manner (Wilber, 2000). In this paper, a university statistics professor who was committed to revamping the nature of learning in his classroom is examined. He selected a collaborative learning model, in which he stressed the skills he believed would help students develop into interdependent learners. In studying the interactions between the statistics professor and his students, it became apparent that their expectations and desires conflicted. Applying an interpretive lens based upon the stakeholders’ value structures (Beck, 2000; Beck & Cowan, 1996) to the data illuminated the bases of the conflicts. Peter has been grappling with change for most of his career as a university professor. He wanted to assist students to develop skills that could help them cope better in the changing world, but the students had different goals and expectations. In this paper these conflicts are looked at more closely and the ways differing value structures may inhibit change are ex- plained. The underlying value structures of the profes- sor are summarized by analyzing how he structured the course and how he responded to student feedback. Eight student stakeholders’ reactions to the collabora- tive course structure are analyzed along with their team negotiations, relationships, and responses to personal interviews. The value structures inherent in a Research I institution that limits access to upper-class under- graduate majors, oversees the effectiveness of the instructor, and eventually awards degrees to students are discussed. This paper contextualizes a snapshot of Collaborative Teams in a University Statistics Course: A Case Study of How Differing Value Structures Inhibit Change Nancy T. Davis and Margaret R. Blanchard Florida State University In a rapidly changing world, individuals need the intellectual agility, problem-solving skills, and increased interdependence that are not developed in a traditional classroom. Despite years of reform efforts, little change in practice has been observed. This is a case study of the efforts of a statistics professor who used collaborative learning to prepare his students for the challenges of the 21 st century. The nature of the statistics course, the intentions of the professor, and the interactions and feedback of his students are analyzed in terms of their underlying value structures (Beck & Cowan, 1996). Conflicting expectations and experiences, particularly with assessment, resulted in dissatisfaction and frustrations for the professor and the students.