ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding

Faculty: A Step toward Improving

Professional Development Programs.

ERIC Digest.

ERIC Development Team

www.eric.ed.gov

Table of Contents

If you're viewing this document online, you can click any of the topics below to link directly to that section.

Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.................................... 1

A COMPARISON OF PART-TIME AND FULL-TIME FACULTY....... 2

DISCIPLINARY VARIATIONS................................................ 4

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT.................. 5

CONCLUSION.................................................................. 5

REFERENCES.................................................................. 6

ERIC Identifier: ED477910

Publication Date: 2002-11-00

Author: Carducci, Rozana

Source: ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges Los Angeles CA.

Understanding Faculty: A Step toward

Improving Professional Development Programs.

ERIC Digest.

THIS DIGEST WAS CREATED BY ERIC, THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.

Page 1 of 7
INFORMATION CENTER. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ERIC, CONTACT

ACCESS ERIC 1-800-LET-ERIC

A study by Huber states that "community college faculty constitute 31% of all U.S.

higher education faculty, teaching 39% of all higher education students and 46% of all

first-year students" (as cited in Editors notes, 2002, p. 1). Given the strong presence of

community college faculty in the academy, it is essential that colleges develop

institutional programs and policies that enhance community college teaching and

learning. To be effective, these programs need to take into account the differing

backgrounds, perspectives, and goals of community college faculty.

This Digest, drawn from "Community College Faculty: Characteristics, Practices, and

Challenges"(New Directions for Community Colleges, Summer 2002), summarizes

research findings on the similarities and differences among community college faculty

groups and concludes with a discussion of how this information can be used to increase

the relevance and effectiveness of faculty development initiatives. The research findings

of this NDCC are drawn from the Center for the Study of Community Colleges' 2000

National Faculty Survey and the 1993 and 1999 National Survey of Post-secondary

Faculty.

A COMPARISON OF PART-TIME AND

FULL-TIME FACULTY

According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, 65% of faculty at

public two-year colleges were part-time in 1995 (as cited in Leslie and Gappa, 2002).

Given the large size of this community college faculty sub-group, it is useful to

determine if there are significant differences between full- and part-time faculty with

respect to instructional practices, student relationships, and professional development

needs. If differences exist, this information may assist community college administrators

in designing orientation and professional development programs that meet the distinct

needs of both full- and part-time faculty.

The Similarities

Analyses of data collected in two national studies of community college faculty reveal a

number of shared characteristics between full- and part-time faculty. Leslie and Gappa

(2002) and Schuetz (2002) summarize these findings. Schuetz notes that both faculty

sub-groups indicate similar patterns of instructional activities (43% lectures, 15% class

discussions, and 11% for quizzes and examinations) and both groups express a desire

to participate in professional development opportunities within the next five years (83%

of full-time faculty and 76% of part-time). On a related note, Leslie and Gappa report no

statistical difference between full- and part-time faculty with respect to professional

development reading. They also cite research results that indicate there is no difference

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 2 of 7 ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.
between part- and full-time faculty members' rating of their "working environment in

general" and their relatively high levels of job satisfaction (85% of part-time and 84% of

full-time faculty). These findings support Leslie and Gappa's assertion that "part-timers

in community colleges look more like full-time faculty than is sometimes assumed." (p.

65). In addition, the research highlights both full- and part-time faculty interest in

development programs that enhance their professional knowledge base and

instructional effectiveness.

Differences

Schuetz (2002) and Leslie and Gappa (2002) did uncover several noteworthy

distinctions between full- and part-time faculty. Both studies cite findings from a 2000

Center for the Study of Community Colleges faculty survey, which indicate that part-time

faculty were less likely than their full-time counterparts to have engaged in the following

instructional or professional development activities:

* Revised a course syllabus within last three years (88% vs. 97%)

* Prepared a multi-media presentation for class (42% vs. 53%)

* Co-taught a class with someone from outside their department (15% vs. 24%)

* Developed extracurricular activities for students related to their fields (60% vs. 74%)

* Attended a professional conference in the last three years (67% vs. 89%)

* Received an award for outstanding teaching (24% vs. 39%)

Schuetz (2002) identifies a few additional differences with respect to full- and part-time

faculty participation in professional development activities. Full-time faculty are more

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.

Page 3 of 7
likely to have joined national or regional nondisciplinary organizations (46% vs. 26%),

disciplinary organizations (52% vs.32%), and community-college specific organizations

(22% vs. 13%). Full-time faculty were also more likely to have attended professional

organization meetings (22% vs. 13%). One of the implications for these findings,

according to Schuetz is that, "this relative lack of interaction with professional

colleagues may put part-timers at a disadvantage with respect to enhancing their

instructional practices over time" (p. 43).

While these findings do help to illustrate differences between part- and full-time

community college faculty behaviors, Leslie and Gappa (2002) caution readers against

the inclination to employ these findings as evidence that part-time faculty are less

dedicated and competent than their full-time colleagues. They point out that many of

these differences could be attributed to institutional policies that mitigate against

part-time faculty participation (e.g., no institutional funds for professional association

memberships or travel).

DISCIPLINARY VARIATIONS

An analysis of community college faculty practices by academic discipline also reveals a

number of commonalities and differences. Palmer (2002) asserts that, given the

disciplinary structure of higher education, "it is reasonable to expect that faculty work

will vary across academic fields" (p. 9). Drawing upon data collected in the 1999

National Survey of Post-Secondary Faculty (NSOPF-99), Palmer identified disciplinary

variation along four lines: 1) academic and employment histories; 2) approaches to

instruction; 3) methods used to access student work; and 4) scholarship outside of

teaching. This Digest summarizes Palmer's findings in two of the four dimensions, given

their relevance to a subsequent discussion of professional development programs as a

means of improving community college instruction.

In an examination of instructional strategies, 88% of all faculty report that their primary

method of instruction is lecture/discussion. Disciplinary differences emerge when it

comes to the use of distance learning technologies (nearly one-third of engineering and

computer science faculty utilize this technology) and the use of labs, clinics, or problem

sessions (humanities, mathematics, and the sciences report significantly lower use in

comparison to vocational disciplines). Mathematics and science faculty demonstrate two

important differences in their attitudes towards assessment of student work. Compared

with their colleagues in the humanities, education, health sciences, business, and social

sciences disciplines, faculty in the math and physical sciences are less likely to require

term papers and less likely to utilize peer evaluations as a form of student assessment.

Palmer asserts that recognizing disciplinary variations among community college faculty

"counters the tendency to discuss the community college enterprise as a homogenous

culture, thus guarding against the naive application of faculty development programs

that press the same instructional nostrums across disciplines" (p. 18). Given the

documented existence of disciplinary differences with respect to instructional practices,

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 4 of 7 ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.
it appears appropriate and desirable to create faculty development programs that focus

on disciplinary-specific strategies for improving community college teaching.

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY

DEVELOPMENT

Both Outcalt (2002) and Murray (2002) emphasize the importance of faculty

development initiatives as a means of fostering community, increasing the

professionalism of faculty, and imparting the skills and knowledge necessary to address

the growing diversity of student demographics, learning styles, and goals. According to

Outcalt, "Administrators would do well to create professional development programs

meant to bring faculty together in interaction with one another. These programs,

particularly if they are oriented toward improving instructional abilities, would benefit not

just the faculty but their students" (p. 113).

In an overview of community college faculty development programs, Murray cites three

related themes that diminish program effectiveness: 1) few community colleges link

faculty development programs to the community college mission; 2) few colleges have

formalized evaluation plans and criteria; and 3) minimal faculty participation. Community

college faculty are not eager to participate in development programs that they perceive

to be irrelevant, inefficient, and unfocused.

One strategy for increasing participation in professional development initiatives is to

recognize the heterogeneity of community college faculty and create individualized

programs tailored to the unique needs and interests of distinct sub-groups. For

example, an in-service opportunity on collaborative instructional strategies should be

targeted toward part-time faculty who demonstrate a lower tendency to co-teach

courses or utilize collaborative techniques in the classroom (Shuetz, 2002). A program

on distance learning technology might be most effective if geared toward faculty in the

humanities and social sciences, given that these two disciplines have been slow to

incorporate distance learning in their curricula (Palmer, 2002).

CONCLUSION

An exploration of research data pertaining to community college faculty demographics,

attitudes, curriculum and instruction practices, job satisfaction and professional

development activities will assist in the creation of a more accurate portrait of the

community college professorate and provide educators and administrators with the

knowledge necessary to design programs that will facilitate the improvement of

community college instruction and learning. One of the most damaging myths

concerning community college faculty is the perception that they are a homogenous

group of individuals with similar backgrounds, attitudes, and aspirations. A "one

size-fits-all" approach to faculty development initiatives ignores the unique challenges,

needs, and goals found among community college faculty. While the research

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.

Page 5 of 7
presented in this Digest does confirm the existence of several common faculty

characteristics, of greater importance is the recognition of differences and unique

qualities based on membership in distinct community college sub-cultures. Recognition

of these similarities and differences, and the utilization of this information to inform

faculty development programs, is a critical step in the process of maximizing the

educational potential of community colleges.

REFERENCES

This Digest is drawn from "Community College Faculty: Characteristics, Practices, and

Challenges." New Directions for Community Colleges, Number 118, edited by Charles

L. Outcalt. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, Summer 2002.

Editor's Notes. (pp. 1-5).

Leslie, David W. and Judith M. Gappa. Part-Time Faculty Competent and Committed.

(pp. 59-67).

Murray, John P. The Current State of Faculty Development in Two-Year Colleges. (pp.

89-97).

Outcalt, Charles L. Toward a Professionalized Community College Professoriate. (pp.

109-115).

Palmer, James C. Disciplinary Variations in the Work of Full-Time Faculty Members.

(pp. 9-19).

Schuetz, Pam. Instructional Practices of Part-Time and Full-Time Faculty. (pp. 39-46).

-----

This project has been funded at least in part with Federal funds from the U.S.

Department of Education under contract number ED-99-CO-0010. The content of this

publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of

Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations

imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. ERIC Digests are in the public domain and

may be freely reproduced.

University of California, Los Angeles 3051 Moore Hall P.O. Box 951521 Los Angeles,

CA 90095

Title: Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional Development

Programs. ERIC Digest.

Document Type: Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs)

(071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073);

Available From: ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges. University of California

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 6 of 7 ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.
at Los Angeles, 3051 Moore Hall, P.O. Box 951521, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524. Tel:

310-825-3931. For full text: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/ERIC/eric.html.

Descriptors: College Faculty, Community Colleges, Differences, Full Time Faculty,

Instructional Effectiveness, Part Time Faculty, Professional Development, Teacher

Behavior, Teacher Characteristics, Teacher Improvement, Teacher Student

Relationship, Two Year Colleges

Identifiers: ERIC Digests

###

[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED477910 2002-11-00 Understanding Faculty: A Step toward Improving Professional

Development Programs. ERIC Digest.

Page 7 of 7