Post on 04-Jan-2016
description
Enhancing Quality of Teaching and Learning in the US: Factors Supporting Involvement and Development of Part-
Time Community College Faculty
Presented by Jamilah Jones
June 15-17, 2009
Golden Sands, Bulgaria
Index Research Purpose Background Literature Review Preliminary Data and Results:
Part A: Teaching Techniques, Engagement and Satisfaction
Implications Next Steps in Research
Part B: Student Outcomes
The Paradox of “Quality” The community college runs the risk of being
unfairly judged in terms of quality because of its open access mission.
4-year Institutions Measures of Quality: Prestige Selectivity Specialized Curriculum Research
Measures of Quality in the Literature Determinants of quality at the community
college:
Institutional Resources
Instructional and Management Processes
Student Outcomes
Value-Added Impact of Students
Curricular Structure and Emphasis
Why include community college faculty(professors) in discussions of quality? A salient feature in all standard measures of CC
quality is faculty.
Faculty (salaries & benefits) are of the largest instructional expenditures regional accreditation perspective
Shared governance model (decision making, budgeting, and decision making) assumes CC faculty participation
The teaching and learning paradigm is inherently linked to faculty.
The Literature on Community College Faculty – Exposing the Gap Investigating leading peer-reviewed US
journals of Higher Education 30 articles published on the community college 3 articles (14%) addressed CC faculty as a central
theme
Investigating leading peer-reviewed US journals on Community Colleges (Twombly & Townsend, 2008) 777 Articles on the community college Of those only, 11% discuss faculty as a central
theme
The literature on Community College Faculty The utilization of part-time faculty is both a product
and mandate of the open access mission of the community college. Industry needs lend to utilizations of industry professionals
on a part time basis
The use of part-time faculty at the community college is expected to continue to grow.
Part-time (adjunct) faculty currently account for 2/3rd of all US instructional faculty in the community college
Teaching roughly 1/3rd of all classes
Literature Continued Those studies geared at part-time community
college faculty have largely focused on characteristics, satisfaction, working conditions, and suggestions for improving integration (Banachowski, G., 1996, Eagan, 2007; Gappa & Leslie, 1993; Jacoby, D., 2005; Townsend & Twombly, 2007; Valdez & Anthony, 2001).
Studies that move beyond understanding general characteristic of community college part-time faculty, and seek to examine how the terms of their terms of employment affect student outcomes, are necessary.
Literature Continued. A few recent of part-time community college
faculty negatively affect student success as measured by attrition, and success in sequential courses. (Burgess & Samuels, 1999; Jacoby, 2006 and Jaeger & Eagan, 2009).
What these studies do not measure are “the specific mechanism by which reliance on part-time faculty reduces student graduation rates” (Jacoby, 2006, p. 1098).
This Study Purpose:
This study will investigate three variable of part-time faculty use at the community
college, as potential mechanisms by which student outcomes are affected:
Teaching Techniques Level of Engagement with the Institution Satisfaction
ENGAGEMENTENGAGEMENT
Conceptual Framework
Part A: 2009
Part B: 2010
Purpose – Part A. Our goal in this portion of the research project
is to identify the prevalent teaching and student engagement initiatives and the factors that support their use by part-time community college faculty.
Process/Methodology
Single institution study Carnegie Classification: Associate’s –Public
Suburban-serving Single Campus Campus Setting: Rural: Distant Title IV Participating Institution Non-residential
Quantitative Study Survey: Delivered Electronically to all part-time
faculty
About Northwest State Community College (NSCC)
77 acres, 5 buildings Programs:
Associates of Arts, Science, Applied Business, and Applied Science
Accreditation by NCACS Student Populations: 5,543 (73% - PT: 27%-FT) Tuition: $136/ credit hour Employees : FT Faculty -39, PT Faculty 156 , Staff -
233
Northwest State Community College Service Area
Counties: Williams, Defiance, Paulding, Van Wert, Putnam, Henry, FultonCounties: Williams, Defiance, Paulding, Van Wert, Putnam, Henry, Fulton
Educational Attainment of Service Area*
County Population (2008 Census Estimate)
Population Change from 2000 -2008
Bachelors Degree Attainment (25+)
Fulton 42,485 1% 13.2%
Defiance 38,637 -2.2% 14.3%
Paulding 19,096 -5.9% 7.8%
Van Wert 28,748 -3.1% 12%
Putnam 34,543 -1.5% 12.9%
Henry 28841 -1.3% 11.1%
Lucas 440,456 -3.2% 21.3%
Williams 38,158 -2.6% 10.7%
*US Census data: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html, accessed 5/27/2009
Μ=12.91%
Preliminary Case Study Data from Surveyed Part Time Faculty at Northwest
State Community College
Descriptive 1: Degree Attainment
Descriptive 2: Teaching Experience
Descriptive: Gender
Descriptive: Division/College
Descriptive: Cross-Tab, Division/Longevity
Semesters 0-6 7-13 14-20 21-27 28-34 35-41
Arts & Sciences52.4% (11) 40.0% (4) 42.9% (3) 0.0% (0)
100.0% (1) 0.0% (0)
Allied Health & Public Service 9.5% (2) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)
Business 23.8% (5) 30.0% (3) 28.6% (2)100.0% (1) 0.0% (0)
100.0% (1)
Career and Technical Education/Workplace Credit 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)
Developmental Education 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)
Engineering Technologies 9.5% (2) 10.0% (1) 28.6% (2) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)
Nursing 4.8% (1) 20.0% (2) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)
Total Counts21(51.21%) 10 7 1 1 1
Descriptive: Cross Tab, Feedback from Dean/Longevity
Semesters Taught 0-6 7-13 14-20 21-27 28-34 35-41
Yes42.9% (9)
40.0% (4)
71.4% (5)
0.0% (0)
100.0% (1)
100.0% (1)
No57.1% (12)
60.0% (6)
28.6% (2)
100.0% (1)
0.0% (0)
0.0% (0)
Total Counts 21 10 7 1 1 1
Descriptive: Cross Tab, Value and Appreciated/ Longevity
Semesters Taught 1-6 7-13 14-20 21-27 28-34 35-41
Yes71.4% (15)
70.0% (7)
85.7% (6)
0.0% (0)
100.0% (1)
100.0% (1)
No28.6% (6)
30.0% (3)
14.3% (1)
100.0% (1)
0.0% (0)
0.0% (0)
Total Counts 21 10 7 1 1 1
Conclusions Part-time faculty will be needed in the future. For the sake of quality, we must do a better
job of assessing our part-time faculty. We must support, at the institutional level,
maintain part-time faculty enthusiasm and satisfaction, while also arming them with the necessary tools and teaching techniques.
The most inexperienced faculty are potentially at the most risk of isolation They report that there teaching is not being
assess by senior faculty/deans(these reason should be explored)