In response to demands for public accountability and improved teaching and learning, institutions are recognizing the need to strengthen their faculty development programs. Central to strengthening faculty development programs is increasing faculty participation in these programs. This mixed-method study examined the motivation of full and part-time faculty to seek development, obstacles to attending, as well as preferred formats across four institutions.
AERA - 2010: Examining faculty motivation for professional developmentPatrick Lowenthal
In response to demands for public accountability and improvement of teaching and learning in higher education, institutions are recognizing the need to strengthen their faculty development programs. Central to strengthening faculty development programs is increasing overall faculty (both full and part-time) participation in these programs. This mixed-method study examined 524 full and part-time faculty at four different institutions to determine differences in their motivations to seek development, obstacles to attending, as well as preferred formats. Results indicate that full-time faculty seek more development than part-time faculty across institutions. At some institutions, the preferred format of faculty development contributed to differences among the types of faculty. Despite the focus of faculty developers to offers short workshops and increasingly put more faculty development online, in this study full time faculty tended not to value short workshops or online activities and instead preferred such things as learning by books and videos or even attending retreats. The results of this study suggest that faculty developers should begin thinking differently about the types and the frequency of the faculty development services they offer.
Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at WSSU: Towards an Effective ...Alvaro Galvis
This paper presents a case study that can be helpful for higher education leaders who are struggling with the creation, implementation, or improvement of academic support units that seek to enhance quality of teaching and learning in higher education institutions. The Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) at Winston-Salem State University (WSSU) is a case of faculty development initiatives devoted to foster academic excellence in a middle-sized historically black higher education university. The document includes: Analysis of the context in which this case study occurs, a literature review, and a case study of CETL itself. The study also includes lessons learned about the ways in which organizations such as CETL can be effective and viable.
This paper was published by JHEM, Vol 25, No 1, 2010, pp. 40-73
My presentation at the British Educational Research Association's (BERA) International Conference, University of Warwick, 1-4 September 2010. This was part of practitioner research in physical education symposium.
"There's a Policy: Nobody Bats an Eye at Babies Being Born...Using Institutional Policy Discourse to Reframe Tenure & Parenting for the Next Generation"
ASHE, Charlotte, NC, November 2011
AERA - 2010: Examining faculty motivation for professional developmentPatrick Lowenthal
In response to demands for public accountability and improvement of teaching and learning in higher education, institutions are recognizing the need to strengthen their faculty development programs. Central to strengthening faculty development programs is increasing overall faculty (both full and part-time) participation in these programs. This mixed-method study examined 524 full and part-time faculty at four different institutions to determine differences in their motivations to seek development, obstacles to attending, as well as preferred formats. Results indicate that full-time faculty seek more development than part-time faculty across institutions. At some institutions, the preferred format of faculty development contributed to differences among the types of faculty. Despite the focus of faculty developers to offers short workshops and increasingly put more faculty development online, in this study full time faculty tended not to value short workshops or online activities and instead preferred such things as learning by books and videos or even attending retreats. The results of this study suggest that faculty developers should begin thinking differently about the types and the frequency of the faculty development services they offer.
Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at WSSU: Towards an Effective ...Alvaro Galvis
This paper presents a case study that can be helpful for higher education leaders who are struggling with the creation, implementation, or improvement of academic support units that seek to enhance quality of teaching and learning in higher education institutions. The Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) at Winston-Salem State University (WSSU) is a case of faculty development initiatives devoted to foster academic excellence in a middle-sized historically black higher education university. The document includes: Analysis of the context in which this case study occurs, a literature review, and a case study of CETL itself. The study also includes lessons learned about the ways in which organizations such as CETL can be effective and viable.
This paper was published by JHEM, Vol 25, No 1, 2010, pp. 40-73
My presentation at the British Educational Research Association's (BERA) International Conference, University of Warwick, 1-4 September 2010. This was part of practitioner research in physical education symposium.
"There's a Policy: Nobody Bats an Eye at Babies Being Born...Using Institutional Policy Discourse to Reframe Tenure & Parenting for the Next Generation"
ASHE, Charlotte, NC, November 2011
Assessment Assignment: Bath MA International EducationStephen Taylor
This is an assignment I completed for the Assessment unit of the University of Bath's MA in International Education programme.
It is shared here to allow me to embed it onto my professional reflective blog at http://ibiologystephen.wordpress.com
Downloads have been disabled.
Teacher Educators’ and Student Teachers’ Attitude towards Teacher Education P...IJSRP Journal
Attitudes vary at different times of one’s life and are usually determined by several factors such as work environment, job satisfaction and status of the profession. Both student-teachers’ and teacher-educators’ attitudes may affect the quality of teacher preparation program and finally quality of the teacher either positively or negatively. This paper is a focus on the attitude of teacher educators and student teachers towards teacher education programmes in universities. The study adopted a descriptive survey design. The study sample consisted of Bachelor of Education fourth year students drawn from three Public universities and three Private universities, Teacher Educators and Heads of Departments from the faculty of Education. Stratified random sampling was used to select the universities, student-teachers and Teacher Educators. Data was collected using questionnaires, interview schedules, observation checklists and documents analysis. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study found that a large percentage of the respondents portrayed a negative attitude of teacher education programmes. This may be to the fact that most student teachers and teacher educators enrolled in these programmes, do not have teaching as their professional interest thus join by circumstance. The study recommends the need to conduct screening of individuals before admission in teacher education programmes so as to ensure that only those who are interested and committed to teaching as a profession are enrolled. Keywords: Attitude, Teacher Education Programmes, Enrollment, Teacher Educators, Student Teachers, Public University, Private University
Revisiting teaching presence: An analysis of teaching presence across discour...Patrick Lowenthal
Teaching presence has been shown to influence student satisfaction as well as perceptions of perceived learning.However, past research on teaching presence has not investigated how teaching presence differs across discoursecommunities. This study investigated student’s perceptions of teaching presence across different discoursecommunities (i.e., different academic disciplines) in accelerated online courses
In this presentation, we will provide some insight into the lived experience of academic middle managers in the role of heads of departments. The narratives evolve from issues such as circumstances of the decision to become an academic manager, how that feeds into increased demands of the academic middle manager role, and finally, we provide a brief evaluation of the career impact at the moment of the interview. This presentation is built on the data collected in 2015-2016, and currently, we are collecting interviews in a follow-up study with the same set of respondents.
Problems With Assessing Student Autonomy in Higher Education, an Alternative Perspective and a Role For Mentoring.
https://www.edupij.com/files/1/articles/article_123/EDUPIJ_123_article_5a91aa7fe0490.pdf
Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Dancy, M. Facilitating Change in Undergraduate Science Instruction: Making Progress by Improving Communication between Administrators, Educational Researchers, and Faculty Developers, contributed session, Association of American Colleges and Universities Engaging Science, Advancing Learning Conference, Providence, RI, Nov 7, 2008.
William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief, NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982). Dr. LaVelle Henricks, Texas A&M University-Commerce and colleagues published in national refereed journal.
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Distinguished Alumnus, Central Washington University, College of Education and Professional Studies, Ellensburg, Washington; Invited Guest Lecturer, Oxford Round Table, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Hall of Honor, Prairie View A&M University/Member of the Texas A&M University System.
MA International Education University of Bath assignment (Education in and International Context).
In this assignment I have tried to propose an original idea for helping schools define and measure the degree to which they demonstrate the values of international education.
Assessment Assignment: Bath MA International EducationStephen Taylor
This is an assignment I completed for the Assessment unit of the University of Bath's MA in International Education programme.
It is shared here to allow me to embed it onto my professional reflective blog at http://ibiologystephen.wordpress.com
Downloads have been disabled.
Teacher Educators’ and Student Teachers’ Attitude towards Teacher Education P...IJSRP Journal
Attitudes vary at different times of one’s life and are usually determined by several factors such as work environment, job satisfaction and status of the profession. Both student-teachers’ and teacher-educators’ attitudes may affect the quality of teacher preparation program and finally quality of the teacher either positively or negatively. This paper is a focus on the attitude of teacher educators and student teachers towards teacher education programmes in universities. The study adopted a descriptive survey design. The study sample consisted of Bachelor of Education fourth year students drawn from three Public universities and three Private universities, Teacher Educators and Heads of Departments from the faculty of Education. Stratified random sampling was used to select the universities, student-teachers and Teacher Educators. Data was collected using questionnaires, interview schedules, observation checklists and documents analysis. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study found that a large percentage of the respondents portrayed a negative attitude of teacher education programmes. This may be to the fact that most student teachers and teacher educators enrolled in these programmes, do not have teaching as their professional interest thus join by circumstance. The study recommends the need to conduct screening of individuals before admission in teacher education programmes so as to ensure that only those who are interested and committed to teaching as a profession are enrolled. Keywords: Attitude, Teacher Education Programmes, Enrollment, Teacher Educators, Student Teachers, Public University, Private University
Revisiting teaching presence: An analysis of teaching presence across discour...Patrick Lowenthal
Teaching presence has been shown to influence student satisfaction as well as perceptions of perceived learning.However, past research on teaching presence has not investigated how teaching presence differs across discoursecommunities. This study investigated student’s perceptions of teaching presence across different discoursecommunities (i.e., different academic disciplines) in accelerated online courses
In this presentation, we will provide some insight into the lived experience of academic middle managers in the role of heads of departments. The narratives evolve from issues such as circumstances of the decision to become an academic manager, how that feeds into increased demands of the academic middle manager role, and finally, we provide a brief evaluation of the career impact at the moment of the interview. This presentation is built on the data collected in 2015-2016, and currently, we are collecting interviews in a follow-up study with the same set of respondents.
Problems With Assessing Student Autonomy in Higher Education, an Alternative Perspective and a Role For Mentoring.
https://www.edupij.com/files/1/articles/article_123/EDUPIJ_123_article_5a91aa7fe0490.pdf
Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Dancy, M. Facilitating Change in Undergraduate Science Instruction: Making Progress by Improving Communication between Administrators, Educational Researchers, and Faculty Developers, contributed session, Association of American Colleges and Universities Engaging Science, Advancing Learning Conference, Providence, RI, Nov 7, 2008.
William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief, NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982). Dr. LaVelle Henricks, Texas A&M University-Commerce and colleagues published in national refereed journal.
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Distinguished Alumnus, Central Washington University, College of Education and Professional Studies, Ellensburg, Washington; Invited Guest Lecturer, Oxford Round Table, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Hall of Honor, Prairie View A&M University/Member of the Texas A&M University System.
MA International Education University of Bath assignment (Education in and International Context).
In this assignment I have tried to propose an original idea for helping schools define and measure the degree to which they demonstrate the values of international education.
motivation skills for teachers. it will help to the young teachers for success in the field of education and training. it gives the student engagement,motivation for good learning environment.
Slidecast based on a presentation given on October 29th 2009. An attempt to drill down to find concrete strategies to encourage optimal motivation for learning. Far from being an expert on this, this was an opportunity for me to explore a topic of interest.
Alison Coates-McBridge and William Allan Kritsonis, PhD - Article: The M&M Ef...William Kritsonis
Alison Coates-McBridge and William Allan Kritsonis, PhD - Article: The M&M Effect - Assessing the Impact of Merit Pay on Teacher Motivation: National Implications - Published in the DOCTORAL FORUM: NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH, 5(1) 2008
Perceptions of Tenured and Adjunct Faculty Regarding the Role of the Adjunct ...inventionjournals
This study purpose was to explore the perceptions of adjuncts and tenured faculty about the role of the adjunct in higher education. Through purposeful sampling, the lived experiences of nine adjuncts and nine tenured faculty members were considered from three historically black colleges and universities in the southeastern United States. The Critical Social Theory guided this qualitative phenomenological study as it relates to organizational culture. The Critical Social Theory framework illuminates the perceptions of the more powerful players in an organization and the impact of these perceptions on the workplace culture. Six themes that emerged from the analysis of the data: (a) Professional Development and Support, (b) Increased Collaboration, (c)Standard Recruiting and Retention Practices, (d) Shared Responsibilities, (e) Their Perceived Student Perceptions of Adjuncts and Tenured Faculty in the Classroom, and (f) The Relationship between Adjuncts and their University. These themes gave rise to a general description of the perceptions and the workplace culture. The findings from the study yielded several unexpected outcomes.
This presentation was made at the 2010 Northeast Group on Educational Affairs annual conference. It describes education competency domains for hospital-based faculty at Baystate Medical Center, the Western Campus of Tufts University School of Medicine. These competencies will become inreasingly important as graduate medical education transitions to competency-based milestones.
Online faculty development and storytelling: An unlikely solution to improvin...Patrick Lowenthal
Institutions of Higher Education are beginning to place a greater emphasis on quality teaching and student learning. However, few faculty receive any type of teacher training prior to entering the academy. As a result, faculty development is one likely solution to teacher quality issues. But faculty development is faced with serious shortcomings that impede its ability to improve teacher quality. This paper explores how moving faculty development online while at the same time incorporating the use of teacher stories could be a viable strategy to improve faculty development and teacher quality.
Mosley, kennya g the percieved influence of mentoring nfjca v3 n1 2014William Kritsonis
William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief, NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982). Dr. LaVelle Henricks, Texas A&M University-Commerce and colleagues published in national refereed journal.
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Distinguished Alumnus, Central Washington University, College of Education and Professional Studies, Ellensburg, Washington; Invited Guest Lecturer, Oxford Round Table, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Hall of Honor, Prairie View A&M University/Member of the Texas A&M University System.
Olson, james caring and the college professor focus v8 n1 2014William Kritsonis
William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief, NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982). Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Distinguished Alumnus, Central Washington University, College of Education and Professional Studies, Ellensburg, Washington; Invited Guest Lecturer, Oxford Round Table, University of Oxford, United Kingdom; Hall of Honor, Prairie View A&M University/Member of the Texas A&M University System. Professor of Educational Leadership, The University of Texas of the Permian Basin.
Olson, james caring and the college professor focus v8 n1 2014William Kritsonis
NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS (Founded 1982 (www.nationalforum.com) is a group of national and international refereed journals. NFJ publishes articles on colleges, universities and schools; management, business and administration; academic scholarship, multicultural issues; schooling; special education; counseling and addiction, international issues; education; organizational theory and behavior; educational leadership and supervision; action and applied research; teacher education; race, gender, society; public school law; philosophy and history; psychology, and much more. Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief.
Accessing professional development activities: a survey of health sciences ac...Brenda Leibowitz
This is a presentation of data from a survey sent to health sciences academics in the Western Cape, South Africa, regarding their participation in professional development activities and their attitudes towards academic development
Alex Torrez & William Allan Kritsonis, PhD - Article: National Impact for Pre...William Kritsonis
Alex Torrez & William Allan Kritsonis, PhD - Article: National Impact for Pre-Implementation of Smaller Learning Communities - Published in the NATIONAL FORUM: NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH, 5(1) 2008.
Currently (2011), Alex Torrez is Assistant Superintendent of Schools for the Clear Creek Independent School District, Houston, Texas.
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis is a Professor (Tenured) and teaches in the PhD Program in Educational Leadership at PVAMU/Member of the Texas A&M University System.
Construct maps are important tools in educational assessment and can serve multiple purposes related to development and validation, as well as score interpretation and use. This chapter outlines a process for developing a construct map from the qualitative ordering of teachers’ responses to open-ended assessment items. The construct of interest pertains to a teacher’s ability to attend to what students say and do, which is a key component of many recommendations for instructional practice within mathematics education. The instrument we are developing is designed to measure teachers’ attentiveness to student thinking in quantitative reasoning problem situations. A key aspect of our instrument development process is the development of a construct map that hierarchically orders qualitatively different levels of teacher attentiveness. In this chapter we describe our process for developing the construct map with the intent of providing an example to others who may be interested in engaging in the development of construct maps.
Scholars across many disciplines have grappled with questions of what it means for a person to
be and interact online. Who are we when we go online? How do others know we are there and
how do they perceive us? Within the context of online learning, scholarly questions tend to
reflect more specific concerns focused on how well people can learn in a setting limited to
mediated interactions lacking various communication cues. For example, how can a teacher and
students come to know each other if they cannot see each other? How can they effectively
understand and communicate with each other if they are separated by space and, in many
instances, time? These concerns are related to issues of social presence and identity, both of
which are complex, multi-faceted, closely interrelated constructs.
In search of a better understanding of social presence: An investigation into...Patrick Lowenthal
Research on social presence and online learning continues to grow. But to date,
researchers continue to define and conceptualize social presence very
differently. For instance, at a basic level, some conceptualize social presence as
one of three presences within a Community of Inquiry, while others do not.
Given this problem, we analyzed how researchers in highly cited social
presence research defined social presence in an effort to better understand how
they are defining social presence and how this might be changing over time. In
this article, we report the results of our inquiry and conclude with implications
for future research and practice.
Open Access Journals in Educational Technology: Results of a Survey of Exper...Patrick Lowenthal
As the academic publishing industry evolves, there has been an unprecedented growth of “open access journals” (OAJs). In educational technology alone, with an estimated 250 or more total journals, nearly one-third are designated as “open.” Though OAJs are lauded for their contribution to social justice issues (reduction of subscription requirement barriers), many people are suspicious of the content found in them and question the legitimacy of publishing in them. In this study, we sought to discover the opinions of educational technology scholars about OAJs in their own field. We were able to learn which OAJs were deemed to be most valuable, as well as the characteristics of OAJs thought to be particularly important. A companion site accompanies this article, http://edtechjournals.org
In Search of Quality: Using Quality Matters to Analyze the Quality of Massive...Patrick Lowenthal
The concept of the massive, open, online course (MOOC) is not new, but high-profile initiatives have moved them into the forefront of higher education news over the past few years. Members of institutions of higher education have mixed feelings about MOOCs, ranging from those who want to offer college credit for the successful completion of MOOCs to those who fear MOOCs are the end of the university as we know it. We set forth to investigate the quality of MOOCs by using the Quality Matters quality control framework. In this paper, we present the results of our inquiry, with a specific focus on the implications the results have on day-today practice of designing online courses.
Getting graphic About Infographics: Design Lessons Learned From Popular Infog...Patrick Lowenthal
People learn and remember more efficiently and effectively through the use of text and visuals than through text alone. Infographics are one way of presenting complex and dense informational content in a way that supports cognitive processing, learning, and future recognition and recollection. But the power of infographics is that they are a way of delivering the maximum amount of content in the least amount of space while still being precise and clear; because they are visual presentations as opposed to oral or text presentations, they can quickly tell a story, show relationships, and reveal structure. The following paper reports on an exploration of top 20 “liked” infographics on a popular infographic sharing website in an effort to better understand what makes an effective infographic in order to better prepare graduate students as consumers and designers of infographics. The paper concludes with recommendations and strategies on how educators might leverage the power of infographics in their classrooms.
Intentional Web Presence for Research and Technology ProfessionalsPatrick Lowenthal
Intentionally creating a well-crafted online presence, sometimes called a web presence, is important not only for recent graduates but for any professional in a community of practice that values technology use and innovation (e.g., information technology, computer science, digital and graphic design); also, professionals who work with external stakeholders (e.g., consultants working with clients, teachers working with parents, artists working with customers and funding sources) benefit from attention to their web presence. In this presentation, I will share why professionals need to attend to their web presence and share some strategies for crafting the components of a vibrant and dynamic professional web presence and digital footprint.
AERA 2015 Instructional Design Lessons Learned From Reviewing Popular Infogra...Patrick Lowenthal
Infographics are one way of presenting complex and dense informational content in a way the supports cognitive processing, learning, and future recognition and recollection. Infographics, as the name implies, are a way of presenting information graphically. But the power of infographics is that they are a way of delivering the maximum amount of content in the least amount of space while still being precise and clear. In this session we will share the results of our inquiry into what makes an effective infographic. Derived from our inquiry, we will share recommendations on how educators might leverage the power of infographics in their classrooms, and assignments we now use with our students.
Online video is believed to help build social presence and community in online courses. But do students actually watch these videos? And what do they think of them? Do they always build social presence for every student? This mixed methods exploratory study investigates students’ perceptions of online video and the degree to which different uses of online video (e.g., video announcements, instructional screencasts, and video feedback) help establish and maintain social presence. The results of the study and the implications for faculty and instructional designers will be discussed in this session.
Intentional Web Presence for Educational Technology ProfessionalsPatrick Lowenthal
Educational technology professionals must be digitally literate. Part of this involves effectively managing one’s web presence. In this presentation, I will argue that educational technology professionals need to practice what they preach by attending to their web presence. I will share strategies for crafting the components of a vibrant and dynamic professional web presence such as creating a personal website, engaging in social networking, contributing and sharing resources/artifacts, and attending to search engine optimization (SEO).
PASSHE 2015: If You Record It, Will They Watch It? And Will It Matter? Explor...Patrick Lowenthal
If You Record It, Will They Watch It? And Will It Matter? Exploring Student Perceptions of Online Video
Online videos can help build presence and community in online courses. But do students actually watch these videos? The presenter will share his experience using asynchronous video (e.g., video announcements, video feedback) as well as share research on students perceptions of asynchronous video, while engaging the audience in their own use of rich media.
Thinking of getting a dog? Be aware that breeds like Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and German Shepherds can be loyal and dangerous. Proper training and socialization are crucial to preventing aggressive behaviors. Ensure safety by understanding their needs and always supervising interactions. Stay safe, and enjoy your furry friends!
Executive Directors Chat Leveraging AI for Diversity, Equity, and InclusionTechSoup
Let’s explore the intersection of technology and equity in the final session of our DEI series. Discover how AI tools, like ChatGPT, can be used to support and enhance your nonprofit's DEI initiatives. Participants will gain insights into practical AI applications and get tips for leveraging technology to advance their DEI goals.
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
it describes the bony anatomy including the femoral head , acetabulum, labrum . also discusses the capsule , ligaments . muscle that act on the hip joint and the range of motion are outlined. factors affecting hip joint stability and weight transmission through the joint are summarized.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
MASS MEDIA STUDIES-835-CLASS XI Resource Material.pdf
Examining Faculty Motivation to Participate in Faculty Development
1. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
1
Preprint: To appear in an upcoming issue of International Journal of University Teaching and Faculty Development
Lowenthal, P. R., Wray, M. L., Bates, B., Switzer, T., & Stevens, E. (in press). Examining faculty
motivation to participate in faculty development. International Journal of University Teaching and Faculty
Development
Examining Faculty Motivation to Participate in Faculty Development
Patrick R. Lowenthal
Boise State University
patricklowenthal@boisestate.edu
Michael L. Wray
Metropolitan State University of Denver
wraym@msudenver.edu
Barbara Bates
DeVry University
bbates@devry.edu
Teri Switzer
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
tswitzer@uccs.edu
Ellen Stevens
University of Colorado Denver
ellen.stevens@ucdenver.edu
2. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
2
Abstract
In response to demands for public accountability and improved teaching and learning,
institutions are recognizing the need to strengthen their faculty development programs. Central
to strengthening faculty development programs is increasing faculty participation in these
programs. This mixed-method study examined the motivation of full and part-time faculty to
seek development, obstacles to attending, as well as preferred formats across four institutions.
Results indicate that full-time faculty seek more development than part-time faculty across
institutions. At some institutions, the preferred format of faculty development contributed to
differences among the types of faculty. Despite efforts to offer short workshops and faculty
development online, in this study full time faculty tended not to value short workshops or online
activities and instead preferred such things as books, videos, or even attending retreats. The
results of this study suggest that faculty developers should begin thinking differently about the
types and the frequency of faculty development.
Keywords: faculty development, professional development, post-secondary teaching & learning
3. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
3
Introduction
Institutions of higher education are placing a greater emphasis on quality teaching and
student learning than ever before (AAC&U, 2002; Chism, 2008; Lieberman, 2005; Lowenthal,
2008). Faculty now find themselves in a world where they are expected to be expert researchers
as well as expert teachers (Boyer, 1990; Chism, 2008). However, very few faculty receive any
type of teacher training prior to entering the academy (Boyer, 1990; Stevens, 1998). Even though
faculty are prepared as scholars, not teachers (AAC&U, 2002), it has been assumed that a
terminal degree is a license to teach (Stevens, 1988). This mismatch between the lack of
teaching preparation and the day-to-day expectations to be an exceptional teacher puts faculty
and administrators at odds with each other. Institutions of higher education, however, have
begun to turn to faculty development as a possible way to improve teaching and learning (Kolbo
& Turnage, 2002). Unfortunately, though, faculty participation in faculty development is
inconsistent (Gardiner, 2005). Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore faculty’s
motivation to participate in faculty development—specifically, by looking at faculty preferred
formats, incentives, and distracters to participate in faculty development.
Background
Faculty development research suggests that development efforts are needed and can
improve teaching and learning in multiple ways at the college level (Fletcher & Patrick, 1998;
Sorcinelli, 2006; Wright, 1998). In addition, faculty development has the ability to not only
enhance teaching skill, but also reduce faculty burnout (Huston & Weaver, 2007; Mintz, 1999;
Roche, 2001), improve the recruitment of women and minorities in unrepresented programs
(Laursen & Rocque, 2009), and enhance collaborative learning amongst faculty (Cole, Barker,
Kolodner, Williamson, Wright, & Kern, 2004; Hill, Soo La, & Lagueux, 2007; Knight, Carrese,
& Wright, 2007).
4. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
4
Despite some of the aforementioned possible benefits of participating in faculty
development, most faculty think they excel in the classroom and, therefore, do not need to
participate in face-to-face development workshops (Chism & Szabo, 1996; Maxwell &
Kazlauskas, 1987; Murray, 2000; Travis, Hursh, Lankewicz, & Tang, 1995). For instance, fifty
percent of faculty believe they are in the top 10% of teachers; ninety percent believe they are in
the top half of teachers (Blackburn, 1995). Administrators struggle with finding ways to attract
faculty to faculty development activities as well as identifying the right mix of faculty
development services to improve faculty teaching and ultimately student learning (Menges,
1997). Face-to-face workshops are efficient both in terms of time and resources, but are not
necessarily the most effective way to help faculty improve teaching quality (Holmgren, 2005;
Menges, 1980; Schroeder, 2005).
While faculty developers have begun offering faculty development workshops online to
address some possible barriers, such as time conflicts and attracting both full and part-time
faculty (Lowenthal, 2008; Shea, Sherer, & Kristensen, 2002; Vrasidas & Glass, 2004; Wood et
al., 1998), there has not been enough research conducted to determine whether this new approach
is attracting any new faculty or improving teaching and learning. At the same time, faculty
developers are trying to clarify the factors that influence faculty participation in faculty
development (Holmgren, 2005). Some faculty attend faculty development activities to improve
the quality of their instruction (Bess, 1982); others attend faculty development to strengthen their
portfolio as they move through the tenure process (Huston & Weaver, 2007), while others have
little interest in participating in faculty development if they are not coerced by department chairs
(Lucas, 2002).
In addition to varying incentives that provide impetus for participation in faculty
development, research suggests that teaching and learning, as well as faculty development, are
5. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
5
contextual (Eddy, 2007; Elen, 2007). Because faculty differ across institution type it is not
enough to understand in general terms what motivates a typical faculty member. Instead, we
posit that, in order to strengthen faculty development programs (which largely involves
increasing faculty participation in faculty development activities), faculty developers must
understand what motivates faculty from different institutional types to attend faculty
development.
Methods
The purpose of this study was to explore what motivates faculty from different types of
higher education institutions to participate in faculty development. The following research
questions guided this study:
1. How do faculty differ by employment category (full time or part-time), tenure status, and
institution type in their frequency of attending faculty development?
2. Are there differences among faculty employment category, institution type, or tenure
status in the preference of faculty development format?
3. What are the differences among faculty employment category, institution type, or tenure
status in their motivation to attend faculty development?
4. What are the differences among faculty employment category, institution type, or tenure
status in their obstacles to attend faculty development?
Population and Sample
The higher education landscape is diverse (Blackburn & Lawrence, 1995). There are
research institutions, teaching institutions, technical institutions, private institutions, religious
institutions, and proprietary institutions to name a few. With each of these institution types
comes a different culture and way of doing things (Blackburn & Lawrence, 1995)—including the
6. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
6
role of faculty development. However, despite these differences, all institutions appear to be
using part-time lecturers more than in the past (Jaschik, 2006). It is unclear, though, how the
differences in institutional culture and the increase use of part-time faculty affect professional
development (Christensen, 2008). With this in mind, we purposefully sampled (Miles &
Huberman, 1994) both full-time (i.e., non-tenure track, tenure track, and tenured) and part-time
faculty (i.e. adjuncts) from four types of higher education institutions in the Western United
States. The four types of institutions sampled included the following
• Research University (RU), a public research university;
• City College (CC), a public four-year college;
• Western Catholic University (CWU), an accelerated adult college in a private
catholic university; and
• Corporate University (CU), a proprietary university.
See Table 1 for a brief description of each institution and Table 2 for a comparison of each
institution.
Table 1
Descriptions of each Institution
Institution Description
City College
(CC)
CC is a public urban commuter college that offers bachelor’s degrees in a
variety of areas (e.g., business, liberal arts, and professional studies). It has a
large diverse population with over 20,000 students. The average student is 28
years old. The faculty are 35% fulltime and 65% part time. Full time faculty
are classified as either tenure track or tenure faculty. Full time faculty set
personal goals based upon teaching, advising, professional development, and
7. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
7
community service; there is less emphasis on research and more on teaching.
Catholic Western
University
(CWU)
CWU is a private catholic Jesuit University. CWU has over 15,000 students
in three different colleges; the biggest college is the College for Professional
Studies (CPS) with over 12,000 students. With satellite campuses across the
region, CPS offers nontraditional accelerated Undergraduate and Graduate
degrees for working adults. About 40% of CPS’s credits are completed
online. CPS does not have a tenure track for faculty; rather full-time faculty
are employed on a contractual basis and not eligible for tenure. Over 80% of
the courses are taught by adjunct faculty.
Corporate
University (CU)
CU provides a career-oriented, technology-based education to about 47,000
undergraduate and graduate students at 70 locations in 22 states and Canada-
- 21,000 of which are fully online students. More than half of the students
are nontraditional and diverse students. CU employs 1100 faculty as well as
adjuncts who teach more than 50% of the courses. Faculty are not eligible
for tenure and the teaching load for full time faculty is 45 credit hours.
Research
University (RU)
RU is a traditional research based institution with academic programs in
science, education, business, and philosophy. It is an urban institution with
limited housing for its 16,000+ students in undergraduate and graduate
degree programs. RU is a tenure granting institution with moderately
intensive research requirements and less focus on teaching and advising.
8. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
8
Only 30% of courses are taught by adjunct faculty.
Table 2
Institutional Differences
Undergraduate
Courses
Graduate
Courses
Tenure or
Tenure Track
Faculty
Emphasis of
Faculty
% of courses
taught by part-time
faculty
RU Yes Yes Yes Scholarship 25%
CC Yes No Yes Teaching 65%
CWU Yes Yes No Teaching 80%
CU Yes Yes No Teaching 65%
An online survey was administered to faculty at each institution. A total of 524 faculty
(234 full-time faculty and 290 part-time faculty) from the four institutions completed the survey.
The participants who completed the survey represented a cross section of employment types.
The survey was developed to investigate faculty characteristics, motivation to attend faculty
development, and obstacles to attending faculty development. The survey was designed to yield
both quantitative and qualitative data using likert scale types of questions as well as open-ended
questions. Before administering the survey, it was verified for content validity by two faculty
development directors at higher education institutions.
Data Analysis
The data was downloaded and imported into SPSS once the surveys were completed.
Descriptive statistics, an analysis of variance (ANOVA), as well as a multivariate analysis of
variance (MANOVA) were used to analyze the quantitative data (Keppel, 1991; Leech, Barrett
& Morgan, 2008; Lomax 2001). The open-ended questions were analyzed by three researchers
9. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
9
using a constant comparison analysis qualitative technique (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007) of
identifying “significant statements” (Creswell, 2007, p. 61), coding these statements, and finding
themes in the data.
Results
Frequency of Attending Faculty Development
Our first research question focused on the frequency that faculty attended faculty
development across institution types. An ANOVA was used to examine the frequency of
attending faculty development programs across institutions. A significant difference was found
between institutional types and faculty rank in the total number of faculty development activities
attended over a two year period, F (3,510) = 5.623, p=.001, eta² = .18, which according to
Cohen, (1998) was a small effect. City College (CC) faculty reported the highest mean
attendance (M=6.45). At CC, tenure track faculty attended an average of 9.53 activities and
tenured faculty attended an average of 9.11 activities over a two year period. Research
University (RU), on the other hand, reported the lowest attendance (M=3.50) (see Table 3 and
Figure 1).
Table 3
Means, Standard Deviation and N for Frequency of Attending Professional Development
Activities by Tenure Status
Employment Type M SD N
Adjunct 4.06 5.13 290
Corporate University 3.31 2.06 13
City College 3.71 4.54 55
Catholic Western
University
Research University
4.30
3.05
5.88
5.71
201
21
Non Tenure Track 5.49 5.13 100
Corporate University 5.96 5.59 49
City College 4.50 .71 2
10. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
10
Catholic Western
University
5.97 4.92 36
Research University
2.54 3.23 13
Tenure Track 5.31 5.81 62
City College 9.53 8.20 19
Research University
3.44 2.93 43
Tenured 6.57 6.21 72
City College 9.11 6.82 35
Research University
4.13 3.09 29
Total Schools * 4.82 5.64 524
Corporate University 5.40 5.16 62
City College 6.45 6.60 110
Catholic Western
University
4.56 5.77 237
Research University 3.50 4.62 115
*p<.001
4.3
5.97
0 0
3.31
5.96
0 0
3.71
4.5
9.53
9.11
3.05
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Adjunct
Non
tenure
Tenure
Track
Tenure
Adjunct
Non
tenure
Tenure
Track
Tenure
Adjunct
Non
tenure
Tenure
Track
Tenure
Adjunct
Catholic Western Corporate U City College Research U
Figure 1. Faculty attendance at faculty development by institution and rank
Preferred Format for Faculty Development
2.54
3.44
4.13
Non
tenure
Tenure
Track
A MANOVA was used to address the second research question of our study which
Tenure
focused on faculty’s preferred format for faculty development. There was a significant main
11. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
11
effect for institutional type, Pillai’s Trace = .073, F (15, 1518) = 5.88, p<.001, eta² = .023, which
was a medium effect size according to Cohen, 1998. A follow-up ANOVA indicated that two
variables contributed to the school differences, online workshops, F (3, 508) = 22.820, p < .001,
and one-hour workshops, F (3, 508) = 4.275, p = .005.
Across institutions faculty appeared to prefer formatted instruction, such as books or
videotapes, and one-hour workshops (see Table 4). Each institution had books or videotapes as
their first or second choice of preferred format (M=3.37). One-hour workshops were also listed
as the first or second preferred format in each institution except CWU (M=3.30).
Table 4
Means and Standard Deviations of likelihood total faculty would participate in formats of
professional development learning activities, by institution
Institution Development Activity M SD N
CC New classroom technology 3.22 1.26 110
Books or videotapes 3.44 1.18 110
Weekend retreat 2.32 1.20 110
One hour workshop* 3.24 1.15 110
Online formats** 2.71 1.21 110
CU New classroom technology 3.29 1.27 62
Books or videotapes 3.39 1.19 62
Weekend retreat 2.00 .99 62
One hour workshop* 3.53 1.08 62
Online formats** 3.41 1.02
CWU New classroom technology 3.56 1.22 237
Books or videotapes 3.24 1.20 237
Weekend retreat 2.46 1.99 237
One hour workshop* 3.11 1.26 237
Online formats** 3.31 1.24
RU New classroom technology 3.36 1.28 115
Books or videotapes 3.57 1.01 115
Weekend retreat 2.43 1.22 115
One hour workshop* 3.63 1.06 115
Online formats** 4.15 2.35 115
12. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
12
Total Schools New classroom technology 3.41 1.25 524
Books or videotapes 3.37 1.18 524
Weekend retreat 2.37 1.19 524
One hour workshop* 3.30 1.19 524
Online formats** 3.38 1.60 524
*p=.005, **p<.001
Motivation to Attend Faculty Development
Our third research question focused on what motivates faculty to attend faculty
development. We used multiple types of analysis to answer this research question. We first used
a MANOVA to investigate the differences between faculty employment type and institution
type in their motivation to attend faculty development programs. There was a significant
interaction between institution type and employment type, Pillai’s Trace = .057, F (16,1010) =
1.85, p= .021, eta² = .029. The follow-up ANOVA indicated that release time significantly
contributed to institution type differences for institutions with tenure status, F (2,511) = 3.52, p=
.030. See Tables 5 and 6, following.
Table 5
Means and Standard Deviations of Incentives by Institution
Institution Development Activity M SD N
CC Release time* .37 .486 110
Stipend .59 .494 110
Promotion .32 .468 110
Public Recognition .13 .335 110
Awards .24 .427 110
Letters of Recognition .06 .245 110
Certificates .33 .471 110
Incentives not important .19 .395 110
CU Release time* .48 .504 62
Stipend .50 .504 62
Promotion .34 .477 62
Public Recognition .18 .385 62
Awards .27 .450 62
Letters of Recognition .11 .319 62
Certificates .40 .495 62
Incentives not important .21 .410 62
CWU Release time* .18 .386 238
13. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
13
Stipend .37 .485 238
Promotion .12 .328 238
Public Recognition .05 .219 238
Awards .11 .318 238
Letters of Recognition .05 .219 238
Certificates .25 .433 238
Incentives not important .39 .488 238
RU Release time* .32 .469 115
Stipend .34 .475 115
Promotion .19 .395 115
Public Recognition .05 .223 115
Awards .17 .373 115
Letters of Recognition .08 .270 115
Certificates .30 .458 115
Incentives not important .43 .497 115
Total Schools Release time* .29 .453 525
Stipend .43 .495 525
Promotion .20 .403 525
Public Recognition .08 .274 525
Awards .17 .376 525
Letters of Recognition .07 .250 525
Certificates .29 .456 525
Incentives not important .33 .472 525
*p=.021
Table 6
Means and Standard Deviations of Incentives by Tenure Status
Incentive Tenure Status M SD N
Stipend Tenured .38 .488 72
Tenure Track .48 .504 62
Non Tenure Track .33 .437 100
Adjunct .46 .499 291
Total .43 .495 525
Release Time* Tenured .40 .494 72
Tenure Track .40 .495 62
Non Tenure Track .61 .490 100
Adjunct .12 .330 291
Total .29 .453 525
Promotion Tenured .18 .387 72
Tenure Track .37 .487 62
Non Tenure Track .27 .446 100
Adjunct .15 .359 291
Total .20 .403 525
Public Recognition Tenured .10 .298 72
14. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
14
Tenure Track .13 .338 62
Non Tenure Track .11 .314 100
Adjunct .06 .235 291
Total .08 .274 525
Awards Tenured .13 .333 72
Tenured Track .27 .450 62
Non Tenure Track .21 .409 100
Adjunct .14 .352 291
Total .17 .376 525
Letters of Recognition Tenured .05 .201 72
Tenure Track .15 .355 62
Non Tenure Track .08 .273 100
Adjunct .05 .221 291
Total .07 .250 525
Certificates Tenured .29 .444 72
Tenured Track .34 .477 62
Non Tenure Track .30 .461 100
Adjunct .29 .454 291
Total .29 .456 525
Incentives not important Tenured .29 .458 72
Tenured Track .32 .471 62
Non Tenure Track .32 .469 100
Adjunct .35 .478 291
Total .33 .472 525
*p=.021
Not surprisingly, part-time faculty accounted for the significant difference between
faculty types (M=.12). Tenured, tenure track and non-tenure track faculty, reported either
stipends or release time as their top two incentives to participate in faculty development. At the
same time though, all faculty types (including part-time), reported that non-monetary or time
incentives were not important, (M=.33). A moderate level of importance was attributed to
certificates of participation (M=.29).
To further explore what motivates faculty to participate in faculty development, we
inquired what motivated faculty to attend previous development activities. A MANOVA was
used to identify if there were any differences in what motivated faculty to attend previous
development activities across institution type and faculty type. There was a significant
15. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
15
interaction between institution type and tenure status, Pillai’s Trace = .030, F (10,1020) = 1.55,
p= .12, eta² = .015. A follow-up ANOVA indicated that “activity was related to technology”
was significantly different for institutions with different tenure types, F (2,608) = 3.43, p= .033,
eta²=.013. This indicates that tenured and full-time faculty in our sample were more likely to
attend previous faculty development activities if the subject was related to technology.
Overall, faculty in our sample were most likely to attend faculty development to improve
teaching (M=.31). Although there were similar means across institution type, RU reported the
highest motivation to improve teaching (M=.43). Table 7 shows the differences between reasons
for attending across institution types. Required faculty development as well as activities related
to technology were the next most frequent response (M=.25). Not surprisingly, CC, where
professional development activities are often required, had the highest response to required
attendance (M=.71). RU had the highest response to activities related to technology (M=.43).
Table 7
Means and Standard Deviations of Motivation to Attend Past Faculty Development Event
Institution Development Activity M SD N
CC PD was required .24 .427 110
I got paid to attend .04 .118 110
Needed for promotion .14 .345 110
Needed for teaching skill .31 .464 110
Activity related to technology* .25 .438 110
CU PD was required .71 .458 62
I got paid to attend .10 .298 62
Needed for promotion .05 .216 62
Needed for teaching skill .23 .422 62
Activity related to technology* .11 .319 62
CWU PD was required .22 .417 238
I got paid to attend .04 .191 238
Needed for promotion .02 .144 238
Needed for teaching skill .32 .469 238
Activity related to technology* .21 .405 238
16. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
16
RU PD was required .05 .223 115
I got paid to attend .03 .184 115
Needed for promotion .04 .205 115
Needed for teaching skill .57 .498 115
Activity related to technology* .43 .497 115
Total Schools PD was required .25 .431 525
I got paid to attend .04 .205 525
Needed for promotion .05 .225 525
Needed for teaching skill .31 .464 525
Activity related to technology* .25 .435 525
*p=.033
Obstacles to Attend Faculty Development
The final research question focused on obstacles to attend faculty development. Faculty
were asked why they would not attend faculty development (e.g., because the time and day of the
event, competing priorities, lack of financial support, inconvenient location, or uninterested in
the topic). Results reported in Table 8 indicated that there is a significant main effect Pillai’s
Trace = .066, F (15,1299) = 1.94, p= .016, eta² = .022. A follow-up ANOVA indicated that
financial support from one’s institution significantly contributed to the group difference
{F(10,435) = 4.43, p= .004, eta² = .030.
Table 8
Means and Standard Deviations of reasons not to attend faculty development contributing to
school mean difference
17. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
17
Institution Reason not to attend M SD N
City College Time and day of the event .73 .447 110
Corporate
University
Catholic Western
U.
Research
University
Total Schools Time and day of the event .65 .478 525
*p=.004
Other competing priorities .59 .494 110
Financial support from
institution*
Location .11 .313 110
Topic .22 .415 110
Time and day of the event
Other competing priorities .48 .504 62
Financial support from
institution*
Location .39 .491 62
Topic .16 .371 62
Time and day of the event
Other competing priorities .57 .497 238
Financial support from
institution*
Location .42 .494 238
Topic .21 .411 238
Time and day of the event
Other competing priorities .64 .487 115
Financial support from
institution*
Location .19 .401 115
Topic .25 .439 115
Other competing priorities .57 .496 525
Financial support from
institution*
Location .32 .466 525
Topic .21 .408 525
Discussion
Frequency of Attendance
.55 .712 110
.63 .487 62
.84 .853 62
.63 .485 238
.30 .580 238
.58 .500 115
.36 .543 115
.44 .680 525
The first research question examined whether faculty differ by employment type, tenure
status, or institution type in their frequency of attending faculty development programs. We
18. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
18
found that institutions that reward attendance to faculty development reported significantly
higher attendance than schools that did not. Mandatory attendance also resulted in higher mean
scores. This suggests that if institutions want to use faculty development to improve teaching
and learning (which entails having faculty regularly attend faculty development) then they need
to either establish reward structures that help encourage faculty to attend or (depending on the
culture of the institution) possibly require faculty to attend.
Preferred Format for Faculty Development
The second research question investigated faculty’s preferred format for faculty
development. When we examined the types of activities the respondents preferred, the one-hour
format, which involves the least time commitment, and the online format, which provides
convenience, prevailed. This suggests that, similar to previous studies, online faculty
development might be a viable option for institutions that plan to respond to current trends
(Posler, 2008; Sherer, 2005).
Motivation to Attend Faculty Development
For the third research question, we examined incentives as a motive to attend faculty
development. Although we found that the preference for release time differed significantly
between the groups, it was not surprising to see that part-time faculty (the major contributor to
group difference) did not value release time as an incentive. Part-time faculty are typically not
eligible for release time at these institutions. Where participation in faculty development was
somehow related to tenure and/or promotion, faculty also tended to prefer documentation for
their attendance. More is learned, however, by examining the descriptive results across all
institutions. Overall results suggest that receiving a stipend was the most motivating factor for
encouraging attendance. The next highest incentive, release time, was prevalent among full-time
faculty.
19. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
19
Obstacles to Attend Faculty Development
The fourth research question focused on possible obstacles that might prevent faculty
from attending faculty development activities. Time and competing priorities were the top two
obstacles for attending faculty development by faculty across all institutions. A total of 65% of
the faculty also responded that the time and day of the event is a major obstacle to attending
faculty development. Financial support differed significantly across institution types. At CU for
example, where there is limited, or no, budget to attend activities outside of the institution, 84%
of faculty responded that lack of financial support impeded their attendance. The other
institution types had similar means. However, faculty at RU, compared to the other institutions,
were the least likely to list financial support as an obstacle—suggesting that faculty at research
institutions like RU have access to more financial resources and support than faculty at smaller
institutions.
The open ended questions added a voice to these findings. Both tenure track and part-time
faculty at each institution made comments such as, “If I had more time to attend, I would
more than likely try to attend all the faculty development workshops,” and “It isn’t lack of
motivation…it is lack of time. Most affiliate faculty have full time jobs, families (some young
children), etc.”.
Perhaps the most complete and informative response is from a RU tenure track faculty
member who remarked,
“In my experience, there is little if any time to take advantage of faculty
development workshops or other institutional opportunities…nose is to the
grindstone 24/7 preparing for classes, conducting research and performing
service. For me, it has little to do with motivation…I simply don’t have a spare
minute.”
20. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
20
Implications of the Study
It is in the best interest of our academic institutions to provide opportunities for faculty to
improve their teaching and research skills and to foster the career development of both new and
seasoned teachers. As previously mentioned, there are many different faculty development
models and programs. However, the key to using faculty development to improve teacing and
learning does not solely lie on the shoulders of each faculty development program; instead, it lies
in how to get faculty to attend these excellent programs. The best program in the world is not
going to improve the teaching process if few people attend. What motivates faculty? What
incentives should be provided?
It is clear there is no specific technique for encouraging participation in faculty
development. However, there are some trends that each institution can, and should, garner from
these results. Most apparent is that institutions must value faculty development attendance at
learning activities and implement some kind of a reward structure for attendance. In fact, one
faculty member commented, “Having a formula in place to count this toward teaching as well as
research (as in a course release without external funding) would free up time for me to attend
workshops.” Another faculty member suggested that receiving “credits toward tenure” would be
a way to motivate faculty to attend workshops. While requiring attendance might improve
attendance rates, it is yet to be determined that improvement would result from such
participation. An even higher participation might be achieved if faculty, particularly adjunct
faculty, are paid to attend. Additionally, institutions may consider varied times and formats that
focus on those workshops that tend to have fewer time conflicts, such as books, videotapes, or
online resources.
21. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
21
References
AAC&U. (2002). Greater expectations: A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college.
Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges and Universities.
Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation,
satisfaction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York: John
Wiley &Sons.
Chism, N. V. N. (Ed.) (2008). Faculty at the margins. New directions for higher education,143.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chism, N. V. N, & Szabo, B. (1996). Who uses faculty development services? In L. Richlin
(Ed.), To improve the academy (Vol. 15; pp. 129-154). Stillwater, OK: New Forms Press.
Christensen, C. (2008). The employment of part-time faculty at community colleges. In
N.V.N.Chism (Ed.), Faculty at the margins. New Directions for Higher education, 143
(pp. 29-26). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cole, K. A., Barker, L. R., Kolodner, K., Williamson, P. R., Wright, S. M., & Kern, D. E.
(2004). Faculty development in teaching skills: An intensive longitudinal model.
Academic Medicine, 79, 469-480.
Cohen, J. (1998). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing from among five
traditions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eddy, P. L. (2007). Faculty development in rural community colleges. New Directions For
Community Colleges, 137, 65-76.
22. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
22
Elen, J., Lindbloom-Ylanne, S., & Clement, M. (2007). Faculty development in research-intensive
universities: The role of academics’ conceptions on the relationship between
research and teaching. International Journal for Academic Development, 12(2), 123-139.
Fletcher, J. J., & Patrick, S. K. (1998). Not just workshops any more: The role of faculty
development in reframing academic priorities. International Journal for Academic
Development, 3(1), 39.
Gardiner, L. F. (2005). Transforming the environment for learning: A crises of quality. In S.
Chadwick-Blossey & D. R. Robertson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for
faculty, instructional, and organizational development. (Vol. 23, pp. 3-23). Bolton, MA:
Anker Publishing.
Hill, L., Soo La, K., & Lagueux, R. (2007). Faculty collaboration as faculty development. Peer
Review, 9(4), 17-19.
Holmgren, R. A. (2005). Teaching partners: Improving teaching and learning by cultivating a
community of practice. In S. Chadwick-Blossey & D. R. Robertson (Eds.), To improve
the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development. (Vol.
23). Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
Houston, T., & Weaver, C. L. (2007). Peer coaching: Professional development for experienced
faculty. Innovations in Higher education, 33, 5-20.
Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Knight, A. M., Carrese, J. A., & Wright, S. M. (2007). Qualitative assessment of the long-term
impact of a faculty development programme in teaching skills. Medical Education, 41(6),
592-600.
23. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
23
Kolbo, J. R., & Turnage, C. C. (2002). Technological applications in faculty development. The
Technology Source, 39. Retrieved from http://technologysource.org/section/
faculty_and_staff_development/
Laursen, S., & Rocque, B. (2009). Faculty development for institutional change: Lessons from
an advance project. Change, 41(2), 18-26.
Leech, N., Barrett, K., & Morgan, G. (2008). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and
Interpretation (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for
data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557-584.
Lomax, R. G. (2001). Statistical concepts: A second course for education and the behavioral
sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lieberman, D. (2005). Beyond faculty development: How centers for teaching and learning can
be laboratories for learning. New Directions for Higher education, 131, 87-98.
Lowenthal, P. R. (2008). Online faculty development and storytelling: An unlikely solution to
improving teacher quality. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 349-356.
Lucas, A. F. (2002). Reaching the unreachable: Improving the teaching of poor teachers. In K.
H. Gillespie, L. R. Hilsen, & E. C. Wadsworth (Eds.), A guide to faculty development
(pp. 167-179). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Maxwell, W. E., & Kazlauskas, E. J. (1987). Which faculty development methods really
work in community colleges? A review of the research. Community/Junior College
Quarterly, 11, 19-32.
Menges, R. J. (1980). Teaching improvement strategies: How effective are they? In AAHE (Ed.),
Current issues in higher education: Improving teaching and institutional quality
Washington, DC: AAHE.
24. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
24
Menges, R. J. (1997). Fostering faculty motivation to teach: Approaches to faculty development.
In J.L. Bess (Ed), Teaching well and liking it: Motivating faculty to teach effectively
(pp. 407-423). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mintz, J. A. (1999). Faculty development and teaching: A holistic approach. Liberal Education,
85(2), 32.
Murray, J. P. (2000). Faculty development in Texas two-year colleges. Community College
Journal of Research and Practice, 24, 251-267.
Posler, B. D., & Bennett, L. (2008). Improving faculty development. Academic Leader, 24(9), 5-
7.
Roche, V. (2001). Professional development models and transformative change: A case study of
indicators of effective practice in higher education. The International Journal for
Academic Development, 6(2), 120-129.
Sherer, P. (2005). Web-based technology improves faculty development. Academic Leader,
21(1), 2-8.
Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of
faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Bolton: MA:
Anker.
Stevens, E. (1988). Tinkering with teaching. Review of Higher Education, 12(1), 63-78.
Travis, J. E., Hursh, D., Lankewicz, G., & Tang, Li (1995). Monitoring the pulse of the faculty:
Needs assessment in faculty development programs. In L. Richlin (Ed.), To improve the
academy, 15 (pp. 95-114). Stillwater, OK: New Forms Press.
Wood, V. L., Stevens, E., McFarlane, T., Peterson, K., Richardson, K., Davis, R., et al. (1998).
25. Running head: EXAMINING FACULTY MOTIVATION
25
Faculty development workshop: Critical reflection in a web-based environment. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education, Washington, DC.
Wright, D. L. (2000). Faculty development centers in research universities: A study of resources
and programs. In M. Kaplan & D. Lieberman (Eds.), To improve the academy, 18 (pp.
291-301). Bolton, MA: Anker.