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)