Faculty Research and Development in the Technology Disciplines

1
Faculty Research and Development in the
Technology Disciplines

• ISECON 2007
• Pat Sendall
• Merrimack College

2
Overview

• Introduction Study Focus
• Literature Review
• What is Faculty Development?
• Survey Results
• Conclusions

3
Introduction

• The focus of this study is on the faculty
  research and development process and how it
  applies to academic technologists
• Is there a double standard within the academy,
  discipline to discipline?

4
Introduction

• Major faculty development efforts in higher
  education gained momentum in the 1960s
• Much of what has been written to-date on the
  subject was published in the 80s 90s
• Survey data indicates
• Perception of a double standard when it comes to
  the development requirements for the academic
  technologist
• Compared to their peers across campus

5
Literature Review

• Faculty development is no longer an optional or
  dispensable add-on to the list of benefits
  available to faculty at universities in the
  United States.
• (Nathan, 1994)
• we must broaden our perspective to capture the
  essence of enhancing or developing scholarship in
  all forms. (DiLorenzo Heppner, 1994)

6
What is Faculty Development?

• Faculty development, means different things to
  different people (Watson Grossman, 1994)
• Early definition of scholarship
• Engaging in original research
• Today, a wider view of scholarship includes
  faculty development
• There are still a variety of definitions
• Internal organizational culture defines it

7
Why Faculty Development?

• Faculty development,
• Promotes improvement of the academy
• Helps individuals develop themselves as
  contributors to the academys mission
• (Legorreta, Kelley, Sablynski, 2006)
• Designed to,
• Improve faculty performance
• as scholars, advisors, academic leaders, and
  contributors to institutional decisions (Nelson,
  1983)

8
Goal of Faculty Development

• The goal of faculty development is to make
  college teaching more successful and more
  satisfying (Sikes Barrett, 1976)
• Faculty development is designed to forestall
  faculty obsolescence (Camblin Steger, 2000)

9
The Faculty Development Plan

• The task of developing a model FDP faculty
  development plan involves managing diversity of
  interests, values, and stages in the professional
  growth of the faculty members
• A one-size-fits-all FDP is not realistic for most
  schools (Legorreta, 2000)

10
Academic Technologist Includes

• Computer Science
• Computer Information Systems
• Management Information Systems
• Information Science
• Information Technology (IT)
• Computer Information Technology
• IT Leadership
• or those who may have shared responsibilities
  between and among various departments including
  Computer Engineering

11
Discipline Difference

• Unlike most disciplines across the academy,
  technology disciplines are in a constant state of
  change
• We are responsible for the same things, i.e.
  journal publications, but in addition
• New teaching paradigms
• The latest software releases
• New programming languages
• New and revised textbooks

12
Different Funding Needs

• Academic technologists development funds may
  include support for
• Research, workshops, seminars
• Other activities that will improve the faculty
  persons knowledge and professional skill set
• The value added will ultimately be the students
  classroom experience

13
Case StudyMerrimack College

• Mission teaching
• Faculty RD funding
• Primarily research support
• Disconnect?
• Funding shared across college from small budget
• Technologists predominantly self taught

14
Survey

• Survey sent July 2007 via email
• ACMs Special Interest Group in Computer Science
  Education (SIGCSE) listserv
• Association of Information Systems AIS World
  listserv
• Open for three weeks
• 210 responses were collected

15
Survey Results

• Demographics
• 35 --15,000 full time students
• 29 --5,000 15,000 full time students
• 17--2,500 5,000 full time students
• 19 --fewer than 2,500 full time students

16
Demographics
17
Courses Taught
18
Source of funding
19
Types of projects funded
20
Development with no support
21
Promotion Standards
22
Conclusions

• Faculty development informs teaching
• Includes research and other types of professional
  development
• Faculty and institutional vitality are dependent
  on faculty development funding
• The vitality of the school depends on a holistic
  approach to faculty development (Bland Schmitz,
  1990)
• Faculty development does not come in a neat
  one-size-fits-all package
• Every institution has its own unique needs, its
  own culture

23
Conclusions

• 81 respondents--funding should be available by
  the institution for technical development
• 37 are actually providing this type of funding
• 78 required to self-educate without funding
• 51 perceived that they had different
  professional development requirements as compared
  to their contemporaries from across the academy

24
Conclusions

• From the point of view of teaching and research,
  different types of situations require different
  skills and resources. (DiLorenzo Heppner,
  1994)
• The fastest areas of job growth (US Dept of
  Labor)
• Software Engineering
• Information Technology
• More incentive for technologists to stay current
  in their fields
• Provide a state of the art education for their
  students

25
Conclusions

• The assumption has long been that a scholar
  would and could easily self-educate to keep
  abreast of new developments and to maintain high
  skill levels.
• To make this presumption today is to ignore the
  swiftness at which knowledge and understanding
  are advancing.
• (Camblin Steger, 2000)

26
Recommendations

• Development funds often decided upon by
  committees of non-technical colleagues
• Educate our peers as to the importance of the
  diversity in the technologists professional
  development
• e.g., Informal talks at lunch
• Stress benefit to students
• More detailed proposals
• Administrative champion

27
Recommendations

• In order for these types of efforts to grow, a
  culture change must happen on many campuses
  across the country
• Development funds haverevitalized professors,
  renewed courses
• Permitting professors to study new subjects,
  benefiting students (Battistella, 2007)

28
Questions?

• Thank you!